Lawren

http://remediallawnotes.blogspot.com/2017/08/buaya-vs-polo-case-digest.html Buaya vs Polo GR L-75079 January 26, 1989 It would be unfair to require the defendant or accused to undergo the ordeal and expense of a trial if the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter or offense. The crime of estafa is a continuing or transitory offense which may be prosecuted at the place where any of the essential elements of the crime took place. One of the essential elements of estafa is damage or prejudice to the offended party . Thus, estafa may be filed in the place where the offended party   has its principal place of business and office. Facts:  Buaya was an insurance agent of Country Bankers Insurance Corporation (CBIC) and was authorized to collect premiums for and in behalf of CBIC then make a report and accounting of the transactions and remit the same to the principal office of CBIC in Manila. However, an audit of Buaya‟s account showed that there was a shortage in the...

  It would be unfair to require the defendant or accused to undergo the ordeal and expense of a trial if the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter or offense. JAVIER vs. SANDIGANBAYAN G.R. Nos. 147026­-27   September 11, 2009  http://chroniclesofaloststudent.blogspot.com/2017/10/javier-vs-sandiganbayan.html   FACTS:   Javier was the private sector representative in the National Book Development Board (NBDB), which was created by R.A. 8047, otherwise known as the “Book Publishing Industry Development Act.”  R.A. No. 8047 provided for the creation of the NBDB, which was placed under the administration and supervision of the Office of the President. The NBDB is composed of eleven (11) members who are appointed by the President, five (5) of whom come from the government, while the remaining six (6) are chosen from the nominees of organizations of private book publishers, printers, writers, book industry related activities, students and t...

CA Decision February 13, 1969 - GUILTY affirming CFI decision CFI Decision signed July 25, 1966; decision promulgated and read to the accused August 23, 1966 Judge retired July 31, 1966 Cannot question the jurisdiction of the court; it even appealed he decision to CA.  JUAN VERA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.  G.R. No. L-31218 February 18, 1970 1. REMEDIAL LAW; COURTS; EXCEPTION TO GENERAL RULE ON NULLITY OF JUDGMENT IF JUDGE RETIRED PRIOR TO PROMULGATION OF SENTENCE. — Petitioners and intervenors can not now raise the issue that the sentence rendred by Judge Surtida is null and void on the ground that he already retired previous to the promulgation of the sentence. For appeals were taken thereon by herein petitioners and intervenor to respondent Court of appeals without ever questioning the decision or jurisidicction of said Judge in the case. As already established in this jurisdiction, after a certain stage, a jurisdictional question, even if on its face meritorious, would not nece...

  Doctrine of laches bars a party from attacking the jurisdiction has been extended to criminal cases. Laches, in a general sense, is failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do that which, by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier; it is negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it. The doctrine of laches or of "stale demands" is based upon grounds of public policy which requires, for the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and, unlike the statute of limitations, is not a mere question of time but is principally a question of the inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or asserted.   SERAFIN TIJAM, ET AL.,  Plaintiffs-appellees, -versus-  MAGDALENO SIBONGHANOY ALIAS GAVINO SIBONGHANOY, ET AL.,  Defendants , MANILA SUR...

Jurisdiction determined on the nature of the position of the accused at the time of the commission of the crime Subido, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan  G.R. No. 122641 January 20, 1997 January 20, 1997 Special civil action in the Supreme Court. Certiorari. Justice Davide, Jr.   FACTS: ·        June 25, 1992: Bayani Subido, Jr. (then a Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation) and Rene Parina (then a BID Special Agent), while in the performance of their official functions, caused the issuance and implementation of a warrant of arrest (dated June 25, 1992) against James J. Maksimuk, knowing full well that the BID Decision (dated June 6, 1991) requiring Maksimuk’s deportation had not yet become final and executory considering the pendency of a Motion for Reconsideration. Maksimuk was detained for 43 days, causing him undue injury. ·        July 17, 1995 (but filed on July 28, 1995): Subido and Par...

As a general rule a court proceeding in our judicial set-up is accusatorial or adversary and not inquisitorial in nature. It contemplates two contending parties before the court, which hears them impartially and renders judgment only after trial. G.R. Nos. L-25204 and L-25219 January 23, 1970 QUETO  alias  TAN QUETO, (PERSHING TAN QUETO), ET AL.,  petitioners, vs. HON. ALFREDO CATOLICO, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental, respondent. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,  intervenor. FACTS: Two administrative complaints and four charges of “serious misconduct and gross disregard of law” were formulated against Judge Alfredo Catolico. The first complaint is that of the naturalization of 50 naturalized citizens which the   respondent Judge declared as null and void. The second and third complaints which relate to respondent’s dismissal of the cases which have not been tried for more than thirty days and refusal to recognize not only the author...

Petitioner's former counsel erroneously appealed her conviction to the Court of Appeals instead of to the Sandiganbayan. Petitioner pleaded that Section 2 of Rule 50 of the Rules of Court which mandated the dismissal of cases erroneously appealed to the Court of Appeals be relaxed and the Court of Appeals be directed to forward the records of the case to the Sandiganbayan. The Supreme Court, in granting petitioner's prayer held that since the appeal involved a criminal case and the possibility of a person being deprived of liberty due to a procedural lapse is great, a relaxation of the Rules was warranted. The rules of procedure must be viewed as tools to facilitate the attainment of justice, such that any rigid and strict application thereof which results in technicalities tending to frustrate substantial justice must always be avoided Cenita M. Cariaga v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 180010, July 30, 2010 G.R. No. 180010; July 30, 2010 FACTS: Petitioner Cenita M. Caria...