Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ROLEX SUPLICO v. NATIONAL ECONOMIC

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 212381 2015-04-22	REYNALDO M. JACOMILLE v. JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA MENDOZA, J.
The rule is well-settled that for a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy - one which involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial resolution. The case must not be moot or academic or based on extra-legal or other similar considerations not cognizable by a court of justice. Where the issue has become moot and academic, there is no justiciable controversy, and an adjudication thereon would be of no practical use or value as courts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic questions to satisfy scholarly interest, however intellectually challenging.[16]
	GR No. 192377 2012-07-25	CESAR V. MADRIAGA v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION REYES, J.
Judicial power presupposes actual controversies, the very antithesis of mootness. Where there is no more live subject of controversy, the Court ceases to have a reason to render any ruling or make any pronouncement.[21] Courts generally decline jurisdiction on the ground of mootness save when, among others, a compelling constitutional issue raised requires the formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar and the public; or when the case is capable of repetition yet evading judicial review,[22] which are not extant in this case.
	GR No. 159618 2011-02-01	BAYAN MUNA v. ALBERTO ROMULO VELASCO JR., J.
The view's reliance on Suplico v. Neda[77] is similarly improper. In that case, several petitions were filed questioning the power of the President to enter into foreign loan agreements. However, before the petitions could be resolved by the Court, the Office of the Solicitor General filed a Manifestation and Motion averring that the Philippine Government decided not to continue with the ZTE National Broadband Network Project, thus rendering the petition moot. In resolving the case, the Court took judicial notice of the act of the executive department of the Philippines (the President) and found the petition to be indeed moot. Accordingly, it dismissed the petitions.
	GR No. 159618 2011-02-01	BAYAN MUNA v. ALBERTO ROMULO VELASCO JR., J.
At any event, the primordial importance to Filipino citizens in general of the issue at hand impels the Court to brush aside the procedural barrier posed by the traditional requirement of locus standi, as we have done in a long line of earlier cases, notably in the old but oft-cited emergency powers cases[22] and Kilosbayan v. Guingona, Jr.[23] In cases of transcendental importance, we wrote again in Bayan v. Zamora,[24] "The Court may relax the standing requirements and allow a suit to prosper even where there is no direct injury to the party claiming the right of judicial review."
	GR No. 192818 2010-11-17	PEOPLE v. PRINCE FRANCISCO Y ZAFE VELASCO JR., J.
In the instant case, the records do not include any transcript of stenographic notes pertaining to the searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of the plea of guilty made by appellant on March 4, 2003 during the pre-trial. The March 4, 2003 Order of the RTC unequivocally demonstrates that the trial court conducted a searching inquiry ascertaining the voluntariness and full comprehension of appellant. The unavailability of the transcript of stenographic notes does not necessarily connote that no searching inquiry was made by the trial court. The trial court is entitled to the presumption of regularity of performance of duty under Sec. 2(m),[21] Rule 131 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, absent any factual or legal basis to disregard this presumption.[22]
	GR No. 183591 2008-10-14	PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO v. GOVERNMENT OF REPUBLIC PEACE PANEL ON ANCESTRAL DOMAIN CARPIO MORALES, J.
Respondents cite Suplico v. NEDA, et al.[103] where the Court did not "pontificat[e] on issues which no longer legitimately constitute an actual case or controversy [as this] will do more harm than good to the nation as a whole."
	GR No. 183591 2008-10-14	PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO v. GOVERNMENT OF REPUBLIC PEACE PANEL ON ANCESTRAL DOMAIN CARPIO MORALES, J.
When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed office, the military offensive against the MILF was suspended and the government sought a resumption of the peace talks. The MILF, according to a leading MILF member, initially responded with deep reservation, but when President Arroyo asked the Government of Malaysia through Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad to help convince the MILF to return to the negotiating table, the MILF convened its Central Committee to seriously discuss the matter and, eventually, decided to meet with the GRP.[4]