CASE

FACTS

RESOLUTION AND DOCTRINE

In the Matter of
the Plagiarism
Case of Justice
del Castillo

3 authors, no quotation
marks, generic reference etc

Court attorney / legal researcher accidentally deleted citation, no intent

to plagiarize
JUDICIAL WRITING

Administer justice

Consistency; uphold stare decisis

Malice is an element
ACADEMIC WRITING

Degree/award

Original

Intent an element
Dissenting Opinion of Justice Sereno:
Forms of Plagiarism
(1) Uncited data or information

By plagiarizing information that is not common

knowledge
(2) Uncited idea, whether a specific claim or general concept

Committed when distinctive ideas are plagiarized even

though you present them in a different order and in
different words, because they are uncited
(3) Unquoted but verbatim phrase or passage

Committed when you borrowed several distinctive

phrases verbatim, without quotation marks
(4) Uncited structure or organizing strategy

Committed when, though the words and details are

original you have, however, taken the structural
framework or outline directly from the source passage
even though again and again, your language differs
from your source and your invented examples are
original
JUDICIAL PLAGIARISM

Arises when judges author opinions that employ materials from

copyrighted sources such as law journals or books, but neglect to
give credit to the author
Note: Plagiarism may be done through negligence or recklessness without
intent to deceive

Hipos vs Bay

3 Informations (2 rape, 1 acts

of lasciviousness)
Mandamus to dismiss (judge)
Block quotations,
underscoring ours:
Cases with different context
and circumstance

Mandamus is never available to direct the exercise of judgment or

discretion in a particular way or the retraction or reversal of an action
already taken in the exercise of either. While a judge refusing to act on a
Motion to Withdraw can be compelled by a mandamus to act on the
same, he cannot be compelled to act in a certain way. Judge Bay did not
refuse to act on the Motion to Withdraw Informations; he had already
acted on it by denying the same.
Crespo vs Mogul: Once a criminal complaint or an information is filed in
court, any disposition or dismissal of the case or acquittal or conviction of
the accused rests within the jurisdiction, competence, and discretion of
the trial court. The trial court is the best and sole judge on what to do with
the case before it.
RULE 10.02 A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the
context of a paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel, or
the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision
already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact
that which has not been proved

Allied Banking vs
CA

Galadino refused transfer,

dismissed by Allied Banking;
misquote Dosch case

Both Glanidas counsel (Atty Durano) and the Labor Arbiter

(Almirante)misquoted the SCs ruling in Dosch vs NLRC. The phrase refusal
to obey a transfer order cannot be considered insubordination where
employee cited reason for said refusal, such as that of being away from
the family does not appear anywhere in the Dosch decision. Galanidas
counsel lifted the rroneous phrase from one of the italicized lines in the
syllabus of Dosch found in SCRA.

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

The syllabus of cases in official or unofficial reports of SC decisions

or resolutions is not the work of the Court, nor does it state the Courts
decision. It is simply the work of the reporter who gives his understanding of
the decision. A syllabus is not part of the Courts decisions. A counsel
should not cite a syllabus in place of the carefully considered text in the
decision of the Court.
They both substituted a portion of the Dosch decision with a
headnote from the SCRA syllabus, which they even underscored. In short,
they deliberately made the quote from the SCRA syllabus appear as the
words of the SC.
SC: We admonish them for what is at the least patent
carelessness, if not an outright attempt to mislead the parties and the
courts taking cognizance of this case. Rule 10.02 of the CPR mandates
that a lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the text of
decision or authority. It is the duty of all officers of the court to cite the
rulings and decisions of the SC accurately.
COMELEC vs
Noynay

1principal, 2 teachers partisan

political activity; judge
referred to COMELEC Division

Judge wrong, RTC has jurisdiction, first sentence of BP 129 Sec 32: except
in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of RTC, SB
Sec 268, OEC:
GR: RTCs have exclusive original jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal
action or proceedings for violation of the OEC
EXC: those relating to the offense of failure to register and failure to vote

In re Shoop

5 years, comity, PH common

law,, Max Shoop

SC: It is obvious that respondednt judge did not read at all the
opening sentence of Sec 32 of BP129, as amended.
Atty Jose Balbuena, Director IV of COMELE Law Department, must also
be admonished for his utter carelessness in his reference to the case
against Judge Juan Lavilles, Hr
o
Alberto Naldezo NOT Alberto Naldoza
o
And the case was not reported in Volume 245 but rather
Volume 254 of SCRA
o
In MR an Petition, Atty Balbuena deliberately made it appear
that certain quoted portions were the SCs finding even
though the quoted portion was just part of the memorandum
of the Court Administrator quoted in the decision

Permitted, Philippine legal system, Common law principles insofar as

they are not in conflict with existing local laws, custom and
institutions

No other foreign cases of laws and customs

As far as they are applicable to the circumstances of the

community
refer to principles when there are questions regarding codified statutes

Angara vs
COMELEC

Dec 3, Dec 8, Dec 9

Angara won a seat in the
National Assembly
NA Dec 3, 1935 proclaimed
Filed protest with Dec 8,
1935
Dec 9, 1935 EC Reso last
day to file protest
EC Purpose
EC composition

common law vs civil law

COURTS RESOLUTION

EC has the power to determine period

Proclamation from NA not needed

Judicial Supremacy

the power of judicial review under the Constitution

when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it

does not assert any superiority over the other departments it does not
in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the legislature, but only asserts
the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to
determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to
establish for the parties in an actual controversy the rights which that
instrument secures and guarantees to them.
Checks and balances

Making of laws
o Executive can veto or sign
o But legislative can still pass w/o executive

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

When the president enters into treaties

o Some need concurrence of the senate (2/3 vote)

Separation of powers
EC has the power under the constitution
In Re Cunanan

Bar Flunkers Act

Power of SC to regulate
admission to the bar;
Congress only alter or
supplement

Consti 1953-56
Usurpation of judiciarys authority by the legislative
Judiciary has the power to regulate admission to the bar
Congress only supplemental
The Constitution has not conferred on Congress and this Tribunal equal
responsibilities governing the admission to the practice of law. The primary
power and responsibility which the Constitution recognizes, continue to
reside in this court. Congress may repeal, alter and supplement the rules.
SEC 13, ART VIII, CONSTITUTION

SC shall have the power to promulgate rules concerning

pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, and the
admission to the practice of law. Said rules shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade and shall not diminish, increase or
modify substantive rights the existing laws on pleading, practice
and procedure are herby repealed as statutes and are declared
Rules of Courts, subject to the power of the SC to alter and modify
the same

The Congress shall have the power to repeal, alter or supplement

the rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure, and the
admission to the practice of law in the Philippines

SERRANO vs
GALLANT

Sameer vs
Cabiles

Chief officer 1400

(initially)
Second officer
(downgraded
employment) 1000
Gallant did not make him
Chief Officer
Refused to stay Second
Officer
Filed complaint with the
LA for constructive
dismissal
Claim 26K USD
LA Illegal dismissal 8k
( 3months + overtime
pay)
Basis: Sec 10 RA 8042
Sec. 10. Money Claims.x x x
In case of termination of
overseas employment without
just, valid or authorized cause
as defined by law or contract,
the workers shall be entitled to
the full reimbursement of his
placement fee with interest of
twelve percent (12%) per
annum, plus his salaries for the
unexpired portion of his
employment contract or for
three (3) months for every year
of the unexpired term,
whichever is less.

Migrant Workers Act

amendment reincorporated
unconstitutional provision

Sec 10, RA 8042 Unconstitutional; EPC, due process

Non-impairment clause not violated. Law deemed incorporated in the
contract
Self-executing: automatically acknowledged and observed without need
for any enabling legislation
The constitutional mandates of protection to labor and security of tenure
may be deemed as self-executing in the sense that these are
automatically acknowledged and observed without need for any
enabling legislation. However, to declare that the constitutional provisions
are enough to guarantee the full exercise of the rights embodied therein,
and the realization of ideals therein expressed, would be impractical, if not
unrealistic. The espousal of such view presents the dangerous tendency of
being overbroad and exaggerated. The guarantees of full protection to
labor and security of tenure, when examined in isolation, are facially
unqualified, and the broadest interpretation possible suggests a blanket
shield in favor of labor against any form of removal regardless of
circumstance. This interpretation implies an unimpeachable right to
continued employmenta utopian notion, doubtlessbut still hardly
within the contemplation of the framers. Subsequent legislation is still
needed to define the parameters of these guaranteed rights to ensure the
protection and promotion, not only the rights of the labor sector, but of the
employers as well. Without specific and pertinent legislation, judicial
bodies will be at a loss, formulating their own conclusion to approximate at
least the aims of the Constitution.

Unconstitutional
In the hierarchy of laws, the Constitution is supreme. No branch or office of
the government may exercise its powers in any manner inconsistent with
the Constitution, regardless of the existence of any law that supports such
exercise. The Constitution cannot be trumped by any other law. All laws
must be read in light of the Constitution. Any law that is inconsistent with it
is a nullity.

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

Manila Prince
Hotel vs GSIS

Sale of Manila Hotel

Corporation to Malaysian firm
Renong Berhad

A constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the

right conferred and the liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself,
so that they can be determined by an examination and construction of its
terms, and there is no language indicating that the subject is referred to
the legislature for action.

Filipino first policy

National Patrimony

Tanada vs Tuvera

Thus, when a law or a provision of law is null because it is inconsistent with

the Constitution, the nullity cannot be cured by reincorporation or
reenactment of the same or a similar law or provision. A law or provision of
law that was already declared unconstitutional remains as such unless
circumstances have so changed as to warrant a reverse conclusion.
HELD: GSIS accept matching bid of Manila Prince. Filipino First Policy,
Manila Hotel part of national patrimony.

writ of mandamus to compel

respondent public officials to
publish and/or cause to
publish various presidential
decrees, letters of instructions,
general orders,
proclamations, executive
orders, letters of
implementations and
administrative orders.

Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law or contract

violates any norm of the constitution that law or contract whether
promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or entered into
by private persons for private purposes is null and void and without any
force and effect. Thus, since the Constitution is the fundamental
paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed written in every
statute and contract.
Art. 2 of the Civil Code does not preclude the requirement of publication
in the Official Gazette, even if the law itself provides for the date of its
effectivity. The clear object of this provision is to give the general public
adequate notice of the various laws which are to regulate their actions
and conduct as citizens. Without such notice and publication, there would
be no basis for the application of the maxim ignoratia legis nominem
excusat. It would be the height of injustice to punish or otherwise burden a
citizen for the transgression of a law which he had no notice whatsoever,
not even a constructive one.
The publication of all presidential issuances "of a public nature" or "of
general applicability" is mandated by law. Obviously, presidential decrees
that provide for fines, forfeitures or penalties for their violation or otherwise
impose a burden or. the people, such as tax and revenue measures, fall
within this category.
Other presidential issuances which apply only to particular persons or class
of persons such as administrative and executive orders need not be
published on the assumption that they have been circularized to all
concerned.

Tawang MultiPurpose
Cooperative vs
La Trinindad
Water District

Sec 47 PD 198: No franchise

shall be granted to any other
person or agency unless and
except to the extent that the
board of directors consents
thereto subject to the review
by the administration.
TMPC granted Certificate of
Public Convenience
LTWD: exclusive franchise
pursuant to Sec 47

Sec 11, Art XII

No such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character
or for a longer period than 50 years
In case of conflict between the Constitution and a statute, the
Constitution always prevails because the Constitution is the basic law to
which all other laws must conform to. The duty of the Court is to uphold the
Constitution and to declare void all laws that do not conform to it.
It is basic that if a law or an administrative rule violates any norm of the
Constitution, that issuance is null and void and has no effect. The
Constitution is the basic law to which all laws must conform; no act shall be
valid if it conflicts with the Constitution
The Constitution is the fundamental and paramount law of the nation to
which all other laws must conform and in accordance with which all
private rights must be determined and all public authority administered.
Laws that do not conform to the Constitution shall be stricken down for
being unconstitutional
There is no "reasonable and legitimate" ground to violate the Constitution.
The Constitution should never be violated by anyone. Right or wrong, the
President, Congress, the Court, the BOD and the LWUA have no choice
but to follow the Constitution. Any act, however noble its intentions, is void
if it violates the Constitution. This rule is basic.

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

De Castro vs JBC

This is a consolidated case

which assails the
constitutionality of the action
of former President Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo by
appointing a Chief Justice 7
days after the Presidential
election in 2010

Prohibition under Sec 15, Art VIII does not extend to appointments in the
Judiciary
Valenzuela case: overruled the appointment of two RTC judges
^ reversed by the SC
Brion, J. (Separate Opinion)
The principle of stare decisis applies only to action in all future SIMILAR
cases and to none other. Where ample room for distinction exists, then
stare decisis does not apply.
SC ruling are not written in stone so that they will remain unerased and
applicable for all times.

Philippine Health
Care Providers vs
CIR

Insurance business (minute

resolutions)

Florentino vs
Rivera

fallo

A ruling in one era may be declared by the Court at some future time to
be no longer true and should thus be abandoned and changed
IS THE COURT BOUND BY A MINUTE RESOLUTION IN ANOTHER CASE?

Petitioner raises another interesting issue in its MR: whether SC is bound

by the CA ruling in CIR v PNB that a health care agreement of
Philamcare Health Systems is not an insurance contract for purposes
of the DST

When a minute resolution denies or dismisses a petition for failure to

comply with the formal and substantive requirements, the challenged
decision, together with its findings of fact and legal conclusions, are
deemed sustained. What what is its effect on the other cases?
o
Re: same subject matter and same issues concerning the
same parties = RES JUDICATA
o
Other parties or another subject matter (even with the same
parties and issues is involved) = THE MINUTE RESOLUTION IS
NOT BINDING PRECEDENT

A decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and

unalterable

A final judgment may no longer be modified in any respect, even if

the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact or
law

Once a judgment becomes final and executory, it can no longer be

disturbed no matter how erroneous it may be and nothing further can
be done therewith except to execute it.

The operative part in every decision is the dispositive portion of the

fallo.

Where there is a conflict between the fallow and the body of the
decision, THE FALLO CONTROLS

The fallow is the final order while the opinion is merely a statement,
ordering nothing.

OPINON
o
Informal expression of the views of the court
o
Cannot prevail against the courts final order or decision
o
Forms no part of the judgment

While in the body of the decision, order or resolution might create

some ambiguity in the manner of the courts reasoning
preponderates, it is the dispositive portion thereof that finally invests
rights upon the parties, sets conditions for the exercise of those rights,
and imposes the corresponding duties or obligations

It is the dispositive part of the judgment that actually settles and

declares the rights and obligations of the parties, finally, definitively,
and authoritatively, notwithstanding the existence of inconsistent
statements in the body that may tend to confuse.
GUIDELINES ON THE CONTENTS OF A PROPER DISPOSITIVE PORTION (Velarde
vs SJS)
Civil case and special civil action

Granted/denied

Specific relief granted

Costs
TEST OF COMPLETENESS

parties should know their rights and obligations

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

Pagsibigan vs
People

Deed of conditional sale

Ramos vs Pepsi
Cola Bottling
Company

Vehicularaccident, Andres
Bonifacio, personnel
manager testimony

Bayan Muna vs
COMELEC

Rame Statute, US-RP nonsurrender agreedment

they should know how to execute the decision under alternative

contingencies
there should be no need for further proceedings to dispose of the
issues
the case should be terminated by according the proper relief
It is to the interest of the public that there should be an end to
litigation by the parties over a subject fully and fairly adjudicated.
RES JUDICATA
o
Republicae ut sit litium; public policy and necessity (which
makes it to the interest of the State that there shoulf be an
end to litigation)
o
Nemo debet bis vexari et eadem causa; the hardship on the
individual that he should be vexed twice for the same cause
Petition for review under Rule 45 should cover only questions of law.
Questions of fact are not reviewable
QUESTION OF LAW
o
When the doubt centers on what the law is on a certain
set of facts
o
If the issue raised is capable of being resolved without
the need of reviewing the probative value of the
evidence
o
The issue to be resolved must be limited to determining
what the law is on a certain set of facts
QUESTION OF FACT
o
When the doubt centers on the truth or falsity of the
alleged facts
o
Once the issue invites a review of the evidence, the
question posed is one of fact.
Whether Pagsibigan received P215k from Cabasal is a question of fact
o
It can only be resolved after reviewing the probative
value of the evidence
o
Thus it is not reviewable
GR: The factual findings of the TC, esp when affirmed by the CA are
binding on the Court
EXC:
o
Grave abuse of discretion
o
Finding grounded on speculations
o
Inference made is manifestly mistaken
o
When the judgment of CA is based on a
misapprehension of facts
o
When the factual findings are conflicting
o
When the CA went beyond the issues of the case and its
findings are contrary to the admissions of the parties
o
When the CA overlooked undisputed facts which, if
properly considered, would justify a different conclusion
o
When the findings of the CA are contrary to those of TC
o
When the findings of CA are premised on the absence of
evidence are contradicted by the evidence on record.
None of the circumstances are present
For a question to be one of law, it must involve no examination of the
probative value of the evidence presented by the litigants or any of
them
QUESTION OF LAW
o
When the doubt or difference arises as to what the law is
on a certain state of facts
QUESTION OF FACT
o
When doubt arises as to the truth or the falsehood of
alleged facts
Pepsi exercised due diligence

The Agreement Not in Contravention of the Rome Statute

Contrary to petitioners pretense, the Agreement does not contravene or
undermine, nor does it differ from, the Rome Statute. Far from going

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

against each other, one complements the other. As a matter of fact, the
principle of complementarity underpins the creation of the ICC.As aptly
pointed out by respondents and admitted by petitioners, the jurisdiction of
the ICC is to be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions of the
signatory states.
Signatory vs State-Party
Signing vs Ratification (Senate concurrence)
Moreover, under international law, there is a considerable difference
between a State-Party and a signatory to a treaty. Under the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties, a signatory state is only obliged to
refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty;
whereas a State-Party, on the other hand, is legally obliged to follow all
the provisions of a treaty in good faith.
In the instant case, it bears stressing that the Philippines is only a signatory
to the Rome Statute and not a State-Party for lack of ratification by the
Senate. Thus, it is only obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the
object and purpose of the Rome Statute. Any argument obliging the
Philippines to follow any provision in the treaty would be premature.
White Light Corp
vs City of Manila

Declaratory relief; ordinance;

wash up tares and short time
admission

Ordinance invalid, there are less oppressive means to achieve the goal
without curtailing the rights of the people granted by the Constitution.
(void for being overbroad)

Substantive requirements of a valid ordinance:

Must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
Must not be unfair or oppressive
Must not be partial or discriminatory

Must not prohibit but regulate trade

Must be general and consistent with public policy

Must not be unreasonable

Commissioner of
Customs vs
Hypermix Feeds

7% for feed grade

Regulation invalid for failure to comply with the requirements of the

admin code. Also violated EPC.
A legislative rule is in the nature of subordinate legislation, designed to
implement a primary legislation by providing the details thereof. xxx
In addition such rule must be published.
On the other hand, interpretative rules are designed to provide
guidelines to the law which the administrative agency is in charge of
enforcing.
Accordingly, in considering a legislative rule a court is free to make
three inquiries: (delegated power from Congress; court cannot look
into the wisdom)

whether the rule is within the delegated authority of the

administrative agency

whether it is reasonable

whether it was issued pursuant to proper procedure.

But the court is not free to substitute its judgment as to the desirability
or wisdom of the rule for the legislative body, by its delegation of
administrative judgment, has committed those questions to
administrative judgments and not to judicial judgments. In the case of
an interpretative rule, the inquiry is not into the validity but into the
correctness or propriety of the rule.
As a matter of power a court, when confronted with an interpretative
rule, is free to

give the force of law to the rule

go to the opposite extreme and substitute its judgment

give some intermediate degree of authoritative weight to the

interpretative rule.
Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco

Silverio vs
Republic

Rommel Jacinto to Mely;

change of name and sex

A change of name is a privilege and not a right. It may be allowed in

cases where the name is ridiculous, tainted with dishonor, or difficult to
pronounce or write; a nickname is habitually used; or if the change will
avoid confusion. The petitioners basis of the change of his name is that he
intends his first name compatible with the sex he thought he transformed
himself into thru surgery. The Court says that his true name does not
prejudice him at all, and no law allows the change of entry in the birth
certificate as to sex on the ground of sex reassignment. The Court denied
the petition.
Changes sought by Silverio will have serious legal and public policy
consequences. To grant this petition filed by Silverio will greatly alter the
laws on marriage and family relations. Second, there will be major
changes in statutes that underscore the public policy in relation to
women.
Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a historical record of the
facts as they existed at the time of birth. Thus, the sex of a person is
determined at birth, visually done by the birth attendant (the physician or
midwife) by examining the genitals of the infant. Considering that there is
no law legally recognizing sex reassignment, the determination of a
persons sex made at the time of his or her birth, if not attended by error, is
immutable.

Reyes vs Lim

Contract to sell parcel of

land, rescission

If the legislature intends to confer on a person who has undergone sex

reassignment the privilege to change his name and sex to conform with his
reassigned sex, it has to enact legislation laying down the guidelines in turn
governing the conferment of that privilege. It might be theoretically
possible for this Court to write a protocol on when a person may be
recognized as having successfully changed his sex. However, this Court
has no authority to fashion a law on that matter, or on anything else. The
Court cannot enact a law where no law exists. It can only apply or
interpret the written word of its coequal branch of government, Congress.
The instant case, the Supreme Court held that if this was a case where
there is hiatus in the law and in the Rules of Court. If this case was left
alone, the hiatus will result in unjust enrichment to Reyes at the expense of
Lim. Here the court excercised equity jurisdiction.The purpose of the
exercise of equity jurisdiction in this case is to prevent unjust enrichment
and to ensure restitution so that substantial justice may be attained in
cases where the prescribed or customary forms of ordinary law are
inadequate.
The Supreme Court also state that rescission is possible only when the
person demanding rescission can return whatever he may be obliged to
restore. A court of equity will not rescind a contract unless there is
restitution, that is, the parties are restored to the status quo ante.
In this case, it was just, equitable and proper for the trial court to order the
deposit of the P10 million down payment. The decision of the Court of
Appeals.was affirmed.
The hiatus may also imperil restitution, which is a precondition to the
rescission of the Contract to Sell that Reyes himself seeks. This is not a case
of equity overruling a positive provision of law or judicial rule for there is
none that governs this particular case. This is a case of silence or
insufficiency of the law and the Rules of Court. In this case, Article 9 of the
Civil Code expressly mandates the courts to make a ruling despite the
silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws. This calls for the application
of equity, which fills the open spaces
in the law.
Thus, the trial court in the exercise of its equity jurisdiction may validly order
the deposit of the P10 million down payment in court. The purpose of the
exercise of equity jurisdiction in this case is to prevent unjust enrichment
and to ensure restitution. Equity jurisdiction aims to do complete justice in
cases where a court of law is unable to adapt its judgments to the special
circumstances of a case because of the inflexibility of its statutory or legal
jurisdiction. Equity is the principle by which substantial justice may be
attained in cases where the prescribed or customary forms of ordinary law
are inadequate.

Regalado 2016 | Legal Research Midterms| Atty Cervantes - Poco