Hasegawa v.Kitamura

Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a judicial proceeding is conferred by the sovereign authority which establishes and organizes the court. It is given only by law and in the manner prescribed by law. It is further determined by the allegations of the complaint irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the claims asserted therein. In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three consecutive phases are involved: jurisdiction, choice of law, and recognition and enforcement of judgments. Corresponding to these phases are the following questions: 1. Where can or should litigation be initiated? (Jurisdiction)
2. Which law will the court apply? (Choice of Law?)
3. Where can the resulting judgment be enforced? (Enforcement)

Jimenez vs. Cañizares

G.R. No. L-12790 – 109 Phil 273 – Civil Law – Persons and Family Relations – Grounds for Annulment of Marriage – Impotency Joel Jimenez and Remedios Cañizares are husband and wife. Joel later filed for annulment on grounds that Remedios is impotent because her genitals were too small for copulation and such was already…

People vs. Bandian

PEOPLE vs. BANDIAN G.R. No. 45186 September 30, 1936 Infanticide, Article 12 Exempting Circumstances FACTS: At About 7 in the morning of January 31, 1936, Valentine Aguilar, the apellant’s neighbor, saw the appelant go to the thicket about four or five brazas from her house, apparently to respond to a call of nature because it…

Ang Ladlad LGBT vs. COMELEC

ANG LADLAD LGBT PARTY represented herein  by its  Chair,  DANTON  REMOTO,  Petitioner,  versus-  COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,  Respondent. G.R. No. 190582, EN BANC, April 8, 2010, DEL CASTILLO, J. Rather than relying on religious belief, the government must act for secular purposes and in ways that have primarily secular effects. Here, Ang Ladlad has sufficiently demonstrated…

Air Canada vs. CIR

AIR CANADA, Petitioner, -versus- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. G.R.  No.  169507,  SECOND DIVISION,  January 11,  2016,  LEONEN,  J. The Philippines “adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land.” Hence, pursuant to Article 8 of the Republic of the Philippines-CanadaTax Treaty, Air Canada may only be imposed…

Magallona vs. Ermita

PROF. MERLIN M. MAGALLONA vs EDUARDO ERMITA G.R No.  187167,  July  16,  2011,  Carpio RA 9522 is a Statutory Tool to Demarcate the Country’s Maritime Zones and Continental Shelf Under UNCLOS III, not to Delineate Philippine Territory. FACTS: R.A. 3046 was passed demarcating the maritime baselines of the Philippines. After five decades, RA 9552 was…

Lambino vs. COMELEC

RAUL L. LAMBINO and ERICO B. AUMENTADO, TOGETHER WITH 6,327,952 REGISTERED VOTERS v. COMELEC G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006, CARPIO, J. Two essential elements must be present: the people must author and sign the entire proposal and it must be embodied in a petition. These are present only if the full text of the…

Santiago vs. COMELEC

MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO, ALEXANDER PADILLA, and MARIA ISABEL ONGPIN v. Comelec, JESUS DELFIN, ALBERTO & CARMEN PEDROSA, as founding members of PIRMA G.R.  No.  127325,  March  19,  1997,  DAVIDE,  JR.,  J. Section 2 of Article XVII of the Constitution is not self-executory. While the Constitution has recognized or granted that right, the people cannot exercise…

Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS

MANILA PRINCE HOTEL vs. GSIS, MANILA HOTEL CORPORATION, COMMITTEE ON PRIVATIZATION, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNMENT CORPORATE COUNSEL G.R.  No.  122156,  February 3,  1997,  BELLOSILLO,  J. Adhering to the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, the subject constitutional provision is, as it should be, impliedly written in the bidding rules issued by respondent GSIS, lest the bidding rules…

Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, et al.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, MAJOR GENERAL JOSEPHUS Q. RAMAS and ELIZABETH DIMAANO, Respondents. G.R. No. 104768; July 21, 2003 En Banc Ponente: Carpio The Bill of Rights under the 1973 Constitution was not operative during the interregnum. However, the protection accorded to individuals under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and…

Pamatong vs. COMELEC

Pamatong vs. Commission on Elections GR No. 161872 April 13, 2004 FACTS: When the petitioner, Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong, filed his Certificate of Candidacy for Presidency, the Commision on Elections (COMELEC) refused to give the petition its due course. Pamatong requested a case for reconsideration. However, the COMELEC again denied his request. The COMELEC declared…

Pamatong vs. COMELEC

FACTS:  Petitioner Pamatong filed his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for President. Respondent COMELEC declared petitioner and 35 others as nuisance candidates who could not wage a nationwide campaign and/or are not nominated by a political party or are not supported by a registered political party with a national constituency. Pamatong filed a Petition For Writ of…

PLDT vs. NTC

PLDT vs. NTC GR 88404, 18 October 1990; En Banc, Melencio-Herrera (J) Facts: On 22 June 1958, RA 2090 was enacted granting Felix Alberto & Co. (later ETCI) a franchise to establish radio stations for domestic and transoceanic telecommunications. On 13 May 1987, ETCI filed an application with the NTC for the issuance of a…

PLDT vs. NTC

Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. vs National Telecommunications Commission190 SCRA 717 [GR No. 88404 October 18, 1990] Facts: On June 22, 1958, Republic Act No. 2090, was enacted otherwise known as “An Act Granting Felix Alberto and Company, Incorporated, a franchise to establish radio stations for domestic and transoceanic telecommunications.” Felix Alberto & Co. Inc. was…

Marine Radio Communications vs. Reyes

MARINE RADIO COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES INC. vs. REYES Petitioners are self-described enterpreneurs. They provide ship to ship and shore to shore public marine coastal radio stations. In July, DTC unveiled their own system (SOLAS) to ensure the safety of lives at sea. It was set to provide the same services free of charge.…