March 2006

Case Nature Law Ruling

March 03, 2006
SPOUSES ARSENIO and Complaint for Rule of Civil A comparison of the two civil
NIEVES S. REYES v. Damages Procedure on cases will show that the requisites
SOLEMAR Finality of Judgment of res judicata are present, viz: (a)
DEVELOPMENT the former judgment or order must
CORPORATION and be final; (b) it must be a judgment
RENATO M. TANSECO v. or order on the merits; (c) it must
REPUBLIC OF THE have been rendered by a court
PHILIPPINES having jurisdiction over the subject
G.R. No. 129247/G.R. No. matter and the parties; and (d)
136270 there must be, between the first
and the second actions, identity of
parties, of subject matter, and of
cause of action. the argument that
there is no identity of parties since
the Republic was not impleaded in
Civil Case No. 93-1566 is also
suspect. It has been repeatedly
emphasized by the Court that
absolute identity of parties is not
required in order for res judicata to
apply because substantial identity
is sufficient. This means that the
parties in both cases need not be
physically identical provided there
is privity them. Notably, Civil
Case No. 93-1566 was filed not
only against petitioners but also
against the Register of Deeds of
Paraaque, Metro Manila, an
officer of the Republic. Thus, the
Republic cannot be considered a
stranger in said case, which clearly
involves rights of ownership of
realty.
March 06, 2006
DOMINADOR S. PEREZ Complaint for Labor Law in The power to dismiss an employee
and CELINE CAMPOS v. Illegal relation to is a recognized prerogative that is
THE MEDICAL CITY Dismissal Management inherent in the employers right to
GENERAL HOSPITAL, Prerogative freely manage and regulate his
ALFREDO BENGZON, business. An employer cannot be
BENITA MACALAGAY and expected to retain an employee
MARIANNE FRANCISCO whose lack of morals, respect and
G.R. No. 150198 loyalty to his employer or regard
for his employers rules and
appreciation of the dignity and
responsibility of his office has so
plainly and completely been bared.
An employer may not be
compelled to continue to employ a
person whose continuance in
service will patently be inimical to
his interest. The dismissal of an
employee, in a way, is a measure
of self-protection. Nevertheless,
whatever acknowledged right the
employer has to discipline his
employee, it is still subject to
reasonable regulation by the State
 in the exercise of its police power.
Thus, it is within the power of this
Court not only to scrutinize the
basis for dismissal but also to
determine if the penalty is
commensurate to the offense,
notwithstanding the company
rules.
In this case, the Court agrees with
the Labor Arbiter that dismissal
would not be proportionate to the
gravity of the offense considering
the circumstances present in this
case. During their long tenure with
the Hospital, it does not appear that
they have been the subject of
disciplinary sanctions and they
have kept their records
unblemished. Moreover, the Court
also takes into account the fact that
petitioners are not managerial or
confidential employees in whom
greater trust is place by
management and from whom
greater fidelity to duty is
correspondingly expected.
THE CITY GOVERNMENT Petition for RA 7633 RA 7633 was enacted subsequent
OF QUEZON CITY and Prohibition to (Amendment to RA to the LGC. Perfectly aware that
THE CITY TREASURER enjoin public 3594 granting the LGC has already withdrawn
OF QUEZON CITY, DR. auction of franchise to Bayan Bayantels former exemption from
VICTOR B. ENRIGA v. Respondents Telecommunications, relaty taxes, Congress opted to
BAYAN real properties Inc.) pass RA 7633 using, under Section
TELECOMMUNICATIONS, for failure to 11 thereof, exactly the same
INC., pay real defining phrase exclusive of this
G.R. No. 162015 property tax franchise which was the basis for
Bayantels exemption from realty
taxes prior to the LGC. In plain
language, Section 11 of RA 7633
states that the grantee, its
successors or assigns shall be
liable to pay the same taxes on
their real estate, buildings and
personal property, exclusive of this
franchise, as other persons or
corporations now or hereafter may
be required by law to pay. The
court views this subsequent piece
of legislation as an express and real
intention on the part of Congress to
once again remove from the LGCs
delegated taxing power, all of the
franchisees (Bayantel) properties
that are actually, directly and
exclusively used in the pursuit of
its franchise.
UNITED KIMBERLY- Petition for Labor Laws in The court has recognized in
CLARK EMPLOYEES Certiorari for relation to numerous instances the undoubted
UNION PHILIPPINE the imposition Management right of the employer to regulate,
TRANSPORT GENERAL of an upgraded Prerogative according to his own discretion
WORKERS educational and best judgment, all aspects of
ORGANIZATION (UKCEU- qualification of employment, including but not
PTGWO) v. KIMBERLY recommendees limited to, work assignments and
CLARK PHILIPPINES, as a valid supervision, working methods and
INC. exercise of regulations, time, place and
G.R. No. 162957 management manner of work, processes to be
prerogative followed, and hiring, supervision,
transfer, discipline, lay off,
dismissal and recall of workers.
encompassing though it could be,
the exercise of this right is not
absolute. Management prerogative
must be exercised in good faith for
the advancement of the employers
interest and not for the purpose of
defeating or circumventing the
rights of the employees under
special laws, valid agreements
such as the individual contract of
employment and the collective
bargaining agreement, and general
principle of justice and fair play. In
this case, the Court finds that
respondent acted in accord with the
CBA and the November 7, 1995
Guidelines, which, by agreement
of the parties, may be implemented
by respondent after January 01,
1997.
March 10, 2006
BANK OF THE Complaint for Article 2154 of the There is solutio indebiti where: (1)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. Sum of Money Civil Code. payment is made when there exists
ELIZABETH G. no binding relation between the
SARMIENTO payor, who has no duty to pay, and
G.R. No. 146021 the person who received the
payment and (2) the payment is
made through mistake, and not
through liberality or some other
cause. x x x x The quasi-contract
of solutio indebiti is based on the
ancient principle that no one shall
enrich himself unjustly at the
expense of another.
Both elements are lacking in the
present case. Mr. Cascarro, the
Head of the Branches Division
Investigation Unit, had
categorically stated that respondent
was only terminated from service
on August 26, 1988. Respondent
was not suspended from office.
Consequently, during the period in
question, there still existed an
employer-employee relationship
between petitioner and respondent
which entitled the respondent to
the payment of her salary during
the said period. Thus, there can be
no mistaken payment in this case.
Moreover, it has been shown that
the payment of respondents salary
was with the knowledge and
approval of respondents
immediate superior officers.
Hence, the principle of solutio
 indebiti finds no application in this
case.
DAVAO LIGHT & POWER Two separate RA 7691 (An Act Guidelines in the implementation
CO., INC. v. HON. JUDGE civil cases: (1) Expanding the of RA 7691 were laid out in
OF THE REGIONAL for sum of Jurisdiction of the Administrative Circular No. 09-94
TRIAL COURT DAVAO money and Metropolitan Trial dated June 14, 1994. Particularly,
CITY, BRANCH 8, ATTY. damages filed Courts, Municipal with regard to damages, par. 2
SERAFIN S. OSABEL, by Petitioner Trial Courts and provides that in cases where the
NEOCEDA NOVAL- against Private Municipal Circuit claim for damages is the main
OSABEL, MARIE Respondent, and Trial Courts) cause of action, or one of the
JOHANNA OSABEL- (2) for damages causes of action, the amount of
GARCIA, VICTORIA LUZ filed by Private such claim shall be considered in
OSABEL-DACUYCUY, Respondents determining the jurisdiction of the
ANNA CHRISTIA OSABEL against court. x x x x
and SERAFIN OSABEL, JR. Petitioner It is clear that respondents main
G.R. No. 147058 action is for damages. Hence, all
these claims must be included in
determining the jurisdictional
amount, and obviously, it falls
within the jurisdiction of the RTC.
HYATT INDUSTRIAL Complaint for Rule 23 of the Rules While it is true that depositions
MANUFACTURING CORP. Specific of Court may be disallowed by trial courts if
and YU HE CHING v. LEY Performance the examination is conducted in
CONSTRUCTION AND and Damages bad faith; or in such a manner as to
DEVELOPMENT CORP. annoy, embarrass, or oppress the
AND PRINCETON person who is the subject of the
DEVELOPMENT CORP. inquiry, or when the inquiry
G.R. No. 147143 touches upon the irrelevant or
encroaches upon the recognized
domains of privilege, such
circumstances, however are absent
in the case at bar.
The RTC cites the delay in the case
as reason for canceling the
scheduled depositions. While
speedy disposition of cases is
important, such consideration
however should not outweigh a
thorough and comprehensive
evaluation of cases, for the ends of
justice are reached not only
through the speedy disposal of
cases but more importantly,
through a meticulous and
comprehensive valuation of the
merits of the case. Records also
show that the delay of the case is
not attributable to the depositions
sought by LCDC but was caused
by the many pleadings filed by all
the parties including petitioners
herein.
RAMON R. OLBES and Complaint for Law on Suretyship As correctly observed by the CA,
RICARDO R. OLBES v. collection the Suretyship Agreement, as
CHINA BANKING couched, expressly covered both
CORPORATION current (may now be indebted) and
G.R. No. 152082 future (may hereafter become
indebted) loans of the principal. In
net effect, the agreement thus
executed by petitioners was
intended to secure the payments of
the amounts borrowed by and for
 which OO&M signed the PNs in
question.
Not to be overlooked is the fact
that the Suretyship Agreement
expressly contemplated a solidary
obligation, providing as it did that
the surety(ies) hereby jointly and
severally undertake, bind
themselves and warrant to the said
Creditor. It is a cardinal rule that if
the terms of a contract are clear
and leave no doubt as to the
intention of the contracting parties,
the literal meaning of its
stipulation shall control. In the
present case, there can be no
mistaking about petitioners intent,
as sureties, to be jointly and
severally obligated with the
principal maker of the notes in
dispute. As such sureties, Ramon
Olbes and Ricardo Olbes are
personally liable under the
suretyship agreement.
EJR CRAFTS Complaint for Article 128 of the As a rule, findings of fact by
CORPORATION v. HON. underpayment Labor Code administrative agencies are
COURT OF APPEALS, of wages, accorded great respect, if not
DIRECTOR BARTOLOME regular holiday finality by the Courts. x x x x
C. AMOGUIS, NCR DOLE pay, overtime Therefore, this Court not being a
UNDERSECRETARY JOSE pay, trier of facts cannot pass upon the
M. ESPAOL, JR., nonpayment of authenticity and veracity of the
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 13th month pay quitclaim and release forms the
AND EMPLOYMENT, and service only piece of evidence presented
NIVEA MAHILUM, ET. AL. incentive leave by petitioner to support its
G.R. No. 154101 pay contention that no employer-
employee relationship exists
between petitioner and private
respondents at the time of the filing
of the complaint. x x x x The
conclusion reached by both the
Undersecretary of Labor and the
Court of Appeals, after thoroughly
considering all pieces of evidence
presented before them regarding
this issue, must now be regarded
with great respect and finality by
this Court.
Considering thus that there still
exists an employer-employee
relationship between petitioner and
private respondents and that the
case involves violations of labor
standard provisions of the Labor
Code, we agree with the
Undersecretary of Labor and the
appellate court that the Regional
Director has jurisdiction to hear
and decide the instant case in
conformity with Article 128 (b) of
the Labor Code.
NAPOCOR EMPLOYEES Petition for RA 6758 We hold that RA 6758 can be
CONSOLIDATED UNION Mandamus (Compensation and implemented notwithstanding our
(NECU) represented by its
President, ABNER P.
ELERIA, who is also suing in
his personal capacity; NPC
RETIREES, represented by
their Attorneys-in-fact,
JAIME B. ENRIQUEZ and
ZENAIDA N. ATIENZA who
are also suing in their
personal capacities; and
other similarly situated NPC
Employees and Retirees v.
THE NATIONAL POWER
COPORATION (NPC); THE
NATIONAL POWER
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
(NPB)
G.R. No. 157492
MERCURY DRUG
CORPORATION v.
ZENAIDA G. SERRANO
G.R. No. 160509
Classification Act of ruling in De Jesus v. Commission
1989) on Audit. While it is true that in
said case, this Court declared the
nullity of DBM-CCC No. 10, yet
there is nothing in our decision
thereon suggesting or intimating
the suspension of the of the
effectivity of RA 6758 pending the
publication in the Official Gazette
of DBM-CCC No. 10. For sure, in
Philippine International Trading
Corporation v. Commission on
Audit, this Court specifically ruled
that the nullity of DBM-CCC No.
10 will not affect the validity of
RA 6758.
Although NPC stopped its
employers contribution to the NPC
Employees Welfare Fund, NPC
nevertheless continue to pay its
employees the amount equivalent
to its contribution to the subject
fund. NPC integrated its
employers contribution to the
NPC Employees Welfare Fund to
the standardization salary rates of
its employees in compliance with
Section 12 of RA 6758.
Complaint for Art. 282 (c) of the Loss of trust and confidence is
Illegal Labor Code premised on the fact that the
Dismissal, employee holds a position whose
Unfair Labor functions may only be performed
Practice and by someone who has the
Non-Payment of confidence of management. Such
benefits employee has a greater duty to
management than ordinary
workers. The betrayal of this trust
is the essence of the offense which
is a ground for the employees
termination. In this case, there is
no question that Mercury has the
right to expect full trust and
confidence from Serrano because
of her position. Serranos routine
duty was to handle Mercurys
goods and receive customers
payments for eventual handing to
the cashier.
Loss of trust and confidence,
which should be genuine, does not
require proof beyond reasonable
doubt. In this case, Mercury
alleges that Serrano committed
dishonesty by pocketing the P120
payment of one of its customers
during an entrapment initiated by
Mercury Recto-Soler Branch
Manager Mateo. x x x x
Serranos act of pocketing the
payment and handing it to the
cashier only after the customer
returned to the branch gave
 Mercury reasonable ground to
believe, if not entertain the moral
conviction, that Serrano is guilty of
dishonesty. This made her
unworthy of the trust and
confidence reposed on her by
Mercury.
RONALDO B. CASIMIRO, Complaint for Art. 283 of the Labor Art. 283 of the Labor Code of the
ELISA M. LAT, JOSE L. Illegal Code Philippines authorizes
LALAP, CELESTIN S. Dismissal retrenchment as one of the valid
LACHICA, REYNALDO S. causes to dismiss employees as a
MALLILLIN, LEONILA G. measure to avoid or minimize
ROJO, JULIE H. business losses. Retrenchment is
SEBASTIAN, EDITHA M. the termination of employment
SOLOMON, EMILIANO T. initiated by the employer through
TAMBAOAN III, no fault of the employees and
FERNANDO G. TROZADO without prejudice to the latter,
v. STERN REAL ESTATE resorted to by management during
INC. REMBRANDT HOTEL period of business recession,
and/or GRACE KRISTIN industrial depression or seasonal
MEEHAN (General fluctuations, or during lulls
Manager), and ERIC occasioned by lack of orders,
SINGSON (Owner) shortage of materials, conversion
G.R. No. 162233 of the plant for a new production
program or the introduction of ne
methods or more efficient
machinery or of automation.
Simply, put, it is a reduction in
manpower, a measure utilized by
an employer to minimize losses
incurred in the operation of its
business. It is a management
prerogative consistently recognized
and affirmed by this Court.
The Court notes that petitioners
failed to dispute the validity of the
financial statements and receipts
submitted by respondents, or that
any false entries were made
therein. They failed to prove, much
less impute, any ill motive on the
part of the independent auditors
who prepared the financial
statements which respondent
submitted.
Verily, it is neither the function of
the law nor its intent to supplant
the prerogative of management in
running its business, such as, to
compel the latter to operate at a
continuing loss simple because it
has to maintain its workers in
employment. Such an act would be
tantamount to the taking of
property without due process of
law.
AGRIPINO V. MOLINA v. Complaint for Art. 282 of the Labor As a general rule, employers are
PACIFIC PLANS, INC. Illegal Code allowed wide latitude of discretion
G.R. No. 165476 Dismissal and in terminating the employment of
Illegal managerial personnel. The mere
Suspension existence of a basis for believing
that such employee has breached

March 17, 2006
MANILA ELECTRIC
COMPANY (MERALCO) v.
ENERGY REGULATORY
BOARD (ERB), and EDGAR
L. TI, doing business under
the name and style of ELT
ENTERPRISE
G.R. No. 145399
SPOUSES VICENTE YU Petition
and DEMETRIA LEE-YU v. Extra-Judicial
PHILIPPINE Foreclosure of
COMMERCIAL Real
INTERNATIONAL BANK Mortgage
G.R. No. 147902
the trust and confidence of his
employer would suffice for his
dismissal.
A slight assistance to a direct
competitor could constitute a
breach of the employees duty of
loyalty. However, when
competition is indirect or minimal,
the employer may be required to
show that the employee received
substantial assistance from the
competitor. If an employee
usurped a corporate opportunity or
secretly profited from a
competitive activity, the employer
may receive the value of the lost
opportunity or the secret profit.
However, there is no evidence on
record to prove that respondent
expressly prohibited its Sales
Associate from selling for Caritas.
Neither is there evidence on record
to prove that Caritas prohibited its
sales associates from selling pre-
need plans for respondent.
Complaint for RA 7832 (Anti-
The ERB can properly take
unauthorized electricitycognizance of respondent Tis
and
disconnection of Electric complaint for reconnection of
electric service. Transmission
electric service in ERB Case No.
Mines/Materials
99-67, touching as it does on the
Pilferage Act of
obligation of a public utility to
1994) supply adequate electricity and
proper service to the consuming
public. It bears to reiterate that the
ERB, by force of the aforecited
Sections 13 and 17(a) of CA No.
146, as amended, in relation to
Section 14 of EO No. 172, has
jurisdiction, control and
supervision over all public
services, their franchises and
properties, with power to
investigate any matter respecting
its jurisdiction and to require any
public service to furnish safe,
adequate, and proper service as the
public interest may require. To us,
the power of control and
supervision over public utilities
would other be a meaningless
delegation were the ERB is
precluded from requiring a public
utility to reconnect pending the
determination of propriety of the
disconnection.
for Article 2089 of the The Court finds that petitioners
Civil Code have a mistaken notion that the
indivisibility of a real estate
Estate mortgage relates to the venue of
extra-judicial foreclosure
proceedings. The rule on
 indivisibility of a real estate
mortgage is provided for in Art.
2089 of the Civil Code. This rule
presupposes several heirs of the
debtor or creditor and therefore not
applicable to the present case.
Furthermore, what the law
proscribes is the foreclosure of
only a portion of the property or a
number of the several properties
mortgaged corresponding to the
unpaid portion of the debt where,
before foreclosure proceedings,
partial payment was made by the
debtor on his total outstanding loan
or obligation. This also means that
the debtor cannot ask for the
release of any portion of the
mortgaged property or of one or
some of the several lots mortgaged
unless and until the loan thus
secured has been fully paid,
notwithstanding the fact that there
has been partial fulfillment of the
obligation. Hence, it is provide that
the debtor who has paid a part of
the debt cannot ask for the
proportionate extinguishment of
the mortgage as long as the debt is
not completely satisfied. In
essence, indivisibility means that
the mortgage obligation cannot be
divided among the different lots,
that is, each and every parcel under
mortgage answers for the totality
of the debt.
March 21, 2006
ERLINDA GAJUDO, Annulment of Art. 1601 of the It is true that the one-year period of
FERNANDO GAJUDO, JR, Extra-judicial Civil Code redemption provided in Act. No.
ESTELITA GAJUDO, foreclosure and 3135, as amended the law under
BALTAZAR GAJUDO and auction sale which the property here was sold
DANILO ARAHAN CHUA in a foreclosure sale is only
v. TRADERS ROYAL directory and, as such can be
BANK extended by agreement of the
G.R. No. 151098 parties. however, it has also been
held that for legal redemption to be
converted into conventional
redemption, two requisites must be
established: 1) voluntary
agreement of the parties to extend
the redemption period; and 2) the
debtors commitment to pay the
redemption price on a fixed date.
Thus, assuming that an offer was
made to Petitioner Chua to buy
back the property after the lapse of
the period of legal redemption,
petitioners needed to show that the
parties had agreed to extend the
period, and that Petitioner Chua
had committed to pay the
redemption price on a fixed date.
 Other than the Interbank check
marked for deposit by respondent
bank, no other evidence was
presented to establish that
petitioners had offered to pay the
alleged redemption price on a fixed
date. For that matter, petitioners
have not shown that they tendered
payment of the balance and/or
consigned the payment to the
court, in order to fulfill their part of
the purported agreement. These
remedies are available to an
aggrieved debtor under Art. 1256
of the Civil Code, when the
creditor unjustly refuses to accept
the payment of an obligation.
March 23, 2006
FRANCISCO T. JIMENEZ Claim for PD No. 626 To be entitled to disability benefits
v. COURT OF APPEALS, Compensation (Employees under the Employees
EMPLOYEES before SSS Compensation Law) Compensation Law, there must be
COMPENSATION loss or impairment of a physical or
COMMISSION, SOCIAL mental function which resulted
SECURITY SYSTEM and from an injury arising out of or in
HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. the course of employment, or from
G.R. No. 144449 any illness definitely accepted as
an occupational disease listed by
the Commission, or any illness
caused by the employment subject
to proof that the risk of contracting
the same is increased by working
conditions.
Since diabetes mellitus, senile and
mature cataract and bullous
keratopathy, are not listed in the
Table of Occupational Diseases
embodied in Annex A of the Rules
on Employees Compensation,
petitioner is required to present
proof that the risk of contracting
the disease is increased by his
working conditions. This petitioner
failed to do as he merely alleged
that his work as clerk in the
Administration and Records
Department of the Hacienda
increased his risk of contracting his
illnesses.
EDUARDO F. Complaint for PD 1818 as amended PD 1818 prohibits courts from
HERNANDEZ, MA. Damages with by RA 8975 (An Act issuing injunctions against
ENCARNACION R. Prayer for to Ensure the government infrastructure projects.
LEGASPI, JAIME Issuance of a Expeditious In Garcia v. Burgos,PD 1818 was
BLANCO, JR., ENRIQUE Temporary Implementation and held to prohibit courts from issuing
BELO, CARLOS Restraining Completion of an injunction against any
VIAPLANA, CARL FURER, Order and/or a Government infrastructure project in order not
VIVENCIO TINIO, Writ of Infrastructure to disrupt or hamper the pursuit of
MICHAEL BRIGGS, ROSA Preliminary Projects by essential government projects or
CARAM, FAUSTO Injunction Prohibiting the frustrate the economic
PREYSLER, ROBERT Lower Courts from development effort of the nation.
KUA, GEORGE LEE, Issuing Temporary While its sole provision would
GUILLERMO Restraining Orders, appear to encompass all cases
LUCHANGCO, PETER Preliminary involving the implementation of
DEE, LUISA MARQUEZ, Injunctions or projects and contracts on
ANGELITA LILLES, JUAN Preliminary infrastructure, natural resource
CARLOS, HOMER GO, Mandatory development and public utilities,
AMADEO VALENZUELA, Injunction, Providing this rule, however, is not absolute
EMILIO CHING, Penalties for as there are actually instances
ANTONIO CHAN, MURLI Violation thereof and when PD 1818 should not find
SABNANI, MARCOS for Other Purposes) application. In a spate of cases, this
ROCES, RAYMUNDO Court declared that although PD
FELICIANO, NORMA 1818 prohibits any court from
GAFFUD, ALF HOLST, issuing injunctions in cases
LOURDES P. ROQUE, involving infrastructure projects,
MANUEL DY, RAUL the prohibition extends only to the
FERNANDEZ, VICTORIA issuance of injunctions or
TENGCO, CHI MO restraining orders against
CHENG, BARANGAY administrative acts in controversies
DAMARIAS and HON. involving facts or the exercise of
FRANCISCO B. IBAY v. discretion in technical cases. On
NATIONAL POWER issues clearly outside this
CORPORATION dimension and involving questions
G.R. No, 145328 of law, this Court declared that
courts could not be prevented from
exercising their power to restrain
or prohibit administrative acts.
EASTLAND Complaint for Section 2, Rule XI As pointed out by respondent,
CONTRUCTION & Specific and Section 1, Rule petitioner did not appeal the
DEVELOPMENT Performance, XII of the 1996 decision of the Housing and Land
CORPORATION v. Delivery of Title HLURB Rules of Use Arbiter to the HLURB Board
BENEDICTA MORTEL and Damages Procedure of Commissioners. As borne by the
G.R. No. 165648 records, only PDIC and Orient
Bank appealed to the HLURB
Board of Commissioners. There
being no petition for review filed
by petitioner before the HLURB
Board of Commissioners within 30
calendar days after receiving a
copy of the decision of the
Housing and Land Use Arbiter, the
latters decision as regards the
former became final and
executory.
Inasmuch as the decision of the
Housing and Land Use Arbiter had
long been final and executory as
regards petitioner, it can no longer
be altered or modified. Nothing is
more settled in law than that when
a judgment becomes final and
executory it becomes immutable
and unalterable. The same may no
longer be modified in any respect,
even if the modification is meant to
correct what is perceived to be an
erroneous conclusion of fact or
law, and whether made by the
highest court of the land. The
reason is grounded on the
fundamental considerations of
public policy and sound practice
that, at the risk of occasional error,
the judgments or orders of courts
(or quasi-judicial bodies, as in this
case) must be final at some definite
 date fixed by law.
PREMIERE Complaint for Art. 282 of the Labor In the case at bar, respondent
DEVELOPMENT BANK v. illegal Code cannot be held liable for serious
ELSIE ESCUDERO suspension, misconduct or gross negligence.
MANTAL illegal dismissal, No independent evidence was
G.R. No. 167716 unpaid salary presented to prove her willful
and 13th month conspiracy with Detalla. Petitioner
pay eve admitted that there is no direct
evidence that respondent benefited
from the falsified bank guarantee.
Liability for the incident lay solely
with Detalla, who patently
breached the trust and confidence
of petitioner. Respondent merely
followed the orders of the bank
manager which appeared to be
regular. Furthermore, the nature of
respondents job does not include
processing of bank loans and
guarantees. Her work as
accounting clerk refers only to the
opening of deposits and processing
of withdrawals. The alleged
infraction was not within the scope
of her job function. Petitioner did
not contest this fact.
SECURITY BANK Administrative RA 6713 (Code of Well-settled is the doctrine that the
CORPORATION v. case for Gross Conduct and Ethical duty of sheriffs in the execution of
ROMEO C. GONZALBO, Inefficiency and Standards for Public a writ issued by a court is purely
ARTURO A. RAMOS and Neglect of Duty Officials and ministerial. Indeed, it is their
EDILBERTO C. DE Employees ministerial duty to proceed to
CASTRO execute a writ placed in their
A.M. No. P-06-2139 hands, with reasonable celerity and
promptness in accordance with
their mandate, unless restrained by
a court order, they should see to it
that the execution of a judgment is
not unduly delayed. Accordingly,
they must comply with their
mandated obligation as speedily as
possible.
xxx xxx xxx
As public officers, court
employees from the presiding
judge to the lowliest clerk should
always act with a high degree of
professionalism and responsibility.
Sheriffs, specifically, are bound to
use utmost skill and diligence in
the performance of their official
duties, particularly when the rights
of individuals may be jeopardized
by their neglect. Verily they play
an important role in the
administration of justice.
Lest we forget, a public office is a
public trust. Being in close contact
with litigants, sheriffs are in
particular at the grassroots of our
judicial machinery. Hence, their
conduct should be geared towards
maintaining the prestige and
 integrity of the courts. By the very
nature of their functions, they must
conduct themselves with propriety
and decorum. They cannot afford
to err in serving court writs and
processes or in implementing court
orders. Otherwise, they would
undermine the integrity of their
office and the efficient
administration of justice.
March 24, 2006
EDNA ABAD, JOSEPH Complaint for Labor Law on This case does not involve
MARTINEZ and ELISEO Illegal dismissal Termination of abandonment as ground for
ESCANILLAS, JR. v. Employment termination. Abandonment,
ROSELLE CINEMA, involves termination of an
SILVER SCREEN employee by the employer. The
CORPORATION and truth of the matter is that before
VERMY TRINIDAD respondent could dismiss
G.R. No. 141371 petitioners on the ground of
abandonment, petitioners filed with
the LA their complaint for illegal
dismissal. In the present case, it
must be stressed that there is no
evidence showing that respondents
were actually dismissed by
petitioners, let alone, on ground of
abandonment. Neither is there a
showing that petitioners formally
resigned from their work. What is
actually involved herein is the
informal voluntary termination of
employment by the petitioners
employees.
WILLIAM GOLANGCO Arbitration for Art. 1306 of the Obligations arising from contracts
CONSTRUCTION reimbursement Civil Code have the force of law between the
CORPORATION v. of repair parties and should be complied
PHILIPPINE expenses with in good faith. In
COMMERCIAL characterizing the contract as
INTERNATIONAL BANK having the force of law between
G.R. No. 142830 the parties, the law stresses the
obligatory nature of a binding and
valid agreement.
The provision in the construction
contract providing for a defects
liability period was not shown as
contrary to law, morals, good
customs, public order or public
policy. By the nature of the
obligation in such contract, the
provision limiting liability for
defects and fixing specific
guaranty periods was not only fair
and equitable; it was also
necessary. Without such limitation,
the contractor would be expected
to make a perpetual guarantee on
all materials and workmanship.
The adoption of a one-year
guarantee, as done by WGCC and
PCIB, is established usage in the
Philippines for private and
government construction contracts.
 The contract did not specify a
different period for defects in the
granitite wash-out finish; hence,
any defect therein should have
been brought to WGCCs attention
within the one-year defects liability
period in the contract.
JAIME M. BARRIOS, GSIS Claim for PD 626 (Employees Under Section 1(b), Rule III
substituted by his heirs, Income Benefits Compensation and implementing PD 626, for the
ERLINDA BARRIOS and State Insurance death of Barrios to be
CHRISTIANNE JOY Fund) and its IRR compensable, petitioners, as
BARRIOS v. EMPLOYEES claimants, must prove that (a) his
COMPENSATION sickness was the result of an
COMMISSION and occupational disease listed under
GOVERNMENT SERVICE Annex A of the Rules of
INSURANCE SYSTEM Employees Compensation, or (b)
(NATIONAL IRRIGATION the risk of contracting the disease
ADMINISTRATION) was increased by his working
G.R. No. 148089 conditions. In Salalima v.
Employees Compensation
Commission, we held that where
the disease or illness that caused
the death or disability of the
employee is not included in Annex
A, his or her heirs are entitled to
compensation if they can prove
that the risk of contracting the
disease was increased by his or her
working conditions. The law does
not require that the connection be
established with absolute certainty
or that a direct causal relation be
shown. It is not enough that the
theory upon which the claim is
based is probable. Probability, not
certainty, is the touchstone.
PAZ GALVEZ, CARLOS Legal Rules on Co- It is a fundamental principle that a
TAM and TYCOON Redemption ownership co-owner cannot acquire by
PROPERTIES, INC. v. with Damages prescription the share of the other
HON. COURT OF and co-owners, absent any clear
APPEALS and PORFIRIO Cancellation of repudiation of the co-ownership.
GALVEZ Documents For title to prescribe in favor of a
G.R. No. 157954 co-owner there must be a clear
showing that he has repudiated the
claims of the other co-owners and
the latter has been categorically
advised of the exclusive claim he is
making to the property in question.
The rule requires a clear
repudiation of the co-ownership
duly communicated to the other
co-owners. It is only when such
unequivocal notice has been given
that the period of prescription will
begin to run against the other co-
owners and ultimately divest them
of their own title if they do not
seasonably defend it.
LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Complaint for Civil Service Law Section 2(1), Article IX B, 1987
AUTHORITY v. Illegal and Labor Code of Constitution, expressly provides
PERFECTO H. VENUS, JR., Dismissal the Philippines that the civil service embraces all
BIENVENIDO P. SANTOS, branches, subdivisions,
JR., RAFAEL C. ROY, instrumentalities, and agencies of
NANCY C. RAMOS, the Government, including
SALVADOR A. ALFON, government-owned or controlled
NOEL R. SANTOS, corporation with original charters.
MANUEL A. FERRER, Corporations with original charters
SALVADOR G. ALINAS, are those which have been created
RAMON D. LOFRANCO, by special law and not through the
AMADOR H. general corporation law. Thus, in
POLICARPIO, REYNALDO Philippine National Oil Company
B. GENER and Energy Development Corporation
BIENVENIDO G. v. Hon. Leogrado, we held that
ARPILLEDA under the present state of the law,
G.R. No. 163728/G.R. No. the test in determining whether a
163881 government-owned or controlled
corporation is subject to the Civil
Service Law is the maneer of its
creation such that government
corporations created by special
charter are subject to its provisions
while those incorporated under the
general Corporation Law are not
within its coverage. There should
be no dispute then that
employment of LRTA should be
governed only by civil service
rules, and not the Labor Code and
beyond the reach of the
Department of Labor and
Employment, since petitioner
LRTA is a government-owned and
controlled corporation with an
original charter.
SOCIAL SECURITY Claim for Provisions of the Under the Civil Code, a subsequent
SYSTEM v. TERESIT funeral and Civil Code on marriage being voidable, it is
JARQUE VDA. DE BAILON additional claim Marriage and the terminated by final judgment of
G.R. No. 165545 for death Family Code of the annulment in a case instituted by
benefits. Philippines the absent spouse who reappears or
by either of the spouses in the
subsequent marriage.
Under the Family Code, no judicial
proceeding to annul a subsequent
marriage is necessary.
The termination of the subsequent
marriage by affidavit provided by
Art. 42 of the Family Code does
not preclude the filing of an action
in court to prove the reappearance
of the absentee and obtain a
declaration of dissolution or
termination of the subsequent
marriage.
If the absentee reappears, but no
step is taken to terminate the
subsequent marriage, either by
affidavit or by court action, such
absentees mere reappearance,
even if made known to the spouses
in the subsequent marriage, will
not terminate such marriage. Since
the second marriage had been
contracted because of a
presumption that the former spouse
 is dead, such presumption
continues inspite of the spouses
physical reappearance, and by
fiction of law, he or she must still
be regarded as legally an absentee
until the subsequent marriage is
terminated as provided by law.
March 28, 2006
JIMMY T. GO a.k.a. JAIME Complaint for Civil Code provision The Court finds no substantial
T. GAISANO v. HON. ZEUS Collection of a on Obligations reason to reverse the RTCs
C. ABROGAR, in his Sum of Money decision finding petitioner liable
capacity as Presiding Judge solidarily with Looyuko to the
of REGIONAL TRIAL Bank. There was no denying that
COURT Branch 150, Makati he had signed the promissory notes
and INTERNATIONAL as a co-maker and that he executed
EXCHANGE BANK a Surety Agreement. Petitioner
G.R. No. 145213 argues that the parties had actually
intended their liabilities to be joint
and that he has evidence to prove
that his liability was less that what
the RTC declared him liable for.
Petitioners liability is largely a
factual assessment that has been
thoroughly and extensively passed
upon by the RTC and should not
be disturbed on appeal.
SPOUSES JESUS and Complaint for DARAB Rules The issuance during the pendency
EVANGELINE PASCO v. Unlawful of the case of a Notice of Coverage
PISON-ARCEO Detainer to respondent does not, however,
AGRICULTURAL AND automatically make the ejectment
DEVELOPMENT case an agrarian dispute over
CORPORATION which the Department of Agrarian
G.R. No. 165501 Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB) has jurisdiction. The
issuance of a Notice of Coverage is
merely a preliminary step for the
States acquisition of the land for
agrarian reform purposes and it
does not automatically vest title or
transfer the ownership of the land
to the government.
Since during the field investigation
the DAR and Land Bank of the
Philippines would make a
determination as to whether,
among other things, the land will
be placed under agrarian reform,
the lands suitability to agriculture,
a Notice of Coverage does not ipso
facto render the land subject
thereof a land reform area. The
owner retains its right to eject
unlawful possession of his land, as
what respondent did in the present
case.
UNIVERSITY OF SAN Petition to Arts. 261 and 262 of The grievance machinery and no
AGUSTIN EMPLOYEES Declare Illegal the Labor Code strike, no lockout provisions of the
UNION-FFW (USAEU- Strike and Loss CBA forged by the University and
FFW), and individual union of Employment the Union are founded on Articles
officers THEODORE NEIL Status 261 and 262 of the Labor Code.
LASOLA, MERLYN JARA, The parties agreed that practically
JULIUS MARIO, all disputes including bargaining
FLAVIANO MANALO, deadlocks shall be referred to the
RENE CABALUM, grievance machinery which ends in
HERMINIGILDO voluntary arbitration. Moreover, no
CALZADO, MA. LUZ strike or no lockout shall ensue
CALZADO, RAY while the matter is being resolved.
ANTHONY ZUIGA, The University file a Motion to
RIZALENE VILLANUEVA, Strike Out Notice of Strike and
RUDANTE DOLAR, Refer the Dispute to Voluntary
ROVER JOHN TAVARRO, Arbitration precisely to call the
RENA LETE, ALFREDO attention of the NCMB and the
GORIONA, RAMON Union to the fact that the CBA
VACANTE and MAXIMO provides for a grievance machinery
MONTERO v. THE COURT and the parties obligation to
OF APPEALS and exhaust and honor said
UNIVERSITY OF SAN mechanism. Accordingly, the
AGUSTIN NCMB should have directed the
G.R. No. 169632 Union to honor its agreement with
the University to exhaust
administrative grievance measures
and bring the alleged deadlock to
voluntary arbitration.
Unfortunately, the NCMB did not
resolve the Universitys motion
thus paving the way for the strike
on September 19, 2003 and the
deliberate circumvention of the
CBAs grievance machinery and
voluntary arbitration provisions.
As we see it, the failure or refusal
of the NCMB and thereafter the
SOLE to recognize, honor and
enforce the grievance machinery
and voluntary arbitration
provisions of the parties CBA
unwittingly rendered said
provisions, as well as, Articles 261
and 262 of the Labor Code, useless
and inoperative. As her, a union
can easily circumvent the
grievance machinery and a
previous agreement to resolve
differences or conflicts through
voluntary arbitration through the
simple expedient of filing a notice
of strike. On the other hand,
management can avoid the
grievance machinery and voluntary
arbitration provisions of its CBA
by simply filing a notice of
lockout.
O.B. JOVENIR Annulment of Rule 17 of the 1964 Sec. 1, Rule 17 of the 1964 Rules
CONSTRUCTION AND Contracts Rules of Civil of Civil Procedure ordained the
DEVELOPMENT Procedure dismissal of the complaint by the
CORPORATION, OSCAR plaintiff as a matter of right at any
B. JOVENIR and time before service of the answer.
GREGORIO LIONGSON v. The Plaintiff was accorded the
MACAMIR REALTY AND right to dismiss the complaint
DEVELOPMENT without the necessity of alleging in
CORPORATION, SPOUSES the notice of dismissal any ground
ROSAURO and GLORIA nor of making any reservation.
MIRANDA and the It is quite clear that under Section
HONORABLE COURT OF 1, Rule 17 of the old Rules, the
APPEALS
G.R. No. 135803
March 30, 2006
DIDIPIO EARTH-SAVERS
MULTI-PURPOSE
ASSOCIATION
INCORPORATED
(DESAMA), et. al., v.
ELISEA GOZUN, in her
capacity as SECRETARY of
the DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT and
NATURAL RESOURCES
(DENR), HORACIO
RAMOS, in his capacity as
Director of the Mines and
Geosciences Bureau (MGB-
DENR), ALBERTO
ROMULO, in his capacity as
the Executive Secretary of
the Office of the President,
RICHARD N. FERRER, in
his capacity as Acting
Undersecretary of the Office
of the President, IAN
HEATH SANDERCOCK, in
his capacity as President of
CLIMAX-ARIMCO
MINING CORPORATION
G.R. No. 157882
dismissal contemplated therein
could be accomplished by the
plaintiff through mere notice of
dismissal and not through motion
subject to approval by the Court.
Dismissal is ipso facto upon notice,
and without prejudice unless
otherwise stated in the notice. It is
due to these considerations that the
petition should be denied.
Petition for RA 7942 (Philippine Implementing Section 76 of Rep.
Prohibition and Mining Act of 1995) Act No. 7942, Section 105 of DAO
Mandamus and its IRR 96-40 states that holder(s) of
assailing the mining right(s) shall not be
Constitutionality prevented from entry into its/their
of RA 7942 contract/mining areas for the
purpose of exploration,
development, and/or
utilization. That in cases where
surface owners of the lands,
occupants or concessionaires
refuse to allow the permit holder or
contractor entry, the latter shall
bring the matter before the Panel of
Arbitrators for proper
disposition.Section 106 states that
voluntary agreements between the
two parties permitting the mining
right holders to enter and use the
surface owners lands shall be
registered with the Regional Office
of the MGB. In connection with
Section 106, Section 107 provides
that the compensation for the
damage done to the surface owner,
occupant or concessionaire as a
consequence of mining operations
or as a result of the construction or
installation of the infrastructure
shall be properly and justly
compensated and that such
compensation shall be based on the
agreement between the holder of
mining rights and surface owner,
occupant or concessionaire, or
where appropriate, in accordance
with Presidential Decree No.
512. In cases where there is
disagreement to the compensation
or where there is no agreement, the
matter shall be brought before the
Panel of Arbitrators. Section 206
of the implementing rules and
regulations provides an aggrieved
party the remedy to appeal the
decision of the Panel of Arbitrators
to the Mines Adjudication Board,
and the latters decision may be
reviewed by the Supreme Court by
filing a petition for review
on certiorari.
An examination of the foregoing
provisions gives no indication that
the courts are excluded from taking
cognizance of expropriation cases
under the mining law. The
disagreement referred to in Section
107 does not involve the exercise
of eminent domain, rather it
contemplates of a situation wherein
the permit holders are allowed by
the surface owners entry into
the latters lands and disagreement
ensues as regarding the proper
compensation for the allowed entry
and use of the private
lands. Noticeably, the provision
points to a voluntary sale or
transaction, but not to an
involuntary sale.
The legislature, in enacting the
mining act, is presumed to have
deliberated with full knowledge of
all existing laws and jurisprudence
on the subject. Thus, it is but
reasonable to conclude that in
passing such statute it was in
accord with the existing laws and
jurisprudence on the jurisdiction of
courts in the determination of just
compensation and that it was not
intended to interfere with or
abrogate any former law relating to
the same matter. Indeed, there is
nothing in the provisions of the
assailed law and its implementing
rules and regulations that exclude
the courts from their jurisdiction to
determine just compensation in
expropriation proceedings
involving mining operations.
Although Section 105 confers upon
the Panel of Arbitrators the
authority to decide cases where
surface owners, occupants,
concessionaires refuse permit
holders entry, thus, necessitating
involuntary taking, this does not
mean that the determination of the
just compensation by the Panel of
Arbitrators or the Mines
Adjudication Board is final and
conclusive. The determination is
only preliminary unless accepted
by all parties concerned. There is
nothing wrong with the grant of
primary jurisdiction by the Panel
of Arbitrators or the Mines
Adjudication Board to determine in
a preliminary matter the reasonable
compensation due the affected
landowners or occupants. The
original and exclusive jurisdiction
 of the courts to decide
determination of just compensation
remains intact despite the
preliminary determination made by
the administrative agency.
INDUSTRIAL TIMBER Resolution Art. 283 of the Labor While we ruled in this case that the
CORPORATION, Code sanction should be stiffer in a
INDUSTRIAL PLYWOOD dismissal based on authorized
GROUP CORPORATION, cause where the employer failed to
TOMAS TANGSOC, JR., comply with the notice
LORENZO TANGSOC and requirement than a dismissal based
TOMAS TAN v. VIRGILIO on just cause with the same
ABABON et. al., procedural infirmity, however, in
G.R. No. 164518/G.R. No. instances where the execution of a
164965 decision becomes impossible,
unjust or too burdensome,
modification of the decision
becomes necessary in order to
harmonize the disposition with the
prevailing circumstances.
In the determination of the amount
of nominal damages which is
addressed to the sound discretion
of the court, several factors are
taken into account: (1) the
authorized caused invoked,
whether it was a retrenchment or a
closure or cessation of operation of
the establishment due to serious
business losses or financial
reverses or otherwise; (2) the
number of employees to be
awarded; (3) the capacity of the
employer to satisfy the awards,
taken into account their prevailing
financial status as borne by the
records; (4) the employers grant of
other termination benefits in favor
of the employees, and (5) whether
there was a bona fide attempt to
comply with the notice
requirement as opposed to giving
no notice at all.
PAL EMPLOYEES Complaint for Forum Shopping Forum shopping exists when the
SAVINGS AND LOAN Specific element of litis pendentia are
ASSOCIATION, INC. v. Performance, present, or when a final judgment
PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, Damages or in one case will amount to res
INC., AVELINO L. Declaratory judicata in another. There is forum
ZAPANTA and ANDREW L. Relief shopping when the following
HUANG elements concur: (1) identity of the
G.R. No. 161110 parties or, at least, of the parties
who represent the same interest in
both actions; (2) identity of the
rights asserted and relief prayed
for, as the latter is founded on the
same set of facts; and (3) identity
of the two preceding particulars,
such that any judgment rendered in
the other action will amount to res
judicata in the action under
consideration or will constitute litis
pendentia.
 Although there is an identity of
parties in the present case, there is,
however, no identity of reliefs
prayed for. The Petition for
Certiorari, Prohibition and
Injunction filed by respondents
asked the CA to restrain and
prohibit the trial judge from
enforcing the Writ of Execution
Pending Appeal and from further
acting on Civil Case Nos. 97-1026
and 00-0016. This Petition was
filed in the light of the supervening
factual circumstances that had
shown his unjustified reticence to
resolve the pending Motions before
him. In their Motion for
Reconsideration, respondents
prayed for the quashal of the Writ
of Execution Pending Appeal.
Their prayer for relied in their
Petition before the CA was a
necessary consequence of the
RTCs inaction on their Motions.
Had they not filed the Petition
containing that prayer, they would
have had no other avenue to
protect their rights.
March 31, 2006
PAG-ASA STEEL WORKS, Voluntary Labor Code Wage Order No. NCR-08 clearly
INC., v. COURT OF arbitration on provisions on wages
states that only those employees
APPEALS, FORMER wage increase receiving salaries below the
SIXTH DIVISION and PAG- dispute prescribed minimum wage are
ASA STEEL WORKERS entitled to the wage increase
UNION (PSWU) provided therein, and not all
G.R. No. 166647 employees across-the-board as
respondent Union would want
petitioner to do. Considering
therefore that none of the members
of respondent Union are receiving
salaries below the P250.00
minimum wage, petitioner is not
obliged to grant the wage increase
to them.
xxx xxx xxx
Moreover, to ripen into a company
practice that is demandable as a
matter of right, the giving of the
increase should not be by reason of
a strict legal or contractual
obligation, but by reason of an act
of liberality on the part of the
employer. Hence, even if the
company continuously grants a
wage increase as mandated by a
wage order or pursuant to a CBA,
the same would not automatically
ripen into a company practice.
VICENTE ONGKEKO v. Action for sum Civil Code Petitioners undertaking is clear
BPI EXPRESS CARD of money provisions on and concise. He solidarily obliged
CORPORATION Solidary Obligations himself to pay respondent all the
G.R. No. 147275 and Surety liabilities incurred under the credit
 card account, whether under the
principal, renewal or extension
card issued, regardless of the
changes or novation in the terms
and conditions in the issuance and
use of the credit card. Petitioners
liability shall be extinguished only
when the obligations are fully paid
and satisfied.
Petitioner cannot seek sanctuary in
his arguments considering that the
terms and conditions of his
undertaking are unambiguous and
well defined; there is no room for
any interpretation only
application. Given that Lodovica
reneged on her obligations covered
by the credit card account,
petitioner is, therefore, liable.
KOREA EXCHANGE Complaint for Rule 16 of the Rules Courts of justice constituted to
BANK v. HON. ROGELIO collection of of Court pass upon substantial rights will
C. GONZALES, in his money not consider questions where no
capacity as Presiding Judge actual interests are involved. Thus,
of Branch 49 of the RTC, the well-settled rule that courts will
Pampanga, HAN not determine a moot question.
DEVELOPMENT, INC., Where the issues have become
ANTUSA M. MAGNO, moot and academic, there ceases to
FRANCISCO MAGNO, be any justiciable controversy, thus
LOURDES M. MENDOZA rendering the resolution of the
and TEODORO DE MESA same of no practical value. Courts
G.R. No. 139460 will decline jurisdiction over moot
cases because there is no
substantial relief to which
petitioner will be entitled and
which will anyway be negated by
the dismissal of the petition. The
Court will therefore abstain from
expressing its opinion in a case
where no legal relief is needed or
called for.
PCL INDUSTRIES Complaint for Rules on Evidence There is no testimonial evidence
MANUFACTURING Sum of Money whatsoever to support petitioners
CORPORATION v. THE belated explanation that the other
COURT OF APPEALS AND names of suppliers appearing on
ASA COLOR & the work processes are suppliers of
CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES, plastic material and not ink.
INC. Moreover, petitioners witnesses
G.R. No. 147970 contradict each other. Lim claims
that during the period covered by
the work processes, they had only
2 suppliers of ink, namely: CDI
Sakada and ASA Color. On the
other hand, contrary to Lims
claim, Victor Montaez, petitioners
Head of the Accounting
Department, testified that at that
time, they had three or four
suppliers of ink materials. xxx
xxx xxx. Hence, petitioners
own evidence reveals that there
were at least two suppliers of ink
for that batch of production, as
 Lim has stated that both ASA and
CDI are suppliers of ink materials.
hence, the CA was correct in ruling
that petitioners evidence failed to
prove that it was indeed respondent
ASA Color who supplied the
defective ink.
MARIKINA AUTO LINE Criminal Section 37 of RA Under Section 37 of RA 4136,
TRANSPORT Complaint for 4136 (Land motorists are mandated to drive
CORPORATION and reckless Transportation and and operate vehicles on the right
FREDDIE L. SUELTO v. imprudence Traffic Code) and side of the road or highway. In
PEOPLE OF THE resulting in Art. 2185 of the New relation thereto, Art. 2185 of the
PHILIPPINES and damage to Civil Code New Civil Code provides that
ERLINDA V. VALDELLON property unless there is proof to the
G.R. No. 152040 contrary, it is presumed that a
person driving a motor vehicle has
been negligent, if at the time of the
mishap, he was violating any
traffic regulation. By his own
admission, petitioner Suelto
violated the Land Transportation
and Traffic Code when he
suddenly swerved the bus to the
right, thereby causing damage to
the property of private respondent.
PHILEMPLOY SERVICES Complaint for Omnibus Rules Indeed, an employer, in the
AND RESOURCES, INC., v. Illegal Implementing the exercise of its management
ANITA RODRIGUEZ Dismissal Labor Code prerogative, may hire an employee
G.R. No. 152616 on a probationary basis in order to
determine his fitness to perform his
work. The employees services
may be terminated for a just cause
or for his failure to qualify as a
regular employee based on
reasonable standards made known
to him at the time of his
engagement.
The law in protecting the rights of
the laborer authorizes neither
oppression nor self-destruction of
the employer. While the
Constitution is committed to the
policy of social justice and the
protection of the working class, it
should not be supposed that every
labor dispute would automatically
be decided in favor of labor.
BARTOLOME C. PELAYO Claim for POEA Standard For the provision of the Standard
v. AAREMA SHIPPING permanent Employment Employment Contract Governing
AND TRADING CO., INC., disability Contract the Employment of Filipino
MARITIMA FULLMAN, benefits, sick Seamen on Board Ocean-Going
S.L., and PHILIPPIE wage allowance, Vessels to apply, a Filipino seaman
TRANSMARINE reimbursement must show that he suffered an
CARRIERS, INC. of medical and injury or illness during the term of
G.R. No. 155741 hospital his overseas employment.
expenses. In the case at Bar, petitioner claims
that he experienced chest pains and
difficulty in breathing while on
board the MT Newbury, and that
he was examined twice in Nigeria
and diagnosed with a heart ailment.
However, no evidence was
 presented to prove his allegations.
Petitioner maintain that there was a
medical certificate issued in
Nigeria but that respondents
representative took the same and
refused to give it back. However,
this claim is too self-serving and
convenient to be given credence
especially in the face of
respondents vehement denials.
Indeed, if it is true that petitioner
experienced chest pains and
difficulty in breathing, no plausible
reason was given why the
company would refuse to have
petitioner examined for these
complaints. Petitioner does not
dispute that respondents had been
vigilant in responding to his
complaints regarding fever and
chills. The records show that
petitioner was examined no less
than three times for such
complaints by the company-
designated physician and by the
DOH-Malaria Control Service,
who both cleared petitioner from
suspected malaria. To reiterate, no
plausible reason exists why the
company would not similarly grant
petitioners request for
examination for more serious
complaints of chest pains and
difficulty in breathing, if indeed he
experienced them while on board
the MT Newbury. The three
medical certificates presented by
the petitioner to prove that he has
heart ailment cannot help his cause
for they were all issued in 1996
after his extended employment
contract with the respondents
already expired in December 1995.
As aforesaid, a clear prerequisite
for the benefits provided under the
POEA Standard Employment
Contract to be claims is sickness or
injury sustained during the term of
the overseas employment contract.
In the instant case, petitioner failed
to prove sickness or injury during
such time.
SHANGRI-LA Application for RA 166 (Former Under Section 2, in order to
INTERNATIONAL HOTEL registration of Trademark Law) register a trademark, one must be
MANAGEMENT, LTD., the Shangri-La the owner thereof and must have
SHANGRI-LA mark and S logo actually used the mark in
PROPERTIES, INC., commerce in the Philippines for 2
MAKATI SHANGRI-LA months prior to the application for
HOTEL & RESORT, INC., registration. Since ownership of
and KUOK PHILIPPINE the trademark is required for
PROPERTIES, INC. v. registration, Section 2-A of the
DEVELOPERS GROUP OF same law sets out to define how
COMPANIES, INC. one goes about acquiring
G.R. No. 159938 ownership thereof. Under Section
2-A, it is clear that actual use in
commerce is also the test of
ownership but the provision
went further by saying that the
mark must not have been so
appropriated by another.
Additionally, it is significant
to note that Section 2-A does not
require that the actual use of a
trademark must be within the
Philippines. Hence, under R.A.
No. 166, as amended, one may be
an owner of a mark due to actual
use thereof but not yet have the
right to register such ownership
here due to failure to use it within
the Philippines for two months.
While the petitioners may not have
qualified under Section 2 of R.A.
No. 166 as a registrant, neither did
respondent DGCI, since the
latter also failed to fulfill the 2-
month actual use requirement.
What is worse, DGCI was not even
the owner of the mark. For it to
have been the owner, the mark
must not have been already
appropriated (i.e., used) by
someone else. At the time of
respondent DGCI's registration of
the mark, the same was already
being used by the petitioners, albeit
abroad, of which DGCIs
president was fully aware.
SPS. FRANCISCO and Petition for Art. 1292 of the Thus, the well-settled rule
RUBY REYES v. BPI Mandamus and Civil Code is that, with respect to obligations
FAMILY SAVINGS BANK, Prohibition to to pay a sum of money, the
INC., and MAGDALENA L. compel BPI- obligation is not novated by an
LOMETILLO, in her FSB to return instrument that expressly
capacity as ex-officio Petitioners recognizes the old, changes only
Provincial Sheriff for Iloilo certificate of the terms of payment, adds other
G.R. No. 149840-41 title and cancel obligations not incompatible with
the mortgage. the old ones, or the new contract
merely supplements the old one.
BPI-FSB and Transbuilders only
extended the repayment term of the
loan from one year to twenty
quarterly installments at 18%
interest per annum. There was
absolutely no intention by the
parties to supersede or abrogate the
old loan contract secured by the
real estate mortgage executed by
petitioners in favor of BPI-FSB. In
fact, the intention of the new
agreement was precisely to revive
the old obligation after the original
period expired and the loan
remained unpaid. The novation of
a contract cannot be presumed. In
the absence of an express
agreement, novation takes place
only when the old and the new
obligations are incompatible on
every point.
Moreover, under the real estate
mortgage executed by them in
favor of BPI-FSB, petitioners
undertook to secure the P15M loan
of Transbuilders to BPI-FSB and
other credit accommodations of
whatever nature obtained by the
Borrower/Mortgagor. While this
stipulation proved to be onerous to
petitioners, neither the law nor the
courts will extricate a party from
an unwise or undesirable contract
entered into with all the required
formalities and with full awareness
of its consequences. Petitioners
voluntarily executed the real estate
mortgage on their property in favor
of BPI-FSB to secure the P15M
loan of Transbuilders. They cannot
now be allowed to repudiate their
obligation to the bank
after Transbuilders default. While
petitioners liability was written in
fine print and in a contract
prepared by BPI-FSB, it has been
the consistent holding of this Court
that contracts of adhesion are not
invalid per se. On numerous
occasions, we have upheld the
binding effects of such contracts.