The Supreme Court found two Shakey’s managers guilty of theft for withholding service charges from employees. The Court ruled that all five elements of theft were present: (1) there was a taking; (2) of property belonging to another; (3) done with intent to gain; (4) without the owner’s consent; and (5) without violence or force. The Court clarified that the crime was not qualified theft because the victims were fellow employees, not the employer; thus, there was no relationship of trust or confidence between them. Absent this qualifying element, petitioners were only convicted of theft in its simple form.

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of a 68-year-old foreigner for rape and qualified trafficking after inviting and meeting with a minor for sex. In the case of People of the Philippines v. Willem Johannes Peek (G.R. No. 256452, February 25, 2025), the SC held that Peek forced the victim to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money and and under threat of uploading her nude photos online if she refused.

In Melco Resorts v. CIR (G.R. No. 271261, April 2, 2025), the Supreme Court ruled that the two-year period starts from the date the taxpayer actually paid the VAT to the BIR, not from the date the supplier remitted it.

Section 261(e) of the Omnibus Election Code prohibits the use of threats, intimidation, or fraudulent means to influence voters. In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a vice-gubernatorial candidate after finding that he benefited from campaign materials produced using public property and pressured a government employee to support his campaign.

Photo from Unsplash | Frances Gunn 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 SC Upholds Validity of Unwritten Sale of Land[…]

In Sps. Manalese v. Estate of Sps. Ferreras, the Supreme Court ruled that land buyers must verify ownership by checking the certificate of title and reviewing the records in the Registry of Deeds to avoid fraudulent transactions.

In the case of Anido v. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 253527, October 21, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the foreign law that must be proven by a party who seeks the recognition of a divorce decree or judgment must be the law of the country or state that issued it. The applicant must prove the law of the foreign court, office, or tribunal to show that it had competence or jurisdiction to issue the foreign decree or judgment, and that the latter is valid and binding in the country or state from which it originates.

In the case of PAL v. Ahmee et al. and Ahmee et al., v. PAL, the Supreme Court held that the submission by the employer of the payroll or bank advisory or the acknowledgment receipt by the bank constitutes substantial evidence of payment of the employees’ salaries and monetary benefits.

Under Section 4 of MPMCC’s By-Laws, corporations may designate a representative to act in all matters related to the corporation, including service of notice of assessments and meetings, grants of proxies, voting on any matter, and the like.

The Supreme Court has reiterated that using common family terms – like “niece” or “uncle” – in a criminal charge is enough to inform the accused of the nature of their relationship to the victim, especially when that relationship qualifies the crime and increases the penalty.