Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MUNICIPALITY OF TALISAY v. SPS. HILARIO RAMIREZ AND ERLINDA RAMIREZ AND SPS. WILLIAM ABARQUEZ AND JOSEPHINE ABARQUEZ

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 175352 2011-01-18	DANTE V. LIBAN v. RICHARD J. GORDON LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The PNRC succeeded the chapter of the American Red Cross which was in existence in the Philippines since 1917. It was created by an Act of Congress after the Republic of the Philippines became an independent nation on July 6, 1946 and proclaimed on February 14, 1947 its adherence to the Convention of Geneva of July 29, 1929 for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick of Armies in the Field (the "Geneva Red Cross Convention"). By that action the Philippines indicated its desire to participate with the nations of the world in mitigating the suffering caused by war and to establish in the Philippines a voluntary organization for that purpose and like other volunteer organizations established in other countries which have ratified the Geneva Conventions, to promote the health and welfare of the people in peace and in war.[14]
	GR NO. 166429 2005-12-19	REPUBLIC v. HENRICK F. GINGOYON TINGA, J.
Nothing in Rule 67 or Rep. Act No. 8974 requires that the RTC consult with the parties in the expropriation case on who should be appointed as commissioners. Neither does the Court feel that such a requirement should be imposed in this case. We did rule in Municipality of Talisay v. Ramirez[69] that "there is nothing to prevent [the trial court] from seeking the recommendations of the parties on [the] matter [of appointment of commissioners], the better to ensure their fair representation."[70] At the same time, such solicitation of recommendations is not obligatory on the part of the court, hence we cannot impute error on the part of the RTC in its exercise of solitary discretion in the appointment of the commissioners.
	GR NO. 166429 2005-12-19	REPUBLIC v. HENRICK F. GINGOYON TINGA, J.
However, in Municipality of Talisay v. Ramirez,[121] we held that "while it is true that, strictly speaking, it is the court that shall appoint the said commissioners, there is nothing to prevent it from seeking the recommendations of the parties on this matter x x x to ensure their fair representation."