COMMERCIAL LAW
Chair’s Cases (A Thread)
INSURANCE
Alpha Plus v. PCIC GR 203756 (2021) - condition contained in an insurance policy that claims must be presented within 1 year after rejection is essential to a prompt settlement of claims against insurance companies.
#HernanDoIt The "final rejection" simply means denial by the insurer of the claims of the insured and not the rejection or denial by the insurer of the insured's motion or request for reconsideration. The rejection referred to should be construed as the rejection in the first instance.

CIVIL LAW
CHAIR’S CASES (Thread)
Pugoy-Solidum v. Republic of the Philippines GR 213954 (2022) - the totality of evidence must still be sufficient to prove that the incapacity was grave, incurable, and existing prior to the time of the marriage. Carullo-Padua v. Padua GR 208258 (2022) - Irreconcilable differences, conflicting personalities, emotional immaturity and irresponsibility, physical abuse, habitual alcoholism, sexual infidelity or perversion, and abandonment, also do not warrant psychological incapacity

CIVIL LAW
For hotel-keepers to be liable as depositaries, the following elements must concur (Art. 1998 NCC):
a. They have been previously informed about the effects brought by the guests; and
b. The latter have taken the precautions prescribed their safekeeping.
#incrediBar2023 Extended liability of hotel-keepers – includes vehicles, animals and articles introduced or placed in the annexes of the hotel (Art. 1999 NCC)

CRIMINAL LAW Chair’s Cases (thread)
•People v. Constantino GR 251636 (2022) – the test to determine when the act is mala in se and not malum prohibitum is whether it is inherently immoral or the vileness of the penalized act;

#IncrediBar2023 #HernanDoIt #HernandoBar2023 ·Chua v. SOJ GR 214960 (2022)- trust receipts law is malum prohibitum; mere failure of petitioners to turn over the proceeds of the sale of goods, or to return the good themselves if not sold under the trust receipts that were not novated, constitutes the gravamen of the offense.

CRIMINAL LAW
ABERRATIO ICTUS – If the crimes committed against the target victim and third person, who was hit by reason of aberratio ictus, were produced by a single act, the accused is liable for a complex crime.

#IncrediBar2023 #HernandoBar2023 #HernanDoIt
1/4 Exceptions: accused is liable for separate crimes despite the application of the aberratio ictus rule, and not a complex crime:
a. Bullet that killed the target victim is different from the bullet that killed the third person

2/4

CRIMINAL LAW
Obstruction of justice – any person who willfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the apprehension of suspects or the investigation or prosecution of criminal cases, or intrudes in a crime scene and may be typically committed under the following:

1/10 a) Preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal investigation proceeding or from reporting the commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s by means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats;

2/10

REMEDIAL LAW
Factual-issue-bar Rule - Petition for review under Rule 45 is discretionary. It may only be availed if the appeal is on pure question of law. Thus, question of fact is not allowed to be raised because the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. #IncrediBar2023 Instances when Supreme Court may pass upon questions of fact:
—-Conclusions of CA is grounded entirely on speculations, surmises and conjectures
—-Inference is manifestly mistaken
—-There is grave abuse of discretion
—-Judgment is based on misapprehension of facts

— 1 of 3

Chair’s Cases on Legal and Judicial Ethics (a thread)

· Turla v. Caringal AC 11641 (2019) – Falsehood in MCLE Compliance (Rule 1.1 of Canon 1, Rule 10.1 of Canon 10, Canon 17, Canon 18)

#incrediBar2023 #HernandoBar2023 #HernanDoIt · Francia v. Sagario AC 10938 (2019) – Non-filing despite receipt of legal fees from client; highly fiduciary nature of an attorney-client relationship (Rules 16.01 and 16.03 of Canon 16, Canon 17, and Rule 18.03 of Canon 18)

Chair’s cases (Rem)
· Ramirez v. Elomina GR 202661 (2021) - MR was filed out of time; appeal is merely a statutory privilege
· Radaza v. Sandiganbayan GR 201380 (2021) – deficiency remains formal, non-jurisdictional, and curable at any stage of the criminal proceedings · PNB-Republic Bank v. Sian-Limsiaco GR 196323 (2021) – cancellation of mortgage is a personal action; no transfer or disposition of real property rights; mortgagor is a real party-in-interest in a representative capacity #incrediBar2023 #HernandoBar2023 #hernanDoIt