The following posts do 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 your own lawyer to address your legal concerns, if any.
The right to appeal is neither a natural right nor it is a component of due process. It is a mere statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in a manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. (Brual v. Brual, et al., G.R. No. 205451, March 7, 2022)
There is infringement when an unauthorized copy, counterfeit, or colorable imitation of a registered mark is used in connection with the selling or advertising of goods, when such use is likely to cause confusion.
In the case of Kolin Electronics Co., Inc. v. Kolin Philippines International, Inc., G.R. No. 226444, July 06, 2021, the Supreme Court abandoned the Holistic test. Therefore, the prevailing test for determining trademark resemblance is the Dominancy Test, which focuses on the prevalent features of competing marks. The Dominancy Test considers the appearance, sound, meaning, and overall impressions of the competing marks.
Section 2 of Republic Act No. 11917 provides for the Declaration of Policies which states that the State recognizes the vital role of the private sector in the protection of the people and safeguarding of property as well as maintenance of peace and order in the country.
Towards this end, the State shall adopt measures to strengthen the regulation of the private security services industry and establish quality standards to ensure competent private security personnel and professionals that complement our law enforcement authorities in preservation of public order in the country.
In malversation through negligence, what characterizes the negligence is not what the offender did after the public funds or property were taken by another person but what the offender did or omitted to do which permitted the taking thereof.
Preventive suspension is a disciplinary measure for the protection of the company’s property pending investigation of any alleged malfeasance or misfeasance committed by the employee. The employer may place the worker concerned under preventive suspension if his continued employment poses a serious and imminent threat to the life or property of the employer or of his co-workers. (Lafuente v. Davao Central Warehouse Club, G.R. No. 24710, March 17, 2021)
Department Order No. 252, Series of 2025 or the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (Revised IRR) of Republic Act No. 11058 reinforces worker’s right to safety and health, strengthens employer duties, and aligns workplace compliance with the expanded Occupational Safety and Health standards.
The aggrieved party may move for reconsideration within the period for taking an appeal upon the grounds that the damages awarded are excessive, that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that the decision or final order, or that the decision or final order is contrary to law. (Section 1, Rule 37 of the Revised Rules on Civil Procedure)
Section 1, Rule 37 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure provides that within the period for taking an appeal, the aggrieved party may move the trial court to set aside the judgment or final order and grant a new trial.
A non-compete clause may cover both future employment and business.
The annulment may be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
