Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 180363 2009-04-28	EDGAR Y. TEVES v. COMELEC YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The essential elements of the violation of said provision are as follows: 1) The accused is a public officer; 2) he has a direct or indirect financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction; 3) he either: a) intervenes or takes part in his official capacity in connection with such interest, or b) is prohibited from having such interest by the Constitution or by law.[10]
	GR NO. 172602 2007-04-13	HENRY T. GO v. FIFTH DIVISION CALLEJO, SR., J.
Singian thus illustrates that private persons, like petitioner Go, when conspiring with public officers, may be indicted and, if found guilty, held liable for violation of Section 3(g) of RA 3019. Another case, Domingo v. Sandiganbayan,[18] may likewise be applied to this case by analogy.
	GR NO. 157835 2006-07-27	FE M. CABRERA v. SIMEON V. MARCELO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The essential elements of a violation of Section 3(h) of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, are as follows: (1) The accused is a public officer; (2) he has a direct or indirect financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction; and (3) he either: (a) intervenes or takes part in his official capacity in connection with such interest, or (b) is prohibited from having such interest by the Constitution or by law.[6]