Evidence - What Need Not Be Proved

7/23/2019 Evidence - What Need Not Be Proved

1/111

EVIDENCE WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Petitioner,

- versus -

JENNIFER B. CAGANDAHAN,

Respondent.

G.R. No. 166676

Present:

QUISUMBING,J., Chairperson,

CARPIO MORA!S,

"INGA,

#!ASCO, $R.,and

BRION,JJ.

Pro%u&'ated:

Septe%(er )*, *++

x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

DECISIONQUISUMBING,J.:

"his is a petition or revie under Ru&e /0 o the Ru&es o Court raisin'

pure&1 2uestions o &a and see3in' a reversa& o the 4e5ision[1dated $anuar1 )*,

*++0 o the Re'iona& "ria& Court 6R"C7, Bran5h 88 o Sini&oan, a'una, hi5h

'ranted the Petition or Corre5tion o !ntries in Birth Certii5ate i&ed (1 $ennier B.Ca'andahan and ordered the o&&oin' 5han'es o entries in Ca'andahans (irth

5ertii5ate: 6)7 the na%e $ennier Ca'andahan 5han'ed to $e Ca'andahan and 6*7

'ender ro% e%a&e to %a&e.

"he a5ts are as o&&os.

On 4e5e%(er )), *++8, respondent $ennier Ca'andahan i&ed a Petition or

Corre5tion o !ntries in Birth Certii5ate[!(eore the R"C, Bran5h 88 o Sini&oan,

a'una.

In her petition, she a&&e'ed that she as (orn on $anuar1 )8, )9) and as

re'istered as a e%a&e in the Certii5ate o ive Birth (ut hi&e 'roin' up, she

deve&oped se5ondar1 %a&e 5hara5teristi5s and as dia'nosed to have Con'enita&

Adrena& 1perp&asia 6CA7 hi5h is a 5ondition here persons thus a&i5ted

possess (oth %a&e and e%a&e 5hara5teristi5s. She urther a&&e'ed that she as
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn1


2/111

dia'nosed to have 5&itora& h1perthrop1 in her ear&1 1ears and at a'e si;, underent

an u&trasound here it as dis5overed that she has s%a&& ovaries. At a'e thirteen,

tests revea&ed that her ovarian stru5tures had %ini%ior?. Petitioner has ade2uate&1 presented to the Court

ver1 5&ear and 5onvin5in' proos or the 'rantin' o his petition. It as %edi5a&&1

proven that petitioners (od1 produ5es %a&e hor%ones, and irst his (od1 as e&&as his a5tion and ee&in's are that o a %a&e. e has 5hosen to (e %a&e. e is a

nor%a& person and ants to (e a53no&ed'ed and identiied as a %a&e.

@!R!OR!, pre%ises 5onsidered, the Civi& Re'ister o Pa3i&, a'una

is here(1 ordered to %a3e the o&&oin' 5orre5tions in the (irth >5?ertii5ate o

$ennier Ca'andahan upon pa1%ent o the pres5ri(ed ees:


3/111

a7 B1 5han'in' the na%e ro% $ennier Ca'andahan to $!

CAGAN4AAN and

(7 B1 5han'in' the 'ender ro% e%a&e to MA!.

It is &i3eise ordered that petitioners s5hoo& re5ords, voters re'istr1,

(aptis%a& 5ertii5ate, and other pertinent re5ords are here(1 a%ended to 5onor%

ith the ore'oin' 5orre5ted data.

SO OR4!R!4.["

"hus, this petition (1 the Oi5e o the So&i5itor Genera& 6OSG7 see3in' a

reversa& o the a(ove%entioned ru&in'.

"he issues raised (1 petitioner are:

"! "RIA COUR" !RR!4 IN GRAN"ING "! P!"I"ION CONSI4!RING

"A":

I.

"! R!QUIR!M!N"S O RU!S )+8 AN4 )+ O "! RU!S O COUR"

A#! NO" B!!N COMPI!4 @I" AN4,

II.

CORR!C"ION O !N"R UN4!R RU! )+ 4O!S NO" AO@ CANG!

O S!D OR G!N4!R IN "! BIR" C!R"IICA"!, @I!

R!SPON4!N"S M!4ICA CON4I"ION, i.e., CONG!NI"A A4R!NAP!RPASIA 4O!S NO" MAE! !R A MA!.[#

Si%p&1 stated, the issue is hether the tria& 5ourt erred in orderin' the

5orre5tion o entries in the (irth 5ertii5ate o respondent to 5han'e her se; or

'ender, ro% e%a&e to %a&e, on the 'round o her %edi5a& 5ondition 3non as

CA, and her na%e ro% $ennier to $e, under Ru&es )+8 and )+ o the Ru&es o

Court.

"he OSG 5ontends that the petition (e&o is ata&&1 dee5tive or non-

5o%p&ian5e ith Ru&es )+8 and )+ o the Ru&es o Court (e5ause hi&e the &o5a&

5ivi& re'istrar is an indispensa(&e part1 in a petition or 5an5e&&ation or 5orre5tion

o entries under Se5tion 8, Ru&e )+ o the Ru&es o Court, respondents petition

(eore the 5ourt a quodid not i%p&ead the &o5a& 5ivi& re'istrar.[$"he OSG urther

5ontends respondents petition is ata&&1 dee5tive sin5e it ai&ed to state that

respondent is a bona fideresident o the provin5e here the petition as i&ed or
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn5


4/111

at &east three 687 1ears prior to the date o su5h i&in' as %andated under Se5tion

*6(7, Ru&e )+8 o the Ru&es o Court.[6"he OSG ar'ues that Ru&e )+ does not

a&&o 5han'e o se; or 'ender in the (irth 5ertii5ate and respondents 5&ai%ed

%edi5a& 5ondition 3non as CA does not %a3e her a %a&e.[7

On the other hand, respondent 5ounters that a&thou'h the o5a& Civi&

Re'istrar o Pa3i&, a'una as not or%a&&1 na%ed a part1 in the Petition or

Corre5tion o Birth Certii5ate, nonethe&ess the o5a& Civi& Re'istrar as urnished

a 5op1 o the Petition, the Order to pu(&ish on 4e5e%(er )F, *++8 and a&&

p&eadin's, orders or pro5esses in the 5ourse o the pro5eedin's,[%respondent is

a5tua&&1 a %a&e person and hen5e his (irth 5ertii5ate has to (e 5orre5ted to re&e5t

his true se;'ender,[&5han'e o se; or 'ender is a&&oed under Ru&e )+, [1'and

respondent su(stantia&&1 5o%p&ied ith the re2uire%ents o Ru&es )+8 and )+ o

the Ru&es o Court.[11

Ru&es )+8 and )+ o the Ru&es o Court provide:

R()* 1'"

CHANGE OF NAME

S!C"ION ). Venue. A person desirin' to 5han'e his na%e sha&& present thepetition to the Re'iona& "ria& Court o the provin5e in hi5h he resides, >or, in the

Cit1 o Mani&a, to the $uveni&e and 4o%esti5 Re&ations Court?.

S!C. *. Contents of petition. A petition or 5han'e o na%e sha&& (e si'ned and

veriied (1 the person desirin' his na%e 5han'ed, or so%e other person on his

(eha&, and sha&& set orth:

6a7 "hat the petitioner has (een a bona fide resident o the provin5e here

the petition is i&ed or at &east three 687 1ears prior to the date o su5hi&in'

6(7 "he 5ause or hi5h the 5han'e o the petitionerHs na%e is sou'ht

657 "he na%e as3ed or.

S!C. 8. Order for hearing. I the petition i&ed is sui5ient in or% and su(stan5e,the 5ourt, (1 an order re5itin' the purpose o the petition, sha&& i; a date and

p&a5e or the hearin' thereo, and sha&& dire5t that a 5op1 o the order (e pu(&ished

(eore the hearin' at &east on5e a ee3 or three 687 su55essive ee3s in so%enespaper o 'enera& 5ir5u&ation pu(&ished in the provin5e, as the 5ourt sha&&

dee% (est. "he date set or the hearin' sha&& not (e ithin thirt1 68+7 da1s prior to

an e&e5tion nor ithin our 6/7 %onths ater the &ast pu(&i5ation o the noti5e.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn11


5/111

S!C. /.Hearing. An1 interested person %a1 appear at the hearin' and oppose the

petition. "he So&i5itor Genera& or the proper provin5ia& or 5it1 is5a& sha&& appear

on (eha& o the Govern%ent o the Repu(&i5.

S!C. 0.Judgment. Upon satisa5tor1 proo in open 5ourt on the date i;ed in the

order that su5h order has (een pu(&ished as dire5ted and that the a&&e'ations o thepetition are true, the 5ourt sha&&, i proper and reasona(&e 5ause appears or

5han'in' the na%e o the petitioner, ad=ud'e that su5h na%e (e 5han'ed ina55ordan5e ith the pra1er o the petition.

S!C. F. Service of judgment. $ud'%ents or orders rendered in 5onne5tion iththis ru&e sha&& (e urnished the 5ivi& re'istrar o the %uni5ipa&it1 or 5it1 here the

5ourt issuin' the sa%e is situated, ho sha&& orthith enter the sa%e in the 5ivi&

re'ister.

R()* 1'%

CANCELLATION OR CORRECTION OF ENTRIES

IN THE CI+IL REGISTR

S!C"ION ). Who may file petition. An1 person interested in an1 a5t, event, order

or de5ree 5on5ernin' the 5ivi& status o persons hi5h has (een re5orded in the

5ivi& re'ister, %a1 i&e a veriied petition or the 5an5e&&ation or 5orre5tion o an1entr1 re&atin' thereto, ith the Re'iona& "ria& Court o the provin5e here the

5orrespondin' 5ivi& re'istr1 is &o5ated.

S!C. *.ntries subject to cancellation or correction. Upon 'ood and va&id

'rounds, the o&&oin' entries in the 5ivi& re'ister %a1 (e 5an5e&&ed or 5orre5ted:6a7 (irths 6(7 %arria'es 657 deaths 6d7 &e'a& separations 6e7 =ud'%ents o

annu&%ents o %arria'e 67 =ud'%ents de5&arin' %arria'es void ro% the

(e'innin' 6'7 &e'iti%ations 6h7 adoptions 6i7 a53no&ed'%ents o natura&

5hi&dren 6=7 natura&i


6/111

S!C. F.#pediting proceedings. "he 5ourt in hi5h the pro5eedin's is (rou'ht

%a1 %a3e orders e;peditin' the pro5eedin's, and %a1 a&so 'rant pre&i%inar1

in=un5tion or the preservation o the ri'hts o the parties pendin' su5hpro5eedin's.

S!C. . Order. Ater hearin', the 5ourt %a1 either dis%iss the petition or issue anorder 'rantin' the 5an5e&&ation or 5orre5tion pra1ed or. In either 5ase, a 5ertiied

5op1 o the =ud'%ent sha&& (e served upon the 5ivi& re'istrar 5on5erned ho sha&&annotate the sa%e in his re5ord.

"he OSG ar'ues that the petition (e&o is ata&&1 dee5tive or non-

5o%p&ian5e ith Ru&es )+8 and )+ o the Ru&es o Court (e5ause respondents

petition did not i%p&ead the &o5a& 5ivi& re'istrar. Se5tion 8, Ru&e )+ provides that

the 5ivi& re'istrar and a&& persons ho have or 5&ai% an1 interest hi5h ou&d (e

ae5ted there(1 sha&& (e %ade parties to the pro5eedin's. i3eise, the &o5a& 5ivi&

re'istrar is re2uired to (e %ade a part1 in a pro5eedin' or the 5orre5tion o na%ein the 5ivi& re'istr1. e is an indispensa(&e part1 ithout ho% no ina&

deter%ination o the 5ase 5an (e had.[1!Un&ess a&& possi(&e indispensa(&e parties

ere du&1 notiied o the pro5eedin's, the sa%e sha&& (e 5onsidered as a&&in' %u5h

too short o the re2uire%ents o the ru&es.[1""he 5orrespondin' petition shou&d a&so

i%p&ead as respondents the 5ivi& re'istrar and a&& other persons ho %a1 have or

%a1 5&ai% to have an1 interest that ou&d (e ae5ted there(1.[1#Respondent,

hoever, invo3es Se5tion F,[1$Ru&e ) o the Ru&es o Court hi5h states that 5ourts

sha&& 5onstrue the Ru&es &i(era&&1 to pro%ote their o(=e5tives o se5urin' to the

parties a =ust, speed1 and ine;pensive disposition o the %atters (rou'ht (eoreit. @e a'ree that there is su(stantia& 5o%p&ian5e ith Ru&e )+ hen respondent

urnished a 5op1 o the petition to the &o5a& 5ivi& re'istrar.

"he deter%ination o a persons se; appearin' in his (irth 5ertii5ate is a &e'a&

issue and the 5ourt %ust &oo3 to the statutes. In this 5onne5tion, Arti5&e /)* o the

Civi& Code provides:AR". /)*. No entr1 in a 5ivi& re'ister sha&& (e 5han'ed or 5orre5ted ithout a

=udi5ia& order.

"o'ether ith Arti5&e 8F[16o the Civi& Code, this provision as a%ended

(1 Repu(&i5 A5t No. 9+/[17 in so ar as clerical or typographical errors are

invo&ved. "he 5orre5tion or 5han'e o su5h %atters 5an no (e %ade throu'h

ad%inistrative pro5eedin's and ithout the need or a =udi5ia& order. In ee5t, Rep.

A5t No. 9+/ re%oved ro% the a%(it o Ru&e )+ o the Ru&es o Court the
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn17


7/111

5orre5tion o su5h errors. Ru&e )+ no app&ies on&1 to su(stantia& 5han'es and

5orre5tions in entries in the 5ivi& re'ister.[1%

Under Rep. A5t No. 9+/, a 5orre5tion in the 5ivi& re'istr1 invo&vin' the

5han'e o se; is not a %ere 5&eri5a& or t1po'raphi5a& error. It is a su(stantia& 5han'eor hi5h the app&i5a(&e pro5edure is Ru&e )+ o the Ru&es o Court.[1&

"he entries envisa'ed in Arti5&e /)* o the Civi& Code and 5orre5ta(&e under

Ru&e )+ o the Ru&es o Court are those provided in Arti5&es /+ and /+ o the

Civi& Code:

AR". /+. A5ts, events and =udi5ia& de5rees 5on5ernin' the 5ivi& status o persons

sha&& (e re5orded in the 5ivi& re'ister.

AR". /+. "he o&&oin' sha&& (e entered in the 5ivi& re'ister:

6)7 Births 6*7 %arria'es 687 deaths 6/7 &e'a& separations 607 annu&%ents o%arria'e 6F7 =ud'%ents de5&arin' %arria'es void ro% the (e'innin' 67

&e'iti%ations 67 adoptions 697 a53no&ed'%ents o natura& 5hi&dren 6)+7

natura&i


8/111

5hara5teristi5s are deter%ined to (e neither e;5&usive&1 %a&e nor e%a&e. An

or'anis% ith interse; %a1 have (io&o'i5a& 5hara5teristi5s o (oth %a&e and

e%a&e se;es.

Interse; individua&s are treated in dierent a1s (1 dierent 5u&tures. In%ost so5ieties, interse; individua&s have (een e;pe5ted to 5onor% to either a %a&e

or e%a&e 'ender ro&e.[!"Sin5e the rise o %odern %edi5a& s5ien5e in @estern

so5ieties, so%e interse; peop&e ith a%(i'uous e;terna& 'enita&ia have had their

'enita&ia sur'i5a&&1 %odiied to rese%(&e either %a&e or e%a&e 'enita&s. [!#More

5o%%on&1, an interse; individua& is 5onsidered as suerin' ro% a disorder hi5h

is a&%ost a&a1s re5o%%ended to (e treated, hether (1 sur'er1 andor (1 ta3in'

&ieti%e %edi5ation in order to %o&d the individua& as neat&1 as possi(&e into the

5ate'or1 o either %a&e or e%a&e.

In de5idin' this 5ase, e 5onsider the 5o%passionate 5a&&s or re5o'nition othe various de'rees o interse; as variations hi5h shou&d not (e su(=e5t to outri'ht

denia&. It has (een su''ested that there is so%e %idd&e 'round (eteen the se;es, a

no-%ans &and or those individua&s ho are neither tru&1 %a&e nor tru&1 e%a&e.[!$"he 5urrent state o Phi&ippine statutes apparent&1 5o%pe&s that a person (e

5&assiied either as a %a&e or as a e%a&e, (ut this Court is not 5ontro&&ed (1 %ere

appearan5es hen nature itse& unda%enta&&1 ne'ates su5h ri'id 5&assii5ation.

In the instant 5ase, i e deter%ine respondent to (e a e%a&e, then there is

no (asis or a 5han'e in the (irth 5ertii5ate entr1 or 'ender. But i e deter%ine,(ased on %edi5a& testi%on1 and s5ientii5 deve&op%ent

shoin' the respondent to (e other than e%a&e, then a 5han'e in the

su(=e5ts (irth 5ertii5ate entr1 is in order.

Bio&o'i5a&&1, nature endoed respondent ith a %i;ed 6neither 5onsistent&1

and 5ate'ori5a&&1 e%a&e nor 5onsistent&1 and 5ate'ori5a&&1 %a&e7

5o%position. Respondent has e%a&e 6DD7 5hro%oso%es. oever, respondents

(od1 s1ste% natura&&1 produ5es hi'h &eve&s o %a&e hor%ones 6andro'en7. As aresu&t, respondent has a%(i'uous 'enita&ia and the phenot1pi5 eatures o a %a&e.

U&ti%ate&1, e are o the vie that here the person is (io&o'i5a&&1 or

natura&&1 interse; the deter%inin' a5tor in his 'ender 5&assii5ation ou&d (e hat

the individua&, &i3e respondent, havin' rea5hed the a'e o %a=orit1, ith 'ood

reason thin3s o hisher se;. Respondent here thin3s o hi%se& as a %a&e and
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn25


9/111

5onsiderin' that his (od1 produ5es hi'h &eve&s o %a&e hor%ones 6andro'en7 there

is preponderant (io&o'i5a& support or 5onsiderin' hi% as (ein' %a&e. Se;ua&

deve&op%ent in 5ases o interse; persons %a3es the 'ender 5&assii5ation at (irth

in5on5&usive. It is at %aturit1 that the 'ender o su5h persons, &i3e respondent, is

i;ed.

Respondent here has si%p&1 &et nature ta3e its 5ourse and has not ta3en

unnatura& steps to arrest or interere ith hat he as (orn ith. And a55ordin'&1,

he has a&read1 ordered his &ie to that o a %a&e. Respondent 5ou&d have under'one

treat%ent and ta3en steps, &i3e ta3in' &ie&on' %edi5ation, [!6to or5e his (od1 into

the 5ate'ori5a& %o&d o a e%a&e (ut he did not. e 5hose not to do so. Nature has

instead ta3en its due 5ourse in respondents deve&op%ent to revea& %ore u&&1 his

%a&e 5hara5teristi5s.

In the a(sen5e o a &a on the %atter, the Court i&& not di5tate onrespondent 5on5ernin' a %atter so innate&1 private as ones se;ua&it1 and &iest1&e

preeren5es, %u5h &ess on hether or not to under'o %edi5a& treat%ent to reverse

the %a&e tenden51 due to CA. "he Court i&& not 5onsider respondent as havin'

erred in not 5hoosin' to under'o treat%ent in order to (e5o%e or re%ain as a

e%a&e. Neither i&& the Court or5e respondent to under'o treat%ent and to ta3e

%edi5ation in order to it the %o&d o a e%a&e, as so5iet1 5o%%on&1 5urrent&1

3nos this 'ender o the hu%an spe5ies. Respondent is the one ho has to &ive

ith his interse; anato%1. "o hi% (e&on's the hu%an ri'ht to the pursuit o

happiness and o hea&th. "hus, to hi% shou&d (e&on' the pri%ordia& 5hoi5e o hat5ourses o a5tion to ta3e a&on' the path o his se;ua& deve&op%ent and

%aturation. In the a(sen5e o eviden5e that respondent is an in5o%petent [!7and in

the a(sen5e o eviden5e to sho that 5&assi1in' respondent as a %a&e i&& har%

other %e%(ers o so5iet1 ho are e2ua&&1 entit&ed to prote5tion under the &a, the

Court air%s as va&id and =ustiied the respondents position and his persona&

=ud'%ent o (ein' a %a&e.

In so ru&in' e do no %ore than 'ive respe5t to 6)7 the diversit1 o nature

and 6*7 ho an individua& dea&s ith hat nature has handed out. In other ords,

e respe5t respondents 5on'enita& 5ondition and his %ature de5ision to (e a%a&e. ie is a&read1 dii5u&t or the ordinar1 person. @e 5annot (ut respe5t ho

respondent dea&s ith hisunordinar1 state and thus he&p %a3e his &ie easier,

5onsiderin' the uni2ue 5ir5u%stan5es in this 5ase.

As or respondents 5han'e o na%e under Ru&e )+8, this Court has he&d that

a 5han'e o na%e is not a %atter o ri'ht (ut o =udi5ia& dis5retion, to (e e;er5ised
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/september2008/166676.htm#_ftn27


10/111

in the &i'ht o the reasons addu5ed and the 5onse2uen5es that i&& o&&o. [!%"he

tria& 5ourts 'rant o respondents 5han'e o na%e ro% $ennier to $e i%p&ies a

5han'e o a e%inine na%e to a %as5u&ine na%e. Considerin' the 5onse2uen5e that

respondents 5han'e o na%e %ere&1 re5o'ni


11/111

On August 22, !!", five #nformations for kidnapping for ransom $Crim. Case%os. ""&", ""&, ""&2, ""&' and ""&() and three #nformations for kidnapping$Crim Case %os. ""&*, ""&& and ""&+), all dated August (, !!", werefiled-before the egional Trial Court of /amboanga City against Carlos 0alcasantos,1ailon ulais, 1umatiya Amlani, %orma 3ahiddan de ulais, 1alina 4assan de amming,2-

3alvador 5amaril, 4adjirul 6lasin, 1aimuddin 4assan, #mam'-

Taruk Alah, 0reddie5anuel alias Ajid, and several 1ohn and 1ane 7oes. The #nformations for kidnapping forransom, which set forth identical allegations save for the names of the victims, read asfollows8

That on or about the 2th day of 7ecember, !99, in the City of /amboanga,6hilippines, and within the jurisdiction of this 4onorable Court, the above:named accused, being all private individuals, conspiring and confederatingtogether, mutually aiding and assisting one another, with threats to kill theperson of 0;


12/111

Of the twelve accused, only nine were apprehended, namely, 1ailon 1ulais,1umatiya Amlani, %orma 3ahiddan de ulais, 3alvador 5amaril, 4adjirul 6lasin,1ainuddin 4assan, #mam Taruk Alah, 1alina 4assan and 0reddie 5anuel. 9-

On their arraignment on 3eptember ', !!", all the accused pleaded notguilty. 1oint trial on the merits ensued. On April 9, !!, 1udge 6elagio 3. 5andi

rendered the assailed '&:page 7ecision, the dispositive portion of which reads8

D4;;0O;, above premises and discussion taken into consideration, thisCourt renders its judgment, ordering and finding8

. 0;77#; 5A%E;imum period.

D4;;0O;, for the five charges of k-idnapping for r-ansom, and pursuantto Art. 2&+ of the evised 6enal Code, five life imprisonments are imposed on1ainuddin 4assan y Ahmad, 1ailon ulais, 3alvador 5amaril y 5endoFa andadjirul 6lasin y Alih $Crim. Cases %os. ""&":""&().

0or kidnapping 5rs. Birginia 3an Agustin:?ara, a female and public officerand pursuant to Art. 2&+, evised 6enal Code $par. (.), another lifeimprisonment is imposed on 1ainuddin 4assan y Ahmad, 1ailon ulais,

3alvador 5amaril y 5endoFa and 4adjirul 6lasin y Alih $Crim. Case %o.""&&)

0or kidnapping 5onico 3aavedra y to 0rancisco y ?aspar,and their kidnapping not having lasted more than five days, pursuant to Art.2&9, evised 6enal Code, and the #ndeterminate 3entence


13/111

5endoFa and 4adjirul 6lasin y Alih : are sentenced to serve two $2) jail termsranging from ten $") years of prision mayor as minimum, to eighteen $9)years of reclusion temporal as ma>imum $Crim. Cases %os. ""&* and""&+).

'. 1A5AT#A A5


14/111

To 1essica Calunod8

One $) 3eiko wrist watch 6 2*".""

One @racelet 6 2,("".""

One 3houlder @ag 6 2"".""

Cash 6 2"".""

To Armado C. @acarro8

One $) wrist watch 6 9"".""

One %ecklace 6 '"".""

One Calculator 6 2!*.""

;yeglasses 6 *"".""

One 3teel Tape 6 2*".""

To ;dilberto 3. 6ereF

One $) ayban 6 ,""".""

One Drist Datch 6 ,9"".""

Cash 6 '"".""

To Birginia 3an Agustin:?ara

One $) Drist Datch 6 9*".""

The benefit of Art. 2!, evised 6enal Code, on preventive suspension, shallbe e>tended to those sentenced.

The cases against 5ajid 3amson, alias Commander @ungi Awalon amlona.k.a. Commander amlon Carlos 0alcasantos and several 1ohn 7oes and1ane 7oes are AC4#B;7 until their arrest.

Costs against the accused convicted.

3O O7;;7.!-
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn9


15/111

On 5ay +, !!, 1ailon ulais, 1umatiya Amlani de 0alcasantos, %orma 3ahiddande ulais and 1aliha 4ussin filed their joint %otice of Appeal. "-#n a letter dated 0ebruary&, !!+, the same appellants, e>cept 1ailon ulais, withdrew their appeal because oftheir application for amnesty. #n our 5arch !, !!+ esolution, we granted theirmotion. 4ence, only the appeal of ulais remains for the consideration of this Court. -

T7' F$)*sThe Version of the Prosecution

The solicitor general summariFed, in this wise, the facts as viewed by the 6eople8

On 7ecember 2, !99, a group of public officials from various governmentagencies, organiFed themselves as a monitoring team to inspect governmentprojects in /amboanga City. The group was composed of Birginia ?ara, as the

head of the team Armando @acarro, representing the Commission on Audit0eli> del osario, representing the non:government ;dilberto 6ereF,representing the City Assessors Office 1essica Calunod and Allan @asa of theCity @udget Office and 5onico 3aavedra, the driver from the City ;ngineersOffice. $p. ', T3%, October 22, !!".)

On that particular day, the group headed to the


16/111

Commander 0alcasantos also ordered their victims to sign the ransom noteswhich demanded a ransom of 6""."""."" and 6(,"""."" in e>change fortwenty $2") sets of uniform. $p.*, T3%, ibid.)

On 0ebruary ', !9!, at around 28"" oclock noontime, the victims were

informed that they would be released. They started walking until around +8""o clock in the evening of that day. At around 28"" o clock midnight, thevictims were released after Commander 0alcasantos and amlon receivedthe ransom money. $p. !, T3%, ibid.) The total amount paid was622,"""."".The same was reached after several negotiations between 5ayor Bitaliano

Agan of /amboanga City and the representatives of the kidnappers. $pp. 2, &,T3%, %ov. , !!")

> > >.2-

The prosecution presented fifteen witnesses, including some of the kidnap victimsthemselves8 1essica Calunod, Armando @acarro, ;dilberto 6ereF, Birginia 3an Agustin:?ara, Cali>to 0rancisco, and 5onico 3aavedra.

The Version of the Defense

The facts of the case, according to the defense, are as follows8 '-

On 5ay 29, !!", at about "8"" o clock in the morning, while weeding their

farm in 3inaburan, /amboanga del 3ur, accused:appellant 1umatiya Amlaniwas picked up by soldiers and brought to a place where one army battalionwas stationed. Thereat, her five $*) co:accused, namely 3alvador 5amaril,4adjirul 6lasin, 1ainuddin 4assin, #mam Taruk Alah and 0reddie 5anuel werealready detained. #n the afternoon of the same day, appellants spouses 1ailonulais and %orma 3ahiddan were brought to the battalion station and likewisedetained thereat. On 5ay '", !!", the eight $9) accused were transported to5etrodiscom, /amboanga City. 4ere on the same date, they were joined byaccused:appellant 1aliha 4ussin.

At the time Amlani was picked up by the military, she had just escaped fromthe captivity of Carlos 0alcasantos and company who in !99 kidnapped andbrought her to the mountains. Against their will, she stayed with 0alcasantosand his two wives for two months, during which she slept with 0alcasantos asaide of the wives and was made to cook food, wash clothes, fetch water andrun other errands for everybody. An armed guard was assigned to watch her,so that, for sometime, she had to bear the ill:treatment of 0alcasantos other
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn13


17/111

wives one of whom was armed. After about two months, while she wascooking and 0alcasantos and his two wives were bathing in the river, andwhile her guard was not looking, she took her chance and made a successfuldash for freedom. $T3%, 1anuary 2!, !!2, pp. 2:*)


18/111

T7' T($l !ou(*s Rul%/

The trial court found Appellant ulais guilty of five counts of kidnapping for ransomand one count of kidnapping a woman and public officer, for which offenses it imposedupon him si> terms of life imprisonment. #t also found him guilty of two counts of slight

illegal detention for the kidnapping of 5onico 3aavedra and Cali>to 0rancisco. The trialcourt ratiocinated as follows8

6rincipally, the issue here is one of credibility : both of the witnesses and theirversion of what had happened on 7ecember 2, !99, to 0ebruary ', !9!.On this pivotal issue, the Court gives credence to p-rosecution witnesses andtheir testimonies. 6rosecution evidence is positive, clear and convincing. %otaint of evil or dishonest motive was imputed or imputable to p-rosecutionwitnesses. To this Court, who saw all the witnesses testify, p-rosecutionwitnesses testified only because they were impelled by a- sense of justice, of

duty and of truth.

Contrarily, d-efense evidence is weak, uncorroborated and consisted only ofalibis. The individual testimonies of the nine accused dwelt- principally onwhat happened to each of them on 5ay 2+, 29 and 2!, !!". %one of theaccused e>plained where he or she was on and from 7ecember 2, !99, to0ebruary ', !9!, when p-rosecution evidence showed- positively seven ofthe nine accused were keeping the five or si> hostages named byp-rosecution evidence.

The seven accused positively identified to have been present during thecourse of the captivity of the five kidnap:victims:complainants are8 $)1umatiya Amlani $2) 1aliha 4ussin $') %orma 3ahiddan $() 1ailon ulais $*)4adjirul 6lasin $&) 3alvador 5amaril and $+) 1ainuddin 4assan.

The two accused not positively identified are8 0reddie 5anuel alias Ajid, and#mam Taruk Alah. These two must, therefore, be declared acGuitted based onreasonable doubt.

The ne>t important issue to be e>amined is8 Are these seven accused guilty

as conspirators as charged in the eight #nformations or only as accomplicesJ6rosecution evidence shows that the kidnapping group to which the sevenaccused belonged had formed themselves into an armed band for thepurpose of kidnapping for ransom. This armed band had cut themselves offfrom established communities, lived in the mountains and forests, moved fromplace to place in order to hide their hostages. The wives of these armed bandmoved along with their husbands, attending to their needs, giving them


19/111

material and moral support. These wives also attended to the needs of thekidnap victims, sleeping with them or comforting them.

> > > > > > > > >

##) The guilt of 1ainuddin 4assan, 1ailon ulais, 3alvador 5amaril and 4adjirul6lasin. The Court holds these four men guilty as conspirators in the 9 cases ofkidnapping. Enlike the three women:accused, these male accused werearmed. They actively participated in keeping their hostages by fighting off themilitary and CA0?E3, in transferring their hostages from place to place, andin guarding the kidnap hostages. 3alvador 5amaril and 1ailon ulais werepositively identified as among the nine armed men who had kidnapped theeight kidnap victims on 7ecember 2, !99.

The higher degree of participation found by the Court of the four accused is

supported by the rulings of our 3upreme Court Guoted below.

$) The time:honored jurisprudence is that direct proof is not essential to proveconspiracy. #t may be shown by a number of infinite acts, conditions andcircumstances which may vary according to the purposes to be accomplishedand from which may logically be inferred that there was a common design,understanding or agreement among the conspirators to commit the offensecharged. $6eople vs. Cabrera, (' 6hil &( 6eople vs. Carbonel, (9 6hil. 9&9.)

$2) The crime must, therefore, in view of the solidarity of the act and intent

which e>isted between the si>teen accused, be regarded as the act of theband or party created by them, and they are all eGually responsible for themurder in Guestion. $E.3. vs. @undal, et. al. ' 6hil 9!, !9.)

$') Dhen two or more persons unite to accomplish a criminal object, whether throughthe physical volition of one, or all, proceeding severally or collectively, each individualwhose evil will actively contribute to the wrongdoing is in law responsible for the whole,the same as though performed by himself alone. $6eople vs. 6eralta, et. al. 2* 3CA+*!, ++2 $!&9).)(-

T7' Ass/%'& E((o(s

The trial court is faulted with the following errors, viz8

I


20/111

The trial court erred in taking judicial notice of a material testimony givenin another case by amine him.

II

On the assumption that


21/111

cohorts.&-@ecause he was allegedly deprived of his right to cross:e>amine a materialwitness in the person of amine the witnesses against him.

4aving said that, we note, however, that even if the court a quodid take judicialnotice of the testimony of aminations conducted by appellantscounsel. At best, then, the trial courts mention of ample, aside from Commander 0alcasantos and Commander amlon we came toknow first our foster parents, those who were assigned to give us some food.

H ou mean to say that the captors assigned you some men who will take care of youJ

A es.

H And to whom were you assignedJ

A To lla Abdurasa.

H And other than your foster parents- or the parents whom you are assigned to, who elsedid you come to knowJ
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn18


22/111

A 6agal and his wife Tangkongand his wife %ana the two $2) wives of Commander0alcasantos : 5ating and 1anira : another brother in:law of Commander amlon,Esman, the wife of amlon, Tira.

> > > > > > > > >

H %ow, you said that you were with these men for fifty:four days and you really came to

know them. Dill you still be able to recogniFe these persons if you will see them- againJ

A es, maam.

H %ow will you look around this 4onorable Court and see if any of those you mentioned arehereJ

A es, they are here.

H 3ome of them are hereJ

A 3ome of them are here.

> > > > > > > > >

H Dhere is TangkongJ Dhat is he wearingJ

A Dhite t:shirt with orange collar. $witness pointing.) He was one of those nine armed menwho took us from the highway.

TC #%T;6;T;8

Ditness pointed to a man sitting in court and when asked of his name, he gave his nameas 1A# > > > > > > > !-

> > > > > > > >

H And what happened thenJ

A 3ome of the armed men assigned who will be the host or who will be the one to- gi-vefood to us.

H To- whom were you assignedJ

A I was assigned to a certain Tangkong and [his] wife ana.


23/111

> > > > > > > > >

H %ow, you said you were assigned to Tangkong and his wife. 7-o you remember how helooks likeJ

A es.

H %ow, will you please look around this Court and tell us if that said Tangkong and his wifeare hereJ

A es, maam.

H Could you please point this Tangkong to usJ

A !itness pointed to a person in "ourt. [!]hen asked his name he identified [himself] as#ailon $ulais.

H Dhy did you say his name is TangkongJ Dhere did you get that nameJ

A Dell, that is the name by which he is- usually called in the camp.

> > > > > > > > >

ATT. 0A@#A% $counsel for accused ulais)

H Dhen did you first meet TangkongJ

A That was on 7ecember , because I remember he was the one who took us.

H Dhen you were Guestioned by the fiscal a while ago, you stated that 5r. 5amaril was oneof those who stopped the bus and took you to the hill and you did not mentionTangkongJ

A # did not mention but I can remember his face.

> > > > > > > > >

H And because Tangkong was always with you as your host even if he did not tell you that hewas- one of those who stopped you, you would not recogniFe himJ

A %o, # can recogniFe him because he was the one who took my shoes.

COET8

H DhoJ

A Tangkong% your Honor.

> > > > > > > > > 2"-

Also straightforward was ;rnesto 6ereF candid narration8

0#3CA< CA1AO%8

> > > > > > > > >

H Dho elseJ

A The last man.

H 7id you come to know his nameJ


24/111

A &nly his nickname% Tangkong. '!itness pointed to a man in "ourt who identified himselfas #ailon $ulais.(

H And what was Tangkong doing in the mountainJ

A The same% guarding us.

CO33:;=A5#%AT#O% @ ATT. 3A4AH ;ngr. 6ereF, you stated that you were ambushed by nine armed men on your way from

the-


25/111

captivity. 4is participation gives credence to the conclusion of the trial court that he wasa conspirator.

Kidnapping

for anso!

That the kidnapping of the five was committed for the purpose of e>torting ransom isalso apparent from the testimony of Calunod, who was Guite emphatic in identifying theaccused and narrating the circumstances surrounding the writing of the ransom letters.

C6 CA1AO% 7 538

H %ow, you were in their captivity for *( days and you said there were these meetings forpossible negotiation with the City ?overnment. Dhat do you mean by thisJ Dhat wereyou supposed to negotiateJ

A )ecause they told us that they will be releasing us only after the terms. 22-

H And what were the termsJ 7id you come to know the termsJ

A I came to know the terms because I was the one ordered by "ommander *alcasantos towrite the letter% the ransom letter.

H At this point of time, you remember how many letters were you asked to write for yourransomJ

A # could not remember as to how many, but # can identify them.

H Dhy will you able to identify the sameJ

A )ecause I was the one who wrote it.

H And you are familiar, of course, with your penmanshipJ

A es.

H %ow we have here some letters which were turned over to us by the 4onorable City 5ayorBitaliano Agan. ,2,',(,* : there are five letters all handwritten.

COET8

OriginalJ

C6 CA1AO% 7 538

Original, your 4onor.

H And we would like you to go over these and say, tell us if any of these were the ones youwere asked to write.

A $Ditness going over letters-)

This one : 2 pages. This one : 2 pages. %o more.

H Aside from the fact that you identified your penmanship in these letters, what else willmake you remember that these are really the ones you wrote while thereJ


26/111

A The signature is there.

H There is a printed name here,- 1essica Calunod.

A And over it is a signature.

H That is your signatureJ

A es, maam.

H 4ow about in the other letter, did you sign it alsoJ

A es, there is the other signature.

H There are names : other names here : ;ddie 6ereF, Allan @asa, Armando @acarro, 0eli>osario, 1ojie Ortuoste and there are signatures above the same. 7id you come up toknow who signed this oneJ

A Those whose signatures there were signed by the persons. sic-

H And we have here at the bottom, Commander amlon 4assan, and there is the signatureabove the same. 7id you come to know who signed itJ

A #t was- Commander amlon 4assan who signed that.

> > > > > > > > >

H 1essica, # am going over this letter ... Could you please read to us the portion here whichsays the termsJ ...

A $Ditness reading) 5ao ilang gusto nga andamun na ninyo and kantidad nga 6"","""ug 6(,""" baylo sa 2" sets nga uniforms sa @iyernes $6ebrero ', !9!). 2'-

> > > > > > > > >

#%T;6;T; $Translation)8

This is what they like you to prepare8- the amount of 6"","""."" and 6(,"""."" ine>change for- 2" sets of uniform on 0riday, 0ebruary ', !9!.

> > > > > > > > >

H %ow you also earlier identified this other letter and this is dated 1anuary 2, !99.2(-%ow, could you please e>plain to us why it is dated 1anuary 2 !99 and theother one ;nero ', !9! or 1anuary ', !9!J

A # did not realiFe that # placed !9!, !99, but it was !9!.

H 1anuary 2, !9!J

A es

> > > > > > > > >

H %ow, in this letter, were the terms also mentionedJ 6lease go over this.

A $?oing over the letter)

es, maam.

H Could you please read it aloud to usJ
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn24


27/111

A $Ditness reading)

?usto nila and 6"","""."" ng kapinan nu ug 2" sets nga completong uniformer $+colors marine type wala nay labot ang sapatos), tunga medium ug tunga large siFe.2*-

> > > > > > > > >

#%T;6;T;8They like the 6"","""."" and an addition of 2" sets of complete uniform $+ colors,marine:type not including the shoes), one half medium, one half large.

> > > > > > > > >

H After having written these letters, did you come to know after they were- signed by yourcompanions and all of you, do you know if these letters were sentJ #f you know only.

A # would like to make it clear. The first letter was ordered to me by 0alcasantos to inform theCity 5ayor that initial as 6*"","""."", and when we were already : # was asked again towrite, we were ordered to affi> our signature to serve as proof that all of us are alive.2&-sic-

Calunods testimony was substantially corroborated by both Armando @acarro 2+-and;dilberto 6ereF.29-The receipt of the ransom letters, the efforts made to raise and deliverthe ransom, and the release of the hostages upon payment of the money were testifiedto by /amboanga City 5ayor Bitaliano Agan2!-and Teddy 5ejia.'"-

The elements of kidnapping for ransom, as embodied in Article 2&+ of the evised6enal Code,'-having been sufficiently proven, and the appellant, a private individual,having been clearly identified by the kidnap victims, this Court thus affirms the trialcourts finding of appellants guilt on five counts of kidnapping for ransom.

Kidnapping ofPu"lic #fficers

Bictims Birginia 3an Agustin:?ara, 5onico 3aavedra and Cali>to 0rancisco weremembers of the government monitoring team abducted by appellants group. The threetestified to the fact of kidnapping however, they were not able to identify theappellant. ;ven so, appellants identity as one of the kidnappers was sufficientlyestablished by Calunod, @acarro and 6ereF, who were with ?ara, 3aavedra and0rancisco when the abduction occurred.

That ?ara, 3aavedra and 0rancisco were detained for only three hours '2-does not

matter. #n 6eople vs. 7omasian%''-the victim was similarly held for three hours, and wasreleased even before his parents received the ransom note. The accused thereinargued that they could not be held guilty of kidnapping as no enclosure was involved,and that only grave coercion was committed, if at all.'(-Convicting appellants ofkidnapping or serious illegal detention under Art. 2&+ $() of the evised 6enal Code, theCourt found that the victim, an eight:year:old boy, was deprived of his liberty when hewas restrained from going home. The Court justified the conviction by holding that theoffense consisted not only in placing a person in an enclosure, but also in detaining or
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn31http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn32http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn33http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn34http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn31http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn32http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn33http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn34


28/111

depriving him, in any manner, of his liberty.'*-plain where hewas during the Guestioned dates $7ecember 2, !99 to 0ebruary ', !9!) neither didhe rebut Calunod, @acarro and 6ereF, when they identified him as one of theirkidnappers.

R')luso% P'('*u$, Not %ife &!prison!ent
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn36http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn37http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn38http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn39http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn40http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn35http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn36http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn37http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn38http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn39http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1998/jul1998/100901_08.htm#_edn40


29/111

The trial court erred when it sentenced the appellant to si> terms of lifeimprisonment. The penalty for kidnapping with ransom, under the evised 6enal Code,is reclusion perpetua to death. 3ince the crimes happened in !99, when the capitalpenalty was proscribed by the Constitution, the ma>imum penalty that could have beenimposed was reclusion perpetua. tent or duration. to 0rancisco.


30/111

On 3eptember '", !+9, after the usual personal interview,

defendant wrote to plaintiff, offering a contract of employment as

an e>patriate @:+"+ captain for an original period of two $2) years

commencing on 1anuary 2, !+9, 6laintiff accepted the offer and

commenced working on 1anuary 2", !+!. After passing the si>:month probation period, plaintiffLs appointment was confirmed

effective 1uly 2, !+!. $Anne> K@K, p. '", ollo).

On 1uly 2, !+!, defendant offered plaintiff an e>tension of his

two:year contract to five $*) years effective 1anuary 2, !+! to

1anuary 2", !9( subject to the terms and conditions set forth in

the contract of employment, which the latter accepted $Anne> KCK,

p. ', ec.).

7uring his service as @:+"+ captain, plaintiff on August 2(, !9",

while in command of a flight, committed a noise violation offense

at the /urich Airport, for which plaintiff apologiFed. $;>h. K'K, p.

'"+, ec.).

3ometime in !9", plaintiff featured in a tail scraping incident

wherein the tail of the aircraft scraped or touched the runway

during landing. 4e was suspended for a few days until he was

investigated by a board headed by Capt. Choy. 4e wasreprimanded.3cjuris

On 3eptember 2*, !9, plaintiff was invited to take a course of A:

'"" conversion training at Aeroformacion, Toulouse, 0rance at

defendantLs e>pense. 4aving successfully completed and passed

the training course, plaintiff was cleared on April +, !9 for solo

duty as captain of the Airbus A:'"" and subseGuently appointed

as captain of the A:'"" fleet commanding an Airbus A:'"" in

flights over 3outheast Asia. $Anne>es K7K, K;K and K0K, pp. '(:'9,

ec.).

3ometime in !92, defendant, hit by a recession, initiated cost:

cutting measures. 3eventeen $+) e>patriate captains in the

Airbus fleet were found in e>cess of the defendantLs reGuirement


31/111

$t.s.n., 1uly &, !99. p. ). ConseGuently, defendant informed its

e>patriate pilots including plaintiff of the situation and advised

them to take advance leaves. $;>h. K*K, p. (&&, ec.).

ealiFing that the recession would not be for a short time,defendant decided to terminate its e>cess personnel $t.s.n., 1uly

&, !99, p. +). #t did not, however, immediately terminate itLs A:

'"" pilots. #t reviewed their Gualifications for possible promotion to

the @:+(+ fleet. Among the + e>cess Airbus pilots reviewed,

twelve were found Gualified. Enfortunately, plaintiff was not one of

the twelve.1urissc

On October *, !92, defendant informed plaintiff of his termination

effective %ovember , !92 and that he will be paid three $')months salary in lieu of three months notice $Anne> K#K, pp. (:(2,

ec.). @ecause he could not uproot his family on such short

notice, plaintiff reGuested a three:month notice to afford him time

to e>haust all possible avenues for reconsideration and retention.

7efendant gave only two $2) months notice and one $) month

salary. $t.s.n., %ov. 2, !9+. p. 2*).

Aggrieved, plaintiff on 1une 2!, !9', instituted a case for illegal

dismissal before the


32/111

contract andMor documents e>ecuted in 3ingapore. Thus,

defendant postulates that 3ingapore laws should apply and courts

thereat shall have jurisdiction. $pp. *":&!, ec.).5isjuris

#n traversing defendantLs arguments, plaintiff claimed that8 $)where the items demanded in a complaint are the natural

conseGuences flowing from a breach of an obligation and not

labor benefits, the case is intrinsically a civil dispute $2) the case

involves a Guestion that is beyond the field of specialiFation of

labor arbiters and $') if the complaint is grounded not on the

employeeLs dismissal per se but on the manner of said dismissal

and the conseGuence thereof, the case falls under the jurisdiction

of the civil courts. $pp. +":+', ec.)

On 5arch 2', !9+, the court a Guo denied defendantLs motion to

dismiss $pp. 92:9(, #bid). The motion for reconsideration was

likewise denied. $p. !* ibid)

On 3eptember &, !9+, defendant filed its answer reiterating the

grounds relied upon in its motion to dismiss and further arguing

that plaintiff is barred by laches, waiver, and estoppel from

instituting the complaint and that he has no cause of action. $pp.

"2:*)K -

On April ", !!, the trial court handed down its decision in favor of plaintiff.

The dispositive portion of which reads8

KD4;;0O;, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of plaintiff

5enandro


33/111

3#%N*(,+(2."", or its eGuivalent in 6hilippine currency at the

current rate of e>change at the time of payment and the further

amounts of 6&+,*""."" as conseGuential damages with legal

interest from the filing of the complaint until fully paid

6,""","""."" as and for moral damages 6,""","""."" as and

for e>emplary damages and 6"","""."" as and for attorneyLs

fees.

Costs against defendant.

3O O7;;7.K2-

3ingapore Airlines timely appealed before the respondent court and raised the

issues of jurisdiction, validity of termination, estoppel, and damages.

On October 2!, !!', the appellate court set aside the decision of the trial

court, thus,

K...#n the instant case, the action for damages due to illegal

termination was filed by plaintiff:appellee only on 1anuary 9, !9+

or more than four $() years after the effectivity date of his

dismissal on %ovember , !92. Clearly, plaintiff:appelleeLs action

has already prescribed.

D4;;0O;, the appealed decision is hereby ;B;3;7 and

3;T A3#7;. The complaint is hereby dismissed.

3O O7;;7.K'-%ewmiso

6etitionerLs and 3ingapore AirlinesL respective motions for reconsideration

were denied.

%ow, before the Court, petitioner poses the following Gueries8

. #3 T4; 6;3;%T ACT#O%O%; @A3;7 O% CO%TACT

D4#C4 6;3C#@;3 #% T;% ;A3 E%7; AT#C


34/111

0O5 A% #%1E TO T4; #?4T3 O0 T4; 6


35/111

before the > >K5isact

Dhat rules on prescription should apply in cases like this one has long been

decided by this Court. #n illegal dismissal, it is settled, that the ten:year

prescriptive period fi>ed in Article (( of the Civil Code #$y %o* be invoked

by petitioners, for the Civil Code is a law of general application, while the

prescriptive period fi>ed in Article 2!2 of the


36/111

prevail.L $Citing 7everiza v. Intermediate -ppellate "ourt% *+

3CA 292, 2!(.) 5eneralia specialibus non derogant.8-

#n the light of Article 2!, aforecited, we agree with the appellate courtLs

conclusion that petitionerLs action for damages due to illegal termination filedagain on 1anuary 9, !9+ or more than four $() years after the effective date

of his dismissal on %ovember , !92 has already prescribed.

K#n the instant case, the action for damages due to illegal

termination was filed by plaintiff:appellee only on 1anuary 9, !9+

or more than four $() years after the effectivity date of his

dismissal on %ovember , !92. Clearly, plaintiff:appelleeLs action

has already prescribed.K

De base our conclusion not on Article (( of the Civil Code but on Article

2! of the


37/111

when plaintiff:appellee accepted the offer of employment, he was

bound by the terms and conditions set forth in the contract,

among others, the right of mutual termination by giving three

months written notice or by payment of three months salary. 3uch

provision is clear and readily understandable, hence, there is noroom for interpretation.K

> > >

0urther, plaintiff:appelleeLs contention that he is not bound by the

provisions of the Agreement, as he is not a signatory thereto,

deserves no merit. #t must be noted that when plaintiff:appelleeLs

employment was confirmed, he applied for membership with the

3ingapore Airlines cess of what is

reasonably needed.K(-

All these considered, we find sufficient factual and legal basis to conclude that

petitionerLs termination from employment was for an authoriFed cause, for

which he was given ample notice and opportunity to be heard, by respondent
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/114776.html#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/114776.html#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/114776.html#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/114776.html#_ftn14


38/111

company. %o error nor grave abuse of discretion, therefore, could be

attributed to respondent appellate court.3ppedsc

A!!ORINGL, the instant petition is 7#35#33;7. The decision of the Court

of Appeals in C.A. CB %o. '((+& is A00#5;7.

SO ORERE.

[G.R. No. 1>


39/111

P)8,9).00

espondents rejected the above valuation. Thus, pursuant to 3ection

&$d) of .A. &&*+, as amended, a summary administrative proceeding was

conducted before the 6rovincial Agrarian eform Adjudicator $6AA7) todetermine the valuation of the land. ;ventually, the 6AA7 rendered its

7ecision affirming the


40/111

ON! UN4R!4 "IR"-S!#!N P!SOS 6PF0,)8.++7 in 5ash and

in (onds in the proportion provided (1 &a

*. Orderin' respondent and(an3 to pa1 the petitioners or the .F++ he5tares

o ri5e&and the su% o OR"-SID "OUSAN4 P!SOS6P/F,+++.++7 in 5ash and in (onds in the proportion provided (1 &a and

8. Orderin' respondent and(an3 to pa1 the petitioners the su% o S!#!N"-

NIN! "OUSAN4 S!#!N UN4R!4 "IR"-"@O P!SOS

6P9,8*.++7 as the 5o%pounded interest in 5ash.

I" IS SO OR4!R!4. +-

#n determining the valuation of the land, the trial court based the same on

the facts established in another case pending before it $Civil Case %o. &&+!,


41/111

4ence, this petition for review on certiorari.

The fundamental issue for our resolution is whether the Court of Appeals

erred in sustaining the trial courts valuation of the land. As earlier mentioned,

there was no trial on the merits.

To begin with, under 3ection of ;>ecutive Order %o. ("* $!!"), the


42/111

#n the proceedings before the TC, it is mandated to apply the ules of

Court!-and, on its own initiative or at the instance of any of the parties,

appoint one or more commissioners to e>amine, investigate and ascertain

facts relevant to the dispute, including the valuation of properties, and to file a

written report thereof > > >.2"-

#n determining just compensation, the TC isreGuired to consider several factors enumerated in 3ection + of .A. &&*+,

as amended, thus8

Se5. ).'etermination of Just Compensation. In deter%inin' =ust 5o%pensation, the

5ost o a52uisition o the &and, the 5urrent va&ue o &i3e properties, its nature, a5tua&

use and in5o%e, the sorn va&uation (1 the oner, the ta; de5&arations, and the

assess%ent %ade (1 'overn%ent assessors sha&& (e 5onsidered. "he so5ia& and

e5ono%i5 (eneits 5ontri(uted (1 the ar%ers and the ar%or3ers and (1 the

Govern%ent to the propert1, as e&& as the non-pa1%ent o ta;es or &oans se5uredro% an1 'overn%ent inan5in' institution on the said &and, sha&& (e 5onsidered as

additiona& a5tors to deter%ine its va&uation.

These factors have been translated into a basic formula in 7A

Administrative Order %o. &, 3eries of !!2, as amended by 7A

Administrative Order %o. , 3eries of !!(, issued pursuant to the 7As

rule:making power to carry out the object and purposes of .A. &&*+, as

amended.2-

The formula stated in 7A Administrative Order %o. &, as amended, is as

follows8

# J 6CNI ; +.F7 L 6CS ; +.87 L 6M# ; +.)7

# J and #a&ue

CNI J Capita&i


43/111

A.) @hen the CS a5tor is not present and CNI and M# are app&i5a(&e, the or%u&a

sha&& (e:

# J 6CNI ; +.97 L 6M# ; +.)7

A.* @hen the CNI a5tor is not present, and CS and M# are app&i5a(&e, the or%u&a

sha&& (e:

# J 6CS ; +.97 L 6M# ; +.)7

A.8 @hen (oth the CS and CNI are not present and on&1 M# is app&i5a(&e, the

or%u&a sha&& (e:

# J M# ; *

4ere, the TC failed to observe the basic rules of procedure and the

fundamental reGuirements in determining just compensation for the

property. F(s*ly,it dispensed with the hearing and merely ordered the parties

to submit their respective memoranda. 3uch action is grossly erroneous since

the determination of just compensation involves the e>amination of the

following factors specified in 3ection + of .A. &&*+, as amended8

). the 5ost o the a52uisition o the &and

*. the 5urrent va&ue o &i3e properties

8. its nature, a5tua& use and in5o%e

/. the sorn va&uation (1 the oner the ta; de5&arations

0. the assess%ent %ade (1 'overn%ent assessors

F. the so5ia& and e5ono%i5 (eneits 5ontri(uted (1 the ar%ers and thear%or3ers and (1 the 'overn%ent to the propert1 and

. the non-pa1%ent o ta;es or &oans se5ured ro% an1 'overn%ent inan5in'

institution on the said &and, i an1.


44/111

Obviously, these factors involve ?$)*u$l matters which can be established

only during a hearing wherein the contending parties present their respective

evidence. #n fact, to underscore the intricate nature of determining the

valuation of the land, 3ection *9 of the same law even authoriFes the 3pecial

Agrarian Courts to appoint commissioners for such purpose.

S')o%&ly,the TC, in concluding that the valuation of respondents

property is 6+"','+."", merely took judicial notice of the average production

figures % *7' odrigue( )$s' '%&%/ ;'?o(' *and applied the same to

this case without conducting a hearing and worse, without the knowledge or

consent of the parties, thus8

; ; ;. In the 5ase ; ; ; o the 5o5onut portion o the &and 0./8+ he5tares, deendants

deter%ined the avera'e 'ross produ5tion per 1ear at 0+F.90 3i&os on&1, (4 0 48* ;*5**4 9* o0)o9 3* 8*4* 09 4oo )o= 9

o?3*2 4o 48*Rodriguez9* =808 =9 1,'61 >0)o9 =8* 48* oo(4 )2 0

o48 9*9 * 0 48* 9?* 4o= o< B9(2, C?0*9 No4*, o?3*))0@ 4809


45/111

o(4 48* 4o 234 1,'61 >0)o9 9 48* ;*@* @o99 3o2(40o 5* o< 48*

oo(4 )2 0 4809 9*. @e have to app&1 a&so the pri5e o P9.+ per 3i&o as this is

the va&ue that and(an3 i;ed or this 5ase.

"he net in5o%e o the 5o5onut &and is e2ua& to +K o the 'ross in5o%e. So, the netin5o%e o the 5o5onut &and is ),+F) ; .+ ; 9.+ e2ua&s P,*+/.)9 per

he5tare. App&1in' the 5apita&i* (200)

o40*o an1 %atter 2 ))o= 48* 340*9 4o * 8*2 48**o.

Ater the tria&, and (eore =ud'%ent or on appea&, the proper 5ourt, on its on

initiative or on re2uest o a part1, %a1 ta3e =udi5ia& noti5e o an1 %atter 2 ))o=
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn25


46/111

48* 340*9 4o * 8*2 48**oi su5h %atter is de5isive o a %ateria& issue in the

5ase. 6e%phasis added7

The TC failed to observe the above provisions.

L$s*ly, the TC erred in applying the formula prescribed under ;>ecutive

Order $;O) %o. 2292&-and .A. %o. '9((, 2+-as amended, in determining the

valuation of the property and in granting compounded interest pursuant to

7A Administrative Order %o. ', 3eries of !!(. 29-#t must be stressed that

;O %o. 229 covers private agricultural lands (#$(ly &'5o*'& *o ()' $%&

)o(%, while .A. '9(( governs $/()ul*u($l l'$s'7ol& ('l$*o%between the

person who furnishes the landholding, either as owner, civil law lessee,

usufructuary, or legal possessor, and the person who personally cultivates the

same.2!-

4ere, the land is planted to coconut and rice and does not involveagricultural leasehold relation. Dhat the trial court should have applied is the

formula in 7A Administrative Order %o. &, as amended by 7A

Administrative Order %o. discussed earlier.

As regards the award of compounded interest, suffice it to state that 7A

Administrative Order %o. ', 3eries of !!( does not apply to the subject land

but to those lands taken under 6residential 7ecree %o. 2+ '"-and ;>ecutive

Order %o. 229 whose owners have not been compensated. #n this case, the

property is covered by .A. &&*+, as amended, and respondents have beenpaid the provisional compensation thereof, as stipulated during the pre:trial.

Dhile the determination of just compensation involves the e>ercise of

judicial discretion, however, such discretion must be discharged within the

bounds of the law. 4ere, the TC wantonly disregarded .A. &&*+, as

amended, and its implementing rules and regulations. $7A Administrative

Order %o. &, as amended by 7A Administrative Order %o.).

#n sum, we find that the Court of Appeals and the TC erred indetermining the valuation of the subject land. Thus, we deem it proper to

remand this case to the TC for trial on the merits wherein the parties may

present their respective evidence. #n determining the valuation of the subject

property, the trial court shall consider the factors provided under 3ection + of

.A. &&*+, as amended, mentioned earlier. The formula prescribed by the
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/143276.htm#_ftn30


47/111

7A in Administrative Order %o. &, 3eries of !!2, as amended by 7A

Administrative Order %o. , 3eries of !!(, shall be used in the valuation of

the land. 0urthermore, upon its own initiative, or at the instance of any of the

parties, the trial court may appoint one or more commissioners to e>amine,

investigate and ascertain facts relevant to the dispute.

+HEREFORE, the petition is ?A%T;7. The assailed 7ecision of the

Court of Appeals dated 5arch 2", 2""" in CA:?.. 36 %o. *2&' is

;B;3;7. Civil Case %o. &9"& is ;5A%7;7 to the TC, @ranch (",

7aet, Camarines %orte, for trial on the merits with dispatch. The trial judge is

directed to observe strictly the procedures specified above in determining the

proper valuation of the subject property.

SO ORERE.

REPUBLIC GLASS CORPORATION G.R. No. 144413

and GERVEL, INC.,

Petitioners Present!

D"#i$e

%r. C.J. Chairman

&'is'()in*

+n"res,S"nti"*o , #ers's , C"r-io "n$

A/'n"JJ.

Pro('0*"te$!

LAWRENCE C. QUA,

Res-on$ent. %'0 32 224


48/111

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

DECISION

CARPIO, J.:

The Case

Be5ore t6e Co'rt is " -etition 5or re#ie7819"ss"i0in* t6e : ;"r/6

222 De/ision89"n$ t6e : %'0 222 Reso0'tion o5 t6e Co'rt o5

A--e"0s in CA,G.R. CV No.


49/111

Petitioners Re-')0i/ G0"ss Cor-or"tion @RGC "n$ Ger#e0 In/.

@Ger#e0 to*et6er 7it6 res-on$ent L"7ren/e C. &'" @&'" 7ere

sto/?6o0$ers o5 L"$te? In/. @L"$te?. L"$te? o)t"ine$ 0o"ns 5ro(

;etro-o0it"n B"n? "n$ Tr'st Co(-"n @;etro)"n?8


50/111

Under the sa%e A'ree%ents, Qua p&ed'ed ),9*,8F+ 5o%%on shares o sto53 o

Genera& Mi&&in' Corporation 6GMC7 in avor o RGC and Gerve&. "he p&ed'ed

shares o sto53 served as se5urit1 or the pa1%ent o an1 su% hi5h RGC and

Gerve& %a1 (e he&d &ia(&e under the A'ree%ents.

adte3 deau&ted on its &oan o(&i'ations to Metro(an3 and P4CP. en5e,

Metro(an3 i&ed a 5o&&e5tion 5ase a'ainst adte3, RGC, Gerve& and Qua do53eted

as Civi& Case No. 8F/ 6Co&&e5tion Case No. 8F/7 hi5h as ra&ed to the

Re'iona& "ria& Court o Ma3ati, Bran5h )/9 6R"C-Bran5h )/97. 4urin' the

penden51 o Co&&e5tion Case No. 8F/,RGC and Gerve& paid Metro(an3 P

%i&&ion. ater, Metro(an3 e;e5uted a aiver and 2uit5&ai% dated Septe%(er

)9 in avor o RGC and Gerve&. Based on this aiver and 2uit5&ai%,

>9?Metro(an3, RGC and Gerve& i&ed on )F Septe%(er )9 a =oint %otion to

dis%iss Co&&e5tion Case No. 8F/ a'ainst RGC and Gerve&. A55ordin'&1, R"C-

Bran5h )/9 dis%issed the 5ase a'ainst RGC and Gerve&, &eavin' adte3 and Quaas deendants.>)+?

In a &etter dated Nove%(er )9, RGC and Gerve&s 5ounse&, Att1. Antonio

C. Paste&ero, de%anded that Qua pa1 P8,F+,F/F, or /*.**K o P,8+,0/8.00,

>))?as rei%(urse%ent o the tota& a%ount RGC and Gerve& paid to Metro(an3 and

P4CP. Qua reused to rei%(urse the a%ount to RGC and Gerve&. Su(se2uent&1,

RGC and Gerve& urnished Qua ith noti5es o ore5&osure o Quas p&ed'ed shares.

&'" 0e$ " /o(-0"int 5or in'n/tion "n$ $"("*es 7it6

"--0i/"tion 5or " te(-or"r restr"inin* or$er $o/?ete$ "s Ci#i0
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn11


51/111

C"se No. ,:43 @ore/0os're C"se No. ,:43 7it6 RTC,

Br"n/6 :3 to -re#ent RGC "n$ Ger#e0 5ro( 5ore/0osin* t6e

-0e$*e$ s6"res. A0t6o'*6 it iss'e$ " te(-or"r restr"inin* or$er

on > De/e()er 1> RTC,Br"n/6 :3 $enie$ on %"n'"r 1>>

&'"s Ur*ent Petition to S's-en$ ore/0os're S"0e. RGC "n$

Ger#e0 e#ent'"00 5ore/0ose$ "00 t6e -0e$*e$ s6"res o5 sto/? "t

-')0i/ "'/tion. T6's &'"s "--0i/"tion 5or t6e iss'"n/e o5 "

-re0i(in"r in'n/tion )e/"(e (oot.819

Tri"0 in ore/0os're C"se No. ,:43 ens'e$. RGC "n$

Ger#e0 oFere$ &'"s ;otion to Dis(iss

8139

in Co00e/tion C"se No.3:4 "s )"sis 5or t6e 5ore/0os're o5 &'"s -0e$*e$ s6"res. &'"s

;otion to Dis(iss st"tes!

. The foregoing fact ho! that the "a#$ent of

defendant Re"%&'ic G'a Cor"oration and Ger(e', Inc.

!a for the entire o&'igation/o#ere$ ) t6e Contin'in*

S'ret A*ree(ents 76i/6 7ere Annees B "n$ C o5 t6e

Co(-0"int "n$ t6"t t6e s"(e n"t'r"00 re$o'n$8e$9 to t6e

)enet o5 $e5en$"nt &'" 6erein "s -ro#i$e$ 5or ) 0"7s-e/i/"00 Arti/0e 11= o5 t6e Ci#i0 Co$e 76i/6 st"tes t6"t!

12. It is #er /0e"r t6"t t6e -"(ent o5 $e5en$"nts Re-')0i/ G0"ss

Cor-or"tion "n$ Ger#e0 In/. 7"s ('/6 (ore t6"n t6e "(o'nt

sti-'0"te$ in t6e Contin'in* S'ret A*ree(ent 76i/6 is t6e )"sis

5or t6e "/tion "*"inst t6e( "n$ $e5en$"nt &'" 76i/6 7"s 'st

SI ;ILLION TWO HUNDRED 8THOUSAND9 PESOS

@P:22222.22 6en/e 0o*i/"00 t6e s"i$ "00e*e$ o)0i*"tion

('st no7 )e /onsi$ere$ "s 5'00 -"i$ "n$ etin*'is6e$.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/144413.htm#_ftn13


52/111

RGC "n$ Ger#e0 0i?e7ise oFere$ "s e#i$en/e in ore/0os're

C"se No. ,:43 t6e Or$er $is(issin* Co00e/tion C"se No. 3:4814976i/6 RTC,Br"n/6 14> s')se'ent0 re#erse$ on ;etro)"n?s

(otion 5or re/onsi$er"tion. T6's RTC,Br"n/6 14> reinst"te$

Co00e/tion C"se No. 3:4 "*"inst &'".

On 1 %"n'"r 1>>: RTC,Br"n/6 :3 ren$ere$ " De/ision in

ore/0os're C"se No. ,:43 @1 %"n'"r 1>>: De/ision

or$erin* RGC "n$ Ger#e0 to ret'rn t6e 5ore/0ose$ s6"res o5

sto/? to &'". T6e $is-ositi#e -ortion o5 t6e 1 %"n'"r 1>>:

De/ision re"$s!

WHEREORE -re(ises /onsi$ere$ t6is Co'rt 6ere) ren$ers

'$*(ent or$erin* $e5en$"nts oint0 "n$ se#er"00 0i")0e to ret'rn to

-0"intiF t6e 1>3:2 s6"res o5 /o((on sto/? o5 Gener"0 ;i00in*

Cor-or"tion 76i/6 t6e 5ore/0ose$ on De/e()er > 1> or s6o'0$ t6e

ret'rn o5 t6ese s6"res )e no 0on*er -ossi)0e t6en to -" to -0"intiF t6e

"(o'nt o5 P3:2:4:.22 7it6 interest "t : -er "nn'( 5ro(

De/e()er > 1> 'nti0 5'00 -"i$ "n$ to -" -0"intiF P122222.22 "s

"n$ 5or "ttornes 5ees. T6e /osts 7i00 )e 5or $e5en$"nts "//o'nt.

SO ORDERED.81>: @3 ;" 1>>:

Or$er re/onsi$erin* "n$ settin* "si$e t6e 1 %"n'"r 1>>:

De/ision. T6e 3 ;" 1>>: Or$er st"tes!


53/111

A5ter " t6oro'*6 re#ie7 o5 t6e re/or$s o5 t6e /"se "n$ "n

e#"0'"tion o5 t6e e#i$en/e "$$'/e$ ) t6e -"rties "s 7e00 "s t6eir

/ontentions t6e iss'es to )e reso0#e$ )oi0 $o7n to t6e 5o00o7in*!

1. W6et6er or not t6e -"rties o)0i*"tion to rei()'rse

'n$er t6e In$e(nit A*ree(ents 7"s -re(ise$ on t6e -"(ent

) "n o5 t6e( o5 t6e entire o)0i*"tionJ

. W6et6er or not t6ere is )"sis to -0"intiFs "--re6ension

t6"t 6e 7o'0$ )e ("$e to -" t7i/e 5or t6e sin*0e o)0i*"tionJ

"n$

3. W6et6er or not -0"intiF 7"s )enete$ ) t6e -"(ents

("$e ) $e5en$"nts.

Re*"r$in* t6e rst iss'e " /0oser s/r'tin o5 t6e -ertinent

-ro#isions o5 t6e In$e(nit A*ree(ents ee/'te$ ) t6e -"rties 7o'0$

not re#e"0 "n si*ni/"nt in$i/"tion t6"t t6e -"rties 0i")i0ities "re

in$ee$ -re(ise$ on t6e -"(ent ) "n o5 t6e( o5 t6e entire

o)0i*"tion. T6ese "*ree(ents /0e"r0 -ro#i$e t6"t t6e -"rties

o)0i*"tion to rei()'rse "//r'es '-on (ere "$#i/e t6"t one o5 t6e(6"s -"i$ or 7i00 so -" t6e o)0i*"tion. It is not s-e/ie$ 76et6er t6e

-"(ent is 5or t6e entire o)0i*"tion or not.

A//or$in*0 t6e Co'rt st"n$s /orre/te$ in t6is re*"r$. The

o&(io% conc'%ion that can &e een no! i that "a#$ent of

the entire o&'igation i not a condition sine qua nonfor the

"a#ing "art# to de$and rei$&%re$ent.T6e -"rties 6"#e

e-ress0 /ontr"/te$ t6"t e"/6 7i00 rei()'rse 76oe#er is ("$e to -"

t6e o)0i*"tion 76et6er entire0 or 'st " -ortion t6ereo5.

On t6e se/on$ iss'e -0"intiFs "--re6ension t6"t 6e 7o'0$ )e

("$e to -" t7i/e 5or t6e sin*0e o)0i*"tion is 'n5o'n$e$. Un$er t6e

")o#e,(entione$ In$e(nit A*ree(ents in t6e e#ent t6"t t6e

/re$itors "re ")0e to /o00e/t 5ro( 6i( 6e 6"s t6e ri*6t to "s?

$e5en$"nts to -" t6eir -ro-ortion"te s6"re in t6e s"(e 7"


54/111

$e5en$"nts 6"$ /o00e/te$ 5ro( t6e -0"intiF ) 5ore/0osin* 6is -0e$*e$

s6"res o5 sto/? 6is -ro-ortion"te s6"re "5ter t6e 6"$ ("$e

-"(ents. ro( "00 in$i/"tions t6e -ro#isions o5 t6e In$e(nit

A*ree(ents 6"#e re("ine$ )in$in* )et7een t6e -"rties.

On t6e t6ir$ iss'e t6ere is (erit to $e5en$"nts "ssertion t6"t

-0"intiF 6"s )enete$ 5ro( t6e -"(ents ("$e ) $e5en$"nts. A

a''eged defendant, and thi ha not &een denied

"'ainti), in Ci(i' Cae No. *+- 'ed &efore /ranch 0-1 of thi

Co%rt, !here the creditor !ere enforcing the "artie 'ia&i'itie

a %retie, "'ainti) %cceeded in ha(ing the cae di$ied

arg%ing that defendant "a#$ent 2!ere3 for the entire

o&'igation, hence, the o&'igation ho%'d &e conidered f%''#

"aid and e4ting%ihed. Wit6 t6e $is(iss"0 o5 t6e /"se t6e

in$i/"tions "re t6"t t6e /re$itors "re no 0on*er r'nnin* "5ter -0"intiF toen5or/e 6is 0i")i0ities "s s'ret o5 L"$te?.

W6et6er or not t6e s'ret "*ree(ents si*ne$ ) t6e -"rties "n$

t6e /re$itors 7ere no#"te$ is not ("teri"0 in t6is /ontro#ers. T6e 5"/t

is t6"t t6ere 7"s -"(ent o5 t6e o)0i*"tion. Hen/e t6e In$e(nit

A*ree(ents *o#ern.

In t6e n"0 "n"0sis $e5en$"nts -"(ents *"#e rise to -0"intiFs

o)0i*"tion to rei()'rse t6e 5or(er. H"#in* 5"i0e$ to $o so '-on

$e("n$ $e5en$"nts 7ere 'stie$ in 5ore/0osin* t6e -0e$*e$ s6"res o5

sto/?s.

WHEREORE -re(ises /onsi$ere$ t6e $e/ision $"te$ %"n'"r

1 1>>: is re/onsi$ere$ "n$ set "si$e. T6e ")o#e,entit0e$ /o(-0"int

"*"inst $e5en$"nts is DIS;ISSED.

Li?e7ise $e5en$"nts /o'nter/0"i( is "0so $is(isse$.


55/111

SO ORDERED.81:9@E(-6"sis s'--0ie$

&'" 0e$ " (otion 5or re/onsi$er"tion o5 t6e 3 ;" 1>>: Or$er

76i/6 RTC,Br"n/6 :3 $enie$.

A**rie#e$ &'" "--e"0e$ to t6e Co'rt o5 A--e"0s. D'rin* t6e

-en$en/ o5 t6e "--e"0 &'" 0e$ " ;"ni5est"tion81=97it6 t6e

Co'rt o5 A--e"0s "tt"/6in* t6e De/ision819o5 1 No#e()er 1>>:

ren$ere$ in Co00e/tion C"se No. 3:4. T6e $is-ositi#e -ortion o5

t6e $e/ision re"$s!

@!R!OR!, pre%ises 5onsidered, =ud'%ent is here(1 rendered

orderin' deendants adte3, In5. and aren5e C. Qua:

). "o pa1, =oint&1 and severa&&1, the p&ainti the a%ounto P//,00*,8.8/ as o O5to(er 8), )9 p&us the stipu&ated interest o 8+.8K

per annu% and pena&t1 5har'es o )*K per annu% ro% Nove%(er ), )9 unti&

the ho&e a%ount is u&&1 paid, &ess P,+++,+++.++ paid (1 deendants

Repu(&i5 G&ass Corporation and Gerve&, In5., (ut 48* )00)045 o< 2*


56/111

8. "o pa1 the 5ost o suit.

"he Counter5&ai%s o the deendants adte3, In5. and aren5e C. Qua

a'ainst the p&ainti are here(1 dis%issed.

i3eise, the 5ross-5&ai%s o the deendants are dis%issed.

SO OR4!R!4.>)9?6!%phasis supp&ied7

On : ;"r/6 222 t6e Co'rt o5 A--e"0s ren$ere$ t6e 'estione$

De/ision settin* "si$e t6e 3 ;" 1>>: Or$er o5 RTC,Br"n/6 :3

"n$ reinst"tin* t6e 1 %"n'"r 1>>: De/ision or$erin* RGC "n$

Ger#e0 to ret'rn t6e 5ore/0ose$ s6"res o5 sto/? to &'". 829

Hen/e t6is -etition.

The Ruling of the Court of Appeals


57/111

In re#ersin* t6e 3 ;" 1>>: Or$er "n$ reinst"tin* t6e 1 %"n'"r

1>>: De/ision t6e "--e00"te /o'rt 'ote$ t6e RTC,Br"n/6 :3s 1

%"n'"r 1>>: De/ision!

T6e 0i")i0it o5 e"/6 -"rt 'n$er t6e in$e(nit "*ree(ents t6ere5ore is

-re(ise$ on t6e -"(ent ) "n o5 t6e( o5 t6e entire

o)0i*"tion. Wit6o't s'/6 -"(ent t6ere 7o'0$ )e no /orres-on$in*

s6"re to rei()'rse. P"(ent o5 t6e entire o)0i*"tion n"t'r"00

re$o'n$s to t6e )enet o5 t6e ot6er so0i$"r $e)tors 76o ('st t6en

rei()'rse t6e -"in* /o,$e)tors to t6e etent o5 6is /orres-on$in*

s6"re.

In t6e /"se "t )"r Re-')0i/ G0"ss "n$ Ger#e0 ("$e -"rti"0 -"(ents

on0 "n$ so t6e $i$ not etin*'is6 t6e entire o)0i*"tion. B't Re-')0i/

G0"ss "n$ Ger#e0 ne#ert6e0ess o)t"ine$ 'it/0"i(s in t6eir 5"#or "n$ so

t6e /e"se$ to )e so0i$"ri0 0i")0e 7it6 -0"intiF 5or t6e )"0"n/e o5 t6e

$e)t @E6s. D E "n$ I. P0"intiF t6's )e/"(e so0e0 0i")0e 5or t6e

'n-"i$ -ortion o5 t6e $e)t e#en "s 6e is )ein* 6e0$ 0i")0e 5or

rei()'rse(ent on t6e s"i$ -ortion.

W6"t 6"--ene$ t6ere5ore 7"s t6"t ;etro)"n? "n$ PDCP in eFe/t

en5or/e$ t6e S'rets6i- A*ree(ents oint0 "s "*"inst -0"intiF "n$

$e5en$"nts. Conse'ent0 t6e so0i$"r o)0i*"tion 'n$er t6e S'rets6i-

A*ree(ents 7"s no#"te$ ) t6e s')st"nti"0 (o$i/"tion o5 its

-rin/i-"0 /on$itions. T6e res'0tin* /6"n*e 7"s 5ro( one 7it6 t6ree


58/111

so0i$"r $e)tors to one in 76i/6 L"7ren/e &'" )e/"(e t6e so0e

so0i$"r /o,$e)tor o5 L"$te?.

De5en$"nts /"nnot si(-0 -" oF " -ortion o5 t6e $e)t "n$ t6en

")so0#e t6e(se0#es 5ro( "n 5'rt6er 0i")i0it 76en t6e o)0i*"tion 6"s

not )een tot"00 etin*'is6e$.

In t6e n"0 re/?onin* t6is Co'rt n$s t6"t t6e 5ore/0os're "n$ s"0e o5

t6e s6"res -0e$*e$ ) -0"intiF 7"s tot"00 'n'stie$ "n$ 7it6o't )"sis

)e/"'se t6e o)0i*"tion se/'re$ ) t6e 'n$er0in* -0e$*e 6"$ )een

etin*'is6e$ ) no#"tion. 819

T6e Co'rt o5 A--e"0s 5'rt6er 6e0$ t6"t t6ere 7"s "n i(-0ie$

no#"tion or s')st"nti"0 in/o(-"ti)i0it in t6e s'rets (o$e or

("nner o5 -"(ent 5ro( one 5or t6e entire o)0i*"tion to one

(ere0 o5 -ro-ortion"te s6"re. T6e "--e00"te /o'rt r'0e$ t6"t RGC

"n$ Ger#e0s -"(ent to t6e /re$itors on0 "(o'nte$ to t6eir

-ro-ortion"te s6"res o5 t6e o)0i*"tion /onsi$erin* t6e 5o00o7in*

e#i$en/e!T6e 0etter o5 t6e Re-')0i/ to t6e "--e00"nt E6i)it G $"te$ %'ne = 76i/6 (entione$ t6e 0etter 5ro( PDCP /onr(in* i

Evidence - What Need Not Be Proved

Documents

Transcript of Evidence - What Need Not Be Proved