This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-11-09 |
JARDELEZA, J. |
||||
| This principle was reiterated in INC Shipmanagement, Inc., et al. v. Moradas.[37] In that case, this Court upheld the affidavits and statements executed by the vessel's officers and crew members to support the claim that the injuries of respondent-employee were self-inflicted: While respondent contended that the affidavits and statements of the vessel's officers and his fellow crew members should not be given probative value as they were biased, sell-serving, and mere hearsay, he nonetheless failed to present any evidence to substantiate his own theory. Besides, as correctly pointed out by the NLRC, the corroborating affidavits and statements of the vessel's officers antl crew members must be taken as a whole and cannot just be perfunctorily dismissed as self-serving absent any showing that they were lying when they made the statements therein.[38] (Citations omitted; emphasis supplied.) | |||||
|
2014-07-23 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| A petition for certiorari may be filed if the trial court declared the defendant in default with grave abuse of discretion.[9] However, an act of a court or tribunal can only be considered to be tainted with grave abuse of discretion when such act is done in a capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.[10] | |||||