This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2013-09-11 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The term "nuisance" is so comprehensive that it has been applied to almost all ways which have interfered with the rights of the citizens, either in person, property, the enjoyment of his property, or his comfort.[31] | |||||
|
2011-10-11 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| Neither does the MMDA have the power to declare a thing a nuisance. Only courts of law have the power to determine whether a thing is a nuisance. In AC Enterprises v. Frabelle Properties Corp.,[30] we held: We agree with petitioner's contention that, under Section 447(a)(3)(i) of R.A. No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code, the Sangguniang Panglungsod is empowered to enact ordinances declaring, preventing or abating noise and other forms of nuisance. It bears stressing, however, that the Sangguniang Bayan cannot declare a particular thing as a nuisance per se and order its condemnation. It does not have the power to find, as a fact, that a particular thing is a nuisance when such thing is not a nuisance per se; nor can it authorize the extrajudicial condemnation and destruction of that as a nuisance which in its nature, situation or use is not such. Those things must be determined and resolved in the ordinary courts of law. If a thing be in fact, a nuisance due to the manner of its operation, that question cannot be determined by a mere resolution of the Sangguniang Bayan. (Emphasis supplied.) | |||||
|
2011-03-09 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Jurisdiction is defined as the authority to hear and determine a cause or the right to act in a case.[37] In addition to being conferred by the Constitution and the law,[38] the rule is settled that a court's jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the relevant allegations in the complaint,[39] the law in effect when the action is filed,[40] and the character of the relief sought irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the claims asserted.[41] Consistent with Section 1, Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court which provides that the prescribed fees shall be paid in full "upon the filing of the pleading or other application which initiates an action or proceeding", the well-entrenched rule is to the effect that a court acquires jurisdiction over a case only upon the payment of the prescribed filing and docket fees.[42] | |||||
|
2010-08-23 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The test of sufficiency of the facts alleged in a complaint to constitute a cause of action is whether, admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer of the petition or complaint.[18] To determine whether the complaint states a cause of action, all documents attached thereto may, in fact, be considered, particularly when referred to in the complaint.[19] We emphasize, however, that the inquiry is into the sufficiency, not the veracity of the material allegations in the complaint.[20] Thus, consideration of the annexed documents should only be taken in the context of ascertaining the sufficiency of the allegations in the complaint. | |||||
|
2009-01-19 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| To qualify a person to be a real party in interest in whose name an action must be prosecuted, he must appear to be the present real holder of the right sought to be enforced.[76] "Interest" within the meaning of the rule means material interest, an interest in essence to be affected by the judgment as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere incidental interest. By real interest is meant a present substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere expentancy or a future, contingent, subordinate or consequential interest.[77] | |||||