Archive for December, 2010


RENATO REYES, REPRESENTED BY RAMON REYES VS. LEOPOLDO BARRIOS, SUBSTITUTED BY LUCIA MANALUS-BARRIOS (G.R. NO. 172841, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: TECHNICAL RULES NOT FOLLOWED IN DARAB PROCEEDINGS; PROCEDURE FOR GRANT OF EMANCIPATION PROCEEDINGS; ISSUE ON RIGHT OVER RETAINED AREA UNDER SOLE JURISDICTION OF DAR SECRETARY. BRIEF TITLE: REYES VS. BARRIOS.

x – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x

 CASE STORY

REYES FILED A CASE TO OUST BARRIOS FROM HIS FARM ON THE GROUND THAT HIS FARM IS A RETAINED LANDHOLDING. BARRIOS COUNTERED THAT HE IS A TENANT AND LATER IN THE CASE HE WANTED AN EMANCIPATION PATENT IN HIS NAME. HE PRESENTED AFFIDAVITS AS PROOF HE IS TENANT. BUT THE AFFIANTS WERE NOT PRESENTED. SC RULED THAT REYES HAS TO PROVE THAT HIS FARM IS A RETAINED LANDHOLDING AND THAT THE DAR SECRETARY HAS THE SOLE JURISDICTION OVER SUCH ISSUE. AND EVEN IF HIS FARM IS A RETAINED LANDHOLDING HE CANNOT ON THAT GROUND EJECT THE TENANT. THE LAW SPECIFIES THE GROUNDS FOR EJECTING A TENANT AND TILLING A RETAINED FARM HOLDING IS NOT ONE OF THEM. BARRIOS IS A TENANT BASED ON THE EVIDENCES PRESENTED INCLUDING AFFIDAVITS WHOSE AFFIANTS WERE NOT PRESENTED. TECHNICAL RULES OF EVIDENCE ARE NOT FOLLOWED IN DARAB PROCEEDINGS.  BUT HE CANNOT BE ISSUED AN EMANCIPATION PATENT BECAUSE HE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. THERE IS A PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED AND REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED.

DOCTRINES:

 

DARAB IS NOT BOUND BY TECHNICAL RULES.

Under Section 3, Rule I of the 1994 DARAB New Rules of Procedure (now Section 3, Rule I of the 2009 DARAB Rules of Procedure26), the Board and its Regional and Provincial Adjudicators are not bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence, thus:

SECTION 3. Technical Rules Not Applicable. The Board and its Regional and Provincial Adjudicators shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence as prescribed in the Rules of Court, but shall proceed to hear and decide all agrarian cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in accordance with justice and equity.

x x x

c) The provisions of the Rules of Court shall not apply even in suppletory character unless adopted herein or by resolution of the Board. However, due process of law shall be observed and followed in all instances.

Section 1, Rule VIII of the 1994 DARAB New Rules of Procedure (now Section 1, Rule X of the 2009 DARAB Rules of Procedure27) reiterates the non-applicability of technical rules regarding the admission and sufficiency of evidence, thus:

SECTION 1. Nature of Proceedings. The proceedings before the Board or its Adjudicators shall be non-litigious in nature. Subject to the essential requirements of due process, the technicalities of law and procedures and the rules governing the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence obtained in the courts of law shall not apply. x x x

Thus, in Reyes v. Court of Appeals,28 the Court held:

Finally, we rule that the trial court did not err when it favorably considered the affidavits of Eufrocina and Efren Tecson (Annexes “B” and “C”) although the affiants were not presented and subjected to cross-examination. Section 16 of P.D. No. 946 provides that ‘Rules of Court shall not be applicable in agrarian cases even in a suppletory character.’ The same provision states that ‘In the hearing, investigation and determination of any question or controversy, affidavits and counter-affidavits may be allowed and are admissible in evidence.’29

Besides, the DARAB Rules should be liberally construed to carry out the objectives of agrarian reform and to promote just, expeditious, and inexpensive adjudication and settlement of agrarian cases, disputes or controversies.30

 

STEPS FOR ISSUANCE OF EMANCIPATION PATENT

The Primer on Agrarian Reform32 enumerates the steps in transferring the land to the tenant-tiller, thus:

a. First step: the identification of tenants, landowners, and the land covered by OLT.

b. Second step: land survey and sketching of the actual cultivation of the tenant to determine parcel size, boundaries, and possible land use;

c. Third step: the issuance of the Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT). To ensure accuracy and safeguard against falsification, these certificates are processed at the National Computer Center (NCC) at Camp Aguinaldo;

d. Fourth step: valuation of the land covered for amortization computation;

e. Fifth step: amortization payments of tenant-tillers over fifteen (15) year period; and

f. Sixth step: the issuance of the Emancipation Patent.33

Thus, there are several steps to be undertaken before an Emancipation Patent can be issued. As regards respondent, the records are bereft of evidence indicating that this procedure has been followed.

 

DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED SO ONE CAN BE ENTITLED TO  EMANCIPATION PATENT

Furthermore, there are several supporting documents which a tenant-farmer must submit before he can receive the Emancipation Patent, such as:

a. Application for issuance of Emancipation Patent;

b. Applicant’s (owner’s) copy of Certificate of Land Transfer.

c. Certification of the landowner and the Land Bank of the Philippines that the applicant has tendered full payment of the parcel of land as described in the application and as actually tilled by him;

d. Certification by the President of the Samahang Nayon or by the head of farmers’ cooperative duly confirmed by the municipal district officer (MDO) of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Development (MLGCD) that the applicant is a full-fledged member of a duly registered farmers’ cooperative or a certification to these effect;

e. Copy of the technical (graphical) description of the land parcel applied for prepared by the Bureau of Land Sketching Team (BLST) and approved by the regional director of the Bureau of Lands;

f. Clearance from the MAR field team (MARFT)or the MAR District Office (MARDO) legal officer or trial attorney; or in their absence, a clearance by the MARFT leader to the effect that the land parcel applied for is not subject of adverse claim, duly confirmed by the legal officer or trial attorney of the MAR Regional Office or, in their absence, by the regional director;

g. Xerox copy of Official Receipts or certification by the municipal treasurer showing that the applicant has fully paid or has effected up-to-date payment of the realty taxes due on the land parcel applied for; and

h. Certification by the MARFT leader whether applicant has acquired farm machineries from the MAR and/or from other government agencies.34

 

DAR SECRETARY HAS EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OVER ISSUE  ON WHETHER ONE IS ENTITLED TO A RETENTION AREA.

On the issue of petitioner’s claim that the subject landholding forms part of the retained area awarded to him and his sisters, the Court notes that there was no sufficient evidence to substantiate petitioner’s claim. Furthermore, as held by the Court of Appeals, only the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) has the exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the issue of whether petitioner is entitled to a retention area.38 Indeed, under Section 3 (3.5), Rule II of the DARAB 2003 Rules of Procedure, the exercise of the right of retention by the landowner is under the exclusive prerogative of and cognizable by the Office of the Secretary of the DAR. Besides, even if the subject landholding forms part of petitioner’s retained area, petitioner landowner may still not eject respondent tenant absent any of the causes provided under the law. The landowner cannot just terminate the leasehold relationship without valid cause.

x – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x

D E C I S I O N

CARPIO, J.:

The Case

This petition for review1 assails the 8 February 2006 Decision2 and the 29 May 2006 Resolution3 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 90212. The Court of Appeals affirmed the 29 June 1998 Decision and the 7 December 2004 Resolution of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) in DARAB Case No. 5504, declaring Leopoldo Barrios as bona fide tenant of the subject landholding. The DARAB reversed the 31 October 1996 Decision of the Provincial Agrarian Reform Board (PARAD) of San Fernando, Pampanga.

The Facts

On 26 September 1995, petitioner Renato Reyes (petitioner) filed before the Department of Agrarian Reform, Region III, PARAD of San Fernando, Pampanga, a complaint for ejectment against respondent Leopoldo Barrios (respondent). The case was docketed as DARAB CASE No. 1089-P’95.

The case involves a parcel of land measuring approximately 3.6 hectares (landholding)4 which forms part of the property with an aggregate area of 527,695 square meters (property)5 located at Mapaniqui, Candaba, Pampanga covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 14488.6 The property was co-owned by petitioner and his four sisters.7 Petitioner claimed that the property became subject of the Operation Land Transfer under Presidential Decree No. 27 (PD 27), except the 3.6‒hectare landholding which was allegedly retained. In his Memorandum8 dated 18 September 2007, petitioner averred that he and his sister Leticia V. Reyes are the co-owners of the landholding. Petitioner hired respondent as the overseer of the farm and piggery on the landholding. However, petitioner contended that respondent never remitted the proceeds from the piggery business and the fruits from the landholding.9

On the other hand, respondent alleged that he was a tenant of the landholding since 1972 and he even built his house on the subject landholding. Respondent also acted as the caretaker of the piggery business on the landholding. Contrary to petitioner’s allegations, respondent stated that petitioner’s wife took all the proceeds from the piggery business, which later ceased operation due to an epidemic.

When respondent failed to appear during the scheduled hearings, petitioner moved to submit the case for decision on the basis of the evidence presented. Respondent alleged that his failure to attend the scheduled hearings was because he received the Notice for the 29 February 1996 hearing only on 6 March 1996. Respondent moved for the postponement of the hearing because he was bedridden due to hypertension and heart ailment.10 However, the PARAD again heard the case ex-parte on 28 March 1996, of which respondent alleged that he was still not notified.

On 31 October 1996, the PARAD rendered a decision, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Office renders judgment declaring that herein plaintiff [Renato Reyes] is entitled to recover the possession of the property subject of this present litigation; ordering the defendant [Leopoldo Barrios] or anyone claiming any right or authority under him to vacate the premises in question and surrender possession thereof to the plaintiff; and ordering the defendant to pay the sum of P3,000.00 to the plaintiff as attorney’s fees.

No pronouncement as to cost.

SO ORDERED.11

Respondent appealed to the DARAB. Meanwhile, respondent passed away on 13 February 199712 and was substituted by his spouse Lucia Manalus-Barrios.13

On 29 June 1998, the DARAB reversed the PARAD decision and held that respondent is a bona fide tenant of the landholding and that he cannot be ejected from the landholding absent any justifiable cause. The DARAB held:

It appears that Respondent-Appellant is listed as farmer-beneficiary of the land transfer program, as evidenced by the Certification issued by the Officer-in-charge of Arayat-Sta. Ana-Candaba Agrarian Reform Team. The fact of tenancy is buttressed by the joint statement dated March 5, 1989 of residents of neighboring lots who attest to Respondent-Appellant’s cultivation of subject lot. As tenant thereon, Respondent-Appellant, therefore, cannot just be ejected. The causes for extinguishment of Leasehold Relation pursuant to Section 36, Republic Act No. 6657 are:

1. Abandonment of the landholding without the knowledge of the lessor;

2. Voluntary surrender of the landholding by the lessee, written notice of which shall be served three (3) months in advance;

3. Absence of successor or qualified heir, in case of death or permanent incapacity of the lessee;

4. Judicial ejectment of the lessee for causes provided under Sec. 36 of the Code;

5. Acquisition by the lessee of the landholding;

6. Termination of the leasehold under Sec. 38;

7. Mutual consent of the parties; and

8. Conversion of the landholding for non-agricultural purposes subject to the conditions required by law.

The records are bereft of evidence showing the existence of any of the above-quoted circumstances to justify ejectment of Respondent-Appellant from said landholding.

Under the prevailing circumstances, we hold that Respondent-Appellant Barrios is a bona fide tenant of the landholding.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appealed decision is SET ASIDE, and a new one entered:

1.      Declaring Respondent-Appellant Leopoldo Barrios a bona fide tenant of the subject landholding. However, due to his death during the pendency of this case, the surviving spouse, if qualified, shall succeed; if not, the eldest descendant will succeed or the descending descendant in the order of their age;

2.      Directing the plaintiff-landowner Renato Reyes to reinstate the qualified heir of Respondent-Appellant and to maintain him in peaceful possession as cultivator thereof; and

3.      Directing the DAR Regional Office, through its Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) to issue Certificate of Agricultural Lease (CAL) after fixing the lease rental therefor.

SO ORDERED.14

Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration, asking for the reversal of the DARAB decision and the reinstatement of the PARAD decision. Respondent, substituted by his spouse Lucia Manalus-Barrios, also filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration, asking for the modification of the decision by declaring respondent as a beneficiary under PD 27 and to issue an Emancipation Patent in favor of respondent’s surviving spouse Lucia Manalus-Barrios.

In its 7 December 2004 Resolution, the DARAB denied petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration for lack of merit and granted respondent’s Motion for Partial Reconsideration, thus:

In the Motion for Partial Reconsideration, Movant alleged that this Board in its decision has declared that the deceased Defendant-Appellant Leopoldo Barrios is a bona fide tenant on the subject landholding. Moreover, Plaintiff-Appellee maintains that page three (3) of the decision rendered by this Board finds and provides that “Operation Land Transfer (OLT) or Presidential Decree No. 27 was signed into law decreeing the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of the soil, transferring to them the ownership of the land they till and providing the instruments and mechanisms therefore.” Hence, movant prayed that an Emancipation Patent be issued in lieu of the Certificate of Agricultural Lease in consonance with the findings of this Board and DAR Administrative Order No. 13, Series of 1988.

Acting on said motion, this Board finds that the appealed decision shows substantial appreciation that deceased Defendant-Appellant was a bona fide tenant on the subject landholding. Likewise, this Board, in the assailed decision sustained the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 27, providing “the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of the soil . . .”

From the foregoing findings, the pronouncement of this Board specifically paragraph three (3) of the decision seeks modification. In finding that deceased Defendant-Appellant was a bona fide tenant of the subject landholding and declaring the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of the soil, the subsequent issuance of a Certificate of Agricultural Lease as provided in the assailed decision is not in consonance with the findings of the Board. Hence, this Board is constrained to modify or apply the correct conclusions drawn from the facts of the case.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the herein Motion for Reconsideration dated September 30, 1995 is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. Whereas, the Motion for Partial Reconsideration dated October 5, 1998 is GRANTED and a new judgment is rendered, as follows:

1.      Paragraph three (3) of the decision dated June 29, 1998 is hereby modified;

2.      Directing the DAR Regional Director, through the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO), to issue Emancipation Patent in favor of Defendant-Appellant or his heir, herein substitute Defendant-Appellant Lucia Manalus-Barrios;

3.      Directing Plaintiff-Appellee’s successors, co-owners, and the alleged former tenants and all those persons acting on their behalf to vacate the subject landholding and to immediately reinstate the substitute Defendant-Appellant thereto and to maintain her in peaceful possession thereof;

4.      Declaring the landholding fully paid by the defendant-appellant;

5.      Directing the Plaintiff-Appellee’s successors and co-owners to reimburse 75% of palay harvest, of its cash equivalent, on the remaining 12½ croppings to the Defendant-Appellant and deducting therefrom the amount of the expenses incurred by the Plaintiff-Appellee’s successors and co-owners in the present planting season.

Let records of this case be remanded to the Sala of the Honorable Provincial Adjudicator of Pampanga for the immediate issuance of a writ of execution.

SO ORDERED.15

Petitioner filed another Motion for Reconsideration, which the DARAB denied in its Resolution dated 5 May 2005.16 Petitioner then appealed to the Court of Appeals, which denied the petition for review in its 8 February 2006 Decision. The Court of Appeals likewise denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in its 29 May 2006 Resolution.

Hence, this petition for review.

The Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals concurred with the findings of the DARAB, thus:

But the petitioner insists that public respondent decided the case at bench against him in defiance of the evidence on record. We do not agree. The DARAB based its findings on the certification dated December 7, 1982 of then Ministry of Agrarian Reform (now Department of Agrarian Reform) of Sta. Ana, Pampanga finding Leopoldo Barrios as legitimate farmer-beneficiary over a four (4) hectare unirrigated land owned by Renato Reyes, located at Mapaniqui, Candaba, Pampanga; on the certification issued by the Officer-in-charge of Arayat-Sta. Ana-Candaba Agrarian Reform Team listing respondent-appellant as farmer-beneficiary; and on the joint statement dated March 5, 1989 of residents of neighboring lots who attested to respondent-appellant’s cultivation and occupation of the subject lot.

It bears stressing that in administrative proceedings, as in the case at bench, the quantum of evidence required to sustain a judgment is only substantial evidence. It is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if other minds equally reasonable might conceivably opine differently. Thus, findings of fact of quasi-judicial agencies are generally accorded respect, and even finality, by the appellate tribunal, if supported by substantial evidence, this in recognition of their expertise on the specific matters under their consideration.17

The Issues

In his petition, petitioner submits that:

1.      THE COURT OF APPEALS BY RULING IN ITS QUESTIONED DECISION (ANNEX “A”) THAT THE DARAB WAS CORRECT IN DECIDING THE CASE AGAINST HIM AS THIS IS SUPPORTED BY THE CERTIFICATIONS ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF AGRARIAN REFORM AND THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF THE AGRARIAN REFORM TEAM OF ARAYAT-STA. ANA-CANDABA, PAMPANGA DENIED PETITIONER HIS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NOT ONLY ARE THE EVIDENCE OF BARRIOS IRRELEVANT BUT THEY [ARE] ALSO MERE MACHINE COPIES WHICH WERE NEVER PRESENTED IN A PROPER HEARING WHERE THE PETITIONER CAN SCRUTINIZE THEM AND CROSS-EXAMINE PRIVATE RESPONDENT ON THEM.

2. THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED GRIEVOUS LEGAL ERROR AND/OR GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION BY FAILING TO CORRECT THE DARAB IN NOT RECOGNIZING PETITIONER’S RIGHT OVER HIS RETAINED AREA WHICH HAD ALREADY BEEN THE SUBJECT OF AN AWARD IN CLAIM 83-144 OF LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES.18

The Ruling of the Court

We partially grant the petition. We hold that respondent is a bona fide tenant of the subject landholding, as stated in the 29 June 1998 DARAB Decision in DARAB Case No. 5504. However, the 7 December 2004 DARAB Resolution, modifying the 29 June 1998 DARAB Decision and directing the DAR Regional Director to issue Emancipation Patent in favor of respondent or his heirs, should be set aside.

In this case, the DARAB ruling that respondent is a bona fide tenant is supported by evidence submitted by respondent, which included: (1) certification dated 7 December 1982 of the Arayat-Sta. Ana-Candaba Agrarian Reform Team, Ministry of Agrarian Reform, Region III, Pampanga District, stating that respondent is a bona fide farmer-beneficiary under the Operation Land Transfer of the four (4)-hectare farmholding owned by petitioner;19 (2) joint statement (“Salaysay”) dated 5 March 1989 of the former farmworkers of the neighboring farmlots attesting to respondent’s occupation and cultivation of the subject landholding;20 (3) pictures of the subject landholding which was planted with palay crops;21 and (4) picture of respondent’s house constructed on the subject landholding.22

Furthermore, in compliance with the Order23 dated 30 September 2002 of the DARAB, the Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) of Pampanga forwarded to the DARAB the status report on the subject landholding,24 which states:

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

Region III

Municipal Agrarian Reform Office

Candaba, Pampanga

Engr. Rodolfo S. Pangilinan

OIC-PARO

DARPO-Del Pilar,

City of San Fernando Pampanga

Sir:

This refers to the Order dated September 30, 2002 issued by DARCO Appeal Board with the instruction to submit status report of the subject landholding owned by Renato Reyes located at Mapanique, Candaba, Pampanga.

That the undersigned conducted ocular inspection/verification and reveal the following finding to wit:

1.      That Renato Reyes the landowner and Leopoldo Barrios tenant are both deceased.

2.      That the subject landholding was taken over by Renato Reyes since 1996 and it is being administered by Antonio Manalus.

3.      That at present the land in question is planted to palay by the administrator Antonio Manalus with the used (sic) of farm labor and 30 mango tree[s] are existing of the subject landholding.

4.      That the house of Lucia Vda. De Barrios was constructed to the subject landholding with an area of 450 square meters more or less.

5.      That the qualified tenant beneficiaries [are] among the surviving heirs of Leopoldo Barrios is the wife of (sic) Lucia Vda. M. Barrios.

In view of the foregoing facts and base[d] on the Order dated September 30, 2002[,] [t]he undersigned schedule[d] mediation conference on November 18, 2002 in preparation of the Certificate of Agricultural Leasehold.

Very truly yours,

(signed)

SALVADOR S. TOTAAN

M.A.R.O.25

Under Section 3, Rule I of the 1994 DARAB New Rules of Procedure (now Section 3, Rule I of the 2009 DARAB Rules of Procedure26), the Board and its Regional and Provincial Adjudicators are not bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence, thus:

SECTION 3. Technical Rules Not Applicable. The Board and its Regional and Provincial Adjudicators shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence as prescribed in the Rules of Court, but shall proceed to hear and decide all agrarian cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in accordance with justice and equity.

x x x

c) The provisions of the Rules of Court shall not apply even in suppletory character unless adopted herein or by resolution of the Board. However, due process of law shall be observed and followed in all instances.

Section 1, Rule VIII of the 1994 DARAB New Rules of Procedure (now Section 1, Rule X of the 2009 DARAB Rules of Procedure27) reiterates the non-applicability of technical rules regarding the admission and sufficiency of evidence, thus:

SECTION 1. Nature of Proceedings. The proceedings before the Board or its Adjudicators shall be non-litigious in nature. Subject to the essential requirements of due process, the technicalities of law and procedures and the rules governing the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence obtained in the courts of law shall not apply. x x x

Thus, in Reyes v. Court of Appeals,28 the Court held:

Finally, we rule that the trial court did not err when it favorably considered the affidavits of Eufrocina and Efren Tecson (Annexes “B” and “C”) although the affiants were not presented and subjected to cross-examination. Section 16 of P.D. No. 946 provides that ‘Rules of Court shall not be applicable in agrarian cases even in a suppletory character.’ The same provision states that ‘In the hearing, investigation and determination of any question or controversy, affidavits and counter-affidavits may be allowed and are admissible in evidence.’29

Besides, the DARAB Rules should be liberally construed to carry out the objectives of agrarian reform and to promote just, expeditious, and inexpensive adjudication and settlement of agrarian cases, disputes or controversies.30

Although we affirm the ruling of the DARAB that respondent is a bona fide tenant, we disagree with its order for the issuance of an Emancipation Patent in favor of respondent’s heir, as provided in its Resolution dated 7 December 2004. The records show that when the property was placed under the Operation Land Transfer, respondent was not included in the list of tenant beneficiaries who were issued Emancipation Patents, as noted on the title of the property, TCT No. 14488, which was partially canceled in view of the issuance of the new TCTs in favor of the tenant beneficiaries.31

The Primer on Agrarian Reform32 enumerates the steps in transferring the land to the tenant-tiller, thus:

a. First step: the identification of tenants, landowners, and the land covered by OLT.

b. Second step: land survey and sketching of the actual cultivation of the tenant to determine parcel size, boundaries, and possible land use;

c. Third step: the issuance of the Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT). To ensure accuracy and safeguard against falsification, these certificates are processed at the National Computer Center (NCC) at Camp Aguinaldo;

d. Fourth step: valuation of the land covered for amortization computation;

e. Fifth step: amortization payments of tenant-tillers over fifteen (15) year period; and

f. Sixth step: the issuance of the Emancipation Patent.33

Thus, there are several steps to be undertaken before an Emancipation Patent can be issued. As regards respondent, the records are bereft of evidence indicating that this procedure has been followed.

Furthermore, there are several supporting documents which a tenant-farmer must submit before he can receive the Emancipation Patent, such as:

a. Application for issuance of Emancipation Patent;

b. Applicant’s (owner’s) copy of Certificate of Land Transfer.

c. Certification of the landowner and the Land Bank of the Philippines that the applicant has tendered full payment of the parcel of land as described in the application and as actually tilled by him;

d. Certification by the President of the Samahang Nayon or by the head of farmers’ cooperative duly confirmed by the municipal district officer (MDO) of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Development (MLGCD) that the applicant is a full-fledged member of a duly registered farmers’ cooperative or a certification to these effect;

e. Copy of the technical (graphical) description of the land parcel applied for prepared by the Bureau of Land Sketching Team (BLST) and approved by the regional director of the Bureau of Lands;

f. Clearance from the MAR field team (MARFT)or the MAR District Office (MARDO) legal officer or trial attorney; or in their absence, a clearance by the MARFT leader to the effect that the land parcel applied for is not subject of adverse claim, duly confirmed by the legal officer or trial attorney of the MAR Regional Office or, in their absence, by the regional director;

g. Xerox copy of Official Receipts or certification by the municipal treasurer showing that the applicant has fully paid or has effected up-to-date payment of the realty taxes due on the land parcel applied for; and

h. Certification by the MARFT leader whether applicant has acquired farm machineries from the MAR and/or from other government agencies.34

Majority of these supporting documents are lacking in this case. Hence, it was improper for the DARAB to order the issuance of the Emancipation Patent in favor of respondent without the required supporting documents and without following the requisite procedure before an Emancipation Patent may be validly issued.

Moreover, there was no sufficient evidence to prove that respondent has fully paid the value of the subject landholding. As held in Mago v. Barbin,35 the laws mandate full payment of just compensation for the lands acquired under PD 27 prior to the issuance of Emancipation Patents, thus:

In the first place, the Emancipation Patents and the Transfer Certificates of Title should not have been issued to petitioners without full payment of the just compensation. Under Section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 266, the DAR will issue the Emancipation Patents only after the tenant-farmers have fully complied with the requirements for a grant of title under PD 27. Although PD 27 states that the tenant-farmers are already deemed owners of the land they till, it is understood that full payment of the just compensation has to be made first before title is transferred to them. Thus, Section 6 of EO 228 provides that ownership of lands acquired under PD 27 may be transferred only after the agrarian reform beneficiary has fully paid the amortizations.36

Clearly, respondent is not entitled to be issued an Emancipation Patent considering that he has not fully complied with the requirements for a grant of title under PD 27.37

On the issue of petitioner’s claim that the subject landholding forms part of the retained area awarded to him and his sisters, the Court notes that there was no sufficient evidence to substantiate petitioner’s claim. Furthermore, as held by the Court of Appeals, only the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) has the exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the issue of whether petitioner is entitled to a retention area.38 Indeed, under Section 3 (3.5), Rule II of the DARAB 2003 Rules of Procedure, the exercise of the right of retention by the landowner is under the exclusive prerogative of and cognizable by the Office of the Secretary of the DAR. Besides, even if the subject landholding forms part of petitioner’s retained area, petitioner landowner may still not eject respondent tenant absent any of the causes provided under the law. The landowner cannot just terminate the leasehold relationship without valid cause.

WHEREFORE, we PARTIALLY GRANT the petition. We SET ASIDE the 8 February 2006 Decision and the 29 May 2006 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 90212. We REINSTATE the 29 June 1998 Decision of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board in DARAB Case No. 5504.

SO ORDERED.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA

Associate Justice

DIOSDADO M. PERALTA ROBERTO A. ABAD

Associate Justice Associate Justice

JOSE C. MENDOZA

Associate Justice

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Associate Justice

Chairperson

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, and the Division Chairperson’s Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

RENATO C. CORONA

Chief Justice

1Under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.

2Rollo, pp. 8-21. Penned by Associate Justice Renato C. Dacudao, with Associate Justices Lucas P. Bersamin (now SC Associate Justice) and Celia C. Librea-Leagogo, concurring.

3Id. at 23.

4The Certification dated 7 December 1982 of the Arayat-Sta. Ana-Candaba Agrarian Reform Team states that the land owned by petitioner is a 4-hectare unirrigated farmholding, id. at 250. Petitioner’s complaint states that the retained area is 3.6 hectares. However, in his petition for review, petitioner stated that the retained property is a 3.5 hectare orchard farm which is part of the estate covered by TCT No. 14488 with a total area of 527,695 square meters.

5The property covered under TCT No. 14488 consists of five (5) parcels of land with a total aggregate area of 527,695 square meters.

6Rollo, pp. 355-363.

7TCT No. 14488 states that the property is owned by Maria Pilar Dolores V. Reyes, Consolacion V. Reyes, Renato V. Reyes, Leticia V. Reyes, and Martina V. Reyes, id. at 355.

8Id. at 530-541.

9Id. at 97-100.

10Manifestations & Motion to Postpone Hearing, dated 25 March 1996, CA rollo, pp. 191-192.

11Rollo, pp. 110-111.

12Id. at 243.

13Id. at 388.

14 Id. at 84-85.

15Id. at 90-92.

16Id. at 94-95.

17Id. at 54.

18Id. at 33-34.

19Id. at 250.

20Id. at 254.

21Id. at 314.

22Id. at 315.

23Id. at 399-400.

243rd Indorsement dated 30 October 2002 signed by the OIC-PARO Engr. Rodolfo S. Pangilinan of the Provincial Agrarian Reform Office, Region III, San Fernando City.

25Rollo, p. 401. Emphasis supplied.

26SECTION 3. Technical Rules Not Applicable. ‒ The Board and its Regional and Provincial Adjudication Offices shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence as prescribed in the Rules of Court, but shall proceed to hear and decide all agrarian cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in accordance with justice and equity.

x x x

c. The provision of the Rules of Court shall not apply even in suppletory character unless adopted herein or by resolution of the Board.

27SECTION 1. Nature of Proceedings. ‒ The proceedings before the Adjudicator shall be non-litigious in nature.

Subject to the essential requirements of due process, the technicalities of law and procedures and the rules governing the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence obtained in the courts of law shall not apply.

The Adjudicator shall employ reasonable means to ascertain the facts of the controversy including a thorough examination or re-examination of witnesses and the conduct of ocular inspection of the premises in question, if necessary.

28G.R. No. 96492, 26 November 1992, 216 SCRA 25.

29 Id. at 32.

30Rule I, Section 2 of the 1994 DARAB New Rules of Procedure.

31TCT No. 14488, rollo, pp. 355-363.

32Produced by the Agrarian Reform Communication Unit, National Media Production Center for the Ministry of Agrarian Reform (1979) and prepared in consultation with the Bureau of Land Tenure Improvement, Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance, Bureau of Resettlement, Center for Operation Land Transfer and the Public Information Division of the Ministry of Agrarian Reform and the Land Bank of the Philippines, id. at 377-384.

33Id. at 380.

34Primer on Agrarian Reform, id. at 383.

35G.R. No. 173923, 12 October 2009, 603 SCRA 383.

36Id. at 393.

37Section 105 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 (PROPERTY REGISTRATION DECREE) provides that: “After the tenant-farmer shall have fully complied with the requirements for a grant of title under P.D. No. 27, an Emancipation Patent which may cover previously titled or untitled property shall be issued by the Department of Agrarian Reform.”

38CA Decision, p. 13; rollo, p. 20.

THIS POST  CONTAINS A LIST OF CASES IN THIS WEBSITE  UNDER CATEGORY “RECENT SC DECISIONS”.

TO FIND THE CASE YOU WANT, TYPE CTRL F. A FIND BOX APPEARS. TYPE A KEY WORD LIKE “REYES” OR “TAX” THAT COULD LEAD TO YOUR CASE. THEN PRESS “NEXT” APPEARING IN THE FIND BOX. IF A CASE TITLE CONTAINS THE KEY WORD, IT IS IDENTIFIED BECAUSE THE KEY WORD APPEARS IN  WHITE COLOR.  BRING THE CURSOR TO THAT CASE TITLE  AND DOUBLE CLICK. 

 

CASE NO12-0040: JANDY J. AGOY VS. ARANETA CENTER, INC. (G.R. NO. 196358, MARCH 21, 2012, ABAD, J.) SUBJECT/S: LEGALITY OF SC MINUTE RESOLUTIONS (BRIEF TITLE: AGOY VS. ARANETA CENTER)

CASE 2012-0039: F.F. CRUZ & CO., INC. VS. HR CONSTRUCTION CORP. (G.R. NO. 187521, MARCH 14, 2012, REYES, J.) SUBJECT/S: GENERALLY, THE ARBITRAL AWARD OF CIAC IS FINAL AND MAY NOT BE APPEALED; ISSUES ON THE PROPER INTERPRETATION OF THE TERMS OF THE SUBCONTRACT AGREEMENT INVOLVE QUESTIONS OF LAW; WHAT ARE QUESTIONS OF LAW, QUESTIONS OF FACTS. (BRIEF TITLE: F.F. CRUZ VS. HR CONSTRUCTION).

CASE 2012-0038: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. FRANCISCA TALARO,* GREGORIO TALARO,** NORBERTO (JUN) ADVIENTO, RENATO RAMOS, RODOLFO DUZON,*** RAYMUNDO ZAMORA** and LOLITO AQUINO (G.R. No. 175781, March 20, 2012, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT/S: MURDER (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. TALARO)

CASE 2012-0037: JAIME S. PEREZ, BOTH IN HIS PERSONAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHIEF, MARIKINA DEMOLITION OFFICE VS. SPOUSES FORTUNITO L. MADRONA AND YOLANDA B. PANTE (G.R. NO. 184478, MARCH 21, 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: REQUISITES FOR ISSUANCE OF INJUNCTION; NUISANCE PER SE AND NUISANCE PER ACCIDENS; CITY GOVT CANNOT JUST DEMOLISH A FENCE. IT MUST GO TO COURT. (BRIEF TITLE: PEREZ VS. SPOUSES MADRONA)

CASE 2012-0036: SPO2 LOLITO T. NACNAC VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 191913, MARCH 21, 2012, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: MOTION FOR RECON GRANTED BY SC; ELEMENTS OF SELF DEFENSE; (BRIEF TITLE: NACNAC VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2012-0035: AUSTRALIAN PROFESSIONAL REALTY, INC., JESUS GARCIA, and LYDIA MARCIANO VS. MUNICIPALITY OF PADRE GARCIA BATANGAS PROVINCE (G. R. No. 183367, March 14, 2012, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT/S: INJUNCTIVE RELIEFS; CLEAR LEGAL RIGHT; APPEAL UNDER RULE 45 VIS A VIS CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 65; GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION; IRREPARABLE INJURY. (BRIEF TITLE: AUSTRALIAN PROFESSIONAL REALTY VS. MUN. OF PADRE GARCIA)

CASE 2012-0034: ELEANOR DE LEON LLENADO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND EDITHA VILLAFLORES (G.R. NO. 193279, MARCH 14, 2012, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT/S: BP 22; ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE; COMPUTATION OF INTEREST. (BRIEF: LLENADO VS. PEOPLE).

CASE 2012-0033: RE: SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM DATED JANUARY 11, 2010 OF ACTING DIRECTOR ALEU A. AMANTE, PIAB-C, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN; RE: ORDER OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN REFERRING THE COMPLAINT OF ATTYS. OLIVER O. LOZANO AND EVANGELINE J. LOZANO-ENDRIANO AGAINST CHIEF JUSTICE REYNATO S. PUNO [RET.]. (A.M. NO. 10-1-13-SC, MARCH 20, 2012, PER CURIAM) SUBJECT/S: MISQUOTING OR MISUSING CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS IN PLEADINGS[1][2] IN ORDER TO IMPUTE UNJUST ACTS TO MEMBERS OF SC CONSTITUTES GRAVE PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT. (BRIEF TITLE: SC ADMIN CASE OF ATTY. OLIVER LOZANO)

CASE 2012-0032: NORKIS DISTRIBUTORS, INC. AND ALEX D. BUAT VS. DELFIN S. DESCALLAR (G.R. NO. 185255, MARCH 14, 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: FAILURE TO MEET QUOTA NOT BASIS FOR LOSS OF TRUST; TWO RELIEFS OF AN ILLEGALLY DISMISSED EMPLOYEE: BACK WAGES AND REINSTATEMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: NORKIS VS. BUAT)

CASE 2012-0031: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. EDUARDO CASTRO Y PERALTA AND RENERIO DELOS REYES Y BONUS (G.R. NO. 187073, MARCH 14, 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J) SUBJECT/S: ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE; CONSPIRACY; ALIBI; TEMPERATE DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. CASTRO)

CASE 2012-0030: RE: PETITION FOR JUDICIAL CLEMENCY OF JUDGE IRMA ZITA V. MASAMAYOR (A.M. No. 12-2-6-SC, March 6, 2012, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.) SUBJECT: JUDICIAL CLEMENCY (BRIEF TITLE: THE CASE OF JUDGE MASAMAYOR)

CASE 2012-0029: GOODLAND COMPANY, INC. VS. ASIA UNITED BANK, CHRISTINE T. CHAN, FLORANTE DEL MUNDO, ENGRACIO M. ESCASINAS, JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CLERK OF COURT & EX-OFFICIO SHERIFF IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MAKATI CITY, NORBERTO B. MAGSAJO, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF IV OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MAKATI CITY, AND RONALD A. ORTILE, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR MAKATI CITY (G.R. NO. 1955460; GOODLAND COMPANY, INC. VS. ASIA UNITED BANK, ABRAHAM CO, ATTY. JOEL T. PELICANO AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MAKATI CITY (G.R. NO. 195561) (MARCH 14, 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: FORUM SHOPPING; PETITIONER IN HIS CERTIFICATION DECLARED THAT THERE WERE PENDING CASES BUT SC RULED THAT STILL THERE WAS FORUM SHOPPING. (BRIEF TITLE: GOODLAND VS. ASIA UNITED BANK).

CASE 2012-0028: CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION VS. AURORA M. CLAVE (G.R. NO. 194645, MARCH 6, 2012, PER CURIAM) SUBJECT/S: SIMPLE NEGLECT OF DUTY; PENALTY OF DISMISSAL SUSTAINED. (BRIEF TITLE: CIVIL SERVICE VS. CLAVE)

CASE 2012-0026: IN RE: LETTERS OF ATTY. ESTELITO P. MENDOZA RE: G.R. NO. 178083 – FLIGHT ATTENDANTS AND STEWARDS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (FASAP) V. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. (PAL), ET AL. (A.M. NO. 11-10-1-SC, MARCH 13, 2012, BRION, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: RE LETTTERS OF ATTY. MENDOZA)

CASE 2012-0025: MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY VS. JAN CARLO GALA (G.R. Nos. 191288 & 191304, March 7, 2012, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: APPLICATION OF TECHICAL RULES OF PROCEDURE IN LABOR CASES MAY BE RELAXED; DISMISSAL OF PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE SUSTAINED; SAMPLE OF CONDITIONS IN PROBATIONARY EMPLOY AGREEMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: MERALCO VS. GALA).

CASE 2012-0023: JUANA COMPLEX I HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., ANDRES C. BAUTISTA, BRIGIDO DIMACULANGAN, DOLORES P. PRADO, IMELDA DE LA CRUZ, EDITHA C. DY, FLORENCIA M. MERCADO, LEOVINO C. DATARIO, AIDA A. ABAYON, NAPOLEON M. DIMAANO, ROSITA G. ESTIGOY AND NELSON A. LOYOLA, VS. FIL-ESTATE LAND, INC., FIL ESTATE ECOCENTRUM CORPORATION, LA PAZ HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WARBIRD SECURITY AGENCY, ENRIQUE RIVILLA, MICHAEL E. JETHMAL AND MICHAEL ALUNAN (G.R. NO. 152272, MARCH 5, 2012, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: HOW CAUSE OF ACTION IS DETERMINED; ELEMENTS OF CLASS SUIT; REQUIREMENTS FOR WRIT OF PRELIM INJUNCTION. (BRIEF TITLE: JUANA COMPLEX VS. FIL-ESTATE LAND)

CASE 2012-0022: PEOPLE’S BROADCASTING SERVICE (BOMBO RADYO PHILS., INC. VS. THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, DOLE REGION VII, AND JANDELEON JUEZAN (G.R. NO. 179652, MARCH 6, 2012, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECT: IN THE EXERCISE OF THE DOLE’S VISITORIAL AND ENFORCEMENT POWER, THE LABOR SECRETARY OR THE LATTER’S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF AN EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP, TO THE EXCLUSION OF THE NLRC. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE’S BROADCASTING VS. DOLE SECRETARY).

CASE 2012-0021: ERNESTO G. YMBONG VS. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, VENERANDA SY AND DANTE LUZON (G.R. NO. 184885, MARCH 7, 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.:) SUBJECT: COMPANY POLICY THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHO RAN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE MUST RESIGN OR IS DEEMED RESIGNED UPHELD. (BRIEF TITLE: YMBONG VS. ABS-CBN)

CASE 2012-0020: CESAR V. GARCIA, CARLOS RAZON, ALBERTO DE GUZMAN, TOMAS RAZON, OMER E. PALO RIZALDE VALENCIA, ALLAN BASA, JESSIE GARCIA,JUANITO PARAS, ALEJANDRO ORAG, ROMMEL PANGAN, RUEL SOLIMAN, AND CENEN CANLAPAN, REPRESENTED BY CESAR V. GARCIA VS. KJ COMMERCIAL REYNALDO QUE (G.R. NO. `96830, 29 FEBRUARY 2012, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT/S: NOT RAISING THE ISSUE AT CA THAT THE LABOR ARBITER’S DECISION IS FINAL IS FATAL. CANT BE ENTERTAINED BY SC. BOND REQUIREMENT ON APPEAL MAY BE RELAXED. (BRIEF TITLE :GARCIA VS. KJ COMMERCIAL)

CASE 2012-0019: JELBERT B. GALICTO VS. H.E. PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES; ATTY. PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY; AND FLORENCIO B. ABAD, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT (G.R. NO. 193978, 28 FEBRUARY 2012, BRION, J.) SUBJECT/S: SINCE EO IS NOT JUDICIAL, CERTIORARI IS WRONG REMEDY; LOCUS STANDI; WHO IS REAL PARTY IN INTEREST; WHAT IS COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY; DEFECTIVE JURAT NOT FATAL; WHAT IS A MOOT CASE. (BRIEF TITLE: GALICTO VS. AQUINO).

CASE 2012-0017 (G.R. NO. 196271: DATU MICHAEL ABAS KIDA ET AL VS. SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES ET AL.) AND OTHER RELATED CASES) (28 FEBRUARY 2012, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONALITY OF RA NO. 10163 (BRIEF TITLE: THE RA 10163 CASE)

CASE 2012-0016: CHINA BANKING CORPORATION VS. QBRO FISHING ENTERPRISES (G.R. NO. 184556, 22 FEBRUARY 2012, VILLARAMA, JR. J.) SUBJECT/S: EFFECT OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE ON THIRD PARTY MORTGAGOR; EXCEPTION TO THE RULE THAT SC MUST ONLY RESOLVE QUESTIONS OF LAW (BRIEF TITLE: CHINA BANKING VS. QBRO FISHING)

CASE 2012-0015: NEGROS SLASHERS, INC., RODOLFO C. ALVAREZ AND VICENTE TAN VS. ALVIN L. TENG (G.R. NO. 187122, 22 FEBRUARY 2012, VILLARAMA, JR. J.) SUBJECT/S: LATE FILING OF CERTIORARI CONSIDERED; FORUM SHOPPING; PENALTY OF DISMISSAL TOO HARSH. (BRIEF TITLE: NEGROS SLASHERS VS. TENG).

CASE 2012-0014: MEROPE ENRIQUEZ VDA. DE CATALAN VS. LOUELLA A. CATALAN-LEE (G. R. No. 183622 08 FEBRUARY 2012, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT/S: RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCE; LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION (BRIEF TITLE: CATALAN VS. CATALAN-LEE).

CASE 2012-0013: D.M. FERRER & ASSOCIATES CORPORATION VS. UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS (G.R. No. 189496, 01 FEBRUARY 2012, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT/S: WHAT DETERMINES CAUSE OF ACTION; CERTIORARI AS REMEDY IF MAIN CASE IS STILL PENDING. (BRIEF TITLE: D.M. FERRER VS. UST).

CASE 2012-0012: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. MA. IMELDA “IMEE” R. MARCOS-MANOTOC, FERDINAND “BONGBONG” R. MARCOS, JR., GREGORIO MA. ARANETA III, IRENE R. MARCOS-ARANETA, YEUNG CHUN FAN, YEUNG CHUN HO, YEUNG CHUN KAM, AND PANTRANCO EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (PEA)-PTGWO (G.R. NO. 171701, 08 FEBRUARY 2012, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT/S: BEST EVIDENCE RULE; NOTARIZED DOCUMENT AS EVIDENCE; TSN AS EVIDENCE; DUTY OF PUBLIC PROSECUTORS. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. IMEE MARCOS)

CASE 2012-0011: SPOUSES DEMOCRITO AND OLIVIA LAGO VS. JUDGE GODOFREDO B. ABUL, JR., REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 43, GINGOOG CITY (A.M. NO. RTJ-10-2255, 08 FEBRUARY 2012, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW; NOT ALL ERRORS MAKE A JUDGE LIABLE. (BRIEF TITLE: LAGO VS. JUDGE ABUL).

CASE 2012-0010: LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ESTATE OF J. AMADO ARANETA (G.R. NO. 161796); DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM (PETITI0NER) AND NORBERTO RESULTA, EDITHA ABAD, LEDELIA ASIDOY, GIL PAGARAGAN, ROSALITO PAGHUBASAN, EDWIN FAUSTINO, FELOMINO JUSOL, EDELBERTO POBLARES, EFREN APON, NELSON VILLAREAL, JIMMY ZONIO, SERLISTO ZONIO, WILFREDO MARCELINO, ROGELIO RODERO, SERGIO ZONIO, NORBERTO FRANCISCO, AURORA VILLACORTE, JOVITO NINONUEVO, ELIZABETH ZAUSA, RUBEN VILLANUEVA, VICENTA RACCA, ROGELIO RACCA, MERCEDES VILLANUEVA, EDUARDO BIUTE, APOLINARIO TORRAL, BENJAMIN TANJER, JR., MINDA SOLIMAN, CIPRIANO REQUIOLA, GLORIA ROMERO, SILVERIO ZONIO, NESTOR ZONIO, NILO ZAUSA, ROMUALDO ZAUSA, REYNALDO ZAUSA, LUMILYN ZAUSA, GILBERT BAUTISTA, GILDA PACETES, ALUDIA CALUB, LOURDES CAGNO, ABELARDO CAGNO, BENJAMIN MARINAS, CRISPINA ARNAIZ, MARIA CABUS, RESTITUTA PRETENCIO, MA. LUZ ABALOS, ABELARDO DEL ROSARIO, CANDELARIA CEPEDA, HAYDEE MARQUILENCIA, LEONCIA ZATA, LUCIA LOPEZ, MARGARITA MANLANGIT, CRISTINA PACIS, LEONELDA FIDELA, MA. BLESS MASAGNAY, AGUSTIN CADAO, DOLORES FELICIANO, MA. JESSICA FELICIANO, MA. LOURDES FELICIANO, MA. JULITA FELICIANO, FEDERICO ZONIO, NENITA SINGSON, LIBRADA ZASPA, THELMA ELISERIO, SALVADOR VILLORENTE, SATURNINA TESORERO, ROGELIO PARACUELES, ANITA MENDOZA, AMADEO MASAGNAY, ELVIRA CAMPOS, LAURIANO CAMPOS, BENITO VILLAGANAS, VIRGILIO FERRER, SALVADOR RESULTA, NORLITO RESULTA, DIANA SEPTIMO, SALVADOR SEPTIMO, DIOSDADO LAGMAN, CLAUDIA MIRALLES, RICARDO FRANCISCO, RODOLFO FRANCISCO, ALEXANDER YURONG, ALFREDO BUENAVENTURA, ISIDRO DELA CRUZ, REMEDIOS CABUNDOC, ARTEMIO MIRASOL, MINDA COPINO, ANDRES IBARBIA, WILFREDO BALLOS, ELSA BANGCA, ARTURO CANTURIA, PABLITO SAGUIBO, CARLITO VILLONES, JOSEFINA TABANGCURA, NEDA MASAGNAY (PETITIONERS-INTERVENORS); ESTELA MARIE MALOLOS, LORETO DELA CRUZ, JOSE PAJARILLO, IMELDA ZAUSA, FEDERICO ZAUSA REPRESENTED BY ROSALINDA ZAUSA, LUDEVICO ZAUSA, GLORIA VILLANUEVA, ZENAIDA MASAGNAY, ELSIO ESTO, RODOLFO VILLONES, ALVINO NARCI REPRESENTED BY LILIA VILLONES, RUFINO ZONIO, ALBERTO ROSI, ZENAIDA VILLENA, ANTONIO ZAUSA, SALDITO ZONIO, ZACARIAS CORTEZ, LARRY MASAGNAY REPRESENTED BY LEONEL MASAGNAY, ERLINDA MORISON, JUAN CORTEZ, PRIMITIBO NICASIO, CARMELO CESAR, ANDRES ZONIO REPRESENTED BY RUFINO ZONIO, JUANITO ZONIO, JERENCIO ZONIO, ALEX CORTEZ, PEPITO VILLAREAL, (PETITIONERS-MOVANTS) VS. ESTATE OF J. AMADO ARANETA (G.R. NO. 161830); ERNESTO B. DURAN, LOPE P. ABALOS (DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY LOPE ABALOS, JR., ARTEMIO T. GONZALES (DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY PAUL GONZALES, AUGUSTO LIM, IMELDA MARCELINO, ERNESTO NAVARTE (DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY SURVIVING SPOUSE NELIA NAVARTE, FLORANTE M. QUIMZON, MANUEL R. QUIMZON (DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY FLORANTE M. QUIMZON, NELIA ZAUSA (PETITIONERS-INTERVENORS) VS. ESTATE OF J. AMADO ARANETA (G.R. NO. 190456) (08 FEBRUARY 2012, VELASCO, JR., J ) SUBJECT/S: DEFINITION OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS; PRIVATE RIGHTS; JUST COMPENSATION; POWER OF RECLASSIFICATION OF LANDS; JURISDICTION OF DARAB (BRIEF TITLE: J. AMADO ARANETA ESTATE CASE).

CASE 2012-0009: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN (FOURTH DIVISION), IMELDA R. MARCOS, JOSE CONRADO BENITEZ AND GILBERT C. DULAY (G.R. NOS. 153304-05, 08 FEBRUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT/S: WHEN DOUBLE JEOPARDY DOES NOT APPLY; MISTAKE OF COUNSEL BINDS CLIENT; SANDIGAN NEED NOT REQUIRE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE WHEN DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE IS FILED EVEN IF EVIDENCE APPEARS WEAK. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. SANDIGAN AND IMELDA MARCOS).

CASE 2012-0008: LYNVIL FISHING ENTERPRISES, INC. AND/OR ROSENDO S. DE BORJA VS. ANDRES G. ARIOLA, JESSIE D. ALCOVENDAS, JIMMY B. CALINAO AND LEOPOLDO G. SEBULLEN (G.R. NO. 181974, 01 FEBRUARY 2012, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECT/S: TERMINATION FOR BREACH OF TRUST; CONDITIONS FOR THE VALIDITY OF A FIXED-CONTRACT AGREEMENT; RULING OF PROSECUTOR NOT DETERMINATIVE; PENALTY IN CASE THE TWO NOTICE RULE IS NOT FOLLOWED; (BRIEF TITLE: LYNVIL FISHING VS. ARIOLA)

CASE 2012-0007: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION VS. MINERVA M.P. PACHEO (G.R. NO. 178021, 25 JANUARY 2012, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT/S: WHEN TRANSFER OR REASSIGNMENT CONSTITUTES CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL; DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DETAIL AND REASSIGNMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. PACHEO)

CASE 2012-0006: ANITA L. MIRANDA VS. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. No. 176298, 25 JANUARY 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: ACCOUNTANT DEPOSITED CHECKS TO ACCOUNT OF VIVA AND WITHDREW PROCEEDS, LIABLE FOR QUALIFIED THEFT, NOT ESTAFA; COMPUTATION OF PENALTY FOR QUALIFIED THEFT; PENALTY INCREASED TO RECLUSION PERPETUA FOR STOLEN AMOUNT OF P797,187.85. (BRIEF TITLE: MIRANDA VS. PEOPLE).

CASE 2012-0005: MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORPORATION AND/OR WASTFEL-LARSEN MANAGEMENT A/S VS. OBERTO S. LOBUSTA (G.R. NO. 177578, 25 JANUARY 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: LABOR CODE APPLIES TO CLAIMS UNDER POEA-APPROVED CONTRACTS; CONCEPT OF PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY; ORDERS OF COURT TO FILE PLEADINGS ARE NOT MERE REQUESTS, DISOBEDIENCE CONSTITUTES CONTEMPT. (BRIEF TITLE: MAGSAYSAY MARITIME VS. LOBUSTA)

CASE 2012-0003: MARINO B. ICDANG VS. SANDIGANBAYAN (SECOND DIVISION) AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. (G.R. NO. 185960, 25 JANUARY 2012, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT/S: DECISION OF CONVICTION BY SANDIGANBAYAN MUST BE APPEALED UNDER RULE 45 NOT RULE 65; ABSENCE OF COUNSEL DURING PROMULGATION DOES NOT INVALIDATE DECISION. (BRIEF TITLE: ICDANG VS. SANDIGANBAYAN).

CASE 2012-0002: NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION VS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and RODRIGO A. TANFELIX (G.R. NO. 152093, 24 JANUARY 2012, ABAD J.) (BRIEF TITLE: NPC VS. CSC AND TANFELIX)

CASE 2012-0001: PHILIPPINE COCONUT PRODUCERS FEDERATION, INC. (COCOFED), MANUEL V. DEL ROSARIO, DOMINGO P. ESPINA, SALVADOR P. BALLARES, JOSELITO A. MORALEDA, PAZ M. YASON, VICENTE A. CADIZ, CESARIA DE LUNA TITULAR, and RAYMUNDO C. DE VILLA VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NOS. 177857-58); WIGBERTO E. TAÑADA, OSCAR F. SANTOS, SURIGAO DEL SUR FEDERATION OF AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES (SUFAC) and MORO FARMERS ASSOCIATION OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR (MOFAZS), represented by ROMEO C. ROYANDOYAN (INTERVENORS) DANILO S. URSUA VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. No. 178193, 24 JANUARY 2012, VELASCO JR., J.) (BRIEF TITLE: PHIL COCONUT PRODUCERS VS. REPUBLIC)

CASE 2011-0243: SIAO ABA, MIKO LUMABAO, ALMASIS LAUBAN, and BENJAMIN DANDA VS. ATTYS. SALVADOR DE GUZMAN, JR., WENCESLAO “PEEWEE” TRINIDAD, and ANDRESITO FORNIER (A.C. NO. 7649, 14 DECEMBER 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT/S: DEGREE OF EVIDENCE NEEDED TO SANCTION LAWYER; PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENSE; EQUIPOISE DOCTRINE. (BRIEF TITLE: ABA VS. ATTY DE GUZMAN)

CASE 2011-0242: BAGUIO TRINITY DEVELOPERS, INC., HEREIN REPRESENTED BY RICARDO JULIAN VS. THE HEIRS OF JOSE RAMOS AND THE HEIRS OF LEOPOLDO AND VICTORINA NEPA; AND THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS (G.R. NO. 188381, 14 DECEMBER 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECT: REQUIREMENT IN A PETITION FOR ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT OF THE SUBMISSION OF A CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF THE ASSAILED JUDGMENT OR ORDER; LACHES AS A BAR TO A PROPERTY OWNER’S ACTION TO ANNUL A RECONSTITUTED VERSION OF HIS TITLE REGISTERED IN ANOTHER PERSON’S NAME. (BRIEF TITLE: BAGUIO TRINITY VS. HEIRS OF RAMON).

CASE 2011-0241: ESPINA & MADARANG CO. & MAKAR AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL & DEVELOPMENT CORP. (MAKAR), REPRESENTED BY RODRIGO A. ADTOON VS. HON. CADER P. INDAR AL HAJ, JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 14, REGION 12, COTABATO CITY AND ITS OIC, BRANCH CLERK OF COURT, ABIE M. AMILIL (A.M. NO. RTJ-07-2069, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: ISSUING AN ORDER WITHOUT READING PLEADINGS; NEGLIGENCE IN RECORD MANAGEMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: ESPINA VS. INDAR)

CASE 2011-0240: JAIME ABALOS AND SPOUSES FELIX SALAZAR AND CONSUELO SALAZAR, GLICERIO ABALOS, HEIRS OF AQUILINO ABALOS, NAMELY: SEGUNDA BAUTISTA, ROGELIO ABALOS, DOLORES A. ROSARIO, FELICIDAD ABALOS, ROBERTO ABALOS, JUANITO ABALOS, TITA ABALOS, LITA A. DELA CRUZ AND HEIRS OF AQUILINA ABALOS, NAMELY: ARTURO BRAVO, PURITA B. MENDOZA, LOURDES B. AGANON, CONSUELO B. SALAZAR, PRIMA B. DELOS SANTOS, THELMA APOSTOL AND GLECERIO ABALOS VS. HEIRS OF VICENTE TORIO, NAMELY: PUBLIO TORIO, LIBORIO TORIO, VICTORINA TORIO, ANGEL TORIO, LADISLAO TORIO, PRIMO TORIO AND NORBERTO TORIO (G.R. NO. 175444, 14 DECEMBER 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT/S: ORDINARY AND EXTRAORDINARY ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION; EFFECT OF NOTARIZATION; WHEN SC CAN REVIEW FINDINGS OF FACT. (BRIEF TITLE: ABALOS VS. HEIRS OF TORIO).

CASE 2011-0239: JEBSENS MARITIME INC., represented by MS. ARLENE ASUNCION and/or ALLIANCE MARINE SERVICES, LTD. VS. ENRIQUE UNDAG (G.R. NO. 191491, 14 DECEMBER 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: DISABILITY BENEFITS TO SEAMEN. (BRIEF TITLE: JEBSENS VS. UNDAG).

CASE 2011-0238: LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. FEDERICO SUNTAY, AS REPRESENTED BY HIS ASSIGNEE, JOSEFINA LUBRICA (G.R. NO. 188376, 14 DECEMBER 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECT/S: EXPROPRIATION; EXCEPTIONS TO THE MOOT AND ACADEMIC RULE. (BRIEF TITLE: LAND BANK VS. SUNTAY)

CASE 2011-0237: OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON, HONORABLE VICTOR C. FERNANDEZ, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON, AND THE GENERAL INVESTIGATION BUREAU-A, REPRESENTED BY MARIA OLIVIA ELENA A. ROXAS VS. JESUS D. FRANCISCO, SR. (G.R. NO. 172553, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT/S: MOOT AND ACADEMIC PRINCIPLE; PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION (OMBUDSMAN VS. FERNANDEZ)

CASE 2011-0236: RAMONA RAMOS and THE ESTATE OF LUIS T. RAMOS VS. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, OPAL PORTFOLIO INVESTMENTS (SPV-AMC), INC. and GOLDEN DRAGON STAR EQUITIES, INC. (G.R. NO. 178218, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: BLANKET OR DRAGNET CLAUSE IN MORTGAGE; INTENTION OF PARTIES IN A CONTRACT; RAISING ISSUE FOR THE FIRST TIME ON APPEAL, EXCEPTIONS. (BRIEF TITLE: RAMOS VS. PNB)

CASE 2011-0235: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. HENRY ARPON y JUNTILLA (G.R. No. 183563, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT/S: RAPE; PENALTIES AND INDEMNITIES MODIFIED. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. ARPON)

CASE 2011-0234: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. BENJAMIN AMANSEC Y DONA (G.R. NO. 186131, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 11 AND 5, ARTICLE II OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 OR THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. AMANSEC).

CASE 2011-0233: PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 172458, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE FORMAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE REVISED RULES OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS AND THE RULES OF COURT IN FILING A PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE CTA EN BANC. (BRIEF TITLE: PNB VS. CIR)

CASE 2011-0232: MA. JOY TERESA BILBAO VS. SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES (G.R. NO. 183915, 14 DECEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J ) SUBJECT: RESIGNATION (BRIEF TITLE: BILBAO VS. SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINE)

CASE 2011-0231: EVILINA C. BANAAG VS. OLIVIA C. ESPELETA, INTERPRETER III, BRANCH 82, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, QUEZON CITY (A.M. NO. P-11-3011, 16 DECEMBER 2011, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.) SUBJECT: DISGRACEFUL AND IMMORAL CONDUCT; SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE; (BRIEF TITLE: BANAAN VS. ESPELITA)

CASE 2011-0230: MANILA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY VS. DING VELAYO SPORTS CENTER INC. (G.R. NO. 161718, 14 DECEMBER 2011) LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: MIAA VS. DING VELAYO)

CASE 2011-0229: LVM CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANDRES CHUA LAO VS. F.T. SANCHEZ/SOCOR/KIMWA (JOINT VENTURE), F.T. SANCHEZ CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, SOCOR CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION AND KIMWA CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ALL REPRESENTED BY FORTUNATO O. SANCHEZ, JR (G.R. NO. 181961, 05 DECEMBER 2011, PEREZ J.) SUBJECTS: CONTRACTS; VAT/E-VAT. (BRIEF TITLE: LVM CONSTRUCTION VS. F.T. SANCHEZ)

 CASE 2011-0228: ARTHUR BALAO, WINSTON BALAO, NONETTE BALAO, JONILYN BALAO-STRUGAR AND BEVERLY LONGID VS. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, EDUARDO ERMITA, GILBERTO TEODORO, RONALDO PUNO, NORBERTO GONZALES, GEN. ALEXANDER YANO, GEN. JESUS VERZOSA, BRIG. GEN. REYNALDO MAPAGU, LT. P/DIR. EDGARDO DOROMAL, MAJ. GEN. ISAGANI CACHUELA, COMMANDING OFFICER OF THE AFP-ISU BASED IN BAGUIO CITY, PSS EUGENE MARTIN AND SEVERAL JOHN DOES (G.R. NO. 186050); GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, EDUARDO ERMITA, GILBERTO TEODORO, RONALDO PUNO, NORBERTO GONZALES, GEN. ALEXANDER YANO, GEN. JESUS VERZOSA, BRIG. GEN. REYNALDO MAPAGU, LT. P/DIR. EDGARDO DOROMAL, MAJ. GEN. ISAGANI CACHUELA, COMMANDING OFFICER OF THE AFP-ISU BASED IN BAGUIO CITY, PSS EUGENE MARTIN AND SEVERAL JOHN DOES VS. ARTHUR BALAO, WINSTON BALAO, NONETTE BALAO, JONILYN BALAO-STRUGAR AND BEVERLY LONGID (G.R. NO. 186059, 13 DECEMBER 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) (BRIEF TITLE: BALAO VS. ARROYO)

CASE 2011-0227: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. SANDIGANBAYAN (FOURTH DIVISION), JOSE L. AFRICA (SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS), MANUEL H. NIETO, JR., FERDINAND E. MARCOS (SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS), IMELDA R. MARCOS, FERDINAND R. MARCOS, JR., JUAN PONCE ENRILE, AND POTENCIANO ILUSORIO (SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS) (G.R. NO. 152375, 16 DECEMBER 2011, BRION, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. SANDIGANBAYAN ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0226: NIÑA JEWELRY MANUFACTURING OF METAL ARTS, INC. (otherwise known as NIÑA MANUFACTURING AND METAL ARTS, INC.) and ELISEA B. ABELLA VS. MADELINE C. MONTECILLO and LIZA M. TRINIDAD (G.R. NO. 188169, 28 NOVEMBER 2011, REYES, J.) SUBJECTS: ABANDONMENT OF WORK, CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL, DEDUCTIONS FROM PAY, PETITION FOR CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 65 VS. PETITION FOR REIVEW UNDER RULE 45. (BRIEF TITLE: NINA JEWELRY VS. MONTECILLIO)

CASE 2011-0225: RAMON S. CHING AND PO WING PROPERTIES, INC. VS. HON. JANSEN R. RODRIGUEZ, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MANILA, BRANCH 6, JOSEPH CHENG, JAIME CHENG, MERCEDES IGNE AND LUCINA SANTOS, SUBSTITUTED BY HER SON, EDUARDO S. BALAJADIA (G.R. NO. 192828, 28 NOVEMBER 2011, REYES) (SUBJECTS: WHAT DETERMINES WHETHER A CASE FALLS WITHIN PROBATE OR INTESTATE PROCEEDINGS; DISINHERITANCE; MOTION TO DISMISS. (BRIEF TITLE: RAMON CHING ET AL VS. JUDGE RODRIGUEZ). 

CASE 2011-0224: VICTOR R. REYES, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS, CLARIBEL G. REYES, CLARISSA G. REYES AND CZARINA G. REYES VS. COURT OF APPEALS, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, HON. JOSE L. ATIENZA, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS CITY MAYOR OF MANILA, SENEN D. TOMADA, AND HERNANDO B. GARCIA (G.R. NO. 167002, 12 DECEMBER 2011, MENDOZA, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: REYES VS. CA)

CASE 2011-0223: COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 184428, 23 NOVEMBER 2011, VILLARAMA, JR. J.) SUBJECT: INTERPRETATION OF BIR REVENUE REGULATIONS NO. 17-99 (BRIEF TITLE: CIR VS. SMC).

CASE 2011-0222: IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE WRIT OF AMPARO AND HABEAS DATA IN FAVOR OF NORIEL H. RODRIGUEZ.

CASE 2011-0221: FERNANDO CO (FORMERLY DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME “NATHANIEL MAMI HOUSE”VS. LINA B. VARGAS (G.R. NO. 195167, 16 NOVEMBER 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: SC NOT TRIER OF FACTS; C.A. FINDINGS OF FACTS ARE CONCLUSIVE AND FINAL; EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE THAT SC CANNOT REVIEW FACTS. (BRIEF TITLE: CO VS. VARGAS)

CASE 2011-0219: HACIENDA LUISITA, INCORPORATED AND LUISITA INDUSTRIAL PARK CORPORATION and RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION VS. PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL; SECRETARY NASSER PANGANDAMAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM; ALYANSA NG MGA MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG HACIENDA LUISITA, RENE GALANG, NOEL MALLARI, and JULIO SUNIGA[1][1] and his SUPERVISORY GROUP OF THE HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. and WINDSOR ANDAYA (G.R. NO. 171101, 22 NOVEMBER 2011, VELASCO, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: HLI VS. PARC)

 CASE 2011-0218: MARITES E. FREEMAN VS. ATTY. ZENAIDA REYES (A.C. NO. 6246, 15 NOVEMBER 2011, PER CURIAM) SUBJECT: DISBARMENT; DUTY TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEYS RECEIVED FROM CLIENT; ADMIN CASE AGAINST LAWYERS SUI GENERIS; RETURNS EXPECTED FROM LAWYERING; FIDUCIARY RELATION BETWEEN CLIENT AND LAWYER. (BRIEF TITLE: FREEMAN VS. ATTY. REYES)

CASE 2011-0217: CONSTANCIO F. MENDOZA VS. SENEN C. FAMILARA and COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS (G.R. NO. 191017, 15 NOVEMBER 2011, PEREZ) SUBJECT: WHEN IS A CASE CONSIDERED MOOT AND ACADEMIC; EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE THAT CASE SHOULD BE DISMISSED DUE TO MOOTNESS. (BRIEF TITLE: MENDOZA VS. COMELEC)

CASE 2011-0216: MONICO K. IMPERIAL, JR. VS. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM (G.R. NO. 191224, 04 OCTOBER 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: GRAVE MISCONDUCT; SIMPLE MISCONDUCT, PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS; PENALTIES FOR MISCONDUCT; EXAMPLES OF CLEAR DEFIANCE OF THE LAW AND PROCEDURES (BRIEF TITLE: IMPERIAL VS. GSIS)

CASE 2011-215: URBAN BANK INC VS. MAGDALENO M. PENA (G.R. NO. 145817); DELFIN C. GONZALEZ, JR., BENJAMIN L. DE LEON, and ERIC L. LEE VS. MAGDALENO M. PENA (G.R. NO. 145822); MAGDALENO M. PENA VS. URBAN BANK, INC., TEODORO BORLONGAN, DELFIN C. GONZALEZ, JR., BENJAMIN L. DE LEON, P. SIERVO H. DIZON, ERIC L. LEE, BEN T. LIM, JR., CORAZON BEJASA, and ARTURO MANUEL, JR., (G. R. No. 162562) (19 OCTOBER 20110, SERENO J.) SUBJECTS: EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL; RESTITUTION; UNJUST ENRICHMENT.

CASE 2011-0214: HON. JUDGE JESUS B. MUPAS, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 112 AND CARMELITA F. ZAFRA, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DSWD VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, THRU ITS DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, THE LEGAL SERVICE OF THE DSWD, QUEZON CITY AND THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (G.R. NO. 189365, 12 OCTOBER 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT: ORDER OF RTC GRANTING DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE REVERSED BY CA AND SC. NOT VIOLATIVE OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY RULE. (BRIEF TITLE: JUDGE MUPAS VS. PEOPLE).

CASE 2011-0213: BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS VS. BPI EMPLOYEES UNION-DAVAO CHAPTER-FEDERATION OF UNIONS IN BPI UNIBANK (G.R. NO. 164301, 19 OCTOBER 2011, LEONARDO- DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: RIGHT OF A UNION TO REQUEST TERMINATION OF EMPLOYEES ABSORBED BY SURVIVING CORPORATION IN A MERGER. (BRIEF TITLE: BPI VS. BPI EMPLOYEES UNION).

CASE 2011-0212: REPUBLIC FLOUR MILLS CORPORATION VS. FORBES FACTORS INC., (G.R. NO. 152313, 19 OCTOBER 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECTS: LEGAL SUBROGATION; MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF POSTPONEMENT; EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC FLOUR VS. FORBES FACTORS).

CASE 2011-0211: NEMESIO FLORAN AND CARIDAD FLORAN VS. ATTY. ROY PRULE EDIZA (A.C. NO. 5325, 19 OCTOBER 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: OBLIGATION OF A LAWYER TO BE TRUTHFUL, FAIR AND HONEST IN PROTECTING HIS CLIENT’S RIGHTS (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES FLORAN VS. ATTY. EDIZA)

CASE 2011-0210: SIOCHI FISHERY ENTERPRISES, INC., JUN-JUN FISHING CORPORATION, DEDE FISHING CORPORATION, BLUE CREST AQUA-FARMS, INC. AND ILOILO PROPERTY VENTURES INC. VS. BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS (G.R. NO. 193872, 19 OCTOBER 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF RULES; REHABILITATION PLAN; RECEIVERSHIP (BRIEF TITLE: SIOCHI FISHERY VS. BPI).

CASE 2011-0209: ZACARIA A. CANDAO, ABAS A. CANDAO AND ISRAEL B. HARON VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SANDIGANBAYAN (G.R. NOS. 186659-710, 19 OCTOBER 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS. (BRIEF TITLE: CANDAO VS. PEOPLE).

CASE 2011-0208: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. JUDGE UYAG P. USMAN, PRESIDING JUDGE, SHARI’A CIRCUIT COURT, PAGADIAN CITY (A.M. NO. SCC-08-12, 19 OCTOBER 2011, MENDOZA J.) SUBJECT: FAILURE TO FILE SALN. (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. JUDGE USMAN).

CASE 2011-0207: PHILIPPINE ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY VS. GREEN ASIA CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY MR. RENATO P. LEGASPI, PRESIDENT/CEO (G.R. NO. 188866, 19 OCTOBER 2011, SERENO J.) SUBJECTS: PD 1594; PD 454; PRICE ESCALATION. (BRIEF TITLE: PEZA VS. GREEN ASIA)

 CASE 2011-0205: ENRIQUE U. BETOY VS. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION (G.R. NOS. 156556-57, 04 OCTOBER 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: EPIRA; REORGANIZATION OF NPC (BRIEF TITLE: BETOY VS. NPC)

CASE 2011-0202: ERNESTO Z. ORBE VS. JUDGE MANOLITO Y. GUMARANG, PAIRING JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, IMUS, CAVITE (A.M. NO. MTJ-11-1792, 26 SEPTEMBER 2011) SUBJECTS: SMALL CLAIM CASES; CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT. (BRIEF TITLE: ORDE VS. JUDGE GUMARANG).

CASE 2011-0201: PEDRO ANGELES , REPRESENTED BY ADELINA T. ANGELES, ATTORNEY-IN FACT VS. ESTELITA B. PASCUAL, MARIA THERESA PASCUAL, NERISSA PASCUAL, IMELDA PASCUAL, MA. LAARNI PASCUAL AND EDWIN PASCUAL (G.R. NO. 157150, 21 SEPTEMBER 2011, BERSAMIN J.) SUBJECTS: SC NOT TRIER OF FACTS; BUILDER IN GOOD FAITH. (BRIEF TITLE: ANGELES VS. PASCUAL)

CASE 2011-0200: ATTY. EMMANUEL R. ANDAMO VS. JUDGE EDWIN G. LARIDA, JR., CLERK OF COURT STANLEE D. CALMA AND LEGAL RESEARCHER DIANA G. RUIZ, ALL OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 18 TAGAYTAY CITY (G.R. NO. RTJ-11-2265, 21 SEPTEMBER 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECTS: FILING FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINT AGAINST COURT PERSONNEL; GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW; ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF POSSESSION AS MINISTERIAL DUTY. (BRIEF TITLE: ATTY. ANDAMO VS. JUDGE LARIDA).

CASE 2011-0199: FERDINAND A. CRUZ VS. JUDGE HENRICK F. GINGOYON (DECEASED), JUDGE JESUS B. MUPAS, ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 117, PASAY CITY (G.R. NO. 170404, 28 SEPTEMBER 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: DIRECT CONTEMPT OF COURT (BRIEF TITLE: CRUZ VS. GINGOYON)

CASE 2011-0198: BPI EMPLOYEES UNION – METRO MANILA AND ZENAIDA UY VS. BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS (G.R. NO. 178699); BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS VS. BPI EMPLOYEES UNION (G.R. NO. 178735) (21 SEPTEMBER 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) (BRIEF TITLE: BPI EMPLOYEES VS. BPI)

CASE NO. 2011-0197: PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT VS. SANDIGANBAYAN (SECOND DIVISION), TOURIST DUTY FREE SHOPS, INC., BANK OF AMERICA AND RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 152500, 14 SEPTEMBER 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: SEQUESTRATION ORDERS AND FREEZE ORDERS; PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; RES JUDICATA. (BRIEF TITLE: PCGG VS. TOURIST DUTY FREE SHOPS).

CASE 2011-196: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, THROUGH THE HON. SECRETARY, HERMOGENES EBDANE VS. ALBERTO A. DOMINGO (G.R. NO. 175299, 14 SEPTEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: SUMMONS TO THE REPUBLIC; APPEARANCE OF OSG; ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. DOMINGO)

CASE 2011-0195: JOEL GALZOTE Y SORIAGA VS. JONATHAN BRIONES AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 164682, 14 SEPTEMBER 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: APPEAL FROM ORDER DENYING MOTION TO QUASH. (BRIEF TITLE: GALZOTE VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0194: CITY GOVERNMENT OF TUGUEGARAO, REPRESENTED BY ROBERT P. GUZMAN VS. RANDOLPH S. TING (G.R. NOS. 192435-36, 14 SEPTEMBER 2011, VILLARAMA, J.) SUBJECT: PROPER PARTY TO APPEAL DISMISSAL ORDER OF THE SANDIGANYAYAN. (BRIEF TITLE: TUGUEGARAO CITY VS. TING).

CASE 2011-0193: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, THROUGH THE HON. SECRETARY, HERMOGENES EBDANE, PETITIONER, VERSUS ALBERTO A. DOMINGO, RESPONDENT. (G.R. NO. 175299, 14 SEPTEMBER 2011, LEONARDO DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: SERVICE OF SUMMONS; SUIT AGAINST THE STATE. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. DOMINGO)

CASE 2011-0192: SERGIO I. CARBONILLA, EMILIO Y. LEGASPI IV, AND ADONAIS Y. REJUSO, PETITIONERS, – VERSUS – BOARD OF AIRLINES REPRESENTATIVES (MEMBER AIRLINES: ASIANA AIRLINES, CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS, CHINA AIRLINES, CEBU PACIFIC AIRLINES, CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES, CONTINENTAL MICRONESIA AIRLINES, EMIRATES, ETIHAD AIRWAYS, EVA AIR AIRWAYS, FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, GULF AIR, JAPAN AIRLINES, AIR FRANCE-KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES, KOREAN AIR, KUWAIT AIRWAYS CORPORATION, LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES, MALAYSIA AIRLINES, NORTHWEST AIRLINES, PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., QANTAS AIRWAYS, LTD., QATAR AIRLINES, ROYAL BRUNEI AIRLINES, SINGAPORE AIRLINES, SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES, LTD., SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES, AND THAI INTERNATIONAL AIRWAYS), RESPONDENTS. (G.R. NO. 193247); OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, REPRESENTED BY HON. PAQUITO N. OCHOA,* IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY HON. CESAR V. PURISIMA** IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF FINANCE, AND THE BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, REPRESENTED BY HON. ANGELITO A. ALVAREZ**** IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, PETITIONERS, – VERSUS – BOARD OF AIRLINES REPRESENTATIVES (MEMBER AIRLINES: ASIANA AIRLINES ET AL.) (G.R. NO. NO. 194276) (14 SEPTEMBER 2011, CARPIO J). SUBJECTS: INTERVENTION, JURISDICTION OF CA, APPEAL TO OFFICE OF THE PREMISDENT, ESTOPPEL, FORUM SHOPPING, PAYMENT OF OVERTIME FEES FOR CUSTOMS EMPLOYEES. (BRIEF TITLE: CARBONILLA VS. BOARD OF AIRLINES)

CASE 2011-0191: DENIS B. HABAWEL and ALEXIS F. MEDINA VS. THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS, FIRST DIVISION (G.R. NO. 174759, 07 SEPTEMBER 2011, BERSAMIN J.) SUBJECTS: CRITIZING JUDGES; DIRECT CONTEMPT OF COURT. (BRIEF TITLE: HABAWEL VS. CTA).

CASE 2011-0190: PHILIPPINE CHARTER INSURANCE CORPORATION VS. EXPLORER MARITIME CO., LTD., OWNER OF THE VESSEL M/V “EXPLORER”, WALLEM PHILS. SHIPPING, INC., ASIAN TERMINALS, INC. AND FOREMOST INTERNATIONAL PORT SERVICES, INC. (G.R. NO. 175409, 07 SEPTEMBER 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. (BRIEF TITLE: PHILIPPINE CHARTER VS. EXPLORER MARITIME).

CASE 2011-0189: ANTONIO FRANCISCO, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS: NELIA E.S. FRANCISCO, EMILIA F. BERTIZ, REBECCA E.S. FRANCISCO, ANTONIO E.S. FRANCISCO, JR., SOCORRO F. FONTANILLA, AND JOVITO E.S. FRANCISCO VS. CHEMICAL BULK CARRIERS, INCORPORATED (G.R. NO. 193577, 07 SEPTEMBER 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: REQUIRED DILIGENCE OF A BLIND PERSON; SALE. (BRIEF TITLE: FRANCISCO VS. CHEMICAL BULK CARRIERS).

CASE 2011-188: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. ELSIE C. REMOROZA, CLERK OF COURT, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, MAUBAN, QUEZON (A.M. NO. P-05-2083, 06 SEPTEMBER 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: GROSS DISHONESTY; GROSS NEGLECT OF DUTY (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. REMOROZA) 

CASE 2011-0187: RCJ BUS LINES, INCORPORATED VS. STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, INC. (G.R. NO. 193629, 17 AUGUST 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: LIABILITY OF A PUBLIC CARRIER; SUBROGATION; DAMAGES ARISING FROM NEGLIGENCE; LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER. (BRIEF TITLE: RCJ BUS LINES VS. STANDARD INSURANCE.)

CASE 2011-0186: DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. HON. SILVERIO Q. CASTILLO and CRISTINA TRINIDAD ZARATE ROMERO (G.R. NO. 163827, 17 AUGUST 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: CAUSE OF ACTION. (BRIEF TITLE: DBP VS. CASTILLO).

CASE 2011-0185: ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGA represented herein by the incumbent Archbishop VS. EDUARDO SORIANO, JR., EDNA YALUN, EVANGELINA ABLAZA, FELICIDAD Y. URBINA, FELIX SALENGA, REYNALDO I. MALLARI, MARCIANA B. BARCOMA, BIENVENIDO PANGANIBAN, BRIGIDA NAVARRO, EUFRANCIA T. FLORES, VICTORIA B. SUDSOD, EUFRONIO CAPARAS, CRISANTO MANANSALA, LILY MASANGCAY, BENJAMIN GUINTO, JR., MARTHA G. CASTRO and LINO TOLENTINO (G.R. NO. 153829); BENJAMIN GUINTO, JR. VS. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGA represented herein by the incumbent Archbishop (G.R. NO. 160909) (17 AUGUST 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: MOTION TO DISMISS; COLATERAL AND DIRECT ATTACKS; MISJOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION; INJUNCTION. (BRIEF TITLE: ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCH. VS. SORIANO)

CASE 2011-0184: ATIKO TRANS INC. AND CHENGLIE NAVIGATION CO., LTD. VS. PRUDENTIAL GUARANTEE AND ASSURANCE INC. (G.R. NO. 167545, 17 AUGUST 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: COURT JURISDICTION (BRIEF TITLE: ATIKO VS. PRUDENTIAL GUARANTEE)

CASE 2011-0183: FELIXBERTO A. ABELLANA VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SPOUSES SAAPIA B. ALONTO AND DIAGA ALONTO (G.R. NO. 174654, 17 AUGUST 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: CIVIL LIABILITY; FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENT (BRIEF TITLE: ABELLANA VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0182: AMERICAN HOME INSURANCE CO. OF NEW YORK VS. F.F. CRUZ & CO. INC. (G.R. NO. 174926, 10 AUGUST 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: SURETY BOND; CERTIORARI. (BRIEF TITLE: AMERICAN HOME INSURANCE VS. FF CRUZ)

CASE 2011-181: METROPOLITAN BANK and TRUST COMPANY, substituted by MERIDIAN (SPV-AMCI) CORPORATION VS. INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK (G.R. NO. 176008); CHUAYUCO STEEL MANUFACTURING VS. INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK (now UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES) (G.R. NO. 176131) (PERALTA, J., 10 AUGUST 2011) SUBJECTS: ACTION PAULIANA; CERTIORARI; FORUM SHOPPING. (BRIEF TITLE: METROBANK VS. IEB)

CASE 2011-0180: PROF. MERLIN M. MAGALLONA, AKBAYAN PARTY-LIST REP. RISA HONTIVEROS, PROF. HARRY C. ROQUE, JR., AND UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW STUDENTS, ALITHEA BARBARA ACAS, VOLTAIRE ALFERES, CZARINA MAY ALTEZ, FRANCIS ALVIN ASILO, SHERYL BALOT, RUBY AMOR BARRACA, JOSE JAVIER BAUTISTA, ROMINA BERNARDO, VALERIE PAGASA BUENAVENTURA, EDAN MARRI CAÑETE, VANN ALLEN DELA CRUZ, RENE DELORINO, PAULYN MAY DUMAN, SHARON, ESCOTO, RODRIGO FAJARDO III, GIRLIE FERRER, RAOULLE OSEN FERRER, CARLA REGINA GREPO, ANNA MARIE CECILIA GO, IRISH KAY KALAW, MARY ANN JOY LEE, MARIA LUISA MANALAYSAY, MIGUEL RAFAEL MUSNGI, MICHAEL OCAMPO, JAKLYN HANNA PINEDA, WILLIAM RAGAMAT, MARICAR RAMOS, ENRIK FORT REVILLAS, JAMES MARK TERRY RIDON, JOHANN FRANTZ RIVERA IV, CHRISTIAN RIVERO, DIANNE MARIE ROA, NICHOLAS SANTIZO, MELISSA CHRISTINA SANTOS, CRISTINE MAE TABING, VANESSA ANNE TORNO, MARIA ESTER VANGUARDIA, and MARCELINO VELOSO III, VS. HON. EDUARDO ERMITA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, HON. ALBERTO ROMULO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, HON. ROLANDO ANDAYA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, HON. DIONY VENTURA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE NATIONAL MAPPING & RESOURCE INFORMATION AUTHORITY, and HON. HILARIO DAVIDE, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES TO THE UNITED NATIONS (G.R. NO. 187167, 16 JULY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: PHILIPPINE TERRITORY (BRIEF TITLE: MAGALLONA VS. ERMITA).

CASE 2011-0179: ADVENT CAPITAL AND FINANCE CORPORATION VS. ROLAND YOUNG (G.R. NO. 183018, 03 AUGUST 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: REPLEVIN (BRIEF TITLE: ADVENT CAPITAL VS. YOUNG).

CASE 2011-0178: CO GIOK LUN, as substituted by his legal heirs namely: MAGDALENA D. CO, MILAGROS D. CO, BENJAMIN D. CO, ALBERT D. CO, ANGELITA C. TENG, VIRGINIA C. RAMOS, CHARLIE D. CO, and ELIZABETH C. PAGUIO VS. JOSE CO, as substituted by his legal heirs namely: ROSALINA CO, MARLON CO, JOSEPH CO, FRANK CO, ANTONIO CO, NELSON CO, ROLAND CO, JOHNSON CO, CORAZON CO, ADELA CO, SERGIO CO, PAQUITO CO, JOHN CO, NANCY CO, and TERESITA CO (G.R. NO. 184454, 03 AUGUST 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: CO-OWNERSHIP OF LAND. (BRIEF TITLE: LUN VS. CO).

CASE 2011-0177: FRANCIS BELLO, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HIS DAUGHTER AND ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, GERALDINE BELLO-ONA VS. BONIFACIO SECURITY SERVICES, INC. AND SAMUEL TOMAS (G.R. NO. 188086, 03 AUGUST 2011, BRION J.) SUBJECTS: VERIFICATION, CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL. (BRIEF TITLE: BELLO VS. BONIFACIO SECURITY).

CASE 2011-0176: NIPPON HOUSING PHIL. INC., and/or TADASHI OTA, HOROSHI TAKADA, YUSUHIRO KAWATA, MR. NOBOYUSHI and JOEL REYES VS. MAIAH ANGELA LEYNES (G.R. NO. 177816, 03 AUGUST 2011) SUBJECTS: ILLEGAL DISMISSAL; FLOATING STATUS; REDUNDANCY; EMPLOYER UPHELD; (BRIEF TITLE: NIPPON HOUSING VS. LEYNES)

CASE 2011-0175: UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. LAIN⃰ JUNIAT, WINWOOD APPAREL, INC., WINGYAN APPAREL, INC., NONWOVEN FABRIC PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 171569, 01 AUGUST 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: MORTGAGE; PLEDGE; DACION EN PAGO. (BRIEF TITLE: UNION BANK VS. JUNIAT).

CASE 2011-0174: PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK VS. CIRIACO JUMAMOY AND HEIRS OF ANTONIO GO PACE REPRESENTED BY ROSALIA PACE (G.R. NO. 169901, 03 AUGUST 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: LAND TITLES. (BRIEF TITLE: PNB VS. JUMANOY)

CASE 2011-0173: COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. FILINVEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 163653) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. FILINVEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 167689) (19 JULY 2011, PEREZ, J) SUBJECTS: TAXATION, THEORETICAL INTERESTS, CONTROLLED TAXPAYERS. (BRIEF TITLE: CIR VS. FILINVEST)

CASE 2011-0172: PRUDENTIAL BANK VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 180390, 27 JULY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAX. (BRIEF TITLE: PRUDENTIAL BANK VS. BIR)

CASE 2011-0171: NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT CYRIL DEL CALLAR VS. JUDGE SANTOS B. ADIONG, RTC, BRANCH 8, MARAWI CITY (A.M. NO. RTJ-07-2060, 27 JULY 2011, VILLARAMA, J.) SUBJECT: ADMININSTRATIVE CASE AGAINST A JUDGE; GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW; MANDATORY CHARACTER OF PRE-TRIAL; MOTIONS FOR WRIT OF EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL. (BRIEF TITLE: NPC VS. JUDGE ADIONG)

CASE 2011-0170: RENATO V. DIAZ AND AURORA MA. F. TIMBOL VS. THE SECRETARY OF FINANCE AND THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 193007, 19 JULY 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECT: VALUE ADDED TAX ON TOLL FEES. (BRIEF TITLE: DIAZ VS. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE).

CASE 2011-0169: EDWIN TABAO Y PEREZ VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 187246, 20 JULY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE RESULTING TO HOMICIDE. (BRIEF TITLE: TABAO VS PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0168: JOJIT GARINGARAO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 192760, 20 JULY 2011, CARPIO, J.).

CASE 2011-0167: RE: GROSS VIOLATION OF CIVIL SERVICE LAW ON THE PROHIBITION AGAINST DUAL EMPLOYMENT AND DOUBLE COMPENSATION IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE COMMITTED BY MR. EDUARDO V. ESCALA, SC CHIEF JUDICIAL STAFF OFFICER, SECURITY DIVISION, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES (A.M. NO. 2011-04-SC, 05 JULY 2011, PER CURIAM)

CASE 2011-0166: EDITA T. BURGOS VS. PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, GEN. HERMOGENES ESPERON, JR., LT. GEN. ROMEO P. TOLENTINO, MAJ. GEN. JUANITO GOMEZ, MAJ. GEN. DELFIN BANGIT, LT. COL. NOEL CLEMENT, LT. COL. MELQUIADES FELICIANO, DIRECTOR GENERAL OSCAR CALDERON (G.R. NO. 183711); EDITA T. BURGOS VS. PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO, GEN. HERMOGENES ESPERON, JR., LT. GEN. ROMEO P. TOLENTINO, MAJ. GEN. JUANITO GOMEZ, LT. COL. MELQUIADES FELICIANO, LT. COL. NOEL CLEMENT (G.R. NO. 183712); EDITA T. BURGOS VS. CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES, GEN. HERMOGENES ESPERON, JR., COMMANDING GENERAL OF THE PHILIPPINE ARMY, LT. GEN. ALEXANDER YANO; CHIEF OF THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE, DIRECTOR GENERAL AVELINO RAZON, JR. (05 JULY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUZ; WRIT OF AMPARO; CONTEMPT. (BRIEF TITLE: BURGOS VS. PRESIDENT ARROYO)

CASE 2011-0165: HACIENDA LUISITA, INCORPORATED, PETITIONER, LUISITA INDUSTRIAL PARK CORPORATION AND RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, PETITIONERS-IN-INTERVENTION, – VERSUS – PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL; SECRETARY NASSER PANGANDAMAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM; ALYANSA NG MGA MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG HACIENDA LUISITA, RENE GALANG, NOEL MALLARI, AND JULIO SUNIGA[1][1] AND HIS SUPERVISORY GROUP OF THE HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. AND WINDSOR ANDAYA, RESPONDENTS. (G.R. NO. 171101, 05 JULY 2011, VELASCO J.) SUBJECTS: STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION; COMPULSORY ACQUISITION. (BRIEF TITLE: HACIENDA LUISITA VS. PARC)

CASE 2011-0164: AYALA LAND, INC. AND CAPITOL CITIFARMS, INC. VS. SIMEONA CASTILLO, LORENZO PERLAS, JESSIELYN CASTILLO, LUIS MAESA, ROLANDO BATIQUIN, AND BUKLURAN MAGSASAKA NG TIBIG, AS REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, SIMEONA CASTILLO (G.R. NO. 178110, 15 JUNE 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECTS: CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND; ESTOPPEL; PUBLIC POLICY. (BRIEF TITLE: AYALA LAND VS. CASTILLO)

CASE 2011-0163: MIGUEL DELA PENA BARAIRO VS. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT and MST MARINE SERVICES (PHILS.), INC. (G.R. NO. 189314, 15 JUNE 2011) SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DOLE DECISION TO OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT ELIMINATED. (BRIEF TITLE: BARAIRO VS. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT.)

CASE 2011-0162: PHILIPPINE ARMY VS. SPOUSES MAJOR CONSTANCIO PAMITTAN (RET.) AND LEONOR PAMITTAN, SPOUSES ALBERTO TALINIO AND MARIA CHONA P. TALINIO, SPOUSES T/SGT. MELCHOR BACULI AND LAARNI BACULI, SPOUSES S/SGT. JUAN PALASIGUE AND MARILOU PALASIGUE, SPOUSES GRANT PAJARILLO AND FRANCES PAJARILLO, SPOUSES M/SGT. EDGAR ANOG AND ZORAIDA ANOG, AND SPOUSES 2LT. MELITO PAPA AND PINKY PAPA, FOR THEMSELVES AND FOR OTHER OCCUPANTS OF SITIO SAN CARLOS, UPI, GAMU, ISABELA, BY WAY OF CLASS SUIT (G.R. NO. 187326, 15 JUNE 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: MOTION TO DISMISS; INSUFFICIENT CAUSE OF ACTION; STATE AS OWNER CAN USE ITS PROPERTY (BRIEF TITLE: PHILIPPINE ARMY VS. PAMITAN)

CASE 2011-0161: JUDGE EDILBERTO G. ABSIN VS. EDGARDO A. MONTALLA (A.M. NO. P-10-2829, 21 JUNE 2011, PER CURIAM) BRIEF TITLE: JUDGE ABSIN VS. MONTALLA.

CASE 2011-160: RE: RESOLUTION OF THE COURT DATED 1 JUNE 2004 IN G.R. NO. 72954 AGAINST ATTY. VICTOR C. AVECILLA (A.C. NO. 6683, 21 JUNE 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECT: BRINGING OUT ROLLO OUTSIDE COURT FOR UNOFFICIAL USE. (BRIEF TITLE: CASE AGAINST ATTY. AVECILLA).

CASE 2011-0159: HOME DEVELOPMENT MUTUAL FUND (HDMF) VS. Spouses FIDEL and FLORINDA R. SEE and Sheriff MANUEL L. ARIMADO (G.R. NO. 170292, 22 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: CERTIORARI (BRIEF TITLE: HOME DEVELOPMENT VS. SEE).

CASE 2011-0158: UNIVERSITY PLANS INCORPORATED VS. BELINDA P. SOLANO, TERRY A. LAMUG, GLENDA S. BELGA, MELBA S. ALVAREZ, WELMAR R. NAMATA, MARIETTA D. BACHO AND MANOLO L. CENIDO (G.R. NO. 170416, 22 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: NLRC APPEAL BOND; MOTION TO REDUCE BOND. (BRIEF TITLE: UNIVERSITY PLANS VS. SOLANO)

CASE 2011-157: MA. LIGAYA B. SANTOS VS. LITTON MILLS INCORPORATED AND/OR ATTY. RODOLFO MARINO (G.R. NO. 170646, 22 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: SUBSEQUENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE CURES TECHNICAL DEFECTS; ILLEGAL DISMISSAL. (BRIEF TITLE: SANTOS VS. LITTON MILLS)

CASE 2011-0156: ANICETO CALUBAQUIB, WILMA CALUBAQUIB, EDWIN CALUBAQUIB, ALBERTO CALUBAQUIB, and ELEUTERIO FAUSTINO CALUBAQUIB VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 170658, 22 JUNE 2011) SUBJECT: SUMMARY JUDGMENT (BRIEF TITLE: CALUBAQUIB VS. REPUBLIC)

CASE 2011-0155: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. CHITO GRATIL Y GUELAS, (G.R. NO. 182236, 22 JUNE 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: SALE OF PROHIBITED DRUGS; INSTANCE WHEN VIOLATION OF PROCEDURE WAS NOT CONSIDERED; ALIBI; FRAME UP. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. GRATIL).

CASE 2011-0154: CARLO DUMADAG Y ROMIO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176740, 22 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: RAPE, SWEETHEART DEFENSE, CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES, PENALTY, DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. DUMADAG)

CASE 2011-0153: RUEL AMPATUAN “ALIAS RUEL” VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 183676, 22 JUNE 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: DANGEROUS DRUGS; BUY BUST OPERATION; CHAIN OF CUSTODY) BRIEF TITLE (AMPATUAN VS. PEOPLE

CASE 2011-0152: IN THE MATTER OF THE HEIRSHIP (INTESTATE ESTATES) OF THE LATE HERMOGENES RODRIGUEZ, ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ, MACARIO J. RODRIGUEZ, DELFIN RODRIGUEZ, AND CONSUELO M. RODRIGUEZ AND SETTLEMENT OF THEIR ESTATES, RENE B. PASCUAL VS. JAIME M. ROBLES. (G.R. NO. 182645, 22 JUNE 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT: INTERVENTION (BRIEF TITLE: PASCUAL VS. ROBLES).

CASE 2011-0151: ATTY. FACUNDO T. BAUTISTA VS. JUDGE BLAS O. CAUSAPIN, JR., PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 32, GUIMBA, NUEVA ECIJA (A.M. NO. RTJ-07-2044, 22 JUNE 2011, LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW; NON-FORUM SHOPPING; MOTIONS NOT REQUIRED TO BE HEARD. (BRIEF TITLE: BAUTISTA VS. CAUSAPIN)

CASE 2011-0150: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. LUCRESIO ESPINA (G.R. NO. 183564, 29 JUNE 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: STATUTORY RAPE (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. ESPINA)

CASE 2011-0149: NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION VS. YUNITA TUAZON, ROSAURO TUAZON AND MARIA TERESA TUAZON (G.R. NO. 193023, 22 JUNE 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: DETERMINATION OF JUST COMPENSATION. (BRIEF TITLE: NAPOCOR VS. TUAZON)

CASE 2011-0148: LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES (LCP), REPRESENTED BY LCP NATIONAL PRESIDENT JERRY P. TREÑAS; CITY OF CALBAYOG, REPRESENTED BY MAYOR MEL SENEN S. SARMIENTO; AND JERRY P. TREÑAS, IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY AS TAXPAYER VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; MUNICIPALITY OF BAYBAY, PROVINCE OF LEYTE; MUNICIPALITY OF BOGO, PROVINCE OF CEBU; MUNICIPALITY OF CATBALOGAN, PROVINCE OF WESTERN SAMAR; MUNICIPALITY OF TANDAG, PROVINCE OF SURIGAO DEL SUR; MUNICIPALITY OF BORONGAN, PROVINCE OF EASTERN SAMAR; AND MUNICIPALITY OF TAYABAS, PROVINCE OF QUEZON ETC. (G.R. NO. 176951 ETC., 28 JUNE 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECT: SECOND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. (BRIEF TITLE: LEAGUE OF CITIES VS. COMELEC)

CASE 2011-0147: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. URBAN SALCEDO ABDURAHMAN ISMAEL DIOLAGRA, ABDULAJID NGAYA, HABER ASARI, ABSMAR ALUK, BASHIER ABDUL, TOTING HANO, JR., JAID AWALAL, ANNIK/RENE ABBAS, MUBIN IBBAH, MAGARNI HAPILON IBLONG, LIDJALON SAKANDAL, IMRAM HAKIMIN SULAIMAN, NADSMER ISNANI SULAIMAN, NADSMER ISNANI MANDANGAN KAMAR JAAFAR, SONNY ASALI AND BASHIER ORDOÑEZ (G.R. NO. 186523, 22 JUNE 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: ALIBI, MINORITY. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. DIOLAGRA ET AL.)

CASE 2011–0146: FELICISIMA R. DIAZ VS. JUDGE GERARDO E. GESTOPA, JR., MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, NAGA, CEBU (A.M. NO. MTJ-11-1786, 22 JUNE 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT: GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW. (BRIEF TITLE: DIAZ VS. JUDGE GESTOPA).

CASE 2011-0145: WILLIAM ENDELISEO BARROGA VS. DATA CENTER COLLEGE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND IFRED BACTAD (G.R. NO. 174158, 27 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL; TRANSFER; DIMINUTION OF BENEFITS; LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES. (BRIEF TITLE: BARROGA VS. DATA CENTER COLLEGE)

CASE 2011-0144: FEB LEASING AND FINANCE CORPORATION (NOW BPI LEASING CORPORATION) VS. SPOUSES SERGIO P. BAYLON AND MARITESS VILLENA-BAYLON, BG HAULER, INC., AND MANUEL Y. ESTILLOSO (G.R. NO. 181398, 29 JUNE 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: LIABILITY OF A REGISTERED OWNER OF VEHICLE; ATTORNEY’S FEES. (BRIEF TITLE: FEB FINANCE VS. SPOUSES BAYLON)

CASE 2011-0143: BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK INC. VS. PRYCE GASES, INC., INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CORPORATION, and NEDERLANDSE FINANCIERINGS-MAATSCHAPPIJ VOOR ONTWIKKELINGSLANDEN N.V. (G.R. NO. 188365, 29 JUNE 2011, CARPIO, J. (BRIEF TITLE: BPI FAMILY VS. PRYCE GASES)

CASE 2011-0142: BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS VS. ORIENT COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, JOSE C. GO, GEORGE C. GO, VICENTE C. GO, GOTESCO PROPERTIES, INC., GO TONG ELECTRICAL SUPPLY INC., EVER EMPORIUM, INC., EVER GOTESCO RESOURCES AND HOLDINGS INC., GOTESCO TYAN MING DEVELOPMENT INC., EVERCREST CEBU GOLF CLUB AND RESORTS, INC., NASUGBU RESORTS INC., GMCC UNITED DEVELOPMENT CORP., GULOD RESORT, INC., OK STAR, EVER PLAZA, INC. AND EVER ELECTRICAL MFG., INC., (G.R. NO. 148383, 29 JUNE 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: MOOT AND ACADEMIC CASE; JUDGMENT BASED ON COMPROMISE. (BRIEF TITLE: BANGKO SENTRAL VS. ORIENT COMMERCIAL).

CASE 2011-0141: EFREN L. ALVAREZ VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 192591, 29 JUNE 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES. (BRIEF TITLE: ALVAREZ VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0140: SPOUSES WILFREDO PALADA AND BRIGIDA PALADA VS. SOLIDBANK CORPORATION AND SHERIFF MAYO DELA CRUZ (G.R. NO. 172227, 29 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: VALIDITY OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE; NOTARIZED DOCUMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSE PALADA VS. SOLIDBANK).

CASE 2011-0139: WILSON P. GAMBOA VS. FINANCE SECRETARY MARGARITO B. TEVES, FINANCE UNDERSECRETARY JOHN P. SEVILLA, AND COMMISSIONER RICARDO ABCEDE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG) IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS CHAIR AND MEMBERS, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE PRIVATIZATION COUNCIL, CHAIRMAN ANTHONI SALIM OF FIRST PACIFIC CO., LTD. IN HIS CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR OF METRO PACIFIC ASSET HOLDINGS INC., CHAIRMAN MANUEL V. PANGILINAN OF PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY (PLDT) IN HIS CAPACITY AS MANAGING DIRECTOR OF FIRST PACIFIC CO., LTD., PRESIDENT NAPOLEON L. NAZARENO OF PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY, CHAIR FE BARIN OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION, AND PRESIDENT FRANCIS LIM OF THE PHILIPPINE STOCK EXCHANGE; PABLITO V. SANIDAD AND ARNO V. SANIDAD, PETITIONERS-IN-INTERVENTION (G.R. NO. 176579, 28 JUNE 2011, CARPIO, J). SUBJECT: WHETHER THE TERM “CAPITAL” IN SECTION 11, ARTICLE XII OF THE CONSTITUTION REFERS TO THE TOTAL COMMON SHARES ONLY OR TO THE TOTAL OUTSTANDING CAPITAL STOCK. (BRIEF TITLE: GAMBOA VS. FINANCE SECRETARY)

CASE 2011-0138: MAXIMINA A. BULAWAN VS. EMERSON B. AQUENDE (G.R. NO. 182819, 22 JUNE 2011) SUBJECT: ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT; ANNULMENT OF TITLE, RECONVEYANCE AND DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: BULAWAN VS. AQUENDE)

CASE 2011-0137: BIENVENIDO CASTILLO VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 182980, 22 JUNE 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: RECONSTITUION OF TITLE.

CASE 2011-0136: HOME GUARANTY CORPORATION VS. R-II BUILDERS INC. and NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY (G.R. NO. 192649, 22 JUNE 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: COLLABORATING COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO COPIES OF NOTICES; FILING FEES; HOW TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ACTION FOR NULLIFICATION OF A CONTRACT IS INCAPABLE OF PECUNIARY ESTIMATION. (BRIEF TITLE: HOME GUARNTEE VS. R-II BUILDERS).

CASE 2011-0135: PEOPLE OF THEPHILIPPINESVS. ROSAURO ASETRE Y DURAN (G.R. NO. 175834, 08 JUNE 2011,DELCASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: RAPE (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. ASETRE).

CASE 2011-0134: YOLITO FADRIQUELAN, ARTURO EGUNA, ARMANDO MALALUAN, DANILO ALONSO, ROMULO DIMAANO, ROEL MAYUGA, WILFREDO RIZALDO, ROMEO SUICO, DOMINGO ESCAMILLAS and DOMINGO BAUTRO VS. MONTEREY FOODS CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 178409); MONTEREY FOODS CORPORATION VS. BUKLURAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MONTEREY-ILAW AT BUKLOD NG MANGGAGAWA, YOLITO FADRIQUELAN, CARLITO ABACAN, ARTURO EGUNA, DANILO ROLLE, ALBERTO CASTILLO, ARMANDO MALALUAN, DANILO ALFONSO, RUBEN ALVAREZ, ROMULO DIMAANO, ROEL MAYUGA, JUANITO TENORIO, WILFREDO RIZALDO, JOHN ASOTIGUE, NEMESIO AGTAY, ROMEO SUICO, DOMINGO ESCAMILLAS and DOMINGO BAUTRO, (G.R. NO. 178434, 08 JUNE 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: DISMISSAL OF UNION OFFICERS; SLOWDOWNS. (BRIEF TITLE: FADRIQUELAN VS. MONTEREY FOODS).

CASE 2011-0133: HEIRS OF DR. JOSE DELESTE, NAMELY: JOSEFA DELESTE, JOSE RAY DELESTE, RAUL HECTOR DELESTE, AND RUBEN ALEX DELESTE VS. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES (LBP), AS REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LAND VALUATION OFFICE OF LBP COTABATO CITY; THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR – REGION 12 OF COTABATO CITY, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM; THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF REGION X – CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, REPRESENTED BY MCMILLAN LUCMAN, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER (PARO) OF DAR LANAO DEL NORTE; LIZA BALBERONA, IN HER CAPACITY AS DAR MUNICIPAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER (MARO); REYNALDO BAGUIO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF ILIGAN CITY AS NOMINAL PARTY; THE EMANCIPATION PATENT HOLDERS: FELIPE D. MANREAL, CUSTUDIO M. RICO, HEIRS OF DOMINGO V. RICO, HEIRS OF ABDON T. MANREAL, MACARIO M. VELORIA, ALICIA B. MANREAL, PABLO RICO, SALVACION MANREAL, HEIRS OF TRANQUILIANA MANREAL, HEIRS OF ANGELA VELORIA, HEIRS OF NECIFURO CABALUNA, HEIRS OF CLEMENTE RICO, HEIRS OF MANTILLANO OBISO, HEIRS OF HERCULANO BALORIO, AND TITO BALER (G.R. NO. 169913, 08 JUNE 2011, VELASCO JR, J.) SUBJECT: COVERAGE OF AGRARIAN REFORM; APPEAL FROM DECISION OF QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY.

ROXAS FOUNDATION, INC. (G.R. NO. 170575, 08 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: UNLAWFUL DETAINER, FORCIBLE ENTRY, JUDICIAL ADMISSION. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES DEL ROSARIO VS. GERRY ROXAS FOUNDATION).

CASE 2011-0131: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. GARRY DE LA CRUZ Y DE LA CRUZ (G.R. NO. 185717, 08 JUNE 2011) SUBJECTS: RA 9165; BUY BUST OPERATION IN DRUG CASE; CHAIN OF COMMAND. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. DE LA CRUZ).

CASE 2011-0130: CLAY & FEATHER INTERNATIONAL, INC., RAUL O. ARAMBULO, AND ADAM E. JIMENEZ III (FOR THEMSELVES AND FOR CLAY AND FEATHER INTL., INC. VS. ALEXANDER T. LICHAYTOO AND CLIFFORD T. LICHAYTOO (G.R. NO. 193105, 30 MAY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: PROBABLE CAUSE; THEFT. (BRIEF TITLE: CLAY & FEATHER INTERNATIONAL VS. LICHAYTOO).

CASE 2011-0129: ESTATE OF PASTOR M. SAMSON, REPRESENTED BY HIS HEIR ROLANDO B. SAMSON VS. MERCEDES R. SUSANO AND NORBERTO R. SUSANO (G.R. NO. 179024) ; JULIAN C. CHAN VS. MERCEDES R. SUSANO AND NORBERTO R. SUSANO (G.R. NO. 179086, 30 MAY 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: OPERATION LAND TRANSFER; P.D. 27. (BRIEF TITLE: ESTATE OF SAMSON VS. SUSANO).

CASE 2011-0128: DOLORES ADORA MACASLANG VS. RENATO AND MELBA ZAMORA (G.R. NO. 156375, 30 MAY 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECTS: EJECTMENT, UNLAWFUL DETAINER, CAUSE OF ACTION, RTC AS APPELLATE COURT CAN TAKE ACCOUNT OTHER MATTERS NOT RAISED IN MTC. (BRIEF TITLE: MACASLANG VS. ZAMORA).

CASE 2011-00127: DONNINA C. HALLEY VS. PRINTWELL, INC. (G.R. No. 157549, 30 MAY 2011, BERSAMIN, J) SUBJECTS: TRUST FUND DOCTRINE, JUDGE COPYING MEMORANDUM OF PARTY. CHECK AS PAYMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: HALLEY VS. PRINTWELL).

CASE 2011-0126: GEORGE MILLER VS. SECRETARY HERNANDO B. PEREZ, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND GIOVAN BERNARDINO ( G.R. NO. 165412, 30 MAY 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J) SUBJECTS: PROBABLE CAUSE; PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION. (BRIEF TITLE: MILLER VS. SEC. PEREZ)

CASE 2011-0125: AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES (G.R. NO. 168382, 06 JUNE 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: ILLEGAL STRIKE; NEW MATTERS RAISED CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED WHEN JUDGMENT IS ALREADY FINAL. (BRIEF TITLE: ALPAP VS. PAL).

CASE 2011-0124 : PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINESVS. LUIS J. MORALES (G.R. NO. 166355,30 MAY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: JURISDICTION OF SANDIGANBAYAN; EXPOCORP IS PRIVATE CORPORATION; ITS PRESIDENT IS BEYOND JURISDICTION OF SANDIGANBAYAN. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. MORALES).

CASE 2011-0123: DATU ZALDY UY AMPATUAN, ANSARUDDIN ADIONG, REGIE SAHALI-GENERALE VS. HON. RONALDO PUNO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND ALTER-EGO OF PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, AND ANYONE ACTING IN HIS STEAD AND ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES (AFP), OR ANY OF THEIR UNITS OPERATING IN THE AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO (ARMM), AND PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE, OR ANY OF THEIR UNITS OPERATING IN ARMM (G.R. NO. 190259, 07 JUNE 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECT: VALIDITY OF PROCLAMATION OF STATE OF EMERGENCY. (BRIEF TITLE: AMPATUAN VS. PUNO)

CASE 2011-0122: RODOLFO N. REGALA VS. FEDERICO P. CARIN (G.R. NO. 188715, 6 APRIL 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: QUASI DELICT; MORAL DAMAGES; NOMINAL DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: REGALA VS. CARIN)

CASE 2011-0121: RE: PETITION FOR RADIO AND TELEVISION COVERAGE OF THE MULTIPLE MURDER CASES AGAINST MAGUINDANAO GOVERNOR ZALDY AMPATUAN, ET AL., (A.M. NO. 10-11-5-SC); RE: PETITION FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PRESENT COURT HANDLING THE TRIAL OF THE MASSACRE OF 57 PERSONS, INCLUDING 32 JOURNALISTS, IN AMPATUAN, MAGUINDANAO INTO A SPECIAL COURT HANDLING THIS CASE ALONE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACHIEVING GENUINE SPEEDY TRIAL and FOR THE SETTING UP OF VIDEOCAM AND MONITOR JUST OUTSIDE THE COURT FOR JOURNALISTS TO COVER AND FOR THE PEOPLE TO WITNESS THE “TRIAL OF THE DECADE” TO MAKE IT TRULY PUBLIC AND IMPARTIAL AS COMMANDED BY THE CONSTITUTION (A.M. NO. 10-11-6-SC); RE: LETTER OF PRESIDENT BENIGNO S. AQUINO III FOR THE LIVE MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE MAGUINDANAO MASSACRE TRIAL. (A.M. NO. 10-11-7-SC) (CARPIO-MORALES, J.) (14 JUNE 2011).

CASE 2011-0120: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ANDREW ROBLE (G.R. NO. 192188, 11 APRIL 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE DANGERIOUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002; ACCUSED ACQUITTED. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. ROBLE).

CASE 2011-0119: LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND ELIZABETH DIAZ, REPRESENTED BY FRANCISCA P. DE GUZMAN AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT (G.R. NO. 190660, 11 APRIL 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: APPEAL FROM DECISION OF THE SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT (SAC) MUST BE BY PETITION FOR REVIEW. (BRIEF TITLE: LAND BANK VS. C.A.)

CASE 2011-0118: ANGELITO P. MAGNO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, MICHAEL MONSOD, ESTHER LUZ MAE GREGORIO, GIAN CARLO CAJOLES, NENETTE CASTILLON, DONATO ENABE AND ALFIE FERNANDEZ (G.R. NO. 171542, 6 APRIL 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF SANDIGANBAYAN OVER RTC. (BRIEF TITLE: MAGNO VS. PEOPLE).

CASE 2011-0117: PHILIPPINE NATIONAL RAILWAYS VS. KANLAON CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES CO., INC. (G.R. NO. 182967, 6 APRIL 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: TWO REQUIREMENTS FOR GOVT CONTRACTS: AN APPROPRIATION LAW AND CERTIFICATION OF FUND AVAILABILITY. (BRIEF TITLE: PNR VS. KANLAON CONSTRUCTION).

CASE 2011-0116: JAMES BEN L. JERUSALEM VS. KEPPEL MONTE BANK, HOE ENG HOCK, SUNNY YAP AND JOSEFINA PICART (G.R. NO. 169564, 6 APRIL 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: DISMISSAL OF AN EMPLOYEE DUE TO LOSS OF TRUST AND CONFIDENCE. (BRIEF TITLE: JERUSALEM VS. KEPPEL MONTE BANK).

CASE 2011-0115: SPOUSES ROGELIO MARCELO AND MILAGROS MARCELO VS. LBC BANK (G.R. NO. 183575, 11 APRIL 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: WHETHER C.A. CAN ADMIT NEW EVIDENCE IN A SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION FOR CERTIORARI. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES MARCELO VS. LBC BANK).

CASE 2011-0114: OCEAN BUILDERS CONSTRUCTION CORP. AND/OR DENNIS HAO VS. SPOUSES ANTONIO AND ANICIA CUBACUB (G.R. NO. 150898, 13 APRIL 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECTS: DAMAGE BASED ON TORT; WHETHER EMPLOYER IS LIABLE FOR DEATH OF EMPLOYEE. (BRIEF TITLE: OCEAN BUILDERS VS. SPOUSES CUBACUB).

CASE 2011-0113: BANK OF COMMERCE VS. GOODMAN FIELDER INTERNATIONAL PHILIPPINES, INC. (G.R. NO. 191561, 7 MARCH 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: INTERPRETATION OF AN INSTRUMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: BANK OF COMMERCE VS. GOODMAN).

CASE 20111-0112: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. TEODORO P. RIZALVO, JR. (G.R. NO. 172011, 7 MARCH 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: LAND REGISTRATION; JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION OF IMPERFECT TITLE; PD 1525. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. RIZALDO)

CASE 2011-0111: (DENIAL OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION) MA. MERCEDITAS N. GUTIERREZ VS. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, RISA HONTIVEROS-BARAQUEL, DANILO D. LIM, FELIPE PESTAÑO, EVELYN PESTAÑO, RENATO M. REYES, JR., SECRETARY GENERAL OF BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (BAYAN); MOTHER MARY JOHN MANANZAN, CO-CHAIRPERSON OF PAGBABAGO; DANILO RAMOS, SECRETARY-GENERAL OF KILUSANG MAGBUBUKID NG PILIPINAS (KMP); ATTY. EDRE OLALIA, ACTING SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF PEOPLE’S LAWYERS (NUPL); FERDINAND R. GAITE, CHAIRPERSON, CONFEDERATION FOR UNITY, RECOGNITION AND ADVANCEMENT OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (COURAGE); AND JAMES TERRY RIDON OF THE LEAGUE OF FILIPINO STUDENTS (LFS) [FELICIANO BELMONTE, JR.] (G.R. NO. 193459, 8 MARCH 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.)

CASE 2011-0110: AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL, JR., MANUEL B. VILLAR, JOKER P. ARROYO, FRANCIS N. PANGILINAN, PIA S. CAYETANO, AND ALAN PETER S. CAYETANO, VS. SENATE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPRESENTED BY SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE (G.R. NO. 187714, 8 MARCH 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: INDISPENSABLE PARTY; DOCTRINE OF PRIOR JURISDICTION; PUBLICATION OF SENATE RULES. (BRIEF TITLE: PIMENTEL ET AL V S. SENATE COMMITTEE).

CASE 2011-0109: CANDELARIO L. VERZOSA, JR. (IN HIS FORMER CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY) VS. GUILLERMO N. CARAGUE (IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT), RAUL C. FLORES, CELSO D. GANGAN, SOFRONIO B. URSAL AND COMMISSION ON AUDIT (G.R. NO. 157838, 8 MARCH 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: NOTICE OF DISALLOWANCE, PUBLIC BIDDING, OVERPRICING. (BRIEF TITLE: VERZOSA VS. CARAGUE ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0108: FERNANDO V. GONZALEZ VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,RENO G. LIM, STEPHEN C. BICHARA AND THE SPECIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS CONSTITUTED PER RES. DATED JULY 23, 2010 OF THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC (G.R. NO. 192856, 8 MARCH 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECT: DISQUALIFICATION AND CANCELLATION OF CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY; SECOND PLACER RULE. (BRIEF TITLE: GONZALEZ VS. COMELEC ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0107: JULIAN S. LEBRUDO and REYNALDO L. LEBRUDO VS. REMEDIOS LOYOLA (G.R. No. 181370, 9 MARCH 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP, TRANSFER OF RIGHTS (BRIEF TITLE: LEBRUDO VS. LOYOLA)

CASE 2011-0106: PFIZER, INC. AND/OR REY GERARDO BACARRO, AND/OR FERDINAND CORTES, AND/OR ALFRED MAGALLON, AND/OR ARISTOTLE ARCE VS. GERALDINE VELASCO (G.R. NO. 177467, 9 MARCH 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: BACKWAGES, REINSTATEMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: PFIZER ET AL VS. VELASCO)

CASE 2011-105: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RODRIGO SALCEDO ALIAS “DIGOL,” (G.R. NO. 178272, 14 MARCH 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT: MURDER (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. SALCEDO).

CASE 2011-104:UNION LEAF TOBACCO CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. HILARION P. UY VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 185683, 16 MARCH 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: ALIENABLE AND DISPOSABLE LAND; POSSESSION SINCE 12 JUNE 1945. (BRIEF TITLE: UNION LEAF VS. REPUBLIC).

CASE 2011-0103: LORES REALTY ENTERPRISES, INC., LORENZO Y. SUMULONG III VS. VIRGINIA E. PACIA (G.R. NO. 171189, 9 MARCH 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: TERMINATION FROM EMPLOYMENT; AWARD OF DAMAGES (BRIEF TITLE: LORES REALTY VS. PACIA).

CASE 2011-0102: BUREAU OF CUSTOMS VS. PETER SHERMAN, MICHAEL WHELAN, TEODORO B. LINGAN, ATTY. OFELIA B. CAJIGAL and the COURT OF TAX APPEALS (G.R. NO. 190487, 13 APRIL 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: CRIMES MUST BE PROSECUTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. (BRIEF TITLE: BUREAU OF CUSTOMS VS. SHERMAN ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0101: MARIA LAARNI L. CAYETANO VS. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and DANTE O. TINGA (G.R. NO. 193846, 12 APRIL 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECT: POWER OF SC TO REVIEW ORDER OF DIVISION OF COMELEC. (BRIEF TITLE: CAYETANO VS. COMELEC).

CASE 2011-0100: WILFREDO Y. ANTIQUINA VS. MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORPORATION and/or MASTERBULK, PTE., LTD., (G.R. NO. 168922, 13 APRIL 2011, LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES; MEDICAL UNFITNESS BENEFITS; CBA; MARITIME LABOR CASE. (BRIEF TITLE: ANTIQUINA VS. MAGSAYSAY MARITIME).

CASE 2011-0099: HEIRS OF MARILOU K. SANTIAGO, REPRESENTED BY DENNIS K. SANTIAGO, LOURDES K. SANTIAGO AND EUFEMIA K. SANTIAGO VS. ALFONSO AGUILA (G.R. NO. 174034, 9 MARCH 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECT: FILING PETITION FOR REVIEW OUT OF TIME UNDER RULE 43. (BRIEF SUBJECT: HEIRS OF SANTIAGO VS. AGUILA).

CASE 2011-0098: CORNELIA M. HERNANDEZ VS. CECILIO F. HERNANDEZ (G.R. NO. 158576, 9 MARCH 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: QUITCLAIM; WHEN CONSENT IN CONTRACT IS VOIDABLE. (BRIEF TITLE: HERNANDEZ VS. HERNANDEZ).

CASE 2011-0097 (DENIAL OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION FILED BY LEAGUE OF CITIES VS. COMELEC) G.R. NOS. 176951, 177499, AND 178056: LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. V. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL. (BERSAMIN, J, 12 APRIL 2011) SUBJECT: CITYHOOD LAWS. (BRIEF TITLE: LEAGUE OF CITIES VS. COMELEC).

CASE 2011-0096-A: DISSENTING OPINION IN G.R. No. 166859 – REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, versus SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR., ET AL., G.R. No. 169203 – REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, versus SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR.,;G.R. No. 180702- REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES versus EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR., (12 APRIL 2011, CAPRIO MORALES, J.)

CASE 2011-0096: G.R. No. 166859 – REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, versus SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR., ET AL., G.R. No. 169203 – REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, versus SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR.,;G.R. No. 180702- REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES versus EDUARDO M. COJUANGCO, JR., (12 APRIL 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECTS: THE CONCEPT AND GENESIS ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH IN THE PHILIPPINE SETTING ETC.) (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. SANDIGANBAYAN ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0095: PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK VS. RAMON VALENZUELA (G.R. NO. 163530, 9 MARCH 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECT: CORRECTION OF ENTRY IN A TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE. (BRIEF TITLE: PHILIPPINE VETERAN’S BANK VS. VALENZUELA).

CASE 2011-0094: ERLINDA R. TAROG VS. ATTY. ROMULO L. RICAFORT (A.C. No. 8253, 15 MARCH 2011) SUBJECT: DISBARMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: TAROG VS. ATTY. RICAFORT).

CASE 2011-0093: SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA SA CHARTER CHEMICAL SOLIDARITY OF UNIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES FOR EMPOWERMENT AND REFORMS (SMCC-SUPER), ZACARRIAS JERRY VICTORIO – UNION PRESIDENT VS. CHARTER CHEMICAL AND COATING CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 169717, 16 MARCH 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: CERTIFICATION ELECTION; LEGITIMACY OF RANK AND FILE LABOR UNION. (BRIEF TITLE: SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA ET AL VS. CHARTER CHEMICAL).

CASE 2011-0092: EXECUTIVE JUDGE LEONILO B. APITA, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 7, TACLOBAN CITY VS. MARISSA M. ESTANISLAO, COURT LEGAL RESEARCHER II, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 34, TACLOBAN CITY (A.M. NO. P-06-2206, 16 MARCH 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: DUTIES OF LEGAL RESEARCHER; DUTIES OF COURT INTERPRETER; JUDGE CANNOT ASSIGN ONE TO PERFORM THE TASKS OF ANOTHER INDEFINITELY. (BRIEF CASE TITLE: JUDGE APITA VS. ESTANISLAO).

CASE 2011-0091: ATTY. RAFAEL T. MARTINEZ, AND SPOUSES DAN AND EDNA REYES VS. JUDGE GRACE GLICERIA F. DE VERA, PRESIDING JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, SAN CARLOS CITY,PANGASINAN (A.M. NO. MTJ-08-1718, 16 MARCH 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW. (BRIEF TITLE: ATTY MARTINEZ ET AL VS. JUDGE DE VERA)

CASE 2011-0090: SPOUSES ANTONIO F. ALAGAR AND AURORA ALAGAR VS. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK (G.R. NO. 171870, 16 MARCH 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: CASE WHERE PROCEEDS OF WRIT OF EXECUTION WERE ORDERED RETURNED; CERTIORARI; MANDAMUS; FINALITY OF JUDGMENT. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES ALAGAR VS. PNB)

CASE 2011-0089: ALEN ROSS RODRIGUEZ AND REGIDOR TULALI VS. THE HON. BIENVENIDO BLANCAFLOR, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PALAWAN, BRANCH 52, ANDPEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 190171, 14 MARCH 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: DIRECT CONTEMPT. (BRIEF TITLE: RODRIGUEZ ET AL. VS. JUDGE BLANCAFLOR).

CASE 2011-0088: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. JUANITO MANIMTIM, JULIO UMALI, REPRESENTED BY AURORA U. JUMARANG, SPOUSES EDILBERTO BAÑANOLA AND SOFIA BAÑANOLA, ZENAIDA MALABANAN, MARCELINO MENDOZA, DEMETRIO BARRIENTOS, FLORITA CUADRA, AND FRANCISCA MANIMTIM (G.R. NO. 169599, 16 MARCH 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF TITLE (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. MANIMTIM ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0087: COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. MANILA BANKERS’ LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 169103, 16 MARCH 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECT: DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAX ON INSURANCE POLICY. (BRIEF TITLE: CIR VS. MANILA BANKERS)

CASE 2011-0086: NATIONWIDE SECURITY AND ALLIED SERVICES, INC. VS. RONALD P. VALDERAMA (G.R. NO. 186614, 23 FEBRUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL UPHELD; ABANDONMENT OF WORK REBUTTED; VOLUNTARY RESIGNATION DISREGARDED; TEMPORARY OFF-DETAIL MUST NOT EXCEED 6 MONTHS. (BRIEF TITLE: NATIONWIDE SECURITY VS. VALDERAMA).

CASE 2011-0085: PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT AND GAMING CORPORATION (PAGCOR) VS. THE BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR), REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HON. JOSE MARIO BUÑAG, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, PUBLIC RESPONDENT; JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE, WHO ARE PERSONS ACTING FOR, IN BEHALF, OR UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF RESPONDENT. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESPONDENTS. (G.R. NO. 172087, 15 MARCH 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: PAGCOR NOT EXEMPT FROM CORPORATE INCOME TAX BUT EXEMPT FROM VAT; EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE; NON-IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT CLAUSE. (BRIEF TITLE: PAGCOR VS. BIR)

CASE 2011-0084: DAVAO FRUITS CORPORATION VS. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NOS. 181566, 9 MARCH 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: LAND BANK CAN INSTITUTE ACTION FOR DETERMINATION OF JUST COMPENSATION BEFORE THE SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT. (BRIEF TITLE: DAVAO FRUITS VS. LAND BANK).

LEGAL NOTE 2011-0083: RE: LETTER OF THE UP LAW FACULTY ENTITLED “RESTORING INTEGRITY: A STATEMENT BY THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW ON THE ALLEGATIONS OF PLAGIARISM AND MISREPRESENTATION IN THE SUPREME COURT” (A.M. NO. 10-10-4-SC, 8 MARCH 2011, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.)

CASE 2011-0082: SPOUSES FERNANDO AND ANGELINA EDRALIN VS. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK (G.R. NO. 168523, 9 MARCH 2011. DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: MANDAMUS; MORTGAGEE ENTITLED TO WRIT OF POSSESSION DURING REDEMPTION PERIOD; PACTUM COMISSORIUM; RIGHT TO WRIT OF POSSESSION DOES NOT PRESCRIBE. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES EDRALIN VS. PHIL VETERANS BANK).

CASE 2011-0080: ASIA UNITED BANK, CHRISTINE T. CHAN, AND FLORANTE C. DEL MUNDO VS. GOODLAND COMPANY, INC. (G.R. NO. 191388, 9 MARCH 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: FORUM SHOPPING. 2 CASES DISMISSED ON GROUND OF FORUM SHOPPING. (BRIEF TITLE: ASIA UNITED BANK ET AL VS. GOODLAND).

CASE 2011-0079: HOME GUARANTY CORPORATION VS. R-II BUILDERS INC., AND NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY (G.R. NO. 192649, 9 MARCH 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: JURISDICTION OF COURTS, HOW DETERMINED; FILING FEES IN CONNECTION WITH AMENDED COMPLAINT; CAN COURT WITHOUT JURISDICTION RE-RAFFLE CASE TO ANOTHER COURT? (BRIEF TITLE: HOME GUARANTY VS. R-11 BUILDERS ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0078: CHATEAU DE BAIE CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION VS. SPS. RAYMOND AND MA. ROSARIO MORENO (G.R. NO. 186271, 23 FEBRUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: QUESTIONS ON ASSESSMENT OF CONDO DUES ARE INTRA-CORPORATE; FORECLOSURE ALSO INTRA-CORPORATE. (BRIEF TITLE CHATEU DE BAIE VS. SPS. MORENO)

CASE 2011-0077: SUPREME TRANSLINER, INC., MOISES C. ALVAREZ AND PAULITA S. ALVAREZ VS. BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK, INC. (G.R. NO. 165617); BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK, INC. VS. SUPREME TRANSLINER, INC., MOISES C. ALVAREZ AND PAULITA S. ALVAREZ (G.R. NO. 165837)(25 FEBRUARY 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: DETERMINING REDEMPTION PRICE IN FORECLOSURE SALE; CAPITAL GAINS TAX SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN REDEMPTION PRICE. (BRIEF TITLE: SUPREME TRANSLINER ET AL VS. BPI FAMILY).

CASE 2011-0076: BELLE CORPORATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 181298, 2 MARCH 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: TAX CREDIT OF UNUTILIZED EXCESS INCOME TAX PAYMENTS. (BRIEF TITLE: BELLE CORPORATION VS. CIR)

CASE 2011-0075: CENTRAL LUZON DRUG CORPORATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 181371, 2 MARCH 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: WHEN MOTION TO WITHDRAW CASE IS ALLOWED; EFFECT OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL. (BRIEF TITLE: CENTRAL LUZON DRUG VS. CIR)

CASE 2011-0074: SLL INTERNATIONAL CABLES SPECIALIST AND SONNY L. LAGON VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, 4TH DIVISION, ROLDAN LOPEZ, EDGARDO ZUÑIGA AND DANILO CAÑETE (G.R. NO. 172161, 2 MARCH 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECTS: WAGE DIFFERENTIALS; ILLEGAL DISMISSAL. (BRIEF TITLE: SLL INTERNATIONAL VS. NLRC ET AL).

CASE 2011-0073: SOUTH PACIFIC SUGAR CORPORATION AND SOUTH EAST ASIA SUGAR MILL CORPORATION VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND SUGAR REGULATORY ADMINISTRATION (G.R. NO. 180462, 9 FEBRAURY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: DEPUTIZATION OF COUNSEL BY OSG; CONVERSION FEE BID; RTC CANT DEPART FROM PLAIN AND EXPRESS LANGUAGE. (BRIEF TITLE: SOUTH PACIFIC SUGAR ET AL VS. CA ET AL).

CASE 2011-0072: F.A.T. KEE COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. VS. ONLINE NETWORKS INTERNATIONAL, INC. (G.R. NO. 171238, 2 FEBRUARY 2011, LEONARDO – DE CASTRO, J.) SUBJECTS: FAILURE TO ATTACH TSNs TO PETITION; QUESTION OF FACT VIS A VIS QUESTION OF LAW. (BRIEF TITLE: F.A.T. KEE VS. ONLINE).

CASE 2011-0071: OCEANEERING CONTRACTORS (PHILS), INC. VS. NESTOR N. BARRETTO, DOING BUSINESS AS N.N.B. LIGHTERAGE (G.R. NO. 184215, 9 FEBRUARY 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: MARITIME CASE; NEGLIGENCE OF COMMON CARRIER; COMPENSATORY DAMAGES DEPENDS ON PLEADING AND PROOF; ATTORNEYS FEES NOT AUTOMATIC FOR WINNING CASES. (BRIEF TITLE: OCEANEERING CONTRACTORS VS. BARRETO).

CASE 2011-0070: SPOUSES LUIGI M. GUANIO AND ANNA HERNANDEZ-GUANIO VS. MAKATI SHANGRI-LA HOTEL AND RESORT, INC., ALSO DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME OF SHANGRI-LA MANILA (G.R. NO. 190601, 7 FEBRUARY 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECTS: BREACH OF CONTRACT; PROXIMATE CAUSE; NOMINAL DAMAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES GUANIO VS. MAKATI SHANGRI-LA).

CASE 2011-0069: DAVID LU VS. PATERNO LU YM, SR., PATERNO LU YM, JR., VICTOR LU YM, JOHN LU YM, KELLY LU YM, AND LUDO & LUYM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 153690); PATERNO LU YM, SR., PATERNO LU YM, JR., VICTOR LU YM, JOHN LU YM, KELLY LU YM, AND LUDO & LUYM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. DAVID LU (G.R. NO. 157381); JOHN LU YM AND LUDO & LUYM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS OF CEBU CITY(FORMER TWENTIETH DIVISION), DAVID LU, ROSA GO, SILVANO LUDO & CL CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 170889) ( 15 FEBRUARY 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECTS: NULLITY OF SHARE ISSUANCE; ESTOPPEL; RARE CASE WHEN PETITION IS GRANTED BY SC, THEN DISMISSED, THEN GRANTED AGAIN. (BRIEF TITLE: LU VS. LU YM ET AL).

CASE 2011-0068: PLASTIMER INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION AND TEO KEE BIN VS. NATALIA C. GOPO, KLEENIA R. VELEZ, FILEDELFA T. AMPARADO, MIGNON H. JOSEPH, AMELIA L. CANDA, MARISSA D. LABUNOS, MELANIE T. CAYABYAB, MA. CORAZON DELA CRUZ AND LUZVIMINDA CABASA (G.R. NO. 183390, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: FINDINGS OF FACT OF LABOR ARBITER AND NLRC ACCORDED FINALITY; ONE MONTH NOTICE OF TERMINATION; RETRENCHMENT; WAIVER. (BRIEF TITLE: PLASTIMER ET AL VS. GOPO ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0067: METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS,[1] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, PHILIPPINE COAST GUARD, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE MARITIME GROUP, AND DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCALGOVERNMENT VS. CONCERNED RESIDENTS OFMANILA BAY, REPRESENTED ANDJOINED BY DIVINA V. ILAS, SABINIANO ALBARRACIN, MANUEL SANTOS, JR., DINAH DELA PEÑA, PAUL DENNIS QUINTERO, MA. VICTORIA LLENOS, DONNA CALOZA, FATIMA QUITAIN, VENICE SEGARRA, FRITZIE TANGKIA, SARAH JOELLE LINTAG, HANNIBAL AUGUSTUS BOBIS, FELIMON SANTIAGUEL, AND JAIME AGUSTIN R. OPOSA (G.R. NOS. 171947-48, 15 FEBRUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.)

CASE 2011-0066: INSURANCE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS CORPORATION VS. SPOUSES VIDAL S. GREGORIO AND JULITA GREGORIO (G.R. NO. 174104, 14 FEBRUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: LACHES; PRESCRIPTION; ACTION FOR DAMAGES ON GROUND OF FRAUD. (BRIEF TITLE: IPIC VS. SPOUSES GREGORIO)

CASE 2011-0065: LYZAH SY FRANCO VS. PEOPLE OF THEPHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 171328); STEVE BESARIO VS. PEOPLE OF THEPHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 171335) (16 FEBRUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: FINDINGS OF FACT UPHELD; CONSPIRACY; ESTAFA; PENALTIES. (BRIEF TITLE: FRANCO VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0064: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. BARANGAY CAPTAIN TONY TOMAS, SR., BENEDICTO DOCTOR, AND NESTOR GATCHALIAN (G.R. NO. 192251, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES; PARAFIN TEST; DENIAL; ALIBI; TREACHERY; CONSPIRARY. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. TOMAS SR. ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0063: MARCIANO ALCARAZ VS. JUDGE FATIMA GONZALES-ASDALA, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 87,QUEZON CITY (A.M. NO. RTJ-11-2272, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: NOTICE OF HEARING; MOTION FOR EXECUTION; JUDGE CANNOT BE FAULTED FOR NOT ACTING ON A MOTION WITH DEFECTIVE NOTICE OF HEARING. (BRIEF TITLE: ALCARAZ VS. JUDGE ASDALA).

CASE 2011-0062: RE: REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT – BRANCH 56, MANDAUE CITY, CEBU (A.M. NO. 09-7-284-RTC, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: DELAY IN THE DISPOSITION OF CASES.

CASE 2011-0061: E.G & I. CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION AND EDSEL GALEOS VS. ANANIAS P. SATO, NILO BERDIN, ROMEO M. LACIDA, JR., AND HEIRS OF ANECITO S. PARANTAR, SR., NAMELY: YVONNE, KIMBERLY MAE, MARYKRIS, ANECITO, JR., AND JOHN BRYAN, ALL SURNAMED PARANTAR (G.R. NO. 182070, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: ILLEGAL DISMISSAL; ABANDONMENT OF WORK; MONEY CLAIMS. (BRIEF TITLE: EG & I CONSTRUCTION VS. GALEOS ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0060: PAQUITO V. ANDO VS. ANDRESITO Y. CAMPO, ET AL. (G.R. NO. 184007, 16 FEBRUARY 2011, NACHURA, J. ) SUBJECT: THIRD PARTY CLAIM IN LABOR CASE; RTC HAS NO JURISDICTION IN ENFORCEMENT OF NLRC DECISION; PERSONAL PROPERTY OF PRESIDENT OF CORP CANNOT BE SUBJECT OF EXECUTION AGAINST THE CORP. (BRIEF TITLE: ANDO VS. CAMPO ET AL.)

CASE 20121-0059: AFP MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MARIKINA CITY, BRANCH 193 AND SOLID HOMES, INC. (G.R. NO. 183906, 14 FEBRUARY 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT; MANDAMUS; PROHIBITION; RES JUDICATA. (BRIEF TITLE: AFPMBAI VS. RTC MARIKINA CITY ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0058: MA. MERCEDITAS N. GUTIERREZ VS. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, RISA HONTIVEROS-BARAQUEL, DANILO D. LIM, FELIPE PESTAÑO, EVELYN PESTAÑO, RENATO M. REYES, JR., SECRETARY GENERAL OF BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (BAYAN); MOTHER MARY JOHN MANANZAN, CO-CHAIRPERSON OF PAGBABAGO; DANILO RAMOS, SECRETARY-GENERAL OF KILUSANG MAGBUBUKID NG PILIPINAS (KMP); ATTY. EDRE OLALIA, ACTING SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF PEOPLE’S LAWYERS (NUPL); FERDINAND R. GAITE, CHAIRPERSON, CONFEDERATION FOR UNITY, RECOGNITION AND ADVANCEMENT OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (COURAGE); AND JAMES TERRY RIDON OF THE LEAGUE OF FILIPINO STUDENTS (LFS),FELICIANO BELMONTE, JR. (G.R. NO. 193459, 15 FEBRUARY 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECTS: IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHIN REACH OF JUDICIAL REVIEW; ABBREVIATED PROCEEDINGS NOT INDICATION OF BIAS; IMPEACHMENT RULES; PROMULGATION; ONE-YEAR BAR RULE; APPLICABILITY OF RULES ON CRIM PROCEDURES. (BRIEF TITLE: GUTIERREZ VS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0058-A: MA. MERCEDITAS N. GUTIERREZ VS. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, ET AL. (G.R. NO. 193459, 15 FEBRUARY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: CONCURRING OPINION OF JUSTICE CARPIO.

CASE 2011-0057: LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES ET AL. VS. COMELEC ET AL. (G.R. NOS. 176951, G.R. NO. 177499; G.R. No. 178056, 15 FEBRUARY 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECTS: CREATION OF CITIES; LEGISLATIVE POWER; EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE. (BRIEF TITLE: LEAGUE OF CITIES ET AL VS. COMELEC ET AL.

CASE 2011-0056: EXXONMOBIL PETROLEUM AND CHEMICAL HOLDINGS, INC. – PHILIPPINE BRANCH VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(G.R. NO. 180909,19 JANUARY 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECTS: TAX REFUND, EXCISE TAX INVOLVING BILATERAL AGREEMENTS; AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES RAISED IN THE ANSWER. (BRIEF TITLE: EXXONMOBIL VS. CIR)

CASE 2011-0055: BAYAN MUNA, AS REPRESENTED BY REP. SATUR OCAMPO, REP. CRISPIN BELTRAN, AND REP. LIZA L. MAZA VS. ALBERTO ROMULO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, AND BLAS F. OPLE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS (G.R. NO. 159618, 1 FEBRUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: RP-US NON-SURRENDER AGREEMENT; ROME STATUTE; SENATE APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED. (BRIEF TITLE: BAYAN MUNA VS. ALBERTO ROMULO ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0054: MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY VS. HEIRS OF ESTANISLAO MIÑOZA, NAMELY: THE HEIRS OF FILOMENO T. MIÑOZA, REPRESENTED BY LAUREANO M. MIÑOZA; THEHEIRS OF PEDRO T. MIÑOZA; AND THE HEIRS OF FLORENCIA T.MIÑOZA, REPRESENTED BY ANTONIO M. URBIZTONDO (G.R. NO. 186045, 2 FEBRUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION ON NON-FORUM SHOPPING; COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION. (BRIEF TITLE: MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT VS. HEIRS OF MINOZA) 

CASE 2011-0053: FILIPINAS PALMOIL PROCESSING, INC. AND DENNIS T. VILLAREAL VS. JOEL P. DEJAPA, REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT MYRNA MANZANO (G.R. NO. 167332, 7 FEBRUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: FINAL JUDGMENT IS UNALTERABLE; NUNC PRO TUNC ENTRIES. (BRIEF TITLE: FILIPINAS PALM OIL VS. DEJAPA).

CASE 2011-0052: DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. BEN P. MEDRANO AND PRIVATIZATION MANAGEMENT OFFICE [PMO] (G.R. NO. 167004, 7 FEBRUARY 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: CONTRACTS, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, ATTORNEY’S FEES. (BRIEF TITLE: DBP VS. MEDRANO ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0051: ADELIA C. MENDOZA AND AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT OF ALICE MALLETA VS. UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK, INC. (G.R. NO. 165575, 2 FEBRUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) (SUBJECT: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS ON APPELLANT’S BRIEF). (BRIEF TITLE: MENDOZA VS. UCPB)

CASE 2011-0050: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ERLINDA CAPUNO Y TISON (G.R. NO. 185715, 19 JANUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: DANGEROUS DRUGS; CHAIN OF CUSTODY. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. CAPUNO).

CASE 2011-0049: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ERNESTO UYBOCO Y RAMOS (G.R. NO. 178039, 19 JANUARY 2011, PEREZ, J.) SUBJECTS: ELEMENTS OF KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION; WARRANTLESS ARREST; WARRANTLESS SEARCH. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. UYBOCO).

CASE 2011-0048: METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY VS. SPOUSES EDMUNDO MIRANDA AND JULIE MIRANDA (G.R. NO. 187917, 19 JANURY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: WHEN FORECLOSURE IS DECLARED NULL FOR LACK OF PUBLICATION; EXORBITANT INTERESTS; WHEN COURT CAN INQUIRE INTO EXTRAJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE. (BRIEF TITLE: METROBANK VS. SPOUSES MIRANDA).

CASE 2011-0047: BENJAMIN JESALVA VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 187725,19 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: HOMICIDE; CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE; CUSTODIAN INVESTIGATION. (BRIEF TITLE: JESALVA VS. PEOPLE)

CASE 2011-0046: ROBINSONS GALLERIA/ ROBINSONS SUPERMARKET CORPORATION AND/OR JESS MANUEL VS. IRENE R. RANCHEZ (G.R. NO. 177937, 19 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: PROBATIONARY EMPLOYMENT; CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL; BACKWAGES. (BRIEF TITLE: ROBINSONS GALLERIA VS. RACHEZ)

CASE 2011-0045: ALAIN M. DIÑO VS. MA. CARIDAD L. DIÑO (G.R. NO. 178044, 19 JANUARY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE CAN BE DONE EVEN PRIOR TO DISSOLUTION OF CONJUGAL PROPERTIES. (BRIEF SUBJECT: DINO VS. DINO)

CASE 2211-0044: PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK VS. BASES CONVERSION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, ARMANDO SIMBILLO, CHRISTIAN MARCELO, ROLANDO DAVID, RICARDO BUCUD, PABLO SANTOS, AGRIFINA ENRIQUEZ, CONRADO ESPELETA, CATGERUBE CASTRO, CARLITO MERCADO AND ALFREDO SUAREZ (G.R. NO. 173085, 19 JANUARY 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: EXPROPRIATION, INTERVENTION IN EXPROPRIATION PROCEEDINGS. (BRIEF TITLE: PVB VS. BCDA ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0043: SOLEDAD DALTON VS. FGR REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, FELIX NG, NENITA NG, AND FLORA R. DAYRIT OR FLORA REGNER (G.R. NO. 172577, 19 JANUARY 2011, CARPIO, J) SUBJECTS: CONSIGNATION; FINDINGS OF COURT BINDING ON SC. (BRIEF TITLE: DALTON VS. FGR REALTY)

CASE 2011-0042: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. VICTORIO A. DION (A.M. NO. P-10-2799, 18 JANUARY 2011, EN BANC) SUBJECT: UNREMITTED COLLECTIONS OF CLERK OF COURT; DISHONESTY AND GRAVE MISCONDUCT. (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. DION)

CASE 2011-0041: RENATO REAL VS. SANGU PHILIPPINES, INC. AND/ OR KIICHI ABE (G.R. NO. 168757, 19 JANUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT WHETHER A COMPLAINT FOR ILLEGAL DISMISSAL IS AN INTRA-CORPORATE CONTROVERSY. (BRIEF TITLE: REAL VS. SANGU PHILIPPINES ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0040:NILO PADRE VS. FRUCTOSA BADILLO, FEDILA BADILLO, PRESENTACION CABALLES, EDWINA VICARIO (D) REPRESENTED BY MARY JOY VICARIO-ORBETA AND NELSON BADILLO (G.R. NO. 165423, 19 JANURY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: JURISDICTION OF MTC; CERTIORARI. (BRIEF TITLE: NILO PADRE VS. BADILLO ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0039: MODESTO AGYAO, JR. VS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (G.R. NO. 182591, 18 JANUARY 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECT: CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE COVERS PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS ONLY. (BRIEF TITLE: AGYAO VS. CSC).

CASE 2011-0038: GREGORIO R. VIGILAR, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS (DPWH), DPWH UNDERSECRETARIES TEODORO E. ENCARNACION AND EDMUNDO E. ENCARNACION AND EDMUNDO V. MIR, DPWH ASSISTANT SECRETARY JOEL L. ALTEA, DPWH REGIONAL DIRECTOR VICENTE B. LOPEZ, DPWH DISTRICT ENGINEER ANGELITO M. TWAÑO, FELIX A. DESIERTO OF THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP VALIDATION AND AUDITING TEAM, AND LEONARDO ALVARO, ROMEO N. SUPAN, VICTORINO C. SANTOS OF THE DPWH PAMPANGA 2ND ENGINEERING DISTRICT VS. ARNULFO D. AQUINO (G.R. No. 180388, 18 JANUARY 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECTS: EXCEPTION TO EXHAUSTION OF ADMIN REMEDIES; GOVT IMMUNITY FROM SUIT NOT APPLIED. (BRIEF TITLE: VIGILAR ET AL VS. AQUINO)

CASE 2011-0037: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. FORMER JUDGE LEONARDO L. LEONIDA, OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT BRANCH 27, STA. CRUZ, LAGUNA (A.M. NO. RTJ-09-2198, 18 JANUARY 2011, CORONA, C.J) SUBJECT: FAILURE OF JUDGE TO DECIDE CASES WITHIN THE REGLAMENTARY PERIOD. (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. JUDGE LEONIDA)

CASE 2011-0036: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. CLAUDIO M. LOPEZ (A.M. NO. P-10-2788, 18 JANUARY 2011, CORONA, C.J.) SUBJECT: QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED IN ADMIN CASES; DEFINITION OF MISCONDUCT AND WHEN IT IS GRAVE. (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. LOPEZ).

CASE 2011-0035: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. CARLO MAGNO AURE Y ARNALDO AND MELCHOR AUSTRIACO Y AGUILA (G.R. NO. 185163, 17 JANUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS; ILLEGAL SALE OF PROHIBITED DRUGS; ELEMENTS AND HOW PROVEN. (SUBJECT: PEOPLE VS. AURE ET AL)

CASE 2011-0034: SILICON PHILIPPINES, INC., (FORMERLY INTEL PHILIPPINES MANUFACTURING, INC.) VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. NO. 172378, 17 JANUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: CLAIM FOR CREDIT/REFUND OF INPUT VAT ON ZERO-RATED SALES. (BRIEF TITLE: SILICON PHILIPPINES VS. CIR).

CASE 2011-0033:ANTONIO M. CARANDANG VS. HONORABLE ANIANO A. DESIERTO, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN (G.R. NO. 148076); ANTONIO M. CARANDANG VS. SANDIGANBAYAN (FIFTH DIVISION) SUBJECTS: DEFINITION OF OGCC; RADIO PHILIPPINE NETWORK. (BRIEF TITLE: CARANDANG VS. DESIERTO ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0032: LETICIA TAN, MYRNA MEDINA, MARILOU SPOONER, ROSALINDA TAN, AND MARY JANE TAN, MARY LYN TAN, CELEDONIO CHAIRPERSON,TAN, JR., MARY JOY TAN, AND MARK ALLAN TAN, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY THEIR MOTHER, LETICIA TAN, VS. OMC CARRIERS, INC. AND BONIFACIO ARAMBALA, (G.R. NO. 190521, 12 JANUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: ACTUAL DAMAGES, HOW PROVEN; TEMPERATE DAMAGES; EXEMPLARY DAMAGES; ATTORNEY’S FEES IN WRECKLESS IMPRUDENCE CASE. (BRIEF TITLE: TAN ET AL VS. OMC CARRIERS ET AL)

CASE 2011-0031: JESSIE R. DE LEON VS. ATTY. EDUARDO G. CASTELO (A.C. NO. 8620, 12 JANUARY 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECTS: OBLIGATION OF LAWYER TO TELL TRUTH; COMPLAINT AGAINST LAWYER MUST BE MOTIVATED BY GOOD FAITH

CASE 2011-0030: IN RE: REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 45, URDANETA CITY, PANGASINAN, AND REPORT ON THE INCIDENT AT BRANCH 49, SAME COURT. (A.M. No. 08-4-253-RTC, 12 JANUARY 2011, BERSAMIN, J.) SUBJECTS: ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES OF A JUDGE AND CLERK OF COURT; OMISSIONS; PENALTIES.

CASE 2011-0029: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. MERLINDA T. CUACHON, CLERK OF COURT, AND FE P. ALEJANO, COURT STENOGRAPHER, BOTH OF THE MCTC, ILOG-CANDONI, NEGROS OCCIDENTAL (A.M. NO. P-06-2179, 12 JANUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECTS: SIMPLE NEGLECT OF DUTY; RESTITUTION DOES NOT ERASE ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILIT; RESTITUTION TEMPERS PENALTY. (BRIEF TITLE: OCA VS. CUACHON ET AL)

CASE 2011-0028: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. LUIS PAJARIN y DELA CRUZ and EFREN PALLAYA y TUVIERA (G.R. No. 190640, 12 JANUARY 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: ILLEGAL DRUGS; FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROCEDURE IN TAKING CUSTODY OF DRUGS; FAILURE TO IDENTIFY SAME SUBSTANCES. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. PAJARIN).

CASE 2011-0027: FREDDY H. REYES VS. VIVIAN L. PABILANE, COURT INTERPRETER, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, TAGKAWAYAN, QUEZON (A.M. NO. P-09-2696, 12 JANUARY 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECT: DUTY OF COURT INTERPRETER. (BRIEF TITLE: REYES VS. PABILANE).

CASE 2011-0026: CHINA BANKING CORPORATION VS. ARMI S. ABEL (G.R. NO. 182547, 10 JANUARY 2011, ABAD, J.) SUBJECTS: WRIT OF EXECUTION; WRIT OF POSSESSION. (BRIEF TITLE: CHINA BANK VS. ABEL)

CASE 2011-0025: LOADMASTERS CUSTOMS SERVICES, INC. VS. GLODEL BROKERAGE CORPORATION AND R&B INSURANCE CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 179446, 10 JANUARY 2011, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECTS: SUBROGATION; COMMON CARRIER; EQUITY. (BRIEF TITLE: LOADMASTERS VS; GLODEL BROKERAGE)

CASE 2011-0024: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, THROUGH THE HON. SECRETARY NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN VS. SALVADOR N. LOPEZ AGRI-BUSINESS CORP., REPRESENTED BY SALVADOR N. LOPEZ, JR., PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER (G.R. NO. 178895, 10 JANUARY 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECT: EXEMPTION OF GRAZING LAND UNDER THE CARL. LOPEZ LAND EXEMPT. LIMOT LAND COVERED. (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS. LOPEZ).

CASE 2011-2023: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. KHADDAFY JANJALANI, GAMAL B. BAHARAN A.K.A. TAPAY, ANGELO TRINIDAD A.K.A. ABU KHALIL, GAPPAL BANNAH ASALI A.K.A. MAIDAN OR NEGRO, JAINAL SALI A.K.A. ABU SOLAIMAN, ROHMAT ABDURROHIM A.K.A. JACKIE OR ZAKY, AND OTHER JOHN AND JANE DOES (G.R. NO. 188314, 10 JANUARY 2011, SERENO, J.) SUBJECTS: CONSPIRACY, SEARCHING INQUIRY RE PLEA OF GUILT, JUDICIAL ADMISSION. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. JANJALANI ET AL.)

CASE NO. 2011-0022: SPOUSES ISAGANI AND DIOSDADA CASTRO VS. SPOUSES REGINO SE AND VIOLETA DELA CRUZ, SPOUSES EDUARDO AND CHARITO PEREZ AND MARCELINO TOLENTINO (G.R. NO. 190122, 10 JANUARY 2011, CARPIO MORALES, J.) SUBJECTS: WRIT OF INJUNCTION, WHEN UPHELD. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES CASTRO VS. SPOUSES DELA CRUZ ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0021: CASE NO. 2011-0021: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. JAY LORENA Y LABAG (G.R. NO. 184954, 10 JANUARY 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: PROSECUTION OF ILLEGAL SALE OF PROHIBITED DRUGS; CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF PROHIBITED DRUGS. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. LORENA)

CASE 2011-0020: (DENIAL OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION) ANTONIO LEJANO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176389); PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ANTONIO LEJANO, MICHAEL A. GATCHALIAN, HOSPICIO FERNANDEZ, MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ, PETER ESTRADA and GERARDO BIONG (18 JANUARY 2011, ABAD, J.)

CASE 2011-0019: DO-ALL METALS INDUSTRIES, INC., SPS. DOMINGO LIM AND LELY KUNG LIM VS. SECURITY BANK CORP., TITOLAIDO E. PAYONGAYONG, EVYLENE C. SISON, PHIL. INDUSTRIAL SECURITY AGENCY CORP. AND GIL SILOS (G.R. NO. 176339, 10 JANUARY 2011, ABAD, J) SUBJECTS: FILING FEES; EX-PARTE HEARING; TERMINATION OF LEASE. (BRIEF TITLE: DO-ALL METALS ET AL. VS. SECURITY BANK ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0018: SPOUSES GEORGE R. TAN AND SUSAN L. TAN VS. BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, INC.,(G.R. NOS. 190677-78); GEORGE R. TAN AND SUSAN L. TAN, VS. BANCO DE ORO UNIVERSAL BANK (G.R. NOS. 190699-700); BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, INC., VS. GEORGE R. TAN AND SUSAN L. TAN (G.R. NO. 188792, 10 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.: )

CASE 2011-0017: ELENITA C. FAJARDO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 190889, 10 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.)

CASE NO. 2011-0016: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. NG YIK BUN, KWOK WAI CHENG, CHANG CHAUN SHI, CHUA SHILOU HWAN, KAN SHUN MIN, AND RAYMOND S. TAN (G.R. NO. 180452, 10 JANUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECT: DANGEROUS DRUGS. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. NG YIK BUN ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0014: MILAGROS SALTING VS. JOHN VELEZ AND CLARISSA R. VELEZ (G.R. NO. 181930, 10 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: NOTICE TO COUNSEL WHO DIED; EJECTMENT. ( BRIEF TITLE: SALTING VS. VELEZ ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0013: PROSECUTOR HILARIO RONSON H. TILAN VS. JUDGE ESTER PISCOSO-FLOR, RTC, BRANCH 34, BANAUE, IFUGAO (A.M. NO. RTJ-09-2188, 10 JANUARY 2011, BRION, J.) SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF DECISION BEYOND THE 90-DAY PERIOD, GROUND FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION. (BRIEF TITLE: TILAN VS. JUDGE FLOR).

CASE 2011-0012: PRINCE TRANSPORT, INC. AND MR. RENATO CLAROS VS. DIOSDADO GARCIA, LUISITO GARCIA, RODANTE ROMERO, REX BARTOLOME, FELICIANO GASCO, JR., DANILO ROJO, EDGAR SANFUEGO, AMADO GALANTO, EUTIQUIO LUGTU, JOEL GRAMATICA, MIEL CERVANTES, TERESITA CABANES, ROE DELA CRUZ, RICHELO BALIDOY, VILMA PORRAS, MIGUELITO SALCEDO, CRISTINA GARCIA, MARIO NAZARENO, DINDO TORRES, ESMAEL RAMBOYONG, ROBETO* MANO, ROGELIO BAGAWISAN, ARIEL SNACHEZ, ESTAQULO VILLAREAL, NELSON MONTERO, GLORIA ORANTE, HARRY TOCA, PABLITO MACASAET AND RONALD GARCITA (G.R. NO. 167291, 12 JANUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: POWER OF CA TO REVIEW NLRC DECISIONS; VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION; MAY NOT BE SIGNED BY ALL; ABSENCE OF VERIFICATION NOT JURISDICTIONAL, ONLY FORMAL DEFECT; GENERAL PRAYER IN PLEADING ENTITLES PETITIONER TO RELIEF OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFICALLY SOUGHT; (BRIEF TITLE: PRINCE TRANSPORT ET AL. VS. GARCIA ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0011: HEIRS OF SANTIAGO C. DIVINAGRACIA VS. HON. J. CEDRICK O. RUIZ, PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 39, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, ILOILO CITY; GERRY D. SUMACULUB, AS CLERK OF COURT OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT; BOMBO RADYO HOLDINGS, INC., AND ROGELIO M. FLORETE, SR. (G.R. NO. 172508, 12 JANUARY 2011, PERALTA, J.)SUBJECTS: INTRA-CORPORATE DISPUTE; MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES NOT EXECUTORY PENDING APPEAL. (BRIEF TITLE: HEIRS OF DIVINIGRACIA VS. JUDGE RUIZ ET AL.)

CASE 2011-0010: DURBAN APARTMENTS DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF CITY GARDEN HOTEL VS. PIONEER INSURANCE AND SURETY CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 179419, 12 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: ABSENCE DURING PRE-TRIAL; FAILURE TO FILE PRE-TRIAL BRIEF. (BRIEF TITLE: DURBAN APARTMENTS VS. PIONEER INSURANCE.)

CASE 2011-0009: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. FRANCISCO MANLANGIT Y TRESBALLES (G.R. NO. 189806, 12 JANUARY 2011,VELASCO, JR., J) SUBJECTS: SALE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS; ILLEGAL POSSESSION; CHAIN OF CUSTODY) BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. MANLANGIT.)

CASE 2011-0008: RE: G.R. NO. 191721: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ROGELIO DOLORIDO Y ESTRADA (G.R. NO. 191721, 12 JANUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECTS: ELEMENTS OF SELF DEFENSE; UNLAWFUL AGRESSION; TREACHERY; ELEMENTS OF MURDER; AWARD OF DAMAGES IN MURDER. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. DOLORIDO)

CASE 2011-0007: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RODOLFO CAPITLE AND ARTURO NAGARES (G.R. NO. 175330, 12 JANUARY 2010, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: EXTRA JUDICIAL CONFESSION, WHEN ADMISSIBLE; ALIBI AND DENIAL; CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, WHEN SUFFICIENT; DAMAGES WHEN DEATH OCCURS. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. CAPITLE ET AL.

CASE 2011-0006: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RESINS INC. (G.R. NO. 175891, 12 JANUARY 2010, CARPIO, J.) (SUBJECTS: SERVICE OF JUDGMENT; BURDEN OF PROVING SERVICE; CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOT SUFFICIENT).

CASE 2011-0005: BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK INC. VS. GOLDEN POWER DIESEL SALES CENTER, INC. and RENATO C. TAN, G.R. NO. 176019, 12 JANUARY 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: MORTGAGES, WRIT OF POSSESSION. (BRIEF TITLE: BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK VS. GOLDEN POWER DIESEL SALES CENTER, INC. ET AL.)

CASE 2011-2004: THE HERITAGE HOTEL MANILA, ACTING THROUGH ITS OWNER, GRAND PLAZA HOTEL CORPORATION VS. NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS IN THE HOTEL, RESTAURANT AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES-HERITAGE HOTEL MANILA SUPERVISORS CHAPTER (NUWHRAIN-HHMSC) (G.R. NO. 178296, 12 JANUARY 2011, NACHURA, J.) SUBJECTS: JURISDICTION OF BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS; POWER OF CONTROL OF DOLE SECRETARY; UNION REGISTRATION. (BRIEF TITLE: HERITAGE HOTEL VS. NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS.)

CASE 2011-0003: BELLE CORPORATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (G.R. No. 181298, 10 JANUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: REFUND OF EXCESS INCOME TAX PAYMENTS. BRIEF TITLE: BELL CORP VS. CIR

CASE 2011-0002: RE: LETTER-COMPLAINT OF ATTY. ARIEL SAMSON C. CAYETUNA, ET AL., ALL EMPLOYEES OF ASSOCIATE JUSTICE MICHAEL P. ELBINIAS AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE MICHAEL P. ELBINIAS, CA – MINDANAO STATION (A.M. OCA IPI NO. 08-127-CA-J, 11 JANUARY 2011, VELASCO, JR., J.) SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST JUDGES. BRIEF TITLE: LETTER-COMPLAINT OF CAYETUNA.

CASE 2011-0001: LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK VS. ANGELES CATHERINE ENRIQUEZ (G.R. NO. 168646, 12 JANUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.); DELTA DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. VS. ANGELES CATHERINE ENRIQUEZ and LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK, (G.R. NO. 168666, 12 JANUARY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECTS: MORTAGE, CONTRACT TO SELL, DACION EN PAGO, LOAN OBLIGATIONS. BRIEF TITLE: LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK VS. ENRIQUEZ.

CASE 0051: ANTONIO A. ABOC VS. METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY (G.R. NOS. 170542-43); METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY VS. ANTONIO A. ABOC (G.R. NO. 176460) (13 DECEMBER 21010, MENDOZA, J.)

CASE 0050:PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ARNOLD MARTINEZ Y ANGELES, EDGAR DIZON Y FERRER, REZIN MARTINEZ Y CAROLINO, and RAFAEL GONZALES Y CUNANAN (G.R. NO. 191366, 13 DECEMBER 2010, MENDOZA, J.) SUBJECTS: DRUG CASE, ILLEGAL ARREST, ILLEGAL SEARCH, CHAIN OF CUSTODY, FRUIT OF POISONOUS TREE. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. MARTINEZ ET AL.)

CASE 0049: RETIRED EMPLOYEE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, SIBONGA, CEBU VS. MERLYN G. MANUBAG, CLERK OF COURT II, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, SIBONGA, CEBU (A.M. NO. P-10-2833, 14 DECEMBER 2010, PER CURIAM. SUBJECT: DISHONESTY. (BRIEF TITLE: RETIRED EMPLOYEE VS. MANUBAG.)

CASE 0048: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. FELIPE NACHOR y OMAYAN (G.R. NO. 177779, 14 DECEMBER 2010, DEL CASTILLO, J.) SUBJECT: RAPE; LACK OF RESISTANCE IS IMMATERIAL. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. NACHOR)

CASE 0047: IN THE MATTER OF THE BREWING CONTROVERSIES IN THE ELECTION OF THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES; ATTYS. MARCIAL M. MAGSINO, MANUEL M. MARAMBA AND NASSER MAROHOMSALIC VS. ATTYS. ROGELIO A. VINLUAN, ABELARDO C. ESTRADA, BONIFACIO T. BARANDON, JR., EVERGISTO S.ESCALON and RAYMUND JORGE A. MERCADO (A.M. NO. 09-5-2-SC; A.C. NO. 8292, 14 DECEMBER 2010, CORONA, C.J.)

CASE 0046: NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION VS. TERESITA DIATO-BERNAL (G.R. NO. 180979, 15 DECEMBER 2010, NACHURA, J.) (EXPROPRIATION; JUST COMPENSATION) (BRIEF TITLE: NAPOCOR VS. BERNAL)

CASE 0045: EMMANUEL BABAS ET AL VS. LORENZO SHIPPING CORPORATION (G.R. NO. 86091, 15 DECEMBER 2010, NACHURA J.)

CASE 0044: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ALEX LINGASA, JORGE BI-AY AND JOHN DOE (G.R. NO. 192187, 13 DECEMBER 20101, MENDOZA, J.)

CASE 0043:MAXWELL HEAVY EQUIPMENT CORPORATION VS. ERIC UYCHIAOCO YU (G.R. NO. 179395, 15 DECEMBER 2010, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECTS: SC NO TRIER OF FACTS; RTC DECISION AFFIRMED BY CA DEEMED FINAL. (BRIEF TITLE: MAXWELL HEAVY EQUIPMENT VS. YU)

CASE 0042: SPOUSES MARCOS R. ESMAQUEL AND VICTORIA SORDEVILLA VS. MARIA COPRADA (G.R. NO. 152423, 15 DECEMBER 2010, PERALTA, J.)

CASE 0041: BEATRIZ SIOK PING TANG VS. SUBIC BAY DISTRIBUTION, INC. (G.R. NO. 162575, 15 DECEMBER 2010, PERALTA, J.) SUBJECTS: CERTIORARI; REJOINDER OF PARTIES. (BRIEF TITLE: TANG VS. SBDI)

CASE 0040: RAMON B. BRITO SR. VS. SEVERINO D. DIANALA, VIOLETA DIANALA SALES, JOVITA DIANALA DEQUINTO, ROSITA DIANALA, CONCHITA DIANALA and JOEL DEQUINTO (G.R. NO. 171717, 15 DECEMBER 2010, PERALTA, J.)

CASE 0039: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. EFREN DITONA y MONTEFALCON,BERNARD FERNANDEZ AND ERNESTO EMNAS, ACCUSED AND EFREN DITONA Y MONTEFALCON, APPELLANT (G.R. NO. 189841, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. ABAD)

CASE 0038: ATTY. NORLINDA R. AMANTE-DESCALLAR VS. HON. REINERIO (ABRAHAM) B. RAMAS, A.M. NO. RTJ-06-2015, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO)

CASE 0037: SPOUSES VIRGILIO AND ANGELINA ARANDA VS. ATTY. EMMANUEL F. ELAYDA (A.C. NO. 7907, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: LEGAL ETHICS; LAWYER MUST OBSERVE DILIGENCE) BRIEF TITLE: ARANDA VS. ELAYDA

CASE 0036: HEIRS OF DOMINGO VALIENTES VS. HON. REINERIO (ABRAHAM) B. RAMAS, ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE, RTC, BRANCH 29, 9TH JUDICIAL REGION, SAN MIGUEL, ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR AND VILMA V. MINOR (G.R. NO. 157852, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO- DE CASTRO) SUBJECTS: QUIETING OF TITLE; LACHES. BRIEF TITLE: HEIRS OF VALIENTES VS. HON. RAMAS ET AL.

CASE 0035: ROMER SY TAN VS. SY TIONG GUE, FELICIDAD CHAN SY, SY CHIM, SY TIONG SAN, SY YU BUN, SY YU SHIONG, SY YU SAN, and BRYAN SY LIM (G.R. NO. 174570, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. PERALTA) SUBJECTS: SEARCH WARRANT; ROBBERY. BRIEF TITLE: TAN VS. GUE ET AL.

CASE 0034: RENE B. PASCUAL VS. JAIME M. ROBLES (G.R. NO. 182645, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. PERALTA) SUBJECTS: JOINDER OF PARTIES. BRIEF TITLE: PASCUAL VS. ROBLES. 

CASE 0033: THE COCA-COLA EXPORT CORPORATION VS. CLARITA P. GACAYAN (G.R. NO. 149433, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO) SUBJECTS: LOSS OF CONFIDENCE; MISCONDUCT; COMPUTATION OF BACKWAGES. BRIEF TITLE: COCA-COLA VS. GACAYAN.

CASE 0032: FEDERICO SORIANO, CIPRIANO BAUTISTA, JOSE TORALBA, CILODONIO TANTAY, MARIANO BRAVO, ROLANDO TORALBA, FAUSTINO BRAVO, CRISTINA TORALBA, BENJAMIN LACAYANGA, ROSALIA TANTAY, GABRIEL DELA VEGA, ROGELIO BRAVO, and ROMEO TANTAY, represented by their Attorney-in-Fact, TEODORICO GAMBA vs. ANA SHARI B. BRAVO, REBECCA BENITO, JOHN MEJIA, MILA BRAVO, BENITO BRAVO, ERNESTO BRAVO, JOSE ISRAEL BRAVO, JUANA BRAVO, DARAB CENTRAL, and the HON. COURT OF APPEALS, FORMER FIFTH DIVISION (G.R. NO. 152086, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO DE CASTRO) SUBJECTS: JURISDICTION OF DARAB; DECISIONS OF DARAB IMPRESSED WITH FINALITY. BRIEF TITLE: SORIANO ET AL. VS. BRAVO ET AL.

CASE 0031: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RENE CELOCELO (G.R. NO. 173798, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO) SUBJECTS: QUALITY OF TESTIMONY IN RAPE CASE; TRIAL JUDGE IS IN BEST POSITION TO DECIDE. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. CELOCELO

CASE 0030:PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. MONTANO FLORES Y PARAS (G.R. NO. 177355, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO) SUBJECTS: ELEMENTS OF QUALIFIED RAPE; HOW TO PROVE THAT VICTIM IS MINOR. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. FLORES.

CASE 0029:PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ANDRES C. FONTILLAS (G.R. NO. 184177, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. LEONARDO DE CASTRO.) SUBJECTS: INCONSISTENCIES AND IMPROBABILITIES IN TESTIMONY; INTOXICATION; DAMAGES IN RAPE CASE. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. FONTILLAS.

CASE 0028: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. GILBERT CASTRO Y AGUILAR (G.R. NO. 188901, 15 DECEMBER 2010, J. PEREZ) SUBJECTS: RAPE OF A MENTAL RETARDATE IS STATUTORY RAPE; INCONCISTENCIES IN TESTIMONY; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. CASTRO.

CASE 0027: SOUTH COTABATO COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION and GAUVAIN J. BENZONAN vs. HON. PATRICIA A. STO. TOMAS, SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ROLANDO FABRIGAR, MERLYN VELARDE, VINCE LAMBOC, FELIPE GALINDO, LEONARDO MIGUEL, JULIUS RUBIN, EDEL RODEROS, MERLYN COLIAO and EDGAR JOPSON (G.R. NO. 173326, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: CERTIFICATION ON FORUM SHOPPING.

CASE 0026: FERNANDO P. CHAN VS. JOVEN T. OLEGARIO (A.M. NO. P-09-2714, 06 DECEMBER 2010, J. ABAD) SUBJECTS: NON-SETTLEMENT OF DEBT BY COURT EMPLOYEE; SETTLEMENT OF DEBT NOT GROUND FOR DISMISSAL.

 CASE 0025:RENATO REYES, REPRESENTED BY RAMON REYES VS. LEOPOLDO BARRIOS, SUBSTITUTED BY LUCIA MANALUS-BARRIOS (G.R. NO. 172841, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: TECHNICAL RULES NOT FOLLOWED IN DARAB PROCEEDINGS; PROCEDURE FOR GRANT OF EMANCIPATION PROCEEDINGS; ISSUE ON RIGHT OVER RETAINED AREA UNDER SOLE JURISDICTION OF DAR SECRETARY. BRIEF TITLE: REYES VS. BARRIOS.

CASE 0024: PHILIPPINE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PFDA) VS. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS OF LUCENA CITY, CITY OF LUCENA, LUCENA CITY ASSESSOR AND LUCENA CITY TREASURER (G.R. NO. 178030, 15 DECEMBER 2010). SUBJECTS: GOVT INSTRUMENTALITY NOT SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TAX AND ITS PROPERTY CANT BE AUCTIONED TO PAY FOR TAX DILINQUENCY; WHY PFDA IS NOT A GOCC; BRIEF TITLE: PHIL FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS ET AL.

CASE 0023: CHERRYL B. DOLINA VS. GLENN D. VALLECERA (G.R. NO. 182367, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: FILIATION; REMEDIES FOR CHILD SUPPORT. BRIEF TITLE: DOLINA VS. VALLECERA

CASE 0022: CRISPIN SARMIENTO VS. ABAD AND LUISITO P. MENDIOLA, SHERIFF 3, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 20, MANILA (A.M. NO. P-07-2383, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT; ROLE OF SHERIFF; DEFINITION OF MISCONDUCT. BRIEF TITLE: SARMIENTO VS. ABAD

CASE 0021: ARNEL U. TY, MARIE ANTONETTE TY, JASON ONG, WILLY DY, AND ALVIN TY VS. NBI SUPERVISING AGENT MARVIN E. DE JEMIL, PETRON GASUL DEALERS ASSOCIATION, AND TOTALGAZ DEALERS ASSOCIATION (G.R. NO. 182147, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DOJ RESOLUTION BY CA; PROBABLE CAUSE; CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS; EXPRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS. BRIEF TITLE: TY ET AL VS. NBI SUPERVISING AGENT DE JEMIL ET AL.

CASE 0020: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. RICKY ALFREDO Y NORMAN (G.R. NO. 188560, 15 DECEMBER 2010). SUBJECTS: DAMAGES IN RAPE CASE; DECISION OF JUDGE WHO DID NOT HEAR THE CASE; ALIBI. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. ALFREDO.

CASE 0019: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. JOSE PEPITO D. COMBATE a.k.a. “PEPING” (G.R. NO. 189301, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: FINDINGS OF TRIAL COURT RESPECTED; INCONSISTENCIES IN TESTIMONY;

CASE 0018: PCI LEASING AND FINANCE INC. VS. TROJIAN METAL INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, WALFRIDO DIZON, ELIZABETH DIZON, AND JOHN DOE (G.R. NO. 176381, 15 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECTS: FINANCIAL LEASING; REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENT.

CASE 0017: CARMEN EDANO VS. JUDGE FATIMA G. ASDALA, RTC BRANCH 87, QUEZON CITY (A.M. NO. RTJ-06-2007, 06 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: DEADLINE OF JUDGES FOR RENDERING DECISIONS; DECISIONS NOT SUBJECT TO DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS;

CASE 0016: JOVITO S. OLAZO VS. JUSTICE DANTE O. TINGA (RET.) (A.M. NO. 10-5-7-SC, 07 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: DEFINITION OF PRACTICE OF LAW; ACCOUNTABILITY OF GOVERNMENT LAWYERS; ON PRIVATE PRACTICE BY GOVT LAWYERS; RULE ON PRACTICE OF LAW UPON LEAVING GOVERNMENT SERVICE.

CASE 0015: TRANSCEPT CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALS, INC. VS. TERESA C. AGUILAR (G.R. NO. 177556, 08 DECEMBER 2010). SUBJECT: CIAC CASE; COMPUTATION OF UNACCOMPLISHED WORKS, LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, CONSULTANCY SERVICES.)

CASE 0014: SPOUSES REUBEN DE LA CRUZ AND MINERVA DELA CRUZ VS. RAMON C.PAPAP IV IN HIS CAPACITY AS CO-ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF ANGELA M. BUTTE (G.R. NO. 185899, 08 DECEMBER 2010). SUBJECT: DIRECT TESTIMONY NOT SUBJECTED TO CROSS-EXAMINATION EXPUGNED. BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES DELA CRUZ VS. PAPAP IV.

CASE 0013: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. SANDIGANBAYAN (FOURTH DIVISION) AND IMELDA R. MARCOS (G.R. NO. 155832, 07 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: DELEGATION OF QUASI JUDICIAL POWER; ESTOPPEL. BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. SANDIGANBAYAN AND MARCOS.

CASE 0012-E: SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION OF JUSTICE BRION: G.R. NO. 176389 – ANTONIO LEJANO, PETITIONER, -VERSUS- PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.;G.R. NO. 176864 – PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, -VERSUS- HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ET AL., APPELLANTS.

CASE 0012-D: CONCURRING OPINION OF JUSTICE CARPIO MORALES: G.R. NO. 176389 – ANTONIO LEJANO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES; G.R. NO. 176864 – PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ANTONIO LEJANO, ET AL.

CASE 0012-C: SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION OF JUSTICE SERENO: G.R. NO. 176389 – ANTONIO LEJANO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES; G.R. NO. 176864 – PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ANTONIO LEJANO, MICHAEL A. GATCHALIAN, HOSPICIO FERNANDEZ, MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ, PETER ESTRADA and GERARDO BIONG

CASE 0012-B: DISSENTING OPINION OF JUSTICE VILLARAMA, JR. IN ANTONIO LEJANO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176389, 14 DECEMBER 2010); HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB ET AL VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176864, 14 DECEMBER 2010)

CASE 0012: ANTONIO LEJANO VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176389, 14 DECEMBER 2010); HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB ET AL VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 176864, 14 DECEMBER 2010)

CASE 0011: CITY GOVERNMENT OF BUTUAN AND CITY MAYOR LEONIDES THERESA B. PLAZA, THE LATTER IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF HER CO-DEFENDANT, PETITIONERS VS. CONSOLIDATED BROADCASTING SYSTEM (CBS), INC., DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE “DXBR” BOMBO RADYO BUTUAN, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, NORBERTO P. PAGASPAS, AND HON. ROSARITO F. DABALOS, PRESIDING JUDGE, RTC, BRANCH 2, OF AGUSAN DEL NORTE AND BUTUAN CITY, RESPONDENTS (G.R. NO. 157315, 01 DECEMBER 2010) (SUBJECTS: VOLUNTARY INHIBITION/ ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION) BRIEF TITLE: BUTUAN CITY ET AL VS. CONSOLIDATED BROADCASTING ET AL.

CASE 0010: MAY D. AÑONUEVO, ALEXANDER BLEE DESANTIS AND JOHN DESANTIS NERI, PETITIONERS VS. INTESTATE ESTATE OF RODOLFO G. JALANDONI, REPRESENTED BY BERNARDINO G. JALANDONI AS SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR, RESPONDENT (FIRST DIVISION, G.R. NO. 178221, O1 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: MARRIAGE; INTERVENTION IN INTESTATE PROCEEDINGS)

CASE 0009: LOUIS “BAROK” C. BIRAOGO VS. THE PHILIPPINE TRUTH COMMISSION OF 2010 (G.R. NO. 192935, 07 DECEMBER 2010). REP. EDCEL C. LAGMAN, REP. RODOLFO B. ALBANO, JR., REP. SIMEON A. DATUMANONG, AND REP. ORLANDO B. FUA, SR. VS. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR. AND DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT SECRETARY FLORENCIO B. ABAD (G.R. NO. 193036, 07 DECEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE.

CASE 0008: ROMULO R. PERALTA VS. HON. E DE LEON HON. RAUL E. DE LEON ET AL. (G.R. NO. 187978, 24 NOVEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: JURISDICTION OF HLURB

CASE 0007: SOLIDBANK CORP VS. ERNESTO U. GAMIER ET AL. (G.R. NO. 159460, 15 NOVEMBER 2010); SUBJECT: STRIKES, TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT, EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.

CASE 0006: ARSENIO LOCSIN VS. NISSAN CAR LEASE PHILS. ET AL. (G.R. NO. 185567, 10 OCTOBER 2010) SUBJECTS: NLRC RULES, NLRC JURISDICTION, CORPORATE OFFICER)

CASE 0005: PENAFRANCIA TOURS AND TRANSPORT, INC. VS. JOSELITO P. SARMIENTO ET AL. (G.R. NO. 178397, 20 NOVEMBER 2010) SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION IN CONTRACTS.

CASE 0004: RE LETTER OF THE UP COLLEGE OF LAW FACULTY

CASE 0003: VENUYA ET AL. VS. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

CASE 0003-A: DISSENT OF JUSTICE SERENO (A.M. No. 10-7-17-SC – IN THE MATTER OF THE CHARGES OF PLAGIARISM, ETC., AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO)

CASE NO. 0002 – OCT2010: G.R. NO. 191194 – PEOPLE VS. ASIS

CASE NO. 0001 – OCT 2010: G.R. NO. 183852 – CARMELA BROBIO MANGAHAS VS. EUFROCINA A. BROBIO (DOCTRINE RE CONSIDERATION IN CONTRACTS)

CASE 2003-128106-07: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. GONZALO BALDOGO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT (G.R. NO. 128106-07, 24 JANUARY 2003, CALLEJO, SR., J) SUBJECT: MURDER. (BRIEF TITLE: PEOPLE VS. BALOGO)

CASE 1995-109991: ELIAS C. QUIBAL AND ANTONIO U. DENIEGA, PETITIONERS, VS. THE HON. SANDIGANBAYAN (SECOND DIVISION) AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS. (G.R. NO. 10999, 22 MAY 1995, PUNO, J.) SUBJECT: ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT. (BRIEF TITLE: QUIBAL ET AL VS. SANDIGANBAYAN.)

 TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES: 2+51 + 173= 226

PHILIPPINE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PFDA) VS. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, LOCAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS OF LUCENA CITY, CITY OF LUCENA, LUCENA CITY ASSESSOR AND LUCENA CITY TREASURER (G.R. NO. 178030, 15 DECEMBER 2010). SUBJECTS: GOVT INSTRUMENTALITY NOT SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TAX AND ITS PROPERTY CANT BE AUCTIONED TO PAY FOR TAX DILINQUENCY; WHY PFDA IS NOT A GOCC; BRIEF TITLE: PHIL FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS ET AL.

x – – – – – – – – – – – – –  – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x

DIGEST:

PFDA WHICH MANAGED THE LUCENA FISHING PORT COMPLEX WAS ORDERED  BY LUCENA CITY TO PAY REAL PROPERTY TAX ON THE FISHING PORT. LBAA, CBAA AND CTA ALL AFFIRMED THE ORDER OF LUCENA CITY. SC RULED THAT PFDA IS EXEMPT BECAUSE IT IS A GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTALITY NOT A GOVERNMENT OWNED AND CONTROLLED CORPORATION. BUT PORTIONS OF THE PORT LEASED TO PRIVATE ENTITIES NOT EXEMPT FROM REAL PROPERTY TAX.

DOCTRINES:

PFDA, NOT BEING A GOVERNMENT OWNED OR CONTROLLED CORPORATION IS NOT SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TAX.

 

The ruling of the Court of Tax Appeals is anchored on the wrong premise that the PFDA is a government-owned or controlled corporation. On the contrary, this Court has already ruled that the PFDA is a government instrumentality and not a government-owned or controlled corporation.

WHY PFDA IS NOT A GOCC; PROPERTY OF GOVT INSTRUMENTALITY CANNOT BE SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION TO SATISFY TAX DILINQUENCY; 

 

In the 2007 case of Philippine Fisheries Development Authority v. Court of Appeals,6 the Court resolved the issue of whether the PFDA is a government-owned or controlled corporation or an instrumentality of the national government. In that case, the City of Iloilo assessed real property taxes on the Iloilo Fishing Port Complex (IFPC), which was managed and operated by PFDA. The Court held that PFDA is an instrumentality of the government and is thus exempt from the payment of real property tax, thus:

The Court rules that the Authority [PFDA] is not a GOCC but an instrumentality of the national government which is generally exempt from payment of real property tax. However, said exemption does not apply to the portions of the IFPC which the Authority leased to private entities. With respect to these properties, the Authority is liable to pay property tax. Nonetheless, the IFPC, being a property of public dominion cannot be sold at public auction to satisfy the tax delinquency.

x x x

Indeed, the Authority is not a GOCC but an instrumentality of the government. The Authority has a capital stock but it is not divided into shares of stocks. Also, it has no stockholders or voting shares. Hence it is not a stock corporation. Neither is it a non-stock corporation because it has no members.

The Authority is actually a national government instrumentality which is defined as an agency of the national government, not integrated within the department framework, vested with special functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all corporate powers, administering special funds, and enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a charter. When the law vests in a government instrumentality corporate powers, the instrumentality does not become a corporation. Unless the government instrumentality is organized as a stock or non-stock corporation, it remains a government instrumentality exercising not only governmental but also corporate powers.7 (Emphasis supplied)

 

BUT PORTIONS OF THE PORT BEING LEASED TO PRIVATE ENTITIES ARE SUBJECT TO REAL ESTATE TAX.

 

The exercise of the taxing power of local government units is subject to the limitations enumerated in Section 133 of the Local Government Code.9 Under Section 133(o)10 of the Local Government Code, local government units have no power to tax instrumentalities of the national government like the PFDA. Thus, PFDA is not liable to pay real property tax assessed by the Office of the City Treasurer of Lucena City on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex, except those portions which are leased to private persons or entities. (UNDERSCORING SUPPLIED).

x – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – x

D E C I S I O N

CARPIO, J.:

The Case

This petition for review1 assails the 9 May 2007 Decision2 of the Court of Tax Appeals in C.T.A. EB No. 193, affirming the 5 October 2005 Decision of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA) in CBAA Case No. L-33. The CBAA dismissed the appeal of petitioner Philippine Fisheries Development Authority (PFDA) from the Decision of the Local Board of Assessment Appeals (LBAA) of Lucena City, ordering PFDA to pay the real property taxes imposed by the City Government of Lucena on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex.

The Facts

The facts as found by the CBAA are as follows:

The records show that the Lucena Fishing Port Complex (LFPC) is one of the fishery infrastructure projects undertaken by the National Government under the Nationwide Fish Port-Package. Located at Barangay Dalahican, Lucena City, the fish port was constructed on a reclaimed land with an area of 8.7 hectares more or less, at a total cost of PHP 296,764,618.77 financed through a loan (L/A PH-25 and 51) from the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund (OECF) of Japan, dated November 9, 1978 and May 31, 1978, respectively.

The Philippine Fisheries Development Authority (PFDA) was created by virtue of P.D. 977 as amended by E.O. 772, with functions and powers to (m)anage, operate, and develop the Navotas Fishing Port Complex and such other fishing port complexes that may be established by the Authority. Pursuant thereto, Petitioner-Appellant PFDA took over the management and operation of LFPC in February 1992.

On October 26, 1999, in a letter addressed to PFDA, the City Government of Lucena demanded payment of realty taxes on the LFPC property for the period from 1993 to 1999 in the total amount of P39,397,880.00. This was received by PFDA on November 24, 1999.

On October 17, 2000 another demand letter was sent by the Government of Lucena City on the same LFPC property, this time in the amount of P45,660,080.00 covering the period from 1993 to 2000.

On December 18, 2000 Petitioner-Appellant filed its Appeal before the Local Board of Assessment Appeals of Lucena City, which was dismissed for lack of merit. On November 6, 2001 Petitioner-Appellant filed its motion for reconsideration; this was denied by the Appellee Local Board on December 10, 2001.3

PFDA appealed to the CBAA. In its Decision dated 5 October 2005, the CBAA dismissed the appeal for lack of merit. The CBAA ruled:

Ownership of LFPC however has, before hand, been handed over to the PFDA, as provided for under Sec. 11 of P.D. No. 977, as amended, and declared under the MCIAA case [Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Marcos, G.R. No. 120082, 11 September 1996, 261 SCRA 667]. The allegations therefore that PFDA is not the beneficial user of LFPC and not a taxable person are rendered moot and academic by such ownership of PFDA over LFPC.

x x x

PFDA’s Charter, P.D. 977, provided for exemption from income tax under Par. 2, Sec. 10 thereof: “(t)he Authority shall be exempted from the payment of income tax”. Nothing was said however about PFDA’s exemption from payment of real property tax: PFDA therefore was not to lay claim for realty tax exemption on its Fishing Port Complexes. Reading Sec. 40 of P.D. 464 and Sec. 234 of R.A. 7160 however, provided such ground: LFPC is owned by the Republic of the Philippines, PFDA is only tasked to manage, operate, and develop the same. Hence, LFPC is exempted from payment of realty tax.

x x x

The ownership of LFPC as passed on by the Republic of the Philippines to PFDA is bourne by Direct evidence: P.D. 977, as amended (supra). Therefore, Petitioner-Appellant’s claim for realty tax exemption on LFPC is untenable.

WHEREFORE, for all of the foregoing, the herein Appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of merit.

SO ORDERED.4

PFDA moved for reconsideration, which the CBAA denied in its Resolution dated 7 June 2006.5 On appeal, the Court of Tax Appeals denied PFDA’s petition for review and affirmed the 5 October 2005 Decision of the CBAA.

Hence, this petition for review.

The Ruling of the Court of Tax Appeals

The Court of Tax Appeals held that PFDA is a government-owned or controlled corporation, and is therefore subject to the real property tax imposed by local government units pursuant to Section 232 in relation to Sections 193 and 234 of the Local Government Code. Furthermore, the Court of Tax Appeals ruled that PFDA failed to prove that it is exempt from real property tax pursuant to Section 234 of the Local Government Code or any of its provisions.

The Issue

The sole issue raised in this petition is whether PFDA is liable for the real property tax assessed on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex.

The Ruling of the Court

The petition is meritorious.

In ruling that PFDA is not exempt from paying real property tax, the Court of Tax Appeals cited Sections 193, 232, and 234 of the Local Government Code which read:

Section 193. Withdrawal of Tax Exemption Privileges. ‒ Unless otherwise provided in this Code, tax exemptions or incentives granted to, or presently enjoyed by all persons, whether natural or juridical, including government-owned or -controlled corporations, except local water districts, cooperatives duly registered under R.A. No. 6938, non-stock and non-profit hospitals and educational institutions, are hereby withdrawn upon the effectivity of this Code.

Section 232. Power to Levy Real Property Tax. ‒ A province or city or a municipality within the Metropolitan Manila Area may levy an annual ad valorem tax on real property such as land, building, machinery, and other improvement not hereinafter specifically exempted.

Section 234. Exemptions from Real Property Tax. ‒ The following are exempted from payment of the real property tax:

(a) Real property owned by the Republic of the Philippines or any of its political subdivision except when the beneficial use thereof has been granted, for consideration or otherwise, to a taxable person;

(b) Charitable institutions, churches, parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, nonprofit or religious cemeteries and all lands, buildings and improvements actually, directly, and exclusively used for religious, charitable or educational purposes;

(c) All machineries and equipment that are actually, directly and exclusively used by local water districts and government-owned or -controlled corporations engaged in the supply and distribution of water and/or generation and transmission of electric power;

(d) All real property owned by duly registered cooperatives as provided for under R.A. No. 6938; and

(e) Machinery and equipment used for pollution control and environmental protection.

Except as provided herein, any exemption from payment of real property tax previously granted to, or presently enjoyed by, all persons, whether natural or juridical, including all government-owned or -controlled corporations are hereby withdrawn upon the effectivity of this Code.

The Court of Tax Appeals held that as a government-owned or controlled corporation, PFDA is subject to real property tax imposed by local government units having jurisdiction over its real properties pursuant to Section 232 of the Local Government Code. According to the Court of Tax Appeals, Section 193 of the Local Government Code withdrew all tax exemptions granted to government-owned or controlled corporations. Furthermore, Section 234 of the Local Government Code explicitly provides that any exemption from payment of real property tax granted to government-owned or controlled corporations have already been withdrawn upon the effectivity of the Local Government Code.

The ruling of the Court of Tax Appeals is anchored on the wrong premise that the PFDA is a government-owned or controlled corporation. On the contrary, this Court has already ruled that the PFDA is a government instrumentality and not a government-owned or controlled corporation.

In the 2007 case of Philippine Fisheries Development Authority v. Court of Appeals,6 the Court resolved the issue of whether the PFDA is a government-owned or controlled corporation or an instrumentality of the national government. In that case, the City of Iloilo assessed real property taxes on the Iloilo Fishing Port Complex (IFPC), which was managed and operated by PFDA. The Court held that PFDA is an instrumentality of the government and is thus exempt from the payment of real property tax, thus:

The Court rules that the Authority [PFDA] is not a GOCC but an instrumentality of the national government which is generally exempt from payment of real property tax. However, said exemption does not apply to the portions of the IFPC which the Authority leased to private entities. With respect to these properties, the Authority is liable to pay property tax. Nonetheless, the IFPC, being a property of public dominion cannot be sold at public auction to satisfy the tax delinquency.

x x x

Indeed, the Authority is not a GOCC but an instrumentality of the government. The Authority has a capital stock but it is not divided into shares of stocks. Also, it has no stockholders or voting shares. Hence it is not a stock corporation. Neither is it a non-stock corporation because it has no members.

The Authority is actually a national government instrumentality which is defined as an agency of the national government, not integrated within the department framework, vested with special functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all corporate powers, administering special funds, and enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a charter. When the law vests in a government instrumentality corporate powers, the instrumentality does not become a corporation. Unless the government instrumentality is organized as a stock or non-stock corporation, it remains a government instrumentality exercising not only governmental but also corporate powers.7 (Emphasis supplied)

This ruling was affirmed by the Court in a subsequent PFDA case involving the Navotas Fishing Port Complex, which is also managed and operated by the PFDA. In consonance with the previous ruling, the Court held in the subsequent PFDA case that the PFDA is a government instrumentality not subject to real property tax except those portions of the Navotas Fishing Port Complex that were leased to taxable or private persons and entities for their beneficial use.8

Similarly, we hold that as a government instrumentality, the PFDA is exempt from real property tax imposed on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex, except those portions which are leased to private persons or entities.

The exercise of the taxing power of local government units is subject to the limitations enumerated in Section 133 of the Local Government Code.9 Under Section 133(o)10 of the Local Government Code, local government units have no power to tax instrumentalities of the national government like the PFDA. Thus, PFDA is not liable to pay real property tax assessed by the Office of the City Treasurer of Lucena City on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex, except those portions which are leased to private persons or entities.

Besides, the Lucena Fishing Port Complex is a property of public dominion intended for public use, and is therefore exempt from real property tax under Section 234(a)11 of the Local Government Code. Properties of public dominion are owned by the State or the Republic of the Philippines.12 Thus, Article 420 of the Civil Code provides:

Art. 420. The following things are property of public dominion:

(1) Those intended for public use, such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and bridges constructed by the State, banks, shores, roadsteads, and others of similar character;

(2) Those which belong to the State, without being for public use, and are intended for some public service or for the development of the national wealth. (Emphasis supplied)

The Lucena Fishing Port Complex, which is one of the major infrastructure projects undertaken by the National Government under the Nationwide Fishing Ports Package, is devoted for public use and falls within the term “ports.” The Lucena Fishing Port Complex “serves as PFDA’s commitment to continuously provide post-harvest infrastructure support to the fishing industry, especially in areas where productivity among the various players in the fishing industry need to be enhanced.”13 As property of public dominion, the Lucena Fishing Port Complex is owned by the Republic of the Philippines and thus exempt from real estate tax.

WHEREFORE, we GRANT the petition. We SET ASIDE the Decision dated 9 May 2007 of the Court of Tax Appeals in C.T.A. EB No. 193. We DECLARE the Lucena Fishing Port Complex EXEMPT from real property tax imposed by the City of Lucena. We declare VOID all the real property tax assessments issued by the City of Lucena on the Lucena Fishing Port Complex managed by Philippine Fisheries Development Authority, EXCEPT for the portions that the Philippine Fisheries Development Authority has leased to private parties.

SO ORDERED.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA

Associate Justice

DIOSDADO M. PERALTA ROBERTO A. ABAD

Associate Justice Associate Justice

JOSE C. MENDOZA

Associate Justice

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Associate Justice

Chairperson

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, and the Division Chairperson’s Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

RENATO C. CORONA

Chief Justice

1Under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.

2Rollo, pp. 65-90. Penned by Associate Justice Juanito C. Castañeda, Jr., with Presiding Justice Ernesto D. Acosta and Associate Justices Lovell R. Bautista, Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, and Olga Palanca-Enriquez, concurring.

3Id. at 215-216.

4CTA rollo, pp. 60-62.

5Id. at 68-71.

6G.R. No. 169836, 31 July 2007, 528 SCRA 706.

7Id. at 710, 712-714.

8Philippine Fisheries Development Authority v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 150301, 2 October 2007, 534 SCRA 490.

9Manila International Airport Authority v. City of Pasay, G.R. No. 163072, 2 April 2009, 583 SCRA 234.

10Section 133(o) of the Local Government Code reads:

SECTION 133. Common Limitations on the Taxing Powers of the Local Government Units. – Unless otherwise provided herein, the exercise of the taxing powers of provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays shall not extend to the levy of the following:

x x x

(o) Taxes, fees or charges of any kind on the National Government, its agencies and instrumentalities, and local government units.

11Section 234. Exemptions from Real Property Tax. ‒ The following are exempted from payment of the real property tax:

(a) Real property owned by the Republic of the Philippines or any of its political subdivision except when the beneficial use thereof has been granted, for consideration or otherwise, to a taxable person;

12Manila International Airport Authority v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 155650, 20 July 2006, 495 SCRA 591, 644.

13Lucena Fish Port Complex, <http://www.pfda.da.gov.ph/lfpc.html> (visited 13 December 2010).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 200 other followers