This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2011-10-18 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| The petitioners, however, failed to provide us with any cause or justification for this course of action. Hence, while the judicial department and this Court are not bound by the acceptance of the President's certification by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, prudent exercise of our powers and respect due our co-equal branches of government in matters committed to them by the Constitution, caution a stay of the judicial hand.[22] | |||||
|
2007-02-21 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Lastly, petitioners' contention that it was grave abuse of discretion for the COMELEC En Banc to order herein private respondents to continue as Punong Barangays in a hold-over capacity until the holding of special elections, is likewise devoid of merit. In Sambarani v. Comelec,[12] the Court already explained, thus:x x x Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9164 ("RA 9164") provides: | |||||
|
2006-10-25 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The framers of the Constitution directly borrowed[14] the concept of people�s initiative from the United States where various State constitutions incorporate an initiative clause. In almost all States[15] which allow initiative petitions, the unbending requirement is that the people must first see the full text of the proposed amendments before they sign to signify their assent, and that the people must sign on an initiative petition that contains the full text of the proposed amendments.[16] | |||||
|
2003-09-23 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| All said criminal bail bond[s] were duly annotated in the title of our bondsman Eulogio Villarma. As a matter of fact, the total amount of bail bond annotated at said title amounted only to P574,200.00 and not P726,400.00 as computed by said Helen Gamboa-Mijares. The total market value of said title is P1,627,043.01 and the assessed value is P650,820.00 as of 1998, a xerox copy of which is hereto attached as Annex "A." The Province of Negros Occidental and all the Municipalities therein are now increasing the assessment of all land which will amount to almost double of their previous assessment for the purpose of increasing the land tax collection of the government and also due to the increase in the value of the land.[16] Reiterating the contents of Uytiepo's affidavit, the respondent judge explained that there were other accused in criminal cases whose bail bonds were annotated in TCT No. 160427 but had long been dismissed; it just so happened that the said dismissals were not annotated in the title.[17] The respondent attached the respective orders of dismissal in two criminal cases[18] where the said title was used as property bail. The bail bonds in the said criminal cases[19] amounted to P36,000, and if deducted from the amount of P574,200 would result to only P538,200, an amount much lower than its assessed value of P650,820.[20] | |||||