Chavez vs. Romulo G.R. No. 157036‚ June 9‚ 2004A mere license is always revocable FACTS: This case is about the ban on the carrying of firearms outside of residence in order to deter the rising crime rates. Petitioner questions the ban as a violation of his right to property ISSUE: Whether or not the revocation of permit to carry firearms is unconstitutional and Whether or not the right to carry firearms is a vested property right HELD: Petitioner cannot find solace to the above-quoted
Premium Law United States Constitution Property law
Business Law Kikuchi‚ Nikka Lei N. October 14‚ 2014 Cuadra v. Monfort Case Digest Statement of the facts: I. Maria Teresa Cuadra and Maria Teresa Monfort were classmates in Grade Six at the Mabini Elementary School in Bacolod City. On July 9‚ 1962 their teacher assigned them‚ together with three other classmates‚ to weed the grass in the school premises. While thus engaged Maria Teresa Monfort found a plastic headband‚ an ornamental object commonly worn by young girls
Free Logic Parent Mother
Lopez V. Orosa‚ Jr. and Plaza Theatre Inc. G.R. No. L-10817-18 Facts: Enrique Lopez‚ doing business under the trade name of Lopez-Castillo Sawmill‚ was invited by Vicente Orosa‚ Jr. to make an investment in the theatre business namely Plaza Theatre Inc. Lopez expressed his unwillingness to invest‚ however agreed to supply lumber necessary for the construction of the theatre with the assurance that Orosa would be personally liable for any account that the said construction might incur. Lopez was
Free Property Real estate Legal terms
1. Ladera v. Hodges G.R. No. 8027-R‚ September 23‚ 1952‚ Vol. 48‚ No. 12‚ Official Gazette 5374Reyes‚J.B.L.‚ J. FACTS: Paz G. Ladera entered into a contract with C.N. Hodges. Hodges promised to sell a lot with an area of 278square meters to Ladera‚ subject to certain terms and conditions. The agreement called for a downpayment of P 800.00 and monthly installments of P 5.00 each with interest of 1% per month‚ until P2‚085 is paid in full. Incase of failure of the purchaser to make any monthly
Premium Real property Property Personal property
CASE DIGESTS: 1. ALCANTARA vs. ALCANTARA FACTS: On Dec. 8‚ 1982‚ petitioner Restituto Alcantara and respondent Rosita Alcantara‚ without securing the required marriage license‚ went to Manila City Hall for the purpose of marriage. They met a “fixer” and arranged everything for them. A Rev. Aquilino Navarro‚ a Minister of Gospel of the CDCC Chapel solemnized their wedding. The petitioner and respondent went through another marriage ceremony on March 16‚ 1983. The marriage was likewise celebrated
Premium Marriage Wedding
resolution of the Court regarding G.R Nos. 82585‚ 82827 and 83979; wherefore‚ the petitioner’s were lump together considering these cases were same in character. In these consolidated cases‚ 3 principal issues were raised: 1) whether or not petitioners were denied due process when information for libel were filed against them although the finding of the existence of prima facie case was still under review by the Secretary of Justice and‚ subsequently‚ by the President; 2) whether or not the constitutional
Premium United States Constitution Prima facie Freedom of speech
Calvo v. UCPB General Insurance Case Digest Calvo v. UCPB General Insurance G.R. No. 148496 March 19‚ 2002 Facts: Petitioner Virgines Calvo‚ owner of Transorient Container Terminal Services‚ Inc. (TCTSI)‚ and a custom broker‚ entered into a contract with San Miguel Corporation (SMC) for the transfer of 114 reels of semi-chemical fluting paper and 124 reels of kraft liner board from the port area to the Tabacalera Compound‚ Ermita‚ Manila. The cargo was insured by respondent UCPB General Insurance
Premium Insurance
CASE DIGEST CASE #1: Kuroda v. Jalandoni 83 Phil 171 • FACTS: - Shigenori Kuroda‚ former Lieutenant-General of the Japanese Imperial Forces of the Philippines‚ was charged before a Military Commission in violation of the laws and customs of war. The Petitioner seeks to establish the illegality of Executive Order No. 68 of the President of the Philippines; to enjoin and prohibit two US prosecutors from participating in the prosecution of the petitioner’s case; and to permanently
Premium Law Human rights United States Constitution
payable‚ had never received it‚ and that his signature‚ as an endorser‚ was forged by Maasim‚ * Eastern promptly made a demand upon the HSBC to credit the amount of the forged check * Eastern filed against HSBC and PNB * RTC: dismissed the case Issue: Whether the Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) and Philippine National Bank (PNB)‚ defendants should be charged for the payment made to E.M Maasim for the P2000 which was paid on the forged check. Held: The Supreme Court held
Premium Bank Supreme Court of the United States Credit card
Constitutional Law Case Digest People vs. Perfecto Facts: Perfecto was convicted by the municipal trial court as editor of La Nacion for publishing libelous statement pursuant to Article 256 of Spanish Penal Code. Issue: whether article 256 of the Spanish Penal Code‚ punishing "Any person who‚ by . . . writing‚ shall defame‚ abuse‚ or insult any Minister of the Crown or other person in authority . . .‚" is still in force. Ruling: 1. Effect of the Philippine Libel Law‚ Act No. 277‚ on article
Premium Ferdinand Marcos