Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILNABANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION v. JESUS P. ESTANISLAO

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 200670 2015-07-06	CLARK INVESTORS v. SECRETARY OF FINANCE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Secondly, while this case is styled as a petition for certiorari, there is, however, no denying the fact that, in essence, it seeks the declaration by this Court of the unconstitutionality and illegality of the questioned rule, thus partaking the nature, in reality, of one for declaratory relief over which this Court has only appellate, not original, jurisdiction.[7] Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides: Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
	GR No. 174697 2010-07-08	CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE v. ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION BRION, J.
Judicial functions are exercised by a body or officer clothed with authority to determine what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are with respect to the matter in controversy.[27] Quasi-judicial function is a term that applies to the action or discretion of public administrative officers or bodies given the authority to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them as a basis for their official action using discretion of a judicial nature.[28] Thus, in Philnabank Employees Association v. Estanislao, we did not grant a petition for certiorari against the Department Secretary who did not act in any judicial or quasi-judicial capacity but merely promulgated the questioned implementing rules under the mandate of Republic Act No. 6971, the applicable law in this cited case.[29]
	GR No. 183409 2010-06-18	CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE v. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM PEREZ, J.
Moreover, although the instant petition is styled as a Petition for Certiorari, in essence, it seeks the declaration by this Court of the unconstitutionality or illegality of the questioned DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, and Memorandum No. 88. It, thus, partakes of the nature of a Petition for Declaratory Relief over which this Court has only appellate, not original, jurisdiction.[28] Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides: Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
	GR No. 154599 2004-01-21	LIGA NG MGA BARANGAY NATIONAL v. CITY MAYOR OF MANILA DAVIDE JR., CJ.
Second, although the instant petition is styled as a petition for certiorari, in essence, it seeks the declaration by this Court of the unconstitutionality or illegality of the questioned ordinance and executive order. It, thus, partakes of the nature of a petition for declaratory relief over which this Court has only appellate, not original, jurisdiction.[14] Section 5, Article VIII of the Constitution provides:Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: