This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2015-08-05 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| a willful disregard or disobedience of a public authority. In its broad sense, contempt is a disregard of, or disobedience to, the rules or orders of a legislative or judicial body or an interruption of its proceedings by disorderly behavior or insolent language in its presence or so near thereto as to disturb its proceedings or to impair the respect due to such a body. In its restricted and more usual sense, contempt comprehends a despising of the authority, justice, or dignity of a court. The phrase contempt of court is generic, embracing within its legal signification a variety of different acts.[43] (Emphasis in the original, citations omitted) | |||||
|
2014-03-11 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Anent indirect contempt, the Court said in Lorenzo Shipping Corporation v. Distribution Management Association of the Philippines:[22] | |||||
|
2014-02-26 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| proceedings by disorderly behavior or insolent language in its presence or so near thereto as to disturb its proceedings or to impair the respect due to such a body. In its restricted and more usual sense, contempt comprehends a despising of the authority, justice, or dignity of a court.[50] Contempt of court is of two (2) kinds, namely: direct and indirect contempt. Indirect contempt or constructive contempt is that which is committed out of the presence of the court. Any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or | |||||
|
2013-07-03 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| In this regard, we deem to be appropriate to reiterate what the Court said on the nature of contempt of court in Lorenzo Shipping Corporation v. Distribution Management Association of the Philippines,[151] viz:Misbehavior means something more than adverse comment or disrespect. There is no question that in contempt the intent goes to the gravamen of the offense. Thus, the good faith, or lack of it, of the alleged contemnor should be considered. Where the act complained of is ambiguous or does not clearly show on its face that it is contempt, and is one which, if the party is acting in good faith, is within his rights, the presence or absence of a contumacious intent is, in some instances, held to be determinative of its character. A person should not be condemned for contempt where he contends for what he believes to be right and in good faith institutes proceedings for the purpose, however erroneous may be his conclusion as to his rights. To constitute contempt, the act must be done willfully and for an illegitimate or improper purpose. | |||||
|
2013-06-05 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| Contempt of court is defined as a disobedience to the court by acting in opposition to its authority, justice, and dignity. It signifies not only a willful disregard or disobedience of the court's order, but such conduct which tends to bring the authority of the court and the administration of law into disrepute or, in some manner, to impede the due administration of justice.[31] To constitute contempt, the act must be done willfully and for an illegitimate or improper purpose.[32] The good faith, or lack of it, of the alleged contemnor should be considered.[33] | |||||