In Green v. Green, the Supreme Court declared the marriage between Jeffrey and Rowena Green void due to Rowena’s psychological incapacity. Evidence showed her pathological gambling, infidelity, dishonesty, and substantial debts, making her unable to fulfill marital obligations. The Court emphasized that psychological incapacity need not be a clinical diagnosis but must be proven through clear acts of dysfunctionality.
In Mother Goose Special School System, Inc. v. Spouses Palaganas, the Supreme Court ruled that the school breached its contractual duty to provide a safe learning environment when a student was repeatedly punched by classmates during a teacher’s absence. The Court emphasized that educational institutions must ensure student safety and cannot solely rely on the “good father of a family” defense in contractual breaches.
Mother Goose Special School System, Inc. v. Spouses Palaganas [January 20, 2025] Read More »
In Spouses Calimlim v. Goño, the Supreme Court ruled that structures built by the Calimlims on public foreshore land without government approval constituted a public nuisance. These unauthorized constructions obstructed public access and caused environmental harm.
generate a 50-word summary for this article. it is a case digest of a case decided by the supreme court of the Philippines. make the summary easily understandable by students and capture important points. no need to cite the G.R. No. and date of the case. here is the link to the article:
In Planters Development Bank v. Heirs of Delos Santos, the Supreme Court ruled that despite the borrowers’ waiver of demand in the promissory note, the bank was still required to provide personal notice before initiating extrajudicial foreclosure. Failure to do so invalidated the foreclosure proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of proper notification to borrowers. Notwithstanding, the High Court upheld the validity of the foreclosure sale in this case finding that Planters Development Bank complied with its obligation to personally notify Sps. Delos Santos of the same.
Planters Development Bank v. Heirs of Delos Santos [January 15, 2025] Read More »
In the case of Lizada vs. Tecson, the Supreme Court disbarred Atty. Demosthenes S. Tecson for misappropriating ₱67 million of his clients’ funds from an expropriation case. Tecson claimed the funds were used to expedite proceedings, but the Court found this constituted bribery and violated legal ethics. He was ordered to return the misappropriated amount.
In People v. Tuazon, the Supreme Court convicted Nell Jackel Tuazon of qualified trafficking. Tuazon paid an intermediary ₱5,000 to exploit 16-year-old AAA sexually. The Court emphasized that trafficking is consummated upon recruitment or use for exploitation, regardless of the victim’s consent or occurrence of sexual intercourse.
An essential requisite of consolidation is that the actions to be consolidated are pending before the court. A case that was already resolved may no longer be consolidated.
“Evident miscalculation of figures” under Section 25 (a), RA 876 means obvious mathematical errors relating to miscalculation that appear on the face of the award. It does not pertain to any allegation of fraud, corruption, or grave abuse. It is limited to clerical errors and honest mistakes and is, thus, correctible insofar as they do not affect the merits of the controversy.
In Go v. Go and Republic, the Supreme Court upheld the nullification of the marriage of the Spouses Leilani and Hendrick Go under Article 36 of the Family Code. It gave credence to the testimony of both ordinary and expert witnesses in determining the existence and gravity of the mutual incompatibility and antagonism between the spouses.
In Tsutsumi v. Republic, the Supreme Court recognized a Japanese divorce between a Filipino and Japanese citizen. The Court accepted authenticated documents as sufficient proof of divorce and Japanese law, emphasizing procedural flexibility to ensure substantial justice in family matters.
