2009 Bar exam Q & A - Remedial Law

QUESTION:Mariano, through his attorney-in-fact, Marcos, filed with the RTC of Baguio City a complaint for annulment of sale against Henry. Marcos and Henry both reside in Asin Road, Baguio City, while Mariano resides in Davao City. Henry filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of prematurity for failure to comply with the mandatory barangay conciliation. Resolve the motion with reasons. (2009 BAR EXAMS)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The motion to dismiss should be denied because the parties in interest, Mariano and Henry, do not reside in the same city/municipality, or is the property subject of the controversy situated therein. The required conciliation/mediation before the proper Barangay as mandated by the Local Government Code governs only when the parties to the dispute reside in the same city or municipality, and if involving real property, as in this case, the property must be situated also in the same city or municipality.

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

CONCEPT OF EMINENT DOMAIN

Eminent domain is the inherent power of a nation or a sovereign state to take, or sanction the taking of, private property for a public use without the owner's consent, conditioned upon payment of just compensation.  In other words, eminent domain is a coercive measure on the part of the state whereby private interests are impaired for the general welfare.

While eminent domain is an inherent power, it is not absolute such that it is subject to limitations imposed under the 1987 Constitution. Section 1, Article III provides that "no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law", while Section 9 thereof states that "private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation". These constitutionally enshrined restrictions ensure that private individuals are not unduly prejudiced by the capricious or oppressive exercise of the State's powers.

In other words, Eminent domain, also known as expropriation, is a power vested in the State to take private property for public use upon payment of just compensation. In the Philippines, this is a constitutional principle governed by the 1987 Constitution, Republic Act No. 10752 (The Right-of-Way Act), as well as jurisprudence.

Article III, Section 9 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. Republic Act No. 10752 further elaborates the rules, providing specific requirements that the government must meet to expropriate property.

Thus, in order for the State to exercise its power of eminent domain, the following requirements must be present:

(a) that it is for a public purpose; and

(b) that just compensation is paid to the property owner.

Public use means its usefulness to the public, utility or advantage, or what is productive of general benefit. This will ensure that any appropriation of private property by the state should be for public use. In the historical perspective, public use should be mean of a constant growth and not static. As society advances, individual demands increases and new demand use of the resources be devoted. In determining the genuinely of necessity for the exercise of eminent domain is a judiciable question, and the power exercised by the legislature is essentially a political question.

Just compensation is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator, the true measure of which is not the taker's gain but the owner's loss. Further, it does not only refer to the payment of the correct amount but also to the payment within a reasonable time from its taking because without prompt payment, the compensation cannot be considered just. In other words, just compensation in the context of eminent domain or expropriation proceedings pertains to the timely or prompt payment of an adequate value sufficient to recoup the loss suffered by the property owner.

In the case of REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS (DPWH), PETITIONER, VS. JOSE GAMIR-CONSUELO DIAZ HEIRS ASSOCIATION, INC., RESPONDENT. G.R. No. 218732, November 12, 2018, it stated:

"Furthermore, the determination of just compensation in expropriation cases is a function addressed to the discretion of the courts owing to the constitutional mandate that no private property shall be taken for public use without payment of just compensation. As such, legislative enactments, as well as executive issuances, fixing or providing for the method of computing just compensation are tantamount to impermissible encroachment on judicial prerogatives. As such, they are not binding on courts and are treated as mere guidelines in ascertaining the amount of just compensation. Even the enumeration of the standards for the assessment of the value of the land for purposes of expropriation under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 8974 reflects the non-exclusive, permissive and discretionary character thereof."

Steps in the Expropriation Process

1. Identification of Property. The government identifies the property required for a public purpose.

2. Offer to Buy. An initial offer to buy the property is made to the owner.

3. Payment of Just Compensation. Full payment of the property’s value must be made before the government takes possession.

The affected landowner upon the implementation of the expropriation, will file in court of their claim for just compensation. However, if the filing will be delayed, the legal payment will be applied from the time of taking. 

Also, the entry into the property prior to full payment, Section 10 of R.A. 7160 requires a deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated. As a rule, there is a difference if the expropriation involve infrastructure projects, it’s not only deposit rather than the full payment of the value of property.

Owners only have the right to question the sufficiency of the compensation, the public use of the property, or the government’s compliance with legal procedures through appropriate legal action. They can also negotiate for better terms or take the matter to court for fair judgment. owners cannot Refuse if expropriation for public purpose and just compensation is paid.

In certain circumstances, affected property owners may be entitled to additional benefits such as relocation support or compensation for loss of livelihood.

To question the expropriation:

1. Administrative Remedy: Property owners can first seek an administrative remedy by negotiating with the government entity involved.

2. Judicial Remedy: If an agreement is not reached, government agency concern can seek judicial intervention by filing an expropriation case.

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

Electronic Filing A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC/A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC. August 20, 2024

A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC/A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC. August 20, 2024

Re: Guidelines on Submission of Electronic Copies of Pleadings and other Court Submissions being filed before the Lower Courts pursuant to the Efficient Use of Paper Rule/Moving Towards Digital Courts: Component One: Transition to Electronic Filing and Service of Pleading, Motions and Other Documents as Well as Digital Services of all Orders in Civil Cases

SCAN, SAVE and SEND within 24 hours after the physical filing of civil pleadings in first and second level courts:

Step 1: SCAN each pleading, with annexes, or convert them to Portable Document Format (PDF).

Step 2: SAVE as separate files following these filename formats:

– [Pleading]-[Docket No.].pdf

– [Annex A]-[Pleading]-[Docket No.].pdf

Step 3: SEND via email:

– Subject: [Docket No.], [Case Title-Pleading Title]

– Body: (a) Primary manner of filing; (b) Filing date; (c) Docket number; (d) Case Title; (e) Filing Party; (f) Contact Numbers; (g) Other e-mail addresses; and (h) Titles of attachments.

– Send to the court’s official email address within 24 hours from the primary filing.

– Cc: all counsel and their law firms.

– Retain copy of transmittal email.

For more information, visit the eFiling microsite at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/electronic-filing/.

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

 

When does presumption of innocence end?

When does presumption of innocence end?

Where the conviction by a lower court is still on appeal, it has not yet reached finality and the accused still enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence. It must be remembered that the existence of a presumption indicating the guilt of the accused does not in itself destroy the constitutional presumption of innocence unless the inculpating presumption, together with all the evidence, or the lack of any evidence or explanation, proves the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Until the accused's guilt is shown in this manner, the presumption of innocence continues. Thus in Mangubat v. Sandiganbayan, the Court held that respondent Sandiganbayan did not act with grave abuse of discretion, correctible by certiorari, when it ruled that despite her conviction, the accused still enjoyed presumption of innocence. 

Re: Judge Angeles, A.M. No. 06-9-545-RTC, January 31, 2008.

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

Case Digest of Agacid vs People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 242133 April 16, 2024.

 

Whether or not Republic Act No. 9262 covers lesbian relationships.?

Agacid vs People, GR No. 242133, April 16, 2024

Republic Act No. 9262, Section 3(a) defines violence against women and their children:

SECTION 3. Definition of Terms. - As used in this Act,

(a) "Violence against women and their children" refers to any act or a series of acts committed by any person against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty."

#law #lawyer #barexamprep #BarExamSuccess #jurisprudence

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

Rules on small claims.

 

A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC or “The 2016 Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases”

Please visit my ACCOUNTS: 

SUI GENERIS YOUTUBE 

SUI GENERIS FACEBOOK PAGE 

SUI GENERIS INSTAGRAM 

Summary of GOOD CONDUCT TIME ALLOWANCE (GCTA) Law or RA No. 10592.

 

REPUBLIC ACT No. 10592

AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLES 29, 94, 97, 98 AND 99 OF ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Article 29 of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment. – Offenders or accused who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing after being informed of the effects thereof and with the assistance of counsel to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:

"1. When they are recidivists, or have been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime; and

"2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily.

"If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall do so in writing with the assistance of a counsel and shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment.

"Credit for preventive imprisonment for the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be deducted from thirty (30) years.1âwphi1

"Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. Computation of preventive imprisonment for purposes of immediate release under this paragraph shall be the actual period of detention with good conduct time allowance: Provided, however, That if the accused is absent without justifiable cause at any stage of the trial, the court may motu proprio order the rearrest of the accused: Provided, finally, That recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees and persons charged with heinous crimes are excluded from the coverage of this Act. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is lestierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment."

Section 2. Article 94 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 94. Partial extinction of criminal liability. – Criminal liability is extinguished partially:

"1. By conditional pardon;

"2. By commutation of the sentence; and

"3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving his sentence."

Section 3. Article 97 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 97. Allowance for good conduct. – The good conduct of any offender qualified for credit for preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of this Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any penal institution, rehabilitation or detention center or any other local jail shall entitle him to the following deductions from the period of his sentence:

"1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of twenty days for each month of good behavior during detention;

"2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a reduction of twenty-three days for each month of good behavior during detention;

"3. During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of twenty-five days for each month of good behavior during detention;

"4. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of thirty days for each month of good behavior during detention; and

"5. At any time during the period of imprisonment, he shall be allowed another deduction of fifteen days, in addition to numbers one to four hereof, for each month of study, teaching or mentoring service time rendered.

"An appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of entitlement to the above allowances for good conduct."

Section 4. Article 98 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A deduction of one fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded his preventive imprisonment or the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner chose to stay in the place of his confinement notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code.

"This Article shall apply to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving sentence."

Section 5. Article 99 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:"

"ART. 99. Who grants time allowances. – Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology and/or the Warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail shall grant allowances for good conduct. Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked."

Section 6. Penal Clause. – Faithful compliance with the provisions of this Act is hereby mandated. As such, the penalty of one (1) year imprisonment, a fine of One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) and perpetual disqualification to hold office shall be imposed against any public officer or employee who violates the provisions of this Act.

Section 7. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The Secretary of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) shall within sixty (60) days from the approval of this Act, promulgate rules and regulations on the classification system for good conduct and time allowances, as may be necessary, to implement the provisions of this Act.

Section 8. Separability Clause. – If any part hereof is held invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of the provisions not otherwise affected shall remain valid and subsisting.

Section 9. Repealing Clause. – Any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive order, letter of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act is hereby repealed, modified or amended accordingly.

Section 10. Effectivity Clause. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days from its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) new papers of general circulation.

Approved,

You can also visit SUI GENERIS Channel for more legal videos.