Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 168852 2008-09-30	SHARICA MARI L. GO-TAN v. SPS. PERFECTO C. TAN AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In Yu v. People,[21] the Court applied suppletorily the provisions on subsidiary imprisonment under Article 39 of the RPC to Batas Pambansa (B.P.) Blg. 22, otherwise known as the "Bouncing Checks Law," noting the absence of an express provision on subsidiary imprisonment in said special law.
	GR NO. 141066 2005-02-17	EVANGELINE LADONGA v. PEOPLE AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly proscribe the suppletory application of the provisions of the RPC. Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, the general provisions of the RPC which, by their nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied suppletorily. Indeed, in the recent case of Yu vs. People,[31] the Court applied suppletorily the provisions on subsidiary imprisonment under Article 39[32] of the RPC to B.P. Blg. 22.