Contract substitution or alteration is an act of illegal recruitment. Section 6(i) of the Republic Act No. 8042, as amended, or the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 provides that to substitute or alter employment contracts approved and verified by the Department of Labor and Employment from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the expiration of the same without the approval of the Department of Labor and Employment is an act of illegal recruitment.

The Head of the Procuring Entity (HoPE), subject to the authority delegated to the Bids and Awards Commission (BAC), if any, shall impose the penalty of suspension for one (1) year for the first offense, and suspension of two (2) years for the second offense, for any of the following offenses:

According to the case of PEPSI-COLA PRODUCTS PHILIPPINES, INC. vs. ANECITO MOLON G.R. No. 175002, February 18, 2013, unfair labor practice (ULP) refers to acts that violate the workers’ right to organize. The prohibited acts are related to the workers’ right to self-organization and to the observance of a CBA. Without that element, the acts, no matter how unfair, are not unfair labor practices.

A contract to sell may not be considered as a conditional contract of sale where the seller may likewise reserve title to the property subject of the sale until the fulfillment of a suspensive condition, because in a conditional contract of sale, the first element of consent is present, although it is conditioned upon the happening of a contingent event which may or may not occur. (Ace Foods, Inc., v. Micro Pacific Technologies Co. LTD, G.R. No. 200602, December 11, 2013)

Article 1378 of the Labor Code of the Philippines provides that in cases of doubt in the interpretation of onerous contracts, the interpretation should be made in a way that is fair for the parties involved. In this case, the seller was allowed to retain partial payments as just compensation for the buyer’s use of the property even after the contract has been cancelled.

In the above-entitled case, the Supreme Court discussed the elements of an implied new lease under Article 1670 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines, to wit:

(a) the term of the original contract of lease has expired;
(b) the lessor has not given the lessee a notice to vacate; and
(c) the lessee continued enjoying the thing leased for 15 days with the acquiescence of the lessor.

Photo from Pexels | On Shot The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Read more about eCAR Expiry Ended: No More Expiration for Electric Certificate Authorizing Registration issued for Transferring Real Property (BIR RR 12-2024)[…]

Under Section 89 of the New Government Procurement Act, all bid prices shall be considered as fixed prices, and therefore not subject to price escalation during contract implementation. In the event of an extraordinary increase in prices of specific components of the Infrastructure Project, price escalation may be considered, subject to prior approval of the Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB). If the cost of construction components increases by more than ten percent (10%) of the unit price of work items, as determined against the prevailing price indices of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), a price escalation may be authorized at a no loss, no-gain basis, using the appropriate formula prescribed by the GPPB. The PSA shall ensure that its price indices are region specific and updated on a monthly basis.