This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-07-09 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Again, in Manaloto v. Veloso III,[7] the Court reiterated as follows: When the ground for dismissal is that the complaint states no cause of action, such fact can be determined only from the facts alleged in the complaint and from no other, and the court cannot consider other matters aliunde. The test, therefore, is whether, assuming the allegations of fact in the complaint to be true, a valid judgment could be rendered in accordance with the prayer stated therein.[8] | |||||
|
2013-09-11 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| The rationale therefor was explained in the case of Manaloto v. Veloso III,[72] citing Concepcion v. CA,[73] to wit:The philosophy behind Art. 26 underscores the necessity for its inclusion in our civil law. The Code Commission stressed in no uncertain terms that the human personality must be exalted. The sacredness of human personality is a concomitant consideration of every plan for human amelioration. The touchstone of every system of law, of the culture and civilization of every country, is how far it dignifies man. If the statutes insufficiently protect a person from being unjustly humiliated, in short, if human personality is not exalted - then the laws are indeed defective. Thus, under this article, the rights of persons are amply protected, and damages are provided for violations of a person's dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind.[74] | |||||