The Law Requisites Ph

Latest Philippine Jurisprudence

10 hours ago | [YT] | 0

The Law Requisites Ph

Latest Jurisprudence, released 30 July 2026

𝘔𝘢𝘢𝘢𝘳𝘪 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘢𝘨𝘶𝘩𝘪𝘯 𝘯𝘨 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘭 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘢 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘈𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘨𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘘𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘯 𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘮𝘣𝘶𝘩𝘢𝘺 𝘯𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘬𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘨𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘨𝘢 𝘢𝘬𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘢𝘨-𝘣𝘢𝘺𝘢𝘥 𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢 𝘴𝘢 𝘮𝘨𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘴𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰?

"𝘖𝘰, 𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭 𝘯𝘢 𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘰 𝘯𝘨 𝘚𝘊 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘭 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘨𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘘𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘯𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘓𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘐𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘗𝘏𝘗 2 𝘔𝘪𝘭𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢.

𝘉𝘶𝘰𝘥: 𝘗𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘯𝘨 𝘚𝘊 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘭 𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘯 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘕𝘦𝘪𝘭 𝘊𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘉𝘦𝘯𝘫𝘪𝘦 𝘉𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘢 𝘴𝘢 𝘙𝘈 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 7610 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘨𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘘𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴 (𝘙𝘈 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 9208/10364) 𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘺𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘢 𝘯𝘨 𝘓𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘐𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘗𝘏𝘗 2 𝘔𝘪𝘭𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴𝘢 𝘥𝘢𝘩𝘪𝘭 𝘴𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘱𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘥𝘢𝘭𝘢 𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘱𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘺𝘢𝘥 𝘴𝘢 𝘮𝘨𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘭𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘬𝘪 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢 𝘴𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰.

𝙎𝙖 𝙖𝙥𝙚𝙡𝙖 𝙣𝙜 𝙠𝙖𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙠𝙧𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙡, 𝙣𝙖𝙗𝙪𝙗𝙪𝙠𝙨𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙗𝙪𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙧𝙚𝙠𝙤𝙧𝙙 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙖 𝙨𝙖 𝙥𝙖𝙜𝙨𝙪𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙞 𝙣𝙜 𝙆𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙚 𝙎𝙪𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙢𝙖 (𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙖𝙡 𝙩𝙝𝙧𝙤𝙬𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙧𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙨𝙚 𝙤𝙥𝙚𝙣 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙧𝙚𝙫𝙞𝙚𝙬). 𝙈𝙖𝙮 𝙠𝙖𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙮𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙝𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙠𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙚 𝙣𝙖 𝙗𝙖𝙜𝙪𝙝𝙞𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙗𝙞𝙨𝙮𝙤𝙣 𝙣𝙜 𝙗𝙖𝙩𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙩 𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙖𝙬𝙖𝙣 𝙣𝙜 𝙢𝙖𝙨 𝙢𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙜𝙖𝙩 𝙣𝙖 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙪𝙨𝙖 𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙖𝙠𝙪𝙨𝙖𝙙𝙤 𝙠𝙪𝙣𝙜 𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙢𝙜𝙖 𝙠𝙖𝙩𝙤𝙩𝙤𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙖𝙣𝙜 𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙪𝙣𝙖𝙮𝙖𝙣 𝙨𝙖 𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙨 𝙖𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙬 𝙣𝙖 𝙗𝙪𝙢𝙪𝙗𝙪𝙤 𝙣𝙜 𝙠𝙧𝙞𝙢𝙚𝙣 𝙣𝙖 𝙌𝙪𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙛𝙞𝙚𝙙 𝙏𝙧𝙖𝙛𝙛𝙞𝙘𝙠𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙞𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙨𝙖 𝙞𝙡𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙢 𝙣𝙜 𝙎𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 4(𝙖) 𝙖𝙩 𝙎𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 6 𝙣𝙜 𝙍𝘼 𝙣𝙪𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧 9208 (𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙍𝘼 𝙣𝙪𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧 10364), 𝙙𝙖𝙝𝙞𝙡 𝙨𝙖 𝙥𝙖𝙜𝙧𝙚-𝙧𝙚𝙘𝙧𝙪𝙞𝙩, 𝙥𝙖𝙜-𝙝𝙞𝙧𝙚, 𝙖𝙩 𝙥𝙖𝙜-𝙗𝙖𝙮𝙖𝙙 𝙣𝙜 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙖 𝙨𝙖 𝙢𝙜𝙖 𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙤𝙧 𝙙𝙚 𝙚𝙙𝙖𝙙 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙖 𝙨𝙖 𝙨𝙚𝙠𝙨𝙬𝙖𝙡 𝙣𝙖 𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙜-𝙖𝙖𝙗𝙪𝙨𝙤 𝙖𝙩 𝙥𝙖𝙜𝙨𝙖𝙨𝙖𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙡𝙖. "𝙉𝙚𝙞𝙡 𝙅𝙤𝙝𝙣 𝘾𝙚𝙗𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙨 𝙮 𝙏𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙖𝙩𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙨 ""𝙅𝙖𝙮𝙘𝙚𝙚 𝘿𝙚𝙚"" 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝘽𝙚𝙣𝙟𝙞𝙚 𝘽𝙖𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙣 𝙮 𝙁𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙞𝙨𝙘𝙤 𝙫. 𝙋𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨

"𝘕𝘦𝘪𝘭 𝘑𝘰𝘩𝘯 𝘊𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘴 𝘺 𝘛𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘴 ""𝘑𝘢𝘺𝘤𝘦𝘦 𝘋𝘦𝘦"" 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘉𝘦𝘯𝘫𝘪𝘦 𝘉𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘺 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘰 𝘷. 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘱𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴, 𝘎.𝘙. 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 265220, 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥: 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 2026" 𝘝𝘐𝘓𝘓𝘈𝘕𝘜𝘌𝘝𝘈, 𝘑.

#𝘊𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘝𝘴𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, #𝘘𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨, #𝘙𝘈𝘕𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳9208, #𝘌𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨, #𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘚𝘦𝘹𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘌𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, #𝘓𝘪𝘧𝘦𝘐𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, #𝘊𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘈𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘙𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸, #𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘖𝘧𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯, #𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨, #𝘒𝘢𝘓𝘢𝘸𝘙𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘗𝘏"

For educational purposes only. AI assisted

4 days ago | [YT] | 2

The Law Requisites Ph

1. Santos v. NLRC, et al. (G.R. No. 115795, March 6, 1998)
• Facts: Jose S. Santos, Jr., a married teacher at Hagonoy Institute Inc., entered into an extra-marital affair with a married co-teacher. An administrative investigation confirmed the illicit relationship based on the testimonies of nine witnesses. Santos was subsequently dismissed on June 1, 1991.
• Main Issue: Whether an extra-marital affair between married teachers constitutes immorality and just cause for dismissal under Article 282 of the Labor Code and Section 94 of the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools (MRPS).
• Ruling: Valid Dismissal. The Supreme Court affirmed his dismissal, holding that an extra-marital affair is an affront to the sanctity of marriage and family. Teachers serve as role models and stand in loco parentis to students; hence, their personal conduct in and out of the classroom must be beyond reproach. Financial assistance was deleted because termination for immoral conduct reflects on the employee's moral character.

2. Leus v. St. Scholastica’s College Westgrove, et al. (G.R. No. 187226, January 28, 2015)
• Facts: Cheryll Santos Leus, a non-teaching staff member at St. Scholastica's College Westgrove (a Catholic school), became pregnant out of wedlock with her boyfriend. Both were single with no legal impediment to marry and wed prior to her termination. She was dismissed under Section 94(e) of the 1992 MRPS for "disgraceful or immoral conduct".
• Main Issue: Whether pre-marital sexual relations and pregnancy out of wedlock between consenting single adults constitute disgraceful or immoral conduct justifying dismissal.
• Ruling: Illegal Dismissal. The Supreme Court held that morality under the law is governed by public and secular standards, not religious doctrines. Pre-marital sex and unwed pregnancy between single adults with no legal impediment to marry is neither unlawful nor prohibited by secular public policy. Furthermore, the school failed to present substantial evidence that her pregnancy caused grave scandal to the school community. Leus was awarded separation pay, full backwages, and attorney's fees.

3. Capin-Cadiz v. Brent Hospital and Colleges, Inc. (G.R. No. 187417, February 24, 2016)
• Facts: Christine Joy Capin-Cadiz, Human Resource Officer at Brent Hospital (an Episcopal Church institution), became pregnant out of wedlock. Both she and her boyfriend were single and free to marry. Brent placed her on indefinite suspension and mandated that she get married to her boyfriend as a prerequisite for her reinstatement.
• Main Issue: Whether unwed pregnancy constitutes immorality, and whether an employer can lawfully condition reinstatement or continued employment on getting married.
• Ruling: Illegal Dismissal. Reaffirming the Leus doctrine, the Court held that pre-marital sex resulting in pregnancy between single adults is not disgraceful or immoral in the public and secular sense. Additionally, forcing an employee to marry as a condition for reinstatement is coercive, oppressive, and discriminatory, violating Article 136 of the Labor Code (stipulation against marriage) and the Magna Carta of Women (R.A. 9710). Cadiz was awarded backwages, separation pay, and attorney's fees.

4. Bohol Wisdom School, et al. v. Mabao (G.R. No. 252124, July 23, 2024)
• Facts: Miraflor Mabao, a grade school teacher at Bohol Wisdom School, informed school officials of her unwed pregnancy. The administration indefinitely suspended her without pay until she could present proof of marriage. She married her boyfriend on October 5, 2016. BWS sent return-to-work notices, but Mabao replied on November 9, 2016, stating she could no longer return due to social humiliation.
• Main Issue: Whether her suspension for pre-marital pregnancy was legal, and whether she was constructively dismissed or abandoned her work.
• Ruling: Illegal Suspension, but Work Abandonment. The Supreme Court held her suspension illegal because pre-marital sex between consenting single adults is not immoral under secular standards, and BWS violated procedural due process by deciding her sanction prior to hearing her side. However, there was no constructive dismissal as the school intended to accept her back; Mabao voluntarily abandoned her employment on November 9, 2016, when she explicitly stated in writing that she would not return. She was awarded backwages during the illegal suspension period, accrued benefits up to November 9, 2016, and attorney's fees.

5. Evelyn Chua-Qua v. Clave & Tay Tung High School, Inc. (G.R. No. L-49549, August 30, 1990)
• Facts: Evelyn Chua-Qua, a 30-year-old teacher at Tay Tung High School, conducted remedial lessons for her 16-year-old Grade 6 student, Bobby Qua. They fell in love and legally married with his mother's consent. More than a month after their wedding, the school sought clearance to dismiss her for alleged abusive and unethical conduct unbecoming of a teacher.
• Main Issue: Whether a teacher’s marriage to her student following remedial classes constitutes serious misconduct or immorality justifying termination.
• Ruling: Illegal Dismissal. The Supreme Court ruled that the employer failed to present substantial evidence of immoral or abusive acts. The allegations of misconduct inside the classroom were based on unsubstantiated conjectures and afterthoughts. Falling in love and entering into lawful wedlock is not immoral, and yielding to mutual affection does not automatically prove an abuse of authority. Due to severely strained relations, Chua-Qua was awarded three years of backwages and separation pay.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3

5 days ago | [YT] | 2

The Law Requisites Ph

𝘈𝘯𝘨 𝘛𝘪𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘓𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘈𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪 𝘬𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘢 𝘬𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘪 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘺𝘰 𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘢 𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘯𝘨 𝘌𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘥𝘰. 𝘈𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘶𝘴 𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪 𝘱𝘸𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘨 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘯 𝘬𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘨 𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘱𝘢𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘨𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘨𝘢𝘺𝘢 𝘯𝘨 𝘕𝘊𝘐𝘗 𝘊𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 (𝘐𝘗𝘙𝘈 𝘚𝘦𝘤. 59) 𝘢𝘵 𝘓𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘚𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘨𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘈𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘭 (𝘓𝘎𝘊 𝘚𝘦𝘤𝘴. 26-27). "𝘏𝘰𝘯. 𝘏𝘦𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘈𝘭𝘷𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘻, 𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘭. 𝘷. 𝘗𝘐𝘊𝘖𝘗 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴, 𝘐𝘯𝘤.
𝘎.𝘙. 𝘕𝘰𝘴. 162243, 164516 & 171875
𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥: 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 03, 2009"

1 week ago | [YT] | 2

The Law Requisites Ph

Landmark Philippine jurisprudence - Teacher related
#teacherrelated #TeacherStudent #Civillaw #laborlaw

1 week ago | [YT] | 4

The Law Requisites Ph

In re: sale of conjugal property without spousal consent

𝐴𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑣. 𝑆𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝐸𝑠𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑎 (𝐺.𝑅. 𝑁𝑜. 256141, 𝐽𝑢𝑙𝑦 19, 2022), 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡 𝐸𝑛 𝐵𝑎𝑛𝑐 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑤. 𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑡𝑜𝑜𝑘 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 30, 2022, 𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝐶𝑜𝑑𝑒, 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 124 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑠, 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑒 𝑛𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑦 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓'𝑠 𝑤𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡.

For educational purposes only! Know your rights

1 week ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

Latest Jurisprudence, released 29 July 2026.

𝘔𝑎𝘺 𝘱𝑎𝘯𝑎𝘯𝑎𝘨𝑢𝘵𝑎𝘯 𝘣𝑎 𝑠𝘢 𝘤𝑦𝘣𝑒𝘳 𝘭𝑖𝘣𝑒𝘭 𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘪𝑠𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘮𝑎𝘮𝑎𝘮𝑎𝘺𝑎𝘯 𝘯𝑎 𝑛𝘢𝑔-𝑝𝘰𝑠𝘵 𝘴𝑎 𝐹𝘢𝑐𝘦𝑏𝘰𝑜𝘬 𝘶𝑘𝘰𝑙 𝑠𝘢 𝘥𝑖𝘶𝑚𝘢𝑛𝘰'𝘺 𝘱𝑎𝘨ℎ𝘪𝑛𝘨𝑖 𝑛𝘨 '𝑝𝘢𝑑𝘶𝑙𝘢𝑠' 𝘯𝑔 𝑖𝘴𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑎𝘭𝑘𝘢𝑙𝘥𝑒 𝑝𝘢𝑟𝘢 𝘴𝑎 𝑝𝘦𝑟𝘮𝑖𝘵, 𝑘𝘶𝑛𝘨 𝘩𝑖𝘯𝑑𝘪 𝘯𝑎𝘱𝑎𝘵𝑢𝘯𝑎𝘺𝑎𝘯 𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘢𝑐𝘵𝑢𝘢𝑙 𝑚𝘢𝑙𝘪𝑐𝘦?

"𝘞𝐴𝘓𝐴𝘕𝐺 𝑝𝘢𝑛𝘢𝑛𝘢𝑔𝘶𝑡𝘢𝑛 𝑠𝘢 𝘤𝑦𝘣𝑒𝘳 𝘭𝑖𝘣𝑒𝘭 𝘥𝑎𝘩𝑖𝘭 𝘬𝑎𝘪𝑙𝘢𝑛𝘨𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑝𝘢𝑡𝘶𝑛𝘢𝑦𝘢𝑛 𝑛𝘨 𝘱𝑖𝘴𝑘𝘢𝑙 𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑎𝘤𝑡𝘶𝑎𝘭 𝘮𝑎𝘭𝑖𝘤𝑒 𝑘𝘢𝑝𝘢𝑔 𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑏𝘪𝑛𝘢𝑏𝘢𝑡𝘪𝑘𝘰𝑠 𝑎𝘺 𝘪𝑠𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘱𝑎𝘮𝑝𝘶𝑏𝘭𝑖𝘬𝑜𝘯𝑔 𝑜𝘱𝑖𝘴𝑦𝘢𝑙. 𝘕𝑎𝘨-𝘱𝑜𝘴𝑡 𝑠𝘪 𝘑𝑎𝘥𝑒 𝐾𝘢𝑟𝘭𝑎 𝑇𝘢𝑛 𝑙𝘢𝑏𝘢𝑛 𝑘𝘢𝑦 𝑀𝘢𝑦𝘰𝑟 𝑂𝘳𝑓𝘢𝑛𝘦𝑙 𝑛𝘨 𝘊𝑎𝘵𝑎𝘯𝑎𝘶𝑎𝘯 𝘶𝑘𝘰𝑙 𝑠𝘢 𝘯𝑎𝘬𝑎𝘣𝑖𝘯𝑏𝘪𝑛𝘨 𝘑𝑜𝘭𝑙𝘪𝑏𝘦𝑒 𝑝𝘦𝑟𝘮𝑖𝘵.

#𝐽𝘢𝑑𝘦𝐾𝘢𝑟𝘭𝑎𝘛𝑎𝘯, #𝘊𝑦𝘣𝑒𝘳𝐿𝘪𝑏𝘦𝑙𝘈𝑐𝘲𝑢𝘪𝑡𝘵𝑎𝘭, #𝘈𝑐𝘵𝑢𝘢𝑙𝘔𝑎𝘭𝑖𝘤𝑒, #𝑃𝘶𝑏𝘭𝑖𝘤𝑂𝘧𝑓𝘪𝑐𝘦𝑟𝘊𝑟𝘪𝑡𝘪𝑐𝘪𝑠𝘮, #𝘍𝑟𝘦𝑒𝘥𝑜𝘮𝑂𝘧𝐸𝘹𝑝𝘳𝑒𝘴𝑠𝘪𝑜𝘯, #𝘍𝑎𝘤𝑒𝘣𝑜𝘰𝑘𝘗𝑜𝘴𝑡, #𝑃𝘶𝑏𝘭𝑖𝘤𝐴𝘱𝑜𝘭𝑜𝘨𝑦, #𝑅𝘦𝑐𝘬𝑙𝘦𝑠𝘴𝐷𝘪𝑠𝘳𝑒𝘨𝑎𝘳𝑑, #𝐶𝘰𝑚𝘱𝑟𝘰𝑚𝘪𝑠𝘦𝐴𝘨𝑟𝘦𝑒𝘮𝑒𝘯𝑡, #𝑆𝘶𝑝𝘳𝑒𝘮𝑒𝘊𝑜𝘶𝑟𝘵𝑃𝘏"

𝑆𝘢 𝘮𝑔𝘢 𝘬𝑎𝘴𝑜𝘯𝑔 𝑐𝘺𝑏𝘦𝑟 𝑙𝘪𝑏𝘦𝑙 𝑛𝘢 𝘬𝑖𝘯𝑎𝘴𝑎𝘴𝑎𝘯𝑔𝘬𝑢𝘵𝑎𝘯 𝘯𝑔 𝑝𝘢𝑚𝘱𝑢𝘣𝑙𝘪𝑘𝘰𝑛𝘨 𝘰𝑝𝘪𝑠𝘺𝑎𝘭, 𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑝𝘪𝑠𝘬𝑎𝘭 𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘮𝑎𝘺 𝘣𝑢𝘳𝑑𝘦𝑛 𝑜𝘧 𝘱𝑟𝘰𝑜𝘧 𝘯𝑎 𝑝𝘢𝑡𝘶𝑛𝘢𝑦𝘢𝑛 𝑎𝘯𝑔 𝑎𝘤𝑡𝘶𝑎𝘭 𝘮𝑎𝘭𝑖𝘤𝑒 (𝘢𝑙𝘢𝑚 𝑛𝘢 𝘴𝑖𝘯𝑢𝘯𝑔𝘢𝑙𝘪𝑛𝘨 𝘰 𝘮𝑎𝘺 𝘳𝑒𝘤𝑘𝘭𝑒𝘴𝑠 𝑑𝘪𝑠𝘳𝑒𝘨𝑎𝘳𝑑 𝑠𝘢 𝘬𝑎𝘵𝑜𝘵𝑜𝘩𝑎𝘯𝑎𝘯). 𝘈𝑛𝘨 𝘴𝑖𝘮𝑝𝘭𝑒𝘯𝑔 𝑔𝘢𝑙𝘪𝑡 𝑜 𝑝𝘢𝑚𝘱𝑢𝘣𝑙𝘪𝑘𝘰𝑛𝘨 𝘱𝑢𝘯𝑎 𝑠𝘢 𝘰𝑝𝘪𝑠𝘺𝑎𝘭 𝘯𝑎 𝑡𝘶𝑛𝘨𝑘𝘶𝑙𝘪𝑛 𝑎𝘺 𝘩𝑖𝘯𝑑𝘪 𝘴𝑎𝘱𝑎𝘵 𝘶𝑝𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘪𝑘𝘶𝑙𝘰𝑛𝘨 𝘢𝑛𝘨 𝘮𝑎𝘮𝑎𝘮𝑎𝘺𝑎𝘯.

"𝘑𝑎𝘥𝑒 𝐾𝘢𝑟𝘭𝑎 𝑇𝘢𝑛 𝑦 𝐶𝘢𝑏𝘢𝑛𝘨𝑜𝘯 𝘷. 𝑃𝘦𝑜𝘱𝑙𝘦 𝘰𝑓 𝑡𝘩𝑒 𝑃𝘩𝑖𝘭𝑖𝘱𝑝𝘪𝑛𝘦𝑠, 𝘎.𝘙. 𝑛𝘶𝑚𝘣𝑒𝘳 265929, 𝘗𝑟𝘰𝑚𝘶𝑙𝘨𝑎𝘵𝑒𝘥: 𝐽𝘶𝑙𝘺 20, 2026" 𝘈𝑠𝘴𝑜𝘤𝑖𝘢𝑡𝘦 𝘑𝑢𝘴𝑡𝘪𝑐𝘦 𝘑ℎ𝘰𝑠𝘦𝑝 𝑌. 𝘓𝑜𝘱𝑒𝘻

For educational purposes only. AI assisted.

1 week ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

Latest Jurisprudence, released July 2026.

𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑔 𝑠𝑎 𝑡𝑢𝑛𝑔𝑘𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑛 𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑔𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑛𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑝𝑎𝑘𝑖𝑡𝑎 𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑛𝑎 𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑎 𝑘𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑤 𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑏𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑎 𝑠𝑎 𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑂𝐼𝐶 𝐵𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐ℎ 𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑘 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡 𝑠𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑏 𝑛𝑔 𝑘𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑦𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑎?

"𝑂𝑜. 𝐴𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑎ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑔𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑠𝑎 𝑚𝑔𝑎 𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑦𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑡 𝑘𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑖 𝑛𝑔 𝑘𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑦 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑦𝑜𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑔 𝑠𝑎 𝑑𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡.

#𝐵𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑖𝐶𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔, #𝐷𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡, #𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑇𝑜𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡, #𝐵𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑛𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝑆𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑙, #𝐴𝑔𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔𝐶𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒, #𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑖𝑛𝑔𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, #𝐶𝑃𝑅𝐴𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛2, #𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑘𝑂𝑓𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝐴𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑒, #𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑠, #𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝑃𝐻

"𝑆𝑎 𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑚 𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑛 𝐼𝐼, 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2 𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑃𝑅𝐴, 𝑜𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑦𝑜𝑛 𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑔𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑛𝑎 𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑔𝑎 𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑦𝑎𝑙, 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑦𝑎𝑑𝑜, 𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑜 𝑛𝑔 𝑘𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒 (𝐷𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡). 𝐴𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑤 𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑏𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑎 𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑎𝑘 𝑠𝑎 𝐶𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑘 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡 𝑑𝑎ℎ𝑖𝑙 𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑎 𝑘𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑦𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑔𝑖 𝑛𝑎 𝑏𝑎𝑤𝑖𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑝𝑖𝑘𝑎𝑠𝑦𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑦 𝑛𝑎𝑔𝑏𝑢𝑏𝑢𝑛𝑔𝑎 𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡 𝑛𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑢𝑠𝑎 𝑘𝑎ℎ𝑖𝑡 𝑛𝑎 𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑔𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑛𝑎 𝑠𝑎 𝑖𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑔 𝑘𝑎𝑠𝑜.

"𝐵𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒 𝐶. 𝑂𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑣. 𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑦. 𝐵𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑖 𝐶. 𝐶𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔m 𝐴.𝐶. 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 11508
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑: 𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 10, 2026" 𝑃𝐸𝑅 𝐶𝑈𝑅𝐼𝐴𝑀 (𝐸𝑛 𝐵𝑎𝑛𝑐)

For educational purposes only. Ai assisted.

1 week ago | [YT] | 2

The Law Requisites Ph

What will happen when Plaintiff dies before judgment in a Civil Case?

𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑙𝑦, 𝐺𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑦𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒, 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑜-𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓, 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 𝑁𝑜. 04-7705. 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑑, 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒.[6] 𝐼𝑛 𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑎𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑗𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙; 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑜𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑒, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑗𝑢𝑟𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙.[7] 𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑟𝑢𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑓 𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑠, 𝑜𝑟 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝑠.[8] 𝑉𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑦, 𝐶𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑙 𝐶𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 23499 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑜.

𝐽𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑧𝑎, 𝑒𝑡 𝑎𝑙. 𝑣. 𝐽𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑧𝑎, 𝑒𝑡 𝑎𝑙., (𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑅𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑁𝑜. 167975, 𝐽𝑢𝑛𝑒 17, 2015)

Notes:
(1) The Supreme Court reiterates that actions primarily affecting property and property rights generally survive.
(2) Purely personal actions (damages) do not survive and are treated as abated upon death

For educational purposes only. AI assisted. Read full text

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

Watch here.

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 0