Case Digest: So v. Republic (G.R. No. 170603)

So v. Republic | G.R. No. 170603 | 29 Jan 2007 | Callejo, Sr. J. | Art IV (Section 1, Par 4) | Petitioners: Edison So Respondents: Republic of the Philippines Recit Ready Summary Herein Petitioner So filed for a Petition for Naturalization under CA No. 473 aka the Revised Naturalization Law.He presented 2 witnesses à fam business lawyer Atty. Adasa & UST classmate Mark Salcedo. RTC granted So’s petition. Respondent Republic of the Phil through OSG said not so fast! Coz SolGen claims na the 2 witnesses So presented did not know him (So) well enough and that they only gave general statements upon being asked about the character and moral conduct of So. CA set aside RTC’s decision. Hence, this present petition. The issue is W/N So qualifies for Philippines Citizenship and the Court said NO. It was wrong for So to claim that that RA 9139 should apply to his case instead of CA No. 473. This is because the latter applied to ALL ALIENS regardless of class while the former applies to nati...
Post a Comment

Case Digest: Jona Bumatay v. Lolita Bumatay (G.R. No. 191320)

Jona Bumatay v. Lolita Bumatay | G.R. No. 191320 | April 25, 2017 | Bigamy |

FACTS 

  • On January 1968, Lolita allegedly married Amado Rosete at 16 years old. Later on, at November 6, 2003, Lolita married Jose Bumatay (Jona’s foster father). Jona then filed a Complaint-Affidavit for Bigamy against Lolita claiming that Lolita’s first marriage was still valid and that she was aware that it was not yet legally dissolved. Lolita’s Counter-Affidavit claims that she learned from her children (with Amado) that he filed a petition for declaration of nullity. Further, in 1990, she was informed by their children that Amado had died in Nueva Vizcaya.
  • On November 8, 2005, Prosecutor Valdez (Official Prosecutor of San Carlos) filed an Information for Bigamy at RTC San Carlos. After the filing, but before her arraignment, Lolita filed a petition for the declaration of nullity of her marriage with Amado at RTC Dagupan. On September 20, 2005, RTC Dagupan declared the marriage void stating that no marriage took place between Lolita and Amado since Lolita’s sister’s signature was on the marriage certificate. 
  • Lolita then filed a Motion to Quash the Information for Bigamy against her. Her argument is based on the fact that the first element of the crime of bigamy is that the offender has been previously legally married. Lolita attached the RTC Dagupan ruling as evidence that the first element was absent. 
  • RTC San Carlos granted Lolita’s motion. They based the decision on Morigo v. People which claimed that: Since the first marriage has been declared void ab intio, there is no first marriage to begin with in determining the foremost element of bigamy. Such declaration of nullity retroacts to the date of the first marriage. 
  • CA affirmed RTC San Carlos.

ISSUE: Whether or not the CA erred in upholding RTC San Carlos’ Order granting Lolita’s motion to quash the Information for the crime of Bigamy?

RULING:

  • Petitioner, Jona Bumatay, has no legal personality to assail the dismissal of the criminal case. Rule 110, Section 5, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure states that all criminal actions commenced by information shall be prosecuted under direction and control of a public prosecutor. Appeals before the SC must be represented by the Office of the Solicitor General. 
  • Further Jona’s personality to even institute bigamy case is nebulous, at best. Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in suit. “Interest” represents material interest or an interest in issue to be affected and it must be present substantial interest. Jona is merely a “foster daughter” of Jose without having undergone the process of legal adoption and as such provides no real interest. 
  • The court does not see the need to waste time on the question of whether or not the CA erred in its ruling. 

DENIED, CA DECISION AFFIRMED

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Digest: Republic v. Sereno (G.R. No 237428) w/ Summary of Separate Opinions

Republic v. Sereno (including Summary of Separate Opinions) | G.R. No. 237428 | May 11, 2018 | Tijam, J. |  Topic: Art. VIII, Sec 5 (other topics included in the full digest) | SUMMARY:   A petition for quo warranto was filed by the OSG assailing the appointment of CJ Sereno as Chief Justice on the ground that she failed to prove her integrity during the nomination process as she failed to comply with the SALN requirements of the JBC. Several groups and individuals filed Motions for Leave to Intervene, among them Senators De Lima and Trillanes. CJ Sereno filed a Motion to Inhibit against six Justices. The Republic argues that (1) quo warranto is the proper remedy, as the Constitution does not make impeachment the exclusive mode of unseating an impeachable officer; (2) the petition is not time barred as prescription cannot run against the States; and, (3) that, at the time of her appointment, CJ Sereno was not of “proven integrity” she not having filed the required SALNs a...
Read more

Case Digest: Gloria Dy v. People (G.R. No 189081)

Gloria Dy v. People of the Philippines | G.R. No. 189081 | August 10, 2016 | Topic: Liability ex delicto / ex contractu FACTS: Dy, as the General Manager of Mandy Commodities Company, Inc. (MCCI) proposed to William Mandy (President of MCCI) to purchase a property for the company. To facilitate the purchase, the president obtained a loan from International China Bank of Commerce (bank), which was granted to the company in the amount of P20 million.   As security, MCCI executed a chattel mortgage over their warehouses. The president entrusted Dy to manage the payment of the loan. Later on, MCCI received a notice of foreclosure over the mortgaged property due to its default in paying.   In order to prevent the foreclosure, the president delivered to Dy, P21,706,281 worth of checks issued by MCCI, with the instruction that Dy shall use the checks to pay the loan. However, the president later discovered that the checks weren’t paid to the bank when the bank foreclosed the mortg...
Read more

Case Digest: Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo (G.R. No. 180906)

Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo |  G.R. No. 180906 | October 7, 2008 |  Puno. C.J. Doctrine and Concepts: The Writ of Amparo offers a better remedy to extralegal killings and enforced disappearances and threats thereof due to the nature of swiftness required to resolve these cases The remedy provides rapid judicial relief as it partakes of a summary that requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner; it is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt or liability for damages requiring preponderance of evidence or administrative responsibility requiring full and exhaustive proceedings. Facts The case at bar is an appeal via Petition for Review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court in relation to Section 19 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo , seeking to reverse and set aside , the Decision promulgated by Court of Appeals in C.A. G.R. AMPARO No. 00001. The original case was filed by ...
Read more