The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is an exception to the rule that hearsay evidence is devoid of probative value. This is because the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur establishes a rule on negligence, whether the evidence is subjected to cross-examination or not. It is a rule that can stand on its own independently of the character of the evidence presented as hearsay.
The crimes of grave threats, light threats, and other light threats are provided under Articles 282, 283, and 285 of the Revised Penal Code.
According to the case of RONNIE CALUAG vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 171511, March 4, 2009, in grave threats, the wrong threatened amounts to a crime which may or may not be accompanied by a condition. In light threats, the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime but is always accompanied by a condition. In other light threats, the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime and there is no condition.
Under the old law, the adopted child cannot be considered as a relative of the ascendants and collaterals of the adopting parents. The relationship created is exclusively between the adopter and the adopted, and does not extend to the relatives of either.
Article 1191 of the Civil Code provides two (2) remedies for breach of obligations: exact fullfilment and rescind the contract with payment of damages in either case. The rescission provided under said provision is applicable to reciprocal obligations.
Rule 132, Section 40 of the Revised Rules on Evidence provides that if the documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony.
Photo from Pexels | cottonbro studio 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 Demurrer to Evidence[…]
Section 27 of the Revised Corporation Code provides a clear legal framework for the removal of corporate directors and trustees, balancing the need for effective governance with safeguards for minority rights.
Section 3, Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that, when the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of his plea and require the prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of culpability. The accused may present evidence in his behalf.
Article 16 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) provides that principals, accomplices, and accessories are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies. For light felonies, only the principals and accomplies are criminally liable for light felonies.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ ruling that the informal structures operated by the spouses Calimlim on foreshore land in Matabungkay Beach constituted a public nuisance. Despite a lack of necessary permits and the existence of multiple notices to vacate, the spouses Calimlim continued their informal operations, causing obstruction, excessive noise, foul odor, and even fire hazards injurious to their neighboring property, the Villa Alexandra, among others.
