Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 203834 2014-07-09	HEIRS OF DIOSDADO M. MENDOZA v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CARPIO, J.
The discretion of the DPWH to terminate or rescind the contract comes into play when the contractor shall have incurred a negative slippage of 15% or more.[11]
	GR Nos. 146184-85 2008-01-31	MANILA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY and ANTONIO P. GANA v. OLONGAPO MAINTENANCE SERVICES VELASCO JR., J.
[A]lthough the law be fair on its face, and impartial in appearance, yet if applied and administered by the public authorities charged with their administration x x x with an evil eye and unequal hand so as to practically make unjust and illegal determination, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution. [61]
	GR NO. 159245 2006-08-31	GV DIVERSIFIED INTERNATIONAL v. CA QUISUMBING, J.
Relying on our rulings in Malaga v. Penachos, Jr.,[10] Genaro R. Reyes Construction, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,[11] and Philippine Ports Authority v. Court of Appeals,[12] petitioner takes exception to the application of P.D. No. 1818. First, it points out that what P.D. No. 1818 proscribes is the issuance of preliminary injunction delaying an infrastructure project of the government. Petitioner claims the preliminary injunction issued by the RTC precisely allowed continuation of work on the project.