Skip to content

Category: Law School

Case outline: Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas, Elizabeth Dimaano – G.R. No. 104768

After a PCGG search and seizure operation, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas and Elizabeth Dimaano are found to have acquired ill gotten wealth through a connection to President Ferdinand E. Marcos. The Sandiganbayan dismisses the case due to lack of evidence on the part of the Republic of the Philippines, PCGG jurisdiction, and the manner in which the search and seizure is conducted. The Republic takes the case to the Supreme Court.

Continue reading Case outline: Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas, Elizabeth Dimaano – G.R. No. 104768

Comments closed

Donations by Reason of Marriage

The Family Code of the Philippines specifically dedicates a whole chapter on the subject of “Donations by Reason of Marriage.” The chapter contains four articles which, like most law books, do not attempt to make the concept crystal clear, but focus directly on the “legal” side rather than explain first where the concept comes from or what it essentially is. This post provides illustrative examples, distinctions between ordinary donations and donations by reason of marriage, as well as its historical context.

Continue reading Donations by Reason of Marriage

Leave a Comment

Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

These Rules shall be known as “The Rules of Procedure for Environmental These Rules shall govern the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil actions before the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts involving enforcement or violations of environmental and other related laws.

Continue reading Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

3 Comments

Hernandez Versus Placer Dome Case Primer

The Hernandez versus Placer Dome case, as an illustrative example of the application of the Writ of Kalikasan, fails to elucidate. First of all, it strictly limits itself to the procedural aspects of the case. Second, it hides the factors that would have made sense of the technical exchanges between the parties. This post tries to supply the lacuna with with life-giving factual antecedents that may help understand the case.

Continue reading Hernandez Versus Placer Dome Case Primer

Leave a Comment

Parts of a Supreme Court Decision

In general, the essential parts of a good decision consist of the following: (1) statement of the case; (2) statement of facts; (3) issues or assignment of errors; (4) court ruling, in which each issue is, as a rule, separately considered and resolved; and, finally, (5) dispositive portion. The ponente may also opt to include an introduction or a prologue as well as an epilogue, especially in cases in which controversial or novel issues are involved.

Continue reading Parts of a Supreme Court Decision

1 Comment

Hongkong v. Olalia — G.R. No. 153675

For our resolution is the instant Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, seeking to nullify the two Orders of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8, Manila (presided by respondent Judge Felixberto T. Olalia, Jr.) issued in Civil Case No. 99-95773. These are: (1) the Order dated December 20, 2001 allowing Juan Antonio Muñoz, private respondent, to post bail; and (2) the Order dated April 10, 2002 denying the motion to vacate the said Order of December 20, 2001 filed by the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, represented by the Philippine Department of Justice (DOJ), petitioner. The petition alleges that both Orders were issued by respondent judge with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction as there is no provision in the Constitution granting bail to a potential extraditee.

Continue reading Hongkong v. Olalia — G.R. No. 153675

Comments closed

Mijares v. Ranada — G.R. No. 139325

Our martial law experience bore strange unwanted fruits, and we have yet to finish weeding out its bitter crop. While the restoration of freedom and the fundamental structures and processes of democracy have been much lauded, according to a significant number, the changes, however, have not sufficiently healed the colossal damage wrought under the oppressive conditions of the martial law period. The cries of justice for the tortured, the murdered, and the desaparecidos arouse outrage and sympathy in the hearts of the fair-minded, yet the dispensation of the appropriate relief due them cannot be extended through the same caprice or whim that characterized the ill-wind of martial rule. The damage done was not merely personal but institutional, and the proper rebuke to the iniquitous past has to involve the award of reparations due within the confines of the restored rule of law.

Continue reading Mijares v. Ranada — G.R. No. 139325

Comments closed

Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas, Elizabeth Dimaano – G.R. No. 104768

Republic of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas and Elizabeth Dimaano. G.R. No. 104768. July 21, 2003. Immediately upon her assumption to office following the successful EDSA Revolution, then President Corazon C. Aquino issued Executive Order No. 1 (EO No. 1) creating the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG). EO No. 1 primarily tasked the PCGG to recover all ill-gotten wealth of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates. EO No. 1 vested the PCGG with the power (a) to conduct investigation as may be necessary in order to accomplish and carry out the purposes of this order and the power (h) to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purpose of this order. Accordingly, the PCGG, through its then Chairman Jovito R. Salonga, created an AFP Anti-Graft Board (AFP Board) tasked to investigate reports of unexplained wealth and corrupt practices by AFP personnel, whether in the active service or retired.

Based on its mandate, the AFP Board investigated various reports of alleged unexplained wealth of respondent Major General Josephus Q. Ramas (Ramas). On 27 July 1987, the AFP Board issued a Resolution on its findings and recommendation on the reported unexplained wealth of Ramas.

Continue reading Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, Major General Josephus Q. Ramas, Elizabeth Dimaano – G.R. No. 104768

Comments closed