Whatever Infos

Abdula vs. Guiani G.R. No.: 118821, February 18, 2000, 326 SCRA 1 FACTS: The case involves a petition for certiorari and prohibition to set aside the warrant of arrest issued by Judge Japal M. Guiani of Branch 14 of the Regional Trial Court of Cotabato City. The petitioners, Mayor Bai Unggie D. Abdula and Odin Abdula, were charged with murder in Criminal Case No. 2376. The murder complaint alleged that the petitioners paid six other individuals for the death of a certain Abdul Dimalen, the former COMELEC Registrar of Kabuntalan, Maguindanao. Initially, the Provincial Prosecutor of Maguindanao dismissed the murder charges against the petitioners and five other respondents due to lack of prima facie evidence. However, a separate information for murder was filed against one of the respondents, Kasan Mama. Subsequently, the case was ordered to be returned to the Provincial Prosecutor for further investigation. After additional evidence was presented, the Provincial Prosecutor foun...

Burgos vs. Chief of Staff G.R. No. L-64261, December 26, 1984, 133 SCRA 800 FACTS: On December 7, 1982, respondent judge issued two [2] search warrants to "Metropolitan Mail" and "We Forum" newspapers. During the search, the office and printing machines, equipment, paraphernalia, motor vehicles and other articles used in the printing, publication and distribution of the said newspapers, as well as numerous papers, documents, books and other written literature alleged to be in the possession and control of petitioner Jose Burgos, Jr. publisher-editor of the "We Forum" newspaper, were seized. Petitioners pray to nullify the search warrants in question. Respondent: Respondents contend that petitioners should have filed a motion to quash said warrants in the court that issued them before impugning the validity of the same before this Court. Respondents also assail the petition on the ground of laches (failure or negligence for an unreasonab...

Marcos v. Manglapus 177 SCRA 668 FACTS: This case involves a petition for mandamus and prohibition asks the Courts to order the respondents to issue travel documents to Mr. Marcos and the immediate members of his family and to enjoin the implementation of the President's decision to bar their return to the Philippines.  Marcos v. Manglapus The case for petitioners is founded on the assertion that the right of the Marcoses to return to the Philippines is guaranteed under the following provisions of the Bill of Rights, to wit: Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may b...

On August 3, 2017, President Rodrigo R. Duterte  signed into law the Republic Act No. 10932 or also known as the Anti-Hospital Deposit Law. Overview This is an act to strengthen the anti-hospital deposit law by incresing the penalties for the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency or serious cases. Amendment This law is to amend Batas Pambansa Bilang 702, otherwise known as  "An act prohibiting the demand of deposits or advance payments for the confinement or treatment of patients in hospitals and medical clinics in certain cases", as amended by Republic Act No. 8344 and for other purposes. Summary SECTION 1. The law prohibits any hospital or medical clinic personnel, as defined or mentioned in the act, to  request, solicit, demand or accept  any deposit or any other form of advance payment as a prerequisite for administering initial or basic medical care to patients...

Ople vs. Torres [Rights of Privacy] GR No. 127685. July 23, 1998 FACTS: This is a petition raised by Senator Blas Ople to invalidate the Administrative Order No. 308 or the Adoption of a National Computerized Identification Reference System issued by President Fidel V. Ramos.  The petitioner contends that the implementation of the said A.O. will violate the rights of the citizens of privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution.  Ople vs. Torres [Rights of Privacy] ISSUE: Whether or not A.O. No. 308 violates the right of privacy.  Ople vs. Torres [Rights of Privacy] Read:  Gaanan vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC) HELD: Yes. The right to privacy as such is accorded recognition independently of its identification with liberty; in itself, it is fully deserving of constitutional protection. The right of privacy is guaranteed in several provisions of the Constitution: "Sections 3 (1), 1, 2, 6, 8 and 17 of the Bill of Rights Sec. 3. The priva...

Gaanan vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC) GR No. L-69809, October 16, 1986 [145 SCRA 112] FACTS: A direct assault case against Leonardo Laconico was filed by complainant Atty. Tito Pintor and his client Manuel Montebon. The said complainants made a telephone call to Laconico to give their terms for withdrawal of their complaint.  Gaanan vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC) Laconico, later on, called appellant Gaanan, who is also a lawyer, to come to his office to advise him about the proposed settlement. When complainant called up, Laconico requested appellant to secretly listen to the telephone conversation through a telephone extension so as to hear personally the proposed conditions for the settlement. After enumerating the conditions, several calls were made to finally confirm if the settlement is agreeable to both parties. As part of their agreement, Laconico has to give the money to the complainant's wife at the office of the Department of Public Highways. ...

Soliven vs. Makasiar GR No. 82585, November 14, 1988 [167 SCRA 394] FACTS: The case at bar is a petition raised by one of the petitioners, Beltran, who wants to call for an interpretation of the constitutional provision on the issuance of warrants of arrest. The petitioner assailed that his constitutional right was violated when respondent RTC judge issued a warrant for his arrest without personally examining the complainant and the witnesses, if any, to determine probable cause.  Soliven vs. Makasiar Beltran's interpretation of the words "determined personally" convinced him that the judge is solely responsible to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses in his determination of probable cause for the issuance of warrants of arrest. Read: Reconsideration -- Secretary of Justice vs. Lantion ISSUE: Whether or not respondent committed a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when the warrant of arrest was issued. ...

De Guzman vs. Comelec GR No. 129118. July 19, 2000  FACTS: This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition with urgent prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, assailing the validity of Section 44 of Republic Act No. 8189 (RA 8189) otherwise known as "The Voters Registration Act of 1996".  De Guzman vs. Comelec SEC. 44. Reassignment of Election Officers. - No Election Officer shall hold office in a particular city or municipality for more than four (4) years. Any election officer who, either at the time of the approval of this Act or subsequent thereto, has served for at least four (4) years in a particular city or municipality shall automatically be reassigned by the Commission to a new station outside the original congressional district. Petitioners, who are either City or Municipal Election Officers, were reassigned to different stations by the COMELEC.  De Guzman vs. Comelec Petitioners contend that ...

Philippine Judges Association vs. Prado GR No. 105371, November 11, 1993 (227 SCRA 703)  FACTS: This is a petition raised by the members of the lower courts who assails the constitutionality of Section 35 of Republic Act No. 7354 implemented by the Philippine Postal Corporation through its Circular No. 92-28. Philippine Judges Association vs. Prado It is alleged that the said law is discriminatory per se to withdraw the franking privilege of the Judiciary but not on other offices of the government, such as:  the President of the Philippines, the Vice President of the Philippines; Senators and Members of the House of Representatives; the Commission on Elections; former Presidents of the Philippines; the National Census and Statistics Office; and the general public in the filing of complaints against public offices and officers. However, the respondents contend that there is no discrimination since the law is based on the valid classification in accordance of the eq...

Secretary of Justice vs. Lantion [Reconsideration] GR No. 139465    October 17, 2000 FACTS: The Supreme Court dismissed the petition in Secretary of Justice v. Lantion (GR 139465, Jan. 18, 2000) and ordered the petitioner to furnish private respondent copies of the extradition request and its supporting papers and to grant him a reasonable period within which to file his comment with supporting evidence. Secretary of Justice vs. Lantion On February 3, 2000, petitioner assailed, on his Urgent Motion for Reconsideration, that the Court failed to look into the important facts and points with regards to extradition law: I. There is a substantial difference between an evaluation process antecedent to the filing of an extradition petition in court and a preliminary investigation. II. Absence of notice and hearing during the evaluation process will not result in a denial of fundamental fairness III. In the evaluation process, instituting a notice and hearing requir...

Secretary of Justice v. Lantion GR 139465, Jan. 18, 2000 FACTS: On June 18, 1999, the Department of Justice received from the Department of Foreign Affairs a U. S. Note Verbale containing a request for the extradition of private respondent Mark Jimenez to the United States. Attached to it were the Grand Jury Indictment, the warrant of arrest issued by the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, and other supporting documents for said extradition.  Secretary of Justice v. Lantion On the same day, the petitioner designated and authorized a panel of attorneys to handle the case in pursuant to Section 5 (1) of Presidential Decree No. 1069. Said attorneys will make a "technical evaluation and assessment" of the extradition request and its supporting documents. The panel found that there are still documents that need to be addressed with. While the evaluation is still pending due to lack of documents, the respondent wrote a letter requesting copies of the of...

Govt. of the United States v. Purganan GR No. 148571, Sept. 24, 2002 FACTS: In accordance to the existing RP-US Extradition Treaty, the United States Government, through diplomatic channels, sent to the Philippine Government Note Verbale an extradition request of Mark B. Jimenez, also known as Mario Batacan Crespo. Upon receipt of the Notes and documents, the secretary of foreign affairs (SFA) transmitted them to the secretary of justice (SOJ) for appropriate action, pursuant to Section 5 of Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1069, also known as the Extradition Law.  Govt. of the United States v. Purganan Jimenez then sought and was granted a TRO to prohibit the DOJ from filing with the RTC a petition for his extradition which was later on assailed by the SOJ. The Court initially dismissed the petition, but later on reverse its decision when it filed its Motion for Reconsideration and held that private respondent was bereft of the right to notice and hearing during the evaluation...

Manosca v. Court of Appeals GR No. 106440, January 29, 1996 FACTS: Petitioners inherited a piece of land located at P. Burgos Street, Calzada, Taguig. Metro Manila, with an area of about four hundred ninety-two (492) square meters.  Manosca v. Court of Appeals The parcel has been the birthsite of Felix Y. Manalo, the founder of the Iglesia Ni Cristo. Because of that, the Naitional Historical Institute (NHI) passed a resolution declaring  the land to be a national historical landmark which was then approved by the Minister of Education, Culture and Sports. Regional Trial Court: The Republic, through the OSG instituted a complaint for expropriation alleging that the land is a public purpose. RTC then ordered the Republic to take over the property after fixing the provisional market and assessed value of the property.  Manosca v. Court of Appeals Court of Appeals: The petition for certiorari and prohibition was dismissed. Read: Belen v. Court of Appeals...

Belen v. Court of Appeals GR No. 76182, 195 SCRA 59 - March 11, 1991 FACTS: A small portion of land (Lot No. 10, Block 18 at Sunog Apog, Tondo, Manila) measuring a hundred (100) square meters, more or less, belonging to the Manotoc Services, Inc., was leased to Pedro M. Belen, which the latter has built a house. Respondents Alfredo Juliano and his family occupied a portion of the said land and later on bought a house standing thereon, not belonging to Belen and moved in without the latter's knowledge. On learning of this, Belen had a talk with Juliano, and they came to an agreement that Juliano could continue staying on the land temporarily and would pay one-half of the rental to Manotok Realty, Inc.  Belen v. Court of Appeals Later a fire razed both Belen's and Juliano's houses to the ground. Belen told Juliano not to build anything on the land any more. However, on Juliano's pleas, Belen acceded to Juliano's continued stay on the land on the explici...