Section 30 of the Revised Corporation Code provides that directors or trustees who willfully and knowingly vote for or assent to patently unlawful acts of the corporation or who are guilty of gross negligence or bad faith in directing the affairs of the corporation or acquire any personal or pecuniary interest in conflict with their duty as such directors or trustees shall be liable jointly and severally for all damages resulting therefrom suffered by the corporation, its stockholders or members and other persons.

The “fresh period rule” was promulgated to standardize the appeal period provided in the Rules and do away with the confusion as to when the 15-day appeal period should be counted.

The Ombudsman Act of 1989 provides that public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, efficiency, act with patriotism and justice and lead modest lives.

Bribery is penalized under the Revised Penal Code, with distinctions drawn between direct bribery, indirect bribery, and corruption of public officials. Each crime carries its own set of elements, reflecting different ways public trust may be compromised.

Under DOLE Department Order 150-16, Security Guard refers to any person who offers or renders personal service to watch or secure a residence, business establishment, building, compound, any other area or property; or inspects, monitors, or performs body checks or searches of individuals or baggage and other forms of security inspection. Private Security Personnel, on the other hand, refers to natural persons, including private detectives, security consultants and security officers, employed by private security agency or firm, to render security and/or detective services.

Photo from Pexels | Hiren Ranpara 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 Anti-Plunder Act (R.A. No. 7080)[…]

The Dominancy Test focuses on the similarity of the prevalent features of the competing trademarks which might cause confusion or deception, and thus infringement. If the competing trademark contains the main, essential or dominant features of another, and confusion or deception is likely to result, infringement takes place. Duplication or imitation is not necessary; nor is it necessary that the infringing label should suggest an effort to imitate. The question is whether the use of the marks involved is likely to cause confusion or mistake in the mind of the public or deceive purchasers.

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.