ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

REMEDIAL LAW
O M N I B U S N O T E S
 DISCLAIMER

The Omnibus Notes represent the collective efforts of the

selfless and heroic Student Volunteers of the Arellano Law Bar
Operations Commission. Its primary purpose is to create a
material that will help the barristers prepare for the bar exams
as well as provide the underbar students with another collateral
to supplement learning in their respective classes.

While these materials were discerningly prepared with utmost

diligence under the guidance and supervision of our notable
professors, it does not claim any authoritative value nor do
these materials claim an impeccable content.

Should the reader find any error in our entries, please feel free
to reach out to our Bar Operations Secretariat at
[email protected] so we can earnestly issue an
erratum at the soonest possible time.

“To all men and women who will walk this path, we humbly
offer this noble endeavor for you. May this be a lighting guide
through the steep and uncertain road until such time you
become the very light in another’s life, liberty and property— the
lawyer ablaze with grit and hope to guide lost causes toward
the right path.”
 PHILIPPINE COPYRIGHT

This material is an intellectual property of the Arellano Law Bar

Operations Commission 2024. Any unauthorized reprint or use
of this material is prohibited. No part of this material may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including but not limited to
photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or
retrieval system without the express written consent of both
Arellano Law Bar Operations Commission 2024 and the
Arellano University School of Law.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © 2024

To God be the Glory!

 REMEDIAL LAW 1

1. Trader’s Bank was held to be liable 2. Ryan was hired by UREIC as a

to RPN, with finality. To execute the construction worker in Malaysia for
judgement, the RTC issued a writ of its principal, TWC. But upon seeking
execution against BankCom, with assistance for their inhuman living
whom Trader’s Bank entered into a and working conditions, Ryan was
Purchase and Sale Agreement, and terminated and eventually
repatriated. This prompted Ryan to
MBTC where the escrow account
file an illegal dismissal and money
pursuant to the Purchase and Sale
claims against UREIC before the
Agreement, was maintained. Labor Arbiter (LA). In the
meantime, Ryan also filed a
Q: Can the RTC directly issue a complaint before the POEA for
writ of execution against MBTC violation of the 2002 POEA Rules
for the escrow account? and Regulations Governing the
Recruitment and Employment of
ANSWER Land-Based Overseas Workers,
No. Under the rules, the execution alleging the same set of facts in the
of a money judgment requires the complaint before the LA. However,
sheriff to first make a demand on the DOLE dismissed the case before
the POEA for failure of Ryan to
the judgment debtor for the
substantiate his allegations and
immediate payment of the
attend the scheduled hearings.
judgment obligation in cash, Because of such dismissal, UREIC
certified bank check or any other claims that the case before the LA
mode of payment that is acceptable should be dismissed for violation of
to the judgment creditors. It is only the doctrines of primary jurisdiction
when the debtor cannot pay all or and immutability of judgement. Do
part of the obligation may the the aforementioned doctrines
sheriff resort to the levy of its apply?
properties. Here, the executing
officer must serve a notice upon ANSWER
Metrobank which is then obliged to No. Primary jurisdiction, also
deliver Traders Royal's credits to known as the doctrine of Prior
the proper officer issuing the writ. Resort, is the power and authority
As explained in National Power vested by the Constitution or by
Corp. v. Philippine Commercial and statute upon an administrative body
Industrial Bank, it is through the to act upon a matter by virtue of its
service of the writ of garnishment specific competence.
that the trial court acquires
jurisdiction to bind the third person Here, while Ryan alleged the same
or garnishee to compliance with all set of facts in the complaints, they
its orders and processes. Verily, the raised different causes of action.
RTC cannot require Metrobank to The LA complaint involved the issue
comply with all its orders and of illegal dismissal and various
processes absent the service of a money claims, while the POEA
writ of garnishment. (MBTC v. RPN, complaint involved administrative
Inc., GR No. 190517, July 27, 2022, disciplinary liability for violation of
J. M. Lopez) the POEA Rules. (UREIC v. Pinmiliw,
GR No. 225263, Match 16, 2022, J.
M. Lopez)

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 2

3. pon petition by Alphonso, an prejudice, Charnnel as a perusal of

American citizen, his marriage to it readily shows that Charnnel's
Rachel was declared void ab initio interests as Alphonso's heir were
by the RTC in 1997, alleging that not directly raised and threshed out
their marriage was bigamous as he in this pleading. To hold otherwise,
was still married to Nancy, another would be tantamount to depriving a
American citizen. Later on, then innocent child, now rightfully
Alphonso cohabitated with and asserting her rights, of due process
married Jocelyn, to whom he bore of law. (Thomas v. Trono, GR No.
a child, Charnnel. After Alphonso’s 241032, March 15, 2021, J. M.
death in 2011, it was found that the Lopez)
OSG never received a copy of the
4. Salvio was appointed as the
RTC decision nullifying his
executor of Gloria’s Estate in the
marriage. Upon such receipt, the
latter’s will. However, when a
OSG nonetheless sought motion was filed to remove Salvio
reconsideration of the RTC decision, as the executor of Edmundo’s
despite the lapse of 13 years. The (Gloria’s husband) estate, Salvio
RTC then reversed the 1997 was likewise removed as executor
decision. In 2017, Charnnel filed a of Gloria’s estate.
petition for annulment of judgment
of the 2011 decision, alleging that Q: Was the removal of Salvio as
she was not afforded due process the executor of Gloria’s estate
when she was not allowed to proper?
participate in the proceedings for
reconsideration before the RTC. ANSWER
Yes. It has long been settled that
Q: Is Charnnel’s petition for the selection or removal of special
annulment of judgement administrators is not governed by
meritorious? the rules regarding the selection or
removal of regular administrators.
ANSWER The probate court may appoint or
Yes. Under Section 2, Rule 47 of remove special administrators
the Rules of Court, the grounds for based on grounds other than those
annulment of judgment are: (1) enumerated in the Rules at its
extrinsic fraud; and (2) lack of discretion, such that the need to
jurisdiction. Jurisprudence, first pass upon and resolve the
however, recognizes a third ground issues of fitness or unfitness and
– denial of due process of law. As the application of the order of
borne by the records, Charnnel was preference under Section 6 of Rule
neither made a party to the 78, as would be proper in the case
proceedings nor was she duly of a regular administrator, do not
notified of the case. Also, she was a obtain. As long as the discretion is
minor at the time the RTC granted exercised without grave abuse, and
the OSG's motion. While Jocelyn is based on reason, equity, justice,
was able to file a Manifestation and and legal principles, interference by
Special Appearance on the OSG's higher courts is unwarranted. Here,
motion for reconsideration, this while it was Salvio who was named
should not bind, much less by Gloria in her will as executor, the
RTC found it logical, practical, and
AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024
 REMEDIAL LAW 3

economical to appoint Norma as arise from, or is not based upon the

special administratrix of Gloria's criminal act of which the accused
estate. After all, she was already was acquitted.
appointed as administratrix of
Edmundo's estate and that the Here, the RTC simply stated in the
conjugal properties of Edmundo dispositive portion of the decision
and Gloria remained undivided. that there was no preponderant
With this setup, she could facilitate evidence to prove Victoria's civil
the requisite division of the estates. liability. In contrast, the CA
(In the matter of the Petition to reviewed the testimonial and
Approve the Will of Gloria Novelo documentary evidence in support of
Vda. De Cea, GR No. 197147, its conclusion that Victoria is liable
February 03, 2021, J. M. Lopez) to pay Eduardo the total amount of
P2,905,000.00. Verily, the CA's
factual findings, which are borne
5. Eduardo charged Victoria with
out by the evidence on record, are
Estafa, where the latter was
binding on this Court, unlike the
acquitted based on reasonable
doubt. The RTC likewise ruled that contrary ruling of the RTC that
there was no preponderant failed to clearly state the facts from
evidence to prove her civil liability. which its conclusion was drawn.
Dissatisfied, Eduardo elevated the (Collado v. Dela Vega, GR No.
civil aspect of the case to the CA, 219511, December 02, 2020, J. M.
where the CA held that Eduardo's Lopez)
appeal to recover civil liability is
proper since Victoria was acquitted
on reasonable doubt. The CA 6. The motion for extension of time to
explained that Eduardo deposited file a Petition for Review which
amounts in Victoria's bank accounts Ligaya filed before the CA, in
as shown in the deposit slips that relation to an unlawful detainer
the prosecution formally offered in case, was dismissed for non-
evidence without any objection payment of docket fees. Ligaya
from the accused. This is in addition however, maintains that she fully
to Victoria's acknowledgment that paid the required docket fees and
Eduardo delivered to her sums of prays for liberal interpretation of
money as investment in her stocks the rules.
business. Should Victoria be held
civilly liable? Q: Was the dismissal proper on
the basis on non-payment of
ANSWER docket fees?
Yes. An acquittal will not bar a civil
action in the following cases: (1) ANSWER
where the acquittal is based on Yes. The grant of any extension for
reasonable doubt as only the filing of a Petition for Review
preponderance of evidence is under Rule 42 is discretionary and
required in civil cases; (2) where subject to the condition that the full
the court declared that the amount of the docket and lawful
accused's liability is not criminal, fees are paid before the expiration
but only civil in nature; and (3) of the reglementary period. Indeed,
where the civil liability does not the full payment of docket fees
within the prescribed period is

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 4

mandatory and necessary to perfect No. Settled is the rule that it is

the appeal. While this may be within the discretion of the trial
relaxed at the discretion of the court to permit the filing of an
court, Ligaya has not shown any answer even beyond the
compelling reason to warrant a reglementary period, provided that
liberal application of the rules. It is there is justification for the belated
only when persuasive reasons exist action and there is no showing that
that the rules may be relaxed to the defendant intended to delay the
spare a litigant of an injustice not proceedings. Here, there is no
commensurate with his failure to showing that Femina intended to
comply with the prescribed delay the proceedings, as she
procedure. In this case, Ligaya is availed several post-judgment
under no threat of suffering an remedies which evinced her desire
injustice if her prayer is not to file an answer and to establish
granted. Quite the contrary, it will her defenses. More importantly,
be unfair if Ligaya's appeal is Vitarich did not suffer any damage.
reinstated as this would mean (Vitarich Corporation v. Dagmil, GR
further waiting on the part of the No. 217138, August 27, 2020, J. M.
private respondent who has long Lopez)
been deprived of the right to
8. After the CA decision declaring the
possess the property he owns. (Ang
spouses Poblete as the owner of
v. CA, GR No. 238203, September
various lots under the name of
03, 2020, J. M. Lopez) Banco Filipino, the spouses moved
for the issuance of a writ of
7. On January 15, 2010, Vitarich filed execution. However, spouses
an action for sum of money against Poblete further moved for the
Femina. Femina’s counsel moved to issuance of an alias writ, alleging
dismiss on the ground of improper that the original writ is incomplete
venue but the same was denied. since it did not order Banco Filipino
The order denying the motion to to surrender and transfer the
dismiss was received by the counsel certificates of title in their names.
on November 3, 2010, but Femina Spouses Poblete averred that the
did not submit any responsive appellate court declared them as
pleading. On January 5, 2011, owners of the properties but it is
Vitarich sought to declare Femina in absurd that the titles still remain
default. Meantime, Femina's new with Banco Filipino. However, the
counsel entered his appearance and issuance of the alias writ was
filed on January 31, 2011 a motion denied on the grounds that the CA
to admit answer. Nonetheless the decision did not direct Banco
RTC declared Femina in default on Filipino to surrender and transfer
February 8, 2011. Femina then the certificates of title to Spouses
availed several post-judgment Poblete. Any modification violates
remedies on the default judgement, the doctrine of immutability of final
but to no avail. judgment.

Q: Was the order of default Q: Will the issuance of an alias

proper? writ directing Banco Filipino to
surrender the titles violate the
doctrine of Immutability of
ANSWER
Judgement?

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 5

laced with kerosene. Meanwhile,

ANSWER Raymund was apprehended by
No. Compelling reason exists to barangay officials when a knife was
exclude this case from the likewise found in his possession. As
application of the doctrine of such, Raymund was charged with
immutability of a final judgment. the murder of Regine and of Arson.
Raymund denied the charges, but
This Court has recognized that the
was nonetheless convicted of
dispositive portion of a final and
murder based on circumstantial
executory judgment may be evidence, and arson.
amended to rectify an inadvertent
omission of what it should have Q: Can circumstantial evidence
logically decreed based on the be sufficient to support the
discussion in the body of the conviction?
Decision. The Court is vested with
inherent authority to effect the ANSWER
necessary consequence of the Yes. In the prosecution of criminal
judgment. However, it should be offenses, conviction is not always
limited to explaining a vague or based on direct evidence. The Rules
equivocal part of the judgment of Court allows resort to
which hampers its proper and full circumstantial evidence provided
execution. The Court cannot modify the following conditions are
or overturn its Decision in the guise satisfied: (a) there is more than one
of clarifying ambiguous points. circumstance; (b) the facts from
Here, the Order to surrender and which the inferences are derived
transfer the certificates of title is are proven; and (c) the combination
deemed implied from the Decision of all the circumstances is such as
declaring Spouses Poblete as to produce a conviction beyond
owners of the lots and ordering reasonable doubt.
Banco Filipino to refrain from
committing acts of dispossession. Here, none of the prosecution
The fact that it was not mentioned witnesses testified having seen
in the dispositive portion is of no Raymund kill Regine and burn the
moment. A judgment is not motel room. Yet, the corpus of
confined to what appears on its face circumstantial evidence constitutes
but extends as well to those an unbroken chain of events
necessary to carry out the Decision pointing to Raymund's guilt.
into effect. (Sps. Poblete v. Banco (People v. Camarse, GR No.
Filipino, GR No. 228620, June 15, 258187, October 19, 2022, J. M.
2020, J. M. Lopez) Lopez)

9. Raymund and Regine checked in at 10. AAA’s lifeless body was found
a motel. A few moments after, underneath Milo's wooden bed lying
Raymund alerted the staff that flat on her back with a cloth
there was a fire in their room. The wrapped around her mouth and
staff tried to stop Raymund from nose, and with both hands tied and
leaving but to no avail. After the fire twisted at her back. After
was put out, they discovered investigation, the autopsy reported
Regine’s dead body and the room that AAA sustained hymenal

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 6

lacerations, and died due to 11. Pio and Soledad filed an answer
asphyxia by suffocation. Milo was seeking for the dismissal of Myrna's
charged with complex crime of rape Complaint on the ground that the
with homicide. The RTC found deeds of sale which purportedly
adequate circumstantial evidence conveyed title over the property to
that Milo was guilty of rape with Myrna was falsified, as their father's
homicide. On appeal, the CA signature thereon was forged. Pio
affirmed the RTC's findings. Milo and Soledad filed a Motion for
conceded during trial that he killed Leave for their Amended Answer to
AAA but disavowed criminal liability be admitted for the purpose of
since it was supposedly accidental. "clarifying several matters and [to]
hasten the determination of the
Q: Is circumstantial evidence actual merits of the controversy.
sufficient to show that Milo RTC denied the Motion for Leave
sexually assaulted AAA? because the case had already gone
through preliminary and pie-trial
ANSWER conference, contrary to petitioners'
Yes, circumstantial evidence should claim. On appeal, CA found no
be enough to prove the sexual grave abuse of discretion on the
assault. part of the RTC in denying
petitioners' Motion for Leave
The Rules of Court allows resort to considering that the records show
circumstantial evidence provided that the case had, indeed, already
the following conditions are gone through the preliminary
satisfied, to wit: (a) there is more conference/pre-trial stage.
than one circumstance; (b) the
facts from which the inferences are Q: Should the amended answer
derived are proven; and (c) the be disallowed?
combination of all the
circumstances is such as to produce ANSWER
a conviction beyond reasonable No, the amendment should be
doubt. The Court explained that a allowed.
judgment of conviction based on
circumstantial evidence can be Rule 10, Sections 1 and 3 allow
upheld only if the circumstances amendments to pleadings "by
proved constitute an unbroken adding [to] or striking out an
chain which leads to one fair and inadequate allegation or description
reasonable conclusion which points in any other respect, so that the
to the accused, to the exclusion of actual merits of the controversy
all others, as the guilty person. may speedily be determined,
without regard to technicalities, and
Here, none of the prosecution in the most expeditious and
witnesses testified having seen Milo inexpensive manner." The only
rape AAA. However, the corpus of limitation under the rules was that
circumstantial evidence constitutes the leave to amend the pleading
an unbroken chain of events "may be refused if it appears to the
pointing to Milo's guilt. (People vs court that the motion was made
Milo Leocadio y Labrador, G.R. No. with intent to delay."
227396. February 22, 2023, J. M.
Lopez) In this case, denied the Motion for
Leave essentially because the case
had already gone through

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 7

preliminary/pre trial conference, petition for certiorari to preserve

and a Pre-Trial Order had already his or her interest in the civil aspect
been issued. n the furtherance of of the criminal case. The appeal or
justice, amendments to pleadings petition for certiorari must allege
are favored and should be liberally the specific pecuniary interest of
allowed at any stage of the the private offended party. The
lawsuit as long as they are not failure to comply with this
dilatory. (Heirs of Pio and Soledad requirement may result in the
Tejada vs Garry Hay, G.R. No. denial or dismissal of the remedy.
250542. October 10, 2022, J. M.
Lopez) The reviewing court shall require
the OSG to file comment within a
12. The RTC convicted Mamerto Austria non-extendible period of thirty (30)
of five counts of acts of days from notice if it appears that
lasciviousness committed the resolution of the private
against AAA and BBB. Mamerto complainant's appeal or petition
moved for reconsideration. The trial for certiorari will necessarily affect
judge handling the criminal cases the criminal aspect of the case or
was promoted, and the new the right to prosecute (i.e.,
presiding judge resolved the motion existence of probable cause, venue
and rendered Joint Orders or territorial jurisdiction, elements
acquitting Mamerto. AAA and BBB of the offense, prescription,
filed a special civil action admissibility of evidence, identity of
for certiorari alleging that the new the perpetrator of the crime,
presiding judge committed grave modification of penalty, and other
abuse of discretion in rendering the questions that will require a review
Joint Orders of acquittal which of the substantive merits of the
merely recited the contents of the criminal proceedings, or the
accused's motion for nullification/reversal of the entire
reconsideration without stating any ruling, or cause the reinstatement
factual and legal basis. Mamerto of the criminal action or meddle
argued that a review of his acquittal with the prosecution of the offense,
will place him in double jeopardy. among other things). The comment
Moreover, the private complainants of the OSG must state whether it
cannot avail of a petition conforms or concurs with the
for certiorari in criminal remedy of the private offended
proceedings without the party. The judgment or order of the
participation or conformity of the reviewing court granting the private
Office of the Solicitor General. complainant's relief may be set
aside if rendered without affording
Q: What is the procedure on the People, through the OSG, the
questioning an acquittal? opportunity to file a comment.

ANSWER 2) The private complainant has no

These rules should be observed with legal personality to appeal or file a
respect to the legal standing of private petition for certiorari to question
complainants in assailing judgments or the judgments or orders involving
orders in criminal proceedings before the the criminal aspect of the case or
SC and the CA, to wit: the right to prosecute, unless made
1) The private complainant has the with the OSG's conformity.
legal personality to appeal the civil
liability of the accused or file a

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 8

The private complainant must provide a specific delineation of the

request the OSG's conformity within boundaries of Sugpon and
the reglementary period to appeal Bakun. Bakun proffers that it
or file a petition for certiorari. The presented greater weight of
private complainant must attach evidence that the disputed area
the original copy of the OSG's belonged to the municipality.
conformity as proof in case the Furthermore, Bakun insists that the
request is granted within the boundary separating Bakun and
reglementary period. Otherwise, Sugpon was already defined by Act
the private complainant must allege Nos. 1646 and 2877. On the other
in the appeal or petition hand, the documents presented by
for certiorari the fact of pendency Sugpon, such as maps,
of the request. If the OSG denied certifications, and the petitions of
the request for conformity, the residents and elders, are not
Court shall dismiss the appeal or conclusive and should not be given
petition for certiorari for lack of weight. In its Comment, Sugpon
legal personality of the private counters that only questions of law
complainant. may be raised in a petition for
review on certiorari under Rule 45
of the Rules of Court. Nonetheless,
3) The reviewing court shall require Bakun raised a factual question by
the OSG to file comment within a asking the Court to reexamine and
non-extendible period of thirty (30) weigh again the pieces of evidence
days from notice on the private presented by the parties to
complainant's petition determine what evidence satisfies
for certiorari questioning the the required quantum of proof of
acquittal of the accused, the preponderance of evidence.
dismissal of the criminal case, and
the interlocutory orders in criminal Q: Should the petition be
proceedings on the ground of granted?
grave abuse of discretion or denial
of due process. ANSWER
No, the petition should be
These guidelines shall be prospective in dismissed.
application. (Mamerto Autria vs AAA
and BBB, G.R. No. 205275, June 28, Generally, only questions of law can
2022, J. M. Lopez) be raised in a petition for review
on certiorari under Rule 45 of the
Rules of Court, subject to limited
exceptions. To successfully invoke
13. The RTC issued a Resolution
these exceptions, petitioner must
reversing Joint Resolution issued by
prove the need for this Court to
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan,
examine the lower court's factual
holding that Act Nos. 1646 and
findings. Merely invoking an
2877 could not be the basis for
exception without proof will not
Bakun to assert a better right over
warrant an examination beyond the
the disputed property because
limits of Rule 45.
these laws do not provide a specific
delineation of the metes and
Here, there are no exceptions
bounds of the two municipalities.
present to justify a re-evaluation of
The CA echoed the RTC that the old
the findings of fact of the trial court
legislations relied upon by Bakun
as affirmed by the appellate
did not categorically and accurately

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 9

court. (Municipality of Bakun vs marked money, up to the

Municipality of Sugpon, G.R. No. consummation of the sale
241370. April 20, 2022, J. M. Lopez) by the delivery of the illegal
drug subject of the sale
whether to the informant
14. Jasper was charged with illegal alone or the police officer.
possession and illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. During the trial, Here, the prosecution failed
the prosecution presented two to clearly establish the
witnesses: PSI Susan Memoracion details of the purported
Cayabyab, a Forensic Chemical sale. Nothing in the records
Officer, and PO2 Jose Rizaldy shows the initial contact
Calibugar, who conducted between the poseur-
surveillance and the buy-bust buyer and the seller, and
operation. Both are members of the the manner by which the
PNP Dipolog City Station Anti-Vice initial contact was made.
Team. They testified that they had The offer to buy, the
been surveilling Jasper since late willingness to sell, and the
May 2002. On June 21, 2002, they agreed purchase price were
obtained a search warrant. The not satisfactorily shown.
next day, a police poseur-buyer
used two marked 100-peso bills to b) No, the seized drugs
transact with Jasper, leading to his should not be admitted.
arrest. A search of Jasper's room, in
the presence of Barangay Captain The identity of the seized
Emerenciana Velasco, revealed drugs is established by
marked money, drug paraphernalia, showing the duly recorded
and sachets of shabu. Jasper's authorized movements and
defense was denial and a claim of custody of seized drugs
being framed. from the time of seizure or
confiscation to receipt by
a) Was the buy bust the investigating officer
operation valid? then turn-over to the
b) Should the seized drugs forensic laboratory up to
be admitted? presentation in court. The
preservation of the chain of
ANSWER custody applies regardless
a) No, the buy -bust of whether the prosecution
operation is not valid. is brought for a violation of
RA No. 6425 or RA No.
The "objective test" requires 9165, which always starts
the details of the purported with the marking of the
transaction during the buy- articles immediately upon
bust operation to be clearly seizure. The marking serves
and adequately shown, i.e. to separate the marked
the initial contact between articles from the corpus of
the poseur-buyer and the all other similar or related
pusher, the offer to articles from the time of the
purchase the drug, and the seizure until disposal
promise or payment of the thereby obviating the
consideration, payment hazards of switching,
using the buy-bust or "planting," or contamination

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 10

of the evidence. Here, the No, CIR is not guilty of forum

evidence points to only the shopping. There is forum shopping
barangay captain when there exist: (a) the identity of
witnessing the search. Such parties, or at least such parties as
a procedure violates Rule representing the same interests in
126 of the Rules of Court both actions; (b) the identity of
which specifically provides rights asserted and relief prayed
that "no search of a house, for, the relief being founded on the
room or any other premises same facts; and (c) the identity of
shall be made except in the the two preceding particulars is
presence of the lawful such that any judgment rendered in
occupant thereof or any the pending case, regardless of
member of his family or in which party is successful would
the absence of the latter, amount to res judicata in the other
two witnesses of sufficient case. Here, requested an extension
age and discretion residing to submit a petition for review
in the same locality." Failure concerning the Decision made on
to comply with the February 3, 2016, by the CTA En
safeguards provided by law Banc in CTA EB No. 1207. This case
in implementing the search was assigned docket number G.R.
warrant makes the search No. 222824. Additionally, the CIR
unreasonable. lodged a motion for reconsideration
of the same Decision before the
Thus, the exclusionary rule CTA En Banc. It's evident that both
applies, any evidence cases involve the CIR, albeit
obtained in violation of this represented by two distinct
constitutional mandate is agencies, the Office of the Solicitor
inadmissible in any General (OSG) and the Bureau of
proceeding for any Internal Revenue (BIR).
purpose. (Jasper Tan vs (Commissioner of Internal Revenue
People, G.R. No. 232611, vs. East Asia Utilities Corp., G.R. No.
April 26, 2021, J. M. Lopez) 225266 Nov 16, 2020, J. M. Lopez)

15. East Asia Utilities, a PEZA- 16. The Sugar Regulatory

registered corporation, faced a Administration (SRA) issued several
preliminary assessment notice from orders allocating Class "D" world
the Commissioner of Internal market sugar to accredited ethanol
Revenue in 2009, alleging producers, which Central Azucarera
deficiency taxes for the year 2006. De Bais, Inc. contested as beyond
After filing a protest, a final decision
the SRA's authority. The RTC of
was issued in 2010, reducing the
Makati City declared these orders
deficiency income tax. East Asia
Utilities then filed a Petition for null and void, stating that ethanol
Review before the Court of Tax producers are not under the SRA's
Appeals, seeking to cancel the regulatory jurisdiction but under the
assessment. DOE. The SRA appealed to the
Court of Appeals (CA), but the CA
Q: Is CIR guilty of forum dismissed the appeal, ruling it as an
shopping? improper remedy. The CA held that
the controversy is purely legal and
ANSWER that the SRA should have filed a
petition for review on certiorari

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 11

under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court However, the RTC received a Notice
before the Supreme Court. The SRA of Appeal via registered mail,
sought reconsideration but was contained in an envelope rubber
denied, prompting the current stamped with the date "October 5,
recourse. The SRA contends that 2015," which it found to be
the issues involve factual questions, imprinted by the postmaster. Thus,
while Central Azucarera argues that in an Order dated October 15,
they are purely legal, maintaining 2015, the RTC denied the Republic's
that the RTC's ruling should stand Notice of Appeal for being filed late.
as final and executory due to the The Republic challenged the RTC
SRA's failure to avail the proper Orders disallowing its Notice of
remedy within the prescribed Appeal through certiorari
period. proceedings before the CA, but the
CA upheld the RTC's decision.
Considering that the (REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS.
controversy is purely legal, did TERESITA I. SALINAS, G.R. No. 238308,
the CA err in dismissing the 12 Oct 2022, J. M. Lopez)
appeal of SRA based on the
mode of appeal? 18. The case involves Franklin Reyes
ANSWER who was apprehended during a
No. The CA correctly dismissed the buy-bust operation by the Laoag
SRA's appeal for being a wrong City Police Station for selling and
mode of review. The SRA should possessing illegal drugs. Despite
have filed a petition for review on Reyes's denial and claims of police
certiorari to this Court and not an
misconduct during his arrest, he
appeal to the CA. Consequently, the
was convicted by the RTC and later
RTC's Order dated January 24,
2019 became final and executory. CA affirmed the decision. Reyes
The improper appeal did not toll the appealed, arguing that the police
reglementary period to file a officers did not follow the chain of
petition for review on certiorari. custody rule and that his guilt was
This means that the SRA has now not proven beyond reasonable
lost its remedy against the trial doubt.
court's ruling. (SUGAR
REGULATORY ADMINISTRATION Q: Should Reyes be acquitted
VS. CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE BAIS of the charges against him
INC. RESPONDENT, G.R. No. given the prosecution's failure
253821, 06 Mar 2023, J. M. Lopez) to prove an unbroken chain of
custody?
17. The case originates from a Petition
for Declaration of Nullity of
ANSWER
Marriage brought by Teresita I.
Yes. In this case, it was only the
Salinas which was granted by the
Kagawad who signed the inventory
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
of evidence. Yet, the operatives
Manila. The Republic filed an MR,
failed to provide any justification
but was denied in an Order dated
showing that the integrity of the
July 27, 2015, which it received on
evidence had all along been
August 4, 2015. It, thus, had until
preserved. They did not describe
August 19, 2015 to file an appeal.
the precautions taken to ensure

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 12

that there had been no change in compliance with the rules and
the condition of the item and no providing additional records.
opportunity for someone not in the However, the CA denied their
chain to have possession of the motion, citing tardiness in filing.
same. The Corderos contested this,
claiming their motion was timely
Indeed, the prosecution must filed, supported by evidence of
satisfactorily established the mailing.
movement and custody of the
seized drug through the following Q: Was the Court of Appeals'
links: (1) the confiscation and outright dismissal of the petition for
marking, if practicable, of the review considered a gross error and
specimen seized from the accused a violation of Spouses Cordero's
by the apprehending officer; (2) the right to be heard on appeal?
turnover of the seized item by the
apprehending officer to the ANSWER
investigating officer; (3) the Yes. Spouses Cordero are deemed
investigating officer's turnover of to have substantially complied with
the specimen to the forensic the rules.
chemist for examination; and, (4)
the submission of the item by the A perusal of the petition for review,
forensic chemist to the court. Here, however, reveals that Spouses
the records reveal a broken chain of Cordero complied with the
custody. (FRANKLIN REYES, JR. Y requirement of attaching copies of
DE LOS REYES VS. PEOPLE OF THE the judgments and orders of the
PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 244545, 10 trial courts. Moreover, these
Feb 2021, J. M. Lopez) attachments are already sufficient
to enable the CA to pass upon the
19. Leonila Octaviano filed an assigned errors and to resolve the
ejectment complaint against appeal even without the pleadings
Spouses Mariano and Raquel and other portions of the records.
Cordero before the Municipal Circuit To be sure, the assailed decisions of
Trial Court (MCTC), which ruled in the trial courts substantially
favor of Octaviano. The Corderos summarized the contents of the
appealed to the Regional Trial Court omitted records. Likewise, the CA
(RTC), which affirmed the MCTC's can resolve the issues by relying on
decision. The Corderos further the principle that the factual
appealed to the Court of Appeals findings of the lower courts are
(CA), but their petition was entitled to great weight. It can also
dismissed due to procedural direct Spouses Cordero to submit
defects, including failure to state additional documents or the clerk of
the material date of receipt of the court of the RTC and MCTC to
RTC decision and failure to provide elevate the original records of the
clear copies of pertinent case. Notably, the Spouses Cordero
documents. appended the pertinent pleadings
and documents in their motion for
The Corderos sought reconsideration before the CA. On
reconsideration, arguing substantial this point, we reiterate that there is

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 13

ample jurisprudence holding that

the subsequent and substantial (a) the accused vehemently
compliance of a party may call for denies selling prohibited
the relaxation of the rules of drugs and there are material
procedure. Yet, the CA failed to do inconsistencies in the
so and insisted on the outright testimonies of the arresting
officers; (b) there are
dismissal of the petition. (SPOUSES
reasons to believe that the
MARIANO CORDERO AND RAQUEL
arresting officers had
CORDERO VS. LEONILA M. motives to falsely testify
OCTAVIANO, G.R. No. 241385, 07 against the accused; or (c)
Jul 2020, J. M. Lopez) only the informant was the
poseur-buyer who actually
20. In August, 2014 PO2 Ronel Agsawa witnessed the entire
executed a buy-bust operation in transaction.
Marikina, after having received a tip
from an informant that a certain The presentation of the
“Bornok” had been selling shabu informant was no longer
there. In said buy-bust, Mark necessary precisely because
Anthony “Bornok” Paguinto was of the testimony of PO2
entrapped after selling a plastic Agsawa, who recounted a
sachet containing white crystalline first-hand account of the
substance to the poseur-buyer PO2 transaction as the poseur-
Agsawa. At the place of arrest, PO2 buyer.
Agsawa did the Markings and
Inventory as witnessed by Vice 2) No, the chain of custody
Mayor Cadiz, Councilor Acuna, was not broken.
Kagawad Cruz and Reporter
Barquilla of Remate. PO2 Agsawa Indeed, the prosecution
delivered the sachets to the Crime must satisfactorily establish
Laboratory, which then confirmed the movement and custody
that it is shabu. The Corpus Delicti, of the seized drug through
being the sachets of shabu, were the following links:
then surrendered to the Evidence (1) the confiscation and
Custodian for safekeeping - until marking of the specimen
the presentation before the seized from the accused by
Regional Trial Court. the apprehending officer;
(2) the turnover of the
a) Is the Informant seized item by the
required to be presented apprehending officer to the
during trial? investigating officer;
b) Was the chain of custody (3) the investigating
broken? officer's turnover of the
specimen to the forensic
ANSWER chemist for examination;
1) NO, the Informant is not and,
required to be presented (4) the submission of the
during trial. item by the forensic chemist
to the court.
The testimony of the
informant may be dispensed Section 21 of the
with, unless: Implementing Rules and

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 14

Regulations of RA No. 9165 that the sachets contained

provides that deviation from methamphetamine hydrochloride.
the procedure would not Jemuel denied the accusations but
ipso facto render the seizure was convicted by the Regional Trial
and custody over the items Court (RTC) of Illegal Sale and
void and invalid, provided Illegal Possession of Dangerous
that the prosecution
Drugs. The Court of Appeals
satisfactorily proves that
affirmed the RTC's decision, finding
there is a justifiable ground
for noncompliance, and the that the prosecution established all
integrity and evidentiary the elements of the offenses and
value of the seized items maintained an unbroken chain of
were properly preserved. custody of the dangerous drugs.
For the saving clause to
apply, the prosecution must Q: Should the accused be acquitted
explain the reasons behind based on doubt as to the integrity
the procedural lapses, and of the chain of custody?
prove the justifiable ground
for noncompliance as a fact. ANSWER
Yes. In this case, the absence of a
The specimens were
representative of the National
identified by PO2 Agsawa as
the same drugs he seized Prosecution Service or the media as
from Mark Anthony. The an insulating witness to the
records showed the inventory and photograph of the
continuous custody of the seized item puts serious doubt as to
seized drugs from the time the integrity of the chain of custody.
they were confiscated from To be sure, only an elected public
Mark Anthony until the time official signed the inventory of
they were presented to the evidence at the place of arrest.
court and offered in Worse, the items were
evidence. (People vs Mark photographed at the police station
Anthony Paguinto, G.R. No. without the presence of any
256242, January 18, 2023,
insulating witness. However, the
J. M. Lopez)
operatives failed to provide any
21. On December 17, 2014, a buy-bust justification for non-compliance
operation against Jemuel was showing that the integrity of the
conducted by the Binangonan evidence had all along been
Police Station. During the preserved. They did not describe
operation, Jemuel sold a plastic the precautions taken to ensure
sachet containing white crystalline that there had been no change in
substance to a poseur-buyer. the condition of the item and no
Jemuel was subsequently arrested, opportunity for someone not in the
and three sachets and two strips of chain to have possession of the
aluminum foil were recovered from same. The utter disregard of the
him. The items were marked and required procedures created a huge
inventoried in the presence of a gap in the chain of custody.
barangay official before being
brought to the police station. Lastly, it must be stressed that
while the law enforcers enjoy the
Forensic examination confirmed

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 15

presumption of regularity in the decisions. The first mode is through

performance of their duties, this an ordinary appeal before the CA
presumption cannot prevail over under Rule 41 where the decision
the constitutional right of the assailed was rendered in the
accused to be presumed innocent exercise of the RTC's original
and it cannot by itself constitute jurisdiction. In ordinary appeals,
proof of guilt beyond reasonable
questions of fact or mixed questions
doubt. The presumption of
of fact and law may be raised. The
regularity is disputable and cannot
be regarded as binding truth. second mode is through a petition
Indeed, when the performance of for review before the CA under Rule
duty is tainted with irregularities, 42 where the decision assailed was
such presumption is effectively rendered by the RTC in the exercise
destroyed. (THE PEOPLE OF THE of its appellate jurisdiction. In
PHILIPPINES V. JEMUEL PADUA Y petitions for review, questions of
CEQUEÑA, G.R. No. 244287, 15 Jun fact, law, or mixed questions of fact
2020, J. M. Lopez) and law may be raised. The third
mode is through an appeal by
22. Cntral Azucarera filed a Petition for certiorari before this Court under
Declaratory Relief questioning the Rule 45 where only questions of law
legality of the SRA's Orders. shall be raised.
Allegedly, the Orders are ultra vires
or beyond the SRA's authority The SRA should have filed a petition
under the law. On the other hand, for review on certiorari to this Court
the SRA claimed that the Orders are and not an appeal to the CA.
valid because it has delegated Consequently, the RTC's Order
authority to regulate all types of became final and executory. The
sugars including those used to improper appeal did not toll the
manufacture ethanol. RTC declared reglementary period to file a
null and void Sugar Order Nos. 1, 1- petition for review on certiorari
A, and 3, Series of 2017-2018 and which means that the SRA has now
explained that ethanol lost its remedy against the trial
manufacturers are not part of the court's ruling. (SUGAR
sugar industry. The SRA sought REGULATORY ADMINISTRATION
reconsideration but was denied, VS. CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE BAIS,
dissatisfied, the SRA elevated the INC., G.R. NO. 253821, MARCH 6,
case to the CA through an appeal 2023, J. M.V. LOPEZ)
filed under the auspices of Rules
41-44. 23. E was shot and killed during a
robbery in her house. S and M, the
Q: Did the SRA avail of the witnesses, immediately reported
appropriate remedy? the incident and described the
suspect as "medyo malaki
Answer katawan." The police received
No. The proper remedy is an appeal information that the suspect was
by certiorari under Rule 45 of the seen and they arrested C, who
Rules of Court. matched the description. S and M
positively identified C in the police
Under the Rules of Court, there are lineup as the suspect and he was
three modes of appeal from RTC
AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024
 REMEDIAL LAW 16

charged with the complex crime of NO. 252212, JULY 14, 2021, J. M.V.
Robbery with Homicide. LOPEZ)

Q: Can the court rely on the 24. Police Officer X received a tip about
identification of S and M to K going to Laguna to buy Shabu. X
sufficiently establish the guilt later called from a jeepney,
beyond reasonable doubt of C? identifying K and their location. An
entrapment intercepted the
Answer jeepney and PO2 X prevented K
Yes, the court may rely on the from discarding a wrapped object,
testimonies of S and M to establish and he confiscated it. X marked it
the guilt of C. as "LQE-1” at the police station. The
sachet was handed to SPO1 S for a
The Revised Penal Code states that lab exam request wherein it was
the special complex crime of confirmed as methamphetamine
Robbery with Homicide has the hydrochloride. K denied the charges
following elements, to wit: (1) the citing failure of the police officers to
taking of personal property with comply with proper handling and
violence or intimidation against custody of the dangerous drug, he
persons; (2) the property taken contested that the marking was not
belongs to another; (3) the taking done at the place of seizure,
was done with animus lucrandi; and insulating witnesses were absent
( 4) on the occasion of the robbery, and no photograph of the
or by reason thereof, homicide was confiscated item was taken.
committed. Furthermore, in
determining the admissibility and Q: Was the chain of custody for
reliability of their out-of-court seized drugs broken?
identification, the Court must look
at the totality of the circumstances Answer
and consider the following factors, Yes, the chain of custody for the
namely: (1) the witness' seized drugs were broken.
opportunity to view the criminal at Under Section 21 of RA 9165, the
the time of the crime; (2) the apprehending team having initial
witness' degree of attention at that custody and control of the drugs
time; (3) the accuracy of any prior shall, immediately after the seizure
description given by the witness; and confiscation, physically
(4) the length of time between the inventory and photograph the same
crime and the identification; (5) the in the presence of the accused or
level of certainty demonstrated by the person/s from whom such items
the witness at the identification; were confiscated and/or seized, or
and (6) the suggestiveness of the his/her representative or counsel, a
identification procedure. In this representative from the media and
case, all the elements of robbery the DOJ, and any elected public
with homicide are present. S and M official who shall be required to sign
were able to report the incident the copies of the inventory and be
immediately and were able to given a copy thereof.
satisfy the totality of circumstances
test. (PEOPLE VS. CAMPOS, G.R.

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 17

In this case, X failed to ensure that According to Kondo v. Civil

witnesses, representative from the Registrar, newly-discovered
media, DOJ, or any elected public evidence may be admissible in
official were present during the evidence if the following requisites
inventory and photographing of the are present: (1) that the evidence
seized item. The link between the was discovered after trial; (2) that
investigating officer and the the evidence could not have been
forensic chemist was not discovered and produced at the trial
established with certainty; it was even with the exercise of
unclear how the seized item reasonable diligence; (3) that it is
reached the forensic chemist. X material, not merely cumulative,
failed to provide any justification corroborative or impeaching; and
showing that the integrity of the (4) that the evidence is of such
evidence had all along been weight that, if admitted, would
preserved. (EVANGELISTA VS. probably change the judgment. It is
PEOPLE, G.R. NO. 229183, essential that the offering party
February 17, 2021, J. M.V. LOPEZ) exercised reasonable diligence in
seeking to locate the evidence
25. X is charged for including false before or during the trial but
information on her PDS. A routine nonetheless failed to secure it.
check revealed a discrepancy when
it was found that X is not in the X insisted she made a genuine
Register of Eligibles. X claimed to effort to find the substitute PDS to
have passed the CSSPE exam on a support her case during the
specific date in 1994 with a high hearings. This document, as
score, but records showed no such argued, was crucial evidence that
exam took place. Instead, she could have changed the Civil
received a different eligibility Service Commission's decision and
certificate which is the Barangay cleared her of wrongdoing. (RAMOS
Official Certificate of Eligibility. VS. ROSELL, G.R. NO. 241363,
These inconsistencies led to SEPTEMBER 16, 2020, J. LOPEZ)
charges of dishonesty, misconduct,
and falsifying documents. X filed a 26. In 2004, Ofelia sold a property to
Motion for Reconsideration before Kaizen Builders, then repurchased it
CSC but was denied. The Civil for another in 2007. In 2008, the
Service Commission ultimately agreement was rescinded, but
found her guilty and fired her from Kaizen defaulted on payments.
her government position. Ofelia sued in 2011, winning in
lower court with further
Q: Was the substitute PDS amendments. Kaizen appealed and
admissible as newly discovered filed for rehabilitation, seeking to
evidence? consolidate cases. Appeals court
denied consolidation due to distinct
Answer parties and matters.
Yes, the substituted PDS meets the 27. Did the Court of Appeals erred in
criteria for newly discovered not consolidating the appealed case
evidence. with the rehabilitation proceedings

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 18

and in proceeding with the case father. A filed a petition under Rule
despite the suspension order? 108 of the Civil Register Act to
correct these entries. The RTC
Answer granted the petition and ordered
Yes, the Court of Appeals the correction of entries in the
committed grave abuse of child's birth certificate. The OSG
discretion in not consolidating the filed a motion for reconsideration,
appealed case with the arguing that the RTC lacked
rehabilitation proceedings and in jurisdiction to correct A's first name
proceeding with the case despite and middle name under Rule 108.
the suspension order. 29. Does the RTC have jurisdiction to
order the correction of A.C.'s first
To enable the company to gain a name, middle name, and marital
new lease on life and allow its status in her child's birth certificate?
creditors to be paid their claims out ANSWER
of its earnings; Sections 16 and 17 Yes, the RTC has jurisdiction under
of RA No. 10142 authorizes the Rule 108 to correct Annabelle's first
rehabilitation court to issue a name and middle name, but not her
Commencement Order that marital status.
includes a Stay Order, which have
the effects of suspending all actions Rule 108 applies when seeking to
for the enforcement of claims correct clerical and innocuous
against the debtor and mistakes or substantial errors
consolidating the resolution of all affecting the civil status,
legal proceedings by and against it. citizenship, and nationality of a
person.
In this case, Kaizen Builders filed a
petition for corporate rehabilitation. In this case, the correction of A's
Yet, the CA proceeded with the case first name and middle name is
and rendered judgment even if considered a clerical error and does
there is a stay order. Hence, the CA not affect her substantial rights.
committed grave abuse of However, the correction of the
discretion. (KAIZEN BUILDERS, marital status is substantial and
INC. VS. COURT OF APPEALS and requires compliance with Sec. 3, 4,
the HEIRS OF OFELIA URSAIS, G.R. & 5 of Rule 108, including
NO. 226894 & 247647, impleading and notifying all
SEPTEMBER 3, 2020, J. LOPEZ) interested parties. Failure to strictly
comply with these requirements
28. A.C. y Shi gave birth to her renders the proceedings void for
daughter with the assistance of a the correction of substantial errors.
registered midwife named BB. (REPUBLIC VS. ONTUCA Y PELENO
Errors were discovered in the birth G.R. No. 232053, JULY 15, 2020, J.
certificate, including the addition of LOPEZ)
the name "Mc" in A's first name, the
misspelling of her middle name as 30. P and J were charged with robbery
"She" and the incorrect indication of by JCLV Realty. It was alleged that
a marriage date and place despite A P and J removed JCLV Realty's
not being married to the child's electric facilities with intent to gain

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 19

and intimidation against persons. 31. Muntinlupa City Police Station Anti-
After the prosecution presented its Illegal Drugs Special Operations
evidence, P filed a demurrer to Task Group planned a buy-bust
evidence, claiming insufficiency of operation against D. They arrested
evidence regarding intent to gain D and immediately proceeded to
and ownership of the metering the police station because a crowd
instruments. The RTC granted P's was forming which might cause a
demurrer, dismissing the case for commotion. PO1 L marked the
lack of evidence against him. J's sachet with D's initials. The police
case was archived pending his officers conducted an inventory and
apprehension or surrender. The CA photograph of the seized items
dismissed JCLV Realty's petition, witnessed by a representative from
ruling that only the Office of the the City Drug Abuse Prevention and
Solicitor General (OSG) could Control Office without an insulating
represent the state in criminal witness. PO1 L and PO3 E
proceedings, and private personally delivered the marked
complainants could only appeal the item to a non-uniformed personnel
civil aspect of the case. of the SPD Crime Laboratory Office,
who then gave it to the forensic
Q: Does JCLV Realty have the chemist.
legal standing to question the
dismissal of the criminal case Q: Was the chain of custody for
against P? dangerous drugs broken?

ANSWER ANSWER
No, JCLV Realty does not have the Yes, the deviation from the
legal standing to file a special civil standard procedure in Section 21
action for certiorari without the dismally compromised the
involvement of the OSG. evidence.

According to Section 35 Par.1 of the Rule 108 applies when Section

1987 Administrative Code, only the 21(a), Article II of the IRR of RA
OSG may represent the 9165 states that, (a) The
government in criminal apprehending team having initial
proceedings, while private custody and control of the drugs
complainants may question shall, immediately after seizure and
dismissals through certiorari, such confiscation, physically inventory
actions should pertain only to the and photograph the same in the
civil aspect of the case. As JCLV presence of the accused or the
Realty's petition mainly concerned person/s from whom such items
the criminal aspect, it lacked were confiscated and /or seized, or
standing without the OSG's his/her representative or counsel, a
involvement. Therefore, the Court representative from the media and
affirmed the CA's decision to the Department of Justice (DOJ),
dismiss the case. (JCLV REALTY VS. and any elected public official who
MANGALI, G.R. NO. 236618, shall be required to sign the copies
AUGUST 27, 2020, J. LOPEZ) or the inventory and be given a
copy thereof; Provided, further,

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024

 REMEDIAL LAW 20

that non-compliance with these respect to the matter directly

requirements under justifiable adjudged or as to any other matter
grounds, as long as the integrity that could have been raised in
and the evidentiary value of the relation thereto, conclusive
seized items are property preserved between the parties and their
by the apprehending officer/team, successors in interest by title
shall not render void and invalid subsequent to the commencement
such seizures of and custody over of the action or special proceeding,
said items. litigating for the same thing and
under the same title and in the
The absence of the required same capacity.
insulating witnesses during the
inventory and photograph of the In this case, X and the City
seized items puts serious doubt as Government of Tacloban freely and
to the integrity of the chain of voluntarily entered into a
custody. Here, there was no compromise agreement, where the
representative from the media and terms and conditions of the
the Department of Justice, and any agreement are likewise clear.
elected public official. (PEOPLE VS. Moreover, the RTC approved the
FLORES Y CASERO, G.R. No. agreement and the Sangguniang
246471, JUNE 16, 2020, J. LOPEZ) Panlungsod ratified it. Hence,
approved compromise agreement
between the parties amounts to a
32. The City of Tacloban sought to
judgment on merits and becomes
acquire land from X for a road to the
final and executory. (CITY
dumpsite. A compromise
GOVERNMENT OF TACLOBAN VS.
agreement was reached, approved
COURT OF APPEALS, G.R. NO.
by the RTC and city council.
221554, February 3, 2021, J. M.V.
However, the city council later
LOPEZ)
revoked its approval. X sought
enforcement of the agreement,
which the lower courts granted
despite the city's objections. The
City of Tacloban appealed, but were
dismissed, citing the finality of the
compromise agreement.

Q: Does the doctrine of res

judicata apply in this case,
barring the city from further
challenging the compromise
agreement?

Answer
Yes, res judicata applies.

Paragraph B of Sec. 47 of Rule 39

states that, “In other cases, the
judgment or final order is, with

AUSL BOC OMNIBUS NOTES 2024