This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-07-29 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| A question of law exists when there is doubt or controversy as to what the law is on a certain state of facts. On the other hand, a question of fact exists when the doubt or controversy arises as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts. The resolution of a question of fact necessarily involves a calibration of the evidence, the credibility of the witnesses, the existence and the relevance of surrounding circumstances, and the probability of specific situations.[18] | |||||
|
2014-12-03 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| It is settled that the appellate jurisdiction of the Court over decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan is limited only to questions of laws; as its the factual findings, as a rule, are conclusive upon the Court.[30] | |||||
|
2013-04-11 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| True enough, questions of fact require evidentiary processes, the "calibration of the evidence, the credibility of the witnesses, the existence and the relevance of surrounding circumstances, and the probability of specific situations,"[54] especially "[i]f the query requires x x x the existence or relevance of surrounding circumstances and their relation to each other, the issue in that query is factual."[55] Generally, these questions of fact cannot be decided by a petition for prohibition under Rule 65,[56] because the rule applies to jurisdictional flaws brought about by lack, excess, or grave abuse of discretion.[57] | |||||