Miles Law Review v.2

22/10/2024

The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Commission on Election Resolution No. 11044-A disqualifying Mandaue City Mayor Jonas C. Cortes, former Albay Governor Noel E. Rosal, and Cebu City Mayor Michael L. Rama from participating as candidates in the 2025 elections following their respective dismissals by the Ombudsman.

Their dismissals included the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification to hold public office, but which the three argued are not yet final.

The Supreme Court also ordered COMELEC to comment on the consolidated petitions within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of notice.

In another case, the Court affirmed the COMELEC’s disqualification of Noel E. Rosal as Governor of Albay, Carmen Geraldine Rosal as Mayor of Legazpi City, and Jose Alfonso V. Barizo as Councilor of Legazpi City, during the 2022 National and Local Elections.

They were disqualified for violating the Omnibus Election Code in disbursing and releasing government funds during the prohibited period before a regular election.

Read the press briefer at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/press-briefer-18/

A copy of the available pleadings may be downloaded from the Public Pleadings section of the Supreme Court website at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/public-pleadings/



Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/

*Updated as of October 23, 2024, 12:00 pm

20/10/2024

The hardest chapters hold the best lessons so keep turning the page.

20/10/2024

𝗗𝗘𝗔𝗥 𝗙𝗨𝗧𝗨𝗥𝗘 𝗟𝗔𝗪𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦 from 𝗕𝗔𝗥 𝗕𝗢𝗬𝗦: 𝗔 𝗡𝗘𝗪 𝗠𝗨𝗦𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟 is now available on 𝗦𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗳𝘆, 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗰 & 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗧𝘂𝗯𝗲 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗰! 🎶

will run all weekends until 𝗡𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗥 𝟯 at the 𝗣𝗠𝗖𝗦 𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗯𝗼𝘅 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿! 🩵

Get your tickets now!
🎟️ bit.ly/barboystickets

20/10/2024

‼️ 𝗧𝗜𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗦𝗘𝗟𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗙𝗔𝗦𝗧 ‼️
Don’t miss 𝗕𝗔𝗥 𝗕𝗢𝗬𝗦: 𝗔 𝗡𝗘𝗪 𝗠𝗨𝗦𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟 running on all weekends until 𝗡𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗥 𝟯 at the PMCS Blackbox Theater, Circuit Makati! ⚖️📚
Get your tickets now!
🎟️ bit.ly/barboystickets

‼️ 𝗧𝗜𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗦𝗘𝗟𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗙𝗔𝗦𝗧 ‼️

Don’t miss 𝗕𝗔𝗥 𝗕𝗢𝗬𝗦: 𝗔 𝗡𝗘𝗪 𝗠𝗨𝗦𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟 running on all weekends until 𝗡𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗥 𝟯 at the PMCS Blackbox Theater, Circuit Makati! ⚖️📚

Get your tickets now!
🎟️ bit.ly/barboystickets

20/10/2024

Message us for more details.

20/10/2024

Masaya ka ba at iti-treat sa Starbucks friends mo pag ito score mo sa midterm exams ng criminal law?

20/10/2024

🔥 Jurists Bar Review: Leading the Way in Bar Exam Success! 🔥

Advance Review starts on 9 November. Don’t miss your chance to join the top choice of future lawyers.

Jurists Bar Review Center has consistently produced an impressive number of passers:

2023: 1,738 Jurists passers (46% of the national passers)

2022: 2,123 Jurists passers (53% of the national passers)

2020/2021: 3,832 Jurists passers (48.50% of the national passers)

✅Boost your chances of passing the 2025 bar. Sign up for our advance review. Be part of the next wave of Jurists lawyers.

20/10/2024

Gumagala ka sana tuwing sabado. Ayan, may pasok ka tuloy 😬

20/10/2024

MAS MUKHANG KAGALANG GALANG KAYO SA PIC

Kasalukuyang ine edit ko ang aking bagong libro ang Book 2 ng Revised Penal Code. Dahil nga sa dami ng aking ginagawa bilang isang taga usig, professor at MCLE lecturer, at dahil na rin sa gahol sa oras, palagi ko itong dala dala para isingit ang pag edit.

Ngayong hapon nasa SM Mega Mall ako dahil sa 3-day sale. Habang namimili napansin ni ate ang nakaipit na aklat sa braso ko at ito ang eksena:

Ate: Mahilig din ako magbasa sir. Siguro maganda yang libro mo at dala dala mo pa kahit saan.
Ako: (Ngumiti lang ako)

Ate: Makapal sir ang book. Tungkol saan ang book na yan sir? (Sabay tingin sa likod ng book)
Ako: Sa batas. Tungkol sa law ito.

Ate: Sir parang ikaw ang nasa pic. Oo nga ikaw nga. Ikaw ba ang author nyan? (Medyo nagulat si ate)
Ako: Di ako yan.

Ate: Weh ikaw nga. Pero mas kagalang galang kayo sa pic e.
Ako: (hay naku, bat pa ko pumunta dito)

19/10/2024

Facts


Ten Unknown Facts About

1. Founding and History: BMW, Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, was founded in 1916 in Munich, Germany, initially producing aircraft engines. The company transitioned to motorcycle production in the 1920s and eventually to automobiles in the 1930s.

2. Iconic Logo: The BMW logo, often referred to as the "roundel," consists of a black ring intersecting with four quadrants of blue and white. It represents the company's origins in aviation, with the blue and white symbolizing a spinning propeller against a clear blue sky.

3. Innovation in Technology: BMW is renowned for its innovations in automotive technology. It introduced the world's first electric car, the BMW i3, in 2013, and has been a leader in developing advanced driving assistance systems (ADAS) and hybrid powertrains.

4. Performance and Motorsport Heritage: BMW has a strong heritage in motorsport, particularly in touring car and Formula 1 racing. The brand's M division produces high-performance variants of their regular models, known for their precision engineering and exhilarating driving dynamics.

5. Global Presence: BMW is a global automotive Company

6. Luxury and Design: BMW is synonymous with luxury and distinctive design, crafting vehicles that blend elegance with cutting-edge technology and comfort.

7. Sustainable Practices: BMW has committed to sustainability, incorporating eco-friendly materials and manufacturing processes into its vehicles, as well as advancing electric vehicle technology with models like the BMW i4 and iX.

8. Global Manufacturing: BMW operates numerous production facilities worldwide, including in Germany, the United States, China, and other countries, ensuring a global reach and localized production.

9. Brand Portfolio: In addition to its renowned BMW brand, the company also owns MINI and Rolls-Royce, catering to a diverse range of automotive tastes and luxury segments.

10. Cultural Impact: BMW's vehicles often become cultural icons, featured in films, music videos, and pop culture. Notably, the BMW 7 Series was James Bond's car of choice in the 1997 movie "Tomorrow Never Dies," further solidifying the brand's association with luxury, performance, and cutting-edge technology. The brand's presence in the entertainment industry has contributed to its image as a symbol of status and innovation.

19/10/2024

16/10/2024

Payapa 🥰😍

16/10/2024

You might not thank them now, but you'll be glad you had them later.

16/10/2024

The Supreme Court welcomes the enactment of Republic Act Nos. 12025 and 12026 creating 3 additional Regional Trial Court (RTC) branches in Muntinlupa City, National Capital Region and 4 additional RTC branches in Calauag, Quezon Province.

16/10/2024

Our featured jurisprudence for today.

16/10/2024

Iginiit ng Korte Suprema na hindi oral defamation o slander ang mga pahayag laban sa mga public officer kapag kaugnay sa kanilang mga opisyal na tungkulin, maliban kung mayroong malice.

May malice kapag alam na mali o binalewala kung mali man ang isang pahayag.

Sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, pinawalang-sala ng Second Division ng Korte Suprema ang isang babaeng nahatulan ng grave oral defamation matapos nitong sigawan, sa gilid ng kalsada, ang kanilang barangay kagawad at tinawag siyang bobo, hindi edukado, ignorante, at hindi patas sa paghawak sa barangay conciliation proceeding sa alitan niya sa isa pang kapitbahay.

Sa ilalim ng Article 358 ng Revised Penal Code, may oral defamation o slander kapag (1) may akusasyon ng krimen, pagkakamali, o depekto; (2) pasalita ang pahayag (3) sa pampublikong paraan; (4) may malice; (5) laban sa isang tao, buhay man o patay; at (6) ang akusasyon ay maaaring magdulot ng kahihiyan sa taong inakusahan.

Ayon sa Korte, presumed o ipinapalagay sa batas na ang mapanirang akusasyon ay may malice kaya ang taong nagbitiw ng mga mapanirang pahayag ang may burden o obligasyon na patunayan na walang malice.

Subalit pagdating sa defamation laban sa mga pampublikong opisyal kaugnay ng kanilang mga tungkulin, ang prosekusyon ang may obligasyon na patunayan na may aktwal na malice sa mga mapanirang pahayag. Kinikilala ng Korte na ang free speech o malayang pamamahayag ay nagbibigay kapangyarihan sa mga mamamayan na panagutin ang mga pampublikong opisyal dahil “public office is a public trust.”

Sa kasong ito, hindi napatunayan ng prosecution na may malice sa mga pahayag ng akusado laban sa barangay kagawad. Dagdag pa ng Korte, hindi dapat maging sensitibo ang mga nasa larangan ng public service.

Basahin ang buong press release sa:
https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-statements-against-public-officers-not-slanderous-when-related-to-the-performance-of-official-duties/

Basahin ang buong Desisyon sa: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/246824-argelyn-m-labargan-vs-people-of-the-philippines/

16/10/2024

The Supreme Court emphasized that statements against public officers do not constitute oral defamation or slander when these concern their discharge of official duties —unless done maliciously.

In a Decision written by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, the Supreme Court’s Second Division acquitted an accused of oral defamation for remarks against a barangay kagawad.

The barangay kagawad was walking past the accused’s house, when she yelled from her house’s terrace that the barangay kagawad was uneducated, ignorant, and biased against the accused in their barangay conciliation proceedings. The remarks were heard by many people as the terrace was beside the highway.

Under Article 358 of the Revised Penal Code, there is oral defamation or slander when (1) there is an allegation of a crime, fault, or flaw; (2) made orally; (3) publicly; (4) maliciously; (5) towards a person, alive or dead; and (6) such allegation tends to cause dishonor on the person defamed.

As the law assumes that a defamatory allegation is malicious, or made with knowledge that it is false, the person who made the defamatory remarks has the burden of proving there was no malice.

However, when it comes to defamation against public officers in relation to their duties, the prosecution has the burden to prove there was actual malice in the defamatory remarks. The Court recognizes that the right to free speech empowers citizens to hold public officers accountable because public office is a public trust.

In the present case, the SC said that the prosecution failed to prove there was malice in the accused’s remarks against the barangay kagawad. It stressed that while the statements may be offensive, they are not actionable by themselves: “Being ‘sensitive’ has no place in this line of service."

Read the full press release at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-statements-against-public-officers-not-slanderous-when-related-to-the-performance-of-official-duties/

Read the full text of the Decision at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/246824-argelyn-m-labargan-vs-people-of-the-philippines/