PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE

The test by which to determine the existence of negligence in a particular case may be stated as follows: Did the defendant in doing the alleged negligent act use that person would have used in the same situation? If not, then he is guilty of negligence. The law here in effect adopts the standard supposed to be supplied by the imaginary conduct of the discreet paterfamilias of the Roman law. The existence of negligence in a given case is not determined by reference to the personal judgment of the actor in the situation before him. The law considers what would be reckless, blameworthy, or negligent in the man of ordinary intelligence and prudence and determines liability by that. The question as to what would constitute the conduct of a prudent man in a given situation must of course be always determined in the light of human experience and in view of the facts involved in the particular case. Abstract speculations cannot here be of much value but this much can be profitably said: Rea

The emphasized portion of Sec. 2 which focuses on the State entering into different types of agreements for the exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources with entities who are deemed Filipino due to 60 percent ownership of capital is pertinent to this case, since the issues are centered on the utilization of our country’s natural resources or specifically, mining. Thus, there is a need to ascertain the nationality of petitioners since, as the Constitution so provides, such agreements are only allowed corporations or associations "at least 60 percent of such capital is owned by such citizens." The deliberations in the Records of the 1986 Constitutional Commission shed light on how a citizenship of a corporation will be determined: Mr. BENNAGEN: Did I hear right that the Chairman’s interpretation of an independent national economy is freedom from undue foreign control? What is the meaning of undue foreign control? MR. VILLEGAS: Undue foreign control is

Section 1. Covered corporations: All corporations engaged in identified areas of activities or enterprises specifically reserved, wholly or partly, to Philippine Nationals by the Constitution, the FIA and other existing laws, amendments thereto and IRRs of said laws except as may otherwise be provided therein. Section 2. All covered corporations shall, at all times, observe the constitutional or statutory ownership requirement. For purposes of determining compliance therewith, the required percentage of Filipino ownership shall be applied to BOTH : [1] The total number of outstanding shares of stock entitled to vote in the election of directors; AND [2] The total number of outstanding shares of stock, whether or not entitled to vote in the election of directors. (SEC Memorandum Circular No. 8 dated 20 May 2013)

The Constitution expressly declares as State policy the development of an economy “effectively controlled” by Filipinos. Consistent with such State policy, the Constitution explicitly reserves the ownership and operation of public utilities to Philippine nationals, who are defined in the Foreign Investments Act of 1991 as Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least 60 percent of whose capital with voting rights belongs to Filipinos. The FIA’s implementing rules explain that “[f]or stocks to be deemed owned and held by Philippine citizens or Philippine nationals, mere legal title is not enough to meet the required Filipino equity. Full beneficial ownership of the stocks, coupled with appropriate voting rights is essential.” In effect, the FIA clarifies, reiterates and confirms the interpretation that the term “capital” in Section 11, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution refers to shares with voting rights, as well as with full beneficial ownership. This is precisely beca

Regarding the exploitation, development and utilization of natural resources via co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution says that only Filipino citizens or corporations whose capital stock is at least 60% owned by Filipinos can qualify to exploit natural resources. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the FULL CONTROL and supervision of the State. The State may DIRECTLY  undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least SIXTY PER CENT

A corporation shall be considered a Filipino corporation if there is no doubt regarding Filipino ownership of its capital stock with at least 60% and no doubt regarding its 60-40 Filipino-alien equity ownership. Therefore, its shareholdings in another corporation shall be considered to be of Filipino nationality when computing the percentage of Filipino equity of that second corporation. (SEC Opinion dated 6 November 1989; DOJ Opinion No. 18, s. 1989; SEC Opinion dated 23 November 1993)

This bill is intended to correct the existing treatment of an LLB or JD degree as being just equivalent to an undergraduate degree. (Hon. Belaro, Salvador Jr. B. - 1-ANG EDUKASYON) Please see the full text below.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED), in a strongly-worded press release, disagrees with the recent resolution issued by the Legal Education Board (LEB) regarding the treatment of law degrees as doctorate. It appears from this press release that CHED is invoking its jurisdiction over graduate schools and is of the opinion that "basic law degrees" cannot be treated equal to doctor's degrees.

Senator Joel Villanueva welcomed on Thursday the signing into law of his bill which allows employees in the private sector to telecommute or work-from-home. RA 11165 or An Act Institutionalizing Telecommuting as an Alternative Work Arrangement for Employees in the Private Sector encourages employers to adopt telecommuting - a work arrangement that allows an employee to work from an alternative workplace with the use of telecommunication and/or computer technologies. While the adoption of the work-from-home scheme will remain as employers' prerogative based on a mutual agreement between the employer and the employee, Villanueva stressed that the telecommuting program should not be less than the minimum labor standards set by law including that for health and safety of workers, schedule and workloads, work hours and social security. "We thank the President for supporting our bill that will promote our workers' right to work-life balance and flexible work arrangement,&

Like succession in civil law, estate tax requires the death of a person. Corporations do not die in this sense. Hence, only individuals are liable to pay estate tax; they are resident citizens, non‐resident citizens, resident aliens and non-resident aliens. Domestic and foreign corporations are subject only to donor's tax and not to estate tax because it is not capable of death but is capable of donating its property.

The properties and rights are transferred to the successors at the time of death. (Article 777, Civil Code of the Philippines) The statute in force at the time of death of the decedent governs the imposition of the estate tax. The estate tax accrues as of the death of the decedent. The accrual of the tax is distinct from the obligation to pay the same. Under Revenue Regulation 12-2018, an estate tax return must be filed within one year from death and the rule on payment is pay-as-you-file, except when extension, installment or partial disposition is granted.

Resolution No. 2019-406 of the Legal Education Board has resolved that law degrees such as Bachelor of Laws and Juris Doctor be considered equivalent to doctor's degrees for purposes of appointment, employment, ranking and compensation.

[ NO RECOMMENDED CITATION ] PJP UNDOCKETED : This content is yet to be peer reviewed and has not yet received any favorable recommendation for citation. It may or may not be queued up for citation recommendation or peer review. Caution is advised. CONTACT US : For immediate action on requests, comments, concerns, suggestions, and other forms of feedback, please message us on Facebook at www.m.me/projectjuris . The rules providing for pre-trial discovery of testimony, pre-trial inspection of documentary evidence and other tangible things, and the examination of property and person, was an important innovation in the rules of procedure. The promulgation of this group of rules satisfied the long-felt need for a legal machinery in the courts to supplement the pleadings for the purpose of disclosing the real points of dispute between the parties and affording an adequate factual basis in preparation for trial (Fortune Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108119, Janua

The Pasay RTC and the Court of Appeals are both correct insofar as they ruled that the amount of support is by no means permanent. In Advincula vs. Advincula, we held that another action for support could be filed again by the same plaintiff notwithstanding the fact that the previous case for support filed against the same defendant was dismissed. We further held in said case that: ...Judgment for support does not become final. The right to support is of such nature that its allowance is essentially provisional; for during the entire period that a needy party is entitled to support, his or her alimony may be modified or altered, in accordance with his increased or decreased needs, and with the means of the giver. It cannot be regarded as subject to final determination. There is no merit to the claim of Jose that the compromise agreement between him and Adriana, as approved by the Makati RTC in the case for voluntary dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains, is a bar to any fur

Here are 51 topics that have been frequently asked in the bar examination on remedial law. This is according to Justice Japar B. Dimaampao. As can be seen, there are two photos below. To download them, right click (or tap and hold on mobile phones) and click "Save image as" (or "Download" on phones).

An amended pleading SUPERSEDES the pleading that it amends. However, admissions in superseded pleadings may be received in evidence against the pleader; and claims or defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived.  (Rule 10, Sec. 8. Effect of amended pleadings. Rules of Court) As can be noted, there are admissions in the original pleadings. Now, what happens to such admissions in said pleadings? They cease to be judicial admissions. Thus, they are to be considered as extrajudicial admissions and may be proved by the party relying thereon by formal offer in evidence of such original pleading. (Ching vs. CA, G.R. No. 110844, April 27, 2000)

The law on contracts has 117 provisions. However, it is an open secret that there are only five basic things to keep in mind when studying contracts. All other provisions (Articles 1305 to 1422) are either explanations or exceptions to these five things. First, what are these five things we are talking about? They are: (1) obligatory force of obligations arising from contracts; (2) relativity of contracts; (3) consensuality of contracts; (4) autonomy of contracts; and (5) mutuality of contracts. These are the five general principles governing contracts. Below is a short discussion of each principle. Also shown below are provisions under the law on contracts under the Civil Code of the Philippines arranged in such a way that it shows under which of these five general principles each provision falls. IMPORTANT NOTE: At the end of this post, there is a two-hour video explaining contracts law. We believe said video is useful and we highly recommend that you take time watching. &

This is a continuation of "Just 5 things to keep in mind re contracts law." If you want to read it again (go back), go to: https://www.projectjurisprudence.com/2019/01/just-5-things-to-keep-in-mind-re-contracts-law.html. IMPORTANT NOTE:   This article is under construction. More contents will be inserted soon. Thank you for bearing with us. <3 IMPORTANT NOTE:   At the end of this post, there is a two-hour video explaining contracts law. We believe said video is useful and we highly recommend that you take time watching. Article 1318. There is no contract unless the following requisites concur: (1) Consent of the contracting parties; (2) Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract; and (3) Cause of the obligation which is established. [1] CONSENT Article 1319. Consent is manifested by the meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract. The offer must be certain and the acceptance absolute.

The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the questions calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally. (Section 1 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court)

There is no presumption of legitimacy of a child born after three hundred days following the dissolution of the marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his allegation. (Section 4Rule 131 of the Rules of Court)

G.R. No. L-6870. May 24, 1954: The phrase "notorious negligence" has been held to be tantamount to "gross negligence", which, in turn, has been defined as follows: Gross negligence is define to be the want of even slight care and diligence. (Mobile and M. R. Co. vs. Aschcraft [1872] 48 Ala., 15.) By gross negligence is meant "such entire want of care as to raise a presumption that the person in fault is conscious of the probable consequences of carelessness, and is indifferent, or worse, to the danger of injury to person or property of others." ... The negligence must amount to a reckless disregard of the safety of person or property." (Wall vs. Cameron [1882] 6 Colo., 275; see, also, The Law Governing Labor Disputes in the Philippines by Francisco, 2nd ed., p. 877.)

Failure to do what is required of you; this is what negligence means. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. (G.R. No. 73998) The diligence with which the law (or contract) requires an individual to at all times govern his conduct varies with the nature of the situation in which he is placed and the importance of the act which he is to perform must be observed. Failure to do this, there is negligence. (G.R. No. 159617) To determine whether there has been negligence by the defendant, there is a two-step analysis that may be used: [1] What level of diligence does the law (or contract) and the circumstances of the case required of the actor? [2] Has the actor acted in accordance with the level of care required by law (or contract) and the circumstances surrounding the case? In one ca

Art. 1173. The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds with the circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph 2, shall apply. If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be observed in the performance, that which is expected of a good father of a family shall be required. (Civil Code of the Philippines) Law or contract may require a different level of care. For example, parties may stipulate that no care (zero level of care) is required (which almost never happens). An example of a higher level of care required by law is that required from common carriers; they are expected to comply with their obligation to deliver persons or goods from one place to another with extraordinary diligence.

The following are elements of quasi-delict: [1] The plaintiff has suffered damage and injury (damnum et injuria, meaning a violation of right and a harm, physical or otherwise, as a result of such violation); [2] An act or omission on the part of the defendant has resulted in such damage and injury. Authors say that the act or omission must be negligent in nature, considering that Article 2176 requires "fault or negligence"; and [3] There is a causal connection of the cause and effect between the fault/negligence of the defendant and the damage and injury suffered by the plaintiff.