Skip to main content

ATTYtude

Search This Blog

on September 03, 2020

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

TOPIC: TERRITORIALITY AND EXTRA-TERRITORIALITY

GIST:

~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~♡~

FACTS:

ISSUE:

RULING:

ADDITIONAL INFO:

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

ORIEL MAGNO, petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents; G.R. No. 96132 June 26, 1992

CUE: accused acquitted of BP 22 for deceitful means of financer of warranty deposit TOPIC: Malum prohibitum as exception to the requirement of mens rea CRIME: 4 counts of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 Accused: petitioner ORIEL MAGNO FACTS: 3 checks - P5,038.43 1 check - P10,076.87 1. Oriel Magno, lacking fund in acquiring complete set of equipment to make his car repair shop operational, approached Corazon Teng, Vice President of Mancor Industries. 2. VP Teng referred Magno to LS Finance and Management Corporation, advising its Vice President, Joey Gomez, that Mancor was willing to supply the pieces of equipment needed if LS Finance could accommodate Magno and and provide him credit facilities. 3. The arrangement went on requiring Magno to pay 30% of the total amount of the equipment as warranty deposit but Magno couldn't afford to pay so he requested VP Gomez to look for third party who could lend him that amount. 4. Without Magno's knowledge, Corazon was the one w...

Albenson Enterprises v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 88694, 11 January 1993

Topic: Art. 19, 20, & 21 FACTS: Petitioner Albenson Enterprises Corporation delivered to Guaranteed Industries, Inc. at Baltao Building mild steel plates which the latter ordered and as part of the payment, a bouncing check was issued by one “Eugenio Baltao”. Petitioner, in a sincere attempt to collect the sum of money due them, filed a criminal complaint against private respondent Eugenio S. Baltao after the latter refused to make good the amount of the bouncing check despite demand. However, there was a mistake of identity as there were two “Eugenio Baltaos” conducting business in the same building – Eugenio S. Baltao and his son, Eugenio Baltao III. It was found that the signature of the check was not of Eugenio S. Baltao and because of the alleged unjust filing of a criminal case against him, respondent Baltao filed a complaint for damages anchored on Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code against petitioners. ISSUE: Whether or not the principle of abuse of rights (Article 1...

Pozar vs. CA (G.R. No. L-62439)

TOPIC: bribery Facts: The petitioner is Gregory James Pozar. The Respondent is the Honorable Court of Appeals. In the case at bar, the petitioner was an applicant for probation. He went to the office looking for a Probation Officer named Danilo Ocampo. Since the latter was not around at that time. Two days later, he was able to give such envelope to the said Ocampo which contained some official papers connected with the appellant’s application for probation and attached thereto was a P100 bill. Such bill was given under the circumstance which would make the receiving public officer liable for bribery. He was then charged for violating the Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code and was found to be guilty. Issue: Is the petitioner liable for Corruption of Public Officials. Held: The Supreme Court said that the circumstance attending the alleged commission of the crime would not show that the petitioner is guilty. The said petitioner is a foreigner, and is unfamiliar with the said transact...

Powered by Blogger