Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ISABELITA C. VINUYA v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY ALBERTO G. ROMULO

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 206510 2014-09-16	MOST REV. PEDRO D. ARIGO v. SCOTT H. SWIFT VILLARAMA, JR., J.
In the light of the foregoing, the Court defers to the Executive Branch on the matter of compensation and rehabilitation measures through diplomatic channels. Resolution of these issues impinges on our relations with another State in the context of common security interests under the VFA. It is settled that "[t]he conduct of the foreign relations of our government is committed by the Constitution to the executive and legislative "the political"--departments of the government, and the propriety of what may be done in the exercise of this political power is not subject to judicial inquiry or decision."[40]
	GR No. 206510 2014-09-16	MOST REV. PEDRO D. ARIGO v. SCOTT H. SWIFT VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The liberalization of standing first enunciated in Oposa, insofar as it refers to minors and generations yet unborn, is now enshrined in the Rules which allows the filing of a citizen suit in environmental cases. The provision on citizen suits in the Rules "collapses the traditional rule on personal and direct interest, on the principle that humans are stewards of nature."[16]
	AM No. 10-10-4-SC 2011-03-08	UP LAW FACULTY'S STATEMENT ON PLAGIARISM ALLEGATIONS LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
II. THIS HONORABLE COURT HAS CONFUSED DIPLOMATIC PROTECTION WITH THE BROADER, IF FUNDAMENTAL, RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES TO PROTECT THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF ITS CITIZENS - ESPECIALLY WHERE THE RIGHTS ASSERTED ARE SUBJECT OF ERGA OMNES OBLIGATIONS AND PERTAIN TO JUS COGENS NORMS.[5]