Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 173780 2011-03-21	METROPOLITAN BANK v. MARINA B. CUSTODIO SERENO, J.
In a petition for review on certiorari filed under Rule 45, the issues that can be raised are limited only to questions of law.[74] Questions of fact are not reviewable in a Rule 45 petition.[75] Nonetheless, this rule permits of exceptions, which the Court has long since recognized.[76]
	GR No. 171982 2010-08-18	DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. TRADERS ROYAL BANK and PRIVATIZATION CARPIO, J.
A question of fact exists when the doubt centers on the truth or falsity of the alleged facts while a question of law exists if the doubt centers on what the law is on a certain set of facts.[10] There is a question of fact if the issue requires a review of the evidence presented or requires the re-evaluation of the credibility of witnesses.[11] However, if the issue raised is capable of being resolved without need of reviewing the probative value of the evidence, the question is one of law.[12]
	GR No. 178621 2010-07-26	MIGUEL RUBIA v. NATIONAL RELATIONS COMMISSION PEREZ, J.
The issues raised by petitioner are evidently factual in nature. By giving due coarse to his petition, this Court is not departing from the well-settled rule that questions of facts are not reviewable.[24] The discordant findings between the Labor Arbiter and the NLR.C however open the door for review.[25]