Digested Cases

 

♦ Cityhood laws declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. (League of Cities v. COMELEC, GR No. 176951,177499,178056, August 24, 2010)League of Cities of the Philippines v. Comelec

 

♦Immediate disconnection of electricity is applicable only when the discovery is personally witnessed and attested to by an officer of the law or a duly authorized representative of the Energy Regulatory Board (ERB). Meralco v. Chua

♦Drug testing should be performed by any government forensic laboratories or any of the drug testing laboratories accredited and monitored by the Department of Health, to safeguard the quality of test results. (Nacague v. Sulpicio Lines, G.R. No. 172589, August 8, 2010)Nacague v. Sulpicio Lines

♦ Withholding agent may file a claim for tax refund. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Smart Communications, G.R. No. 179045, August 25, 2010) CIR v. Smart Communication

♦Where promotion is in name only without any change in job responsibility, the employee cannot demand a conversion or promotion increase. (SCA Hygiene Employees Association v. SCA Hygiene Products, G.R. No. 182877, August 9, 2010) SCA Employees v. SCA Hygiene Prods.

♦Banks can set-off loans with depositor’s money in the bank provided there is a stipulation to the effect. (Metrobank v. Marinas,  G.R. No. 179105, July 26, 2010) Metrobank v. Marinas

♦ Joint venture agreements are to be governed by the law on partnership. (Marsman Drysdale Land Inc. PGI, G.R. No. 183347, June 20, 2010) Marsman Drysdale Land, Inc. v. PGI

♦Immunity Agreements as a contract between parties. (Disini v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180564, June 22, 2010). Disini v. Sandigan

♦ Sexual Infidelity is not tantamount to psychological incapacity. (Ligarde v. Patalinhug, G.R. No. 168796, April 15,2010) Ligeralde v. patalinhug

♦Constructive dismissal exists when an act of clear discrimination, insensibility or disdain by an employer has become so unbearable to the employee leaving him with no option but to forego his continued employment. (Mandapat v. Add Force, G.R. No. 180285; 6 July 2010) Mandapat v. Add Force

♦Stipulations authorizing the imposition of iniquitous or unconscionable interest are contrary to morals, if not against the law. (Asian Finance vs. Gravador, G.R. No. 186550; 5 July 2010) . Asian Cathay Finance and Leasing Corp

♦Mandamus is not available as remedy to order re-correction of board exams. (Antolin v. Damondon, G.R. No. 165036; 5 July 2010)Antolin vs damondon

♦Lands acquired by the NHA are exempt from the coverage of agrarian reform. (NHA v. DARAB, G.R. No. 175200; 4 May 2010). NHA vsDARAB

♦ An illegally dismissed employee is  entitled to backwages and separation pay where his reinstatement had been rendered impossible due to strained relations. (Golden Ace v. Talde, G.R. No. 187200, May 5, 2010.) Golden Ace v. Talde, G.R

♦Access to defamatory information over the internet is not equivalent to “printing and publication” under the laws on libel. (Bonifacio v. RTC of Makati,  G.R. No. 184800; 5 May 2010) Bonifacio vs RTC of Makati

♦Once a married woman opted to adopt her husband’s surname in her passport, she may not revert to the use of her maiden name subject to certain cases. (Remo vs. Secretary of Foreign Affairs;  G.R. 169202; 5 March 2010)  Remo v. Secretary

♦Members of cooperatives are exempt from the 20% withholding tax on interest on their savings and time deposits maintained with the cooperative. Get the summary here. Dumaguete Coop v. CIR – summary

♦ A person afflicted with Dependent Personality Disorder cannot assume the essential marital obligations. This is not to say, however, that anyone diagnosed with Dependent Personality Disorder is automatically deemed psychologically incapacitated to perform his/her marital obligations.  The court must evaluate the facts. (Azcueta vs. Republic, G.R. No. 180668; 26 May 2009)

Get the digest here. azcueta v. republic- summary

♦ A candidate is liable for an election offense only for acts done during the campaign period, not before. In other words, election offenses can be committed by a candidate only upon the start of the campaign period.  Before the start of the campaign period, such election offenses cannot be so committed. This is the latest pronouncement of  the Supreme Court under the case of Penera vs. Commission on Elections (COMELEC), et al (G.R. 181613; 11 September 2009) and in a motion for reconsideration filed for the same case.

Get the digest of the original case here.Panera v. Comelec

And the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Motion for Reconsideration here. Panera v. Comelec – MR

♦ Voters registration extended until January 9, 2010

Palatino, et al. vs. Commission on Elections (COMELEC) G.R. No. 189868; 15 December 2009

Get the digested case here. Palatino v. COMELEC

♦ Appointed officials not ipso facto resigned upon filing of Certificate of Candidacy

Quinto vs. Commission on Elections (COMELEC) G.R. No. 189698; 1 December 2009

Get the digested case here.Quintov.comelec