Rodriguez v. Ynza 97 Phil 1003 (UNREPORTED CASE) Nos. L-8290-8291, November 18, 1955

Rodriguez v. Ynza 97 Phil 1003 (UNREPORTED CASE**)
Nos. L-8290-8291, November 18, 1955

Facts:

The CFI of Iloilo authorized the payment to Atty Benjamin H. Tirol for professional services, charged to the estate of Julia Ynza. 

Jose Ynza objects to the said payment on the ground that Hugo P. Rodriguez, trustee of the estate of Julia Ynza, being a member of the bar*, did not need the assistance of Atty. Tirol, and that, at any rate, the latter had rendered legal services, not to the estate of Julia Ynza, but to the said Hugo Rodriguez in his individual capacity.

*Rule 85, Sec. 7:
“When the executors or administrator is an attorney, he shall not charge against the estate any professional fees for legal services rendered by him.”

Issue:

Whether or not, the objection of Jose Ynza to the payment to Atty Benjamin H. Tirol for professional services charged to the estate of Julia Ynza tenable?

Held:

NO. The objection is untenable.

Rodriguez was named trustee by reason of his qualifications, as an administrator of the estate of Julia Ynza, involved in 8 cases but not in his private capacity as a lawyer.

Atty. Tirol as counsel for Rodriguez in the said cases had rendered services for the benefit of the estate of Julia Ynza, which obtained a favorable decision in every one of the said cases.

**Note: this unreported case is not on the worldwide web as of December 5, 2017. Attached is the actual photo taken on the 97 Phil., page 1003.

Go Gallant PANTHERS NovemBAR 2017!

djao's TRIAL NO ERROR blog supports our dear friends who will be taking the Bar Bxams this November 2017. Go Gallant PANTHERS of the University of Sourthern Philippines, Cebu City!

Go Gallant PANTHERS NovemBAR 2017!

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RONALD BACALAN GABUYA AND RYANNEAL MENESES GIRON, Accused-Appellants. G.R. No. 209038, June 08, 2016

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RONALD BACALAN GABUYA AND RYANNEAL MENESES GIRON, Accused-Appellants.

G.R. No. 209038, June 08, 2016

Topic: Cases penned by Del Castillo, crime of robbery with rape, Article 294, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)

Criminal Case Digest by John Paul C. Ladiao (22 September 2017)

DEL CASTILLO, J.:

FACTS:

This is an appeal from the June 20, 2013 Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-GR. CR-H.C. No. 00441, which affirmed the January 31, 2006 Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City, Branch 24, in Criminal Case No. CBU-62026, finding appellants Ronald Bacalan Gabuya (Gabuya) and Ryanneal Meneses Giron (Giron) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of robbery with rape defined and penalized in Article 294, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), and sentencing them to death.

Gabuya and Giron were charged with the crime of robbery with rape for robbing "AAA" by taking her personal belongings through violence and intimidation and thereafter taking turns raping her. The charge against them stemmed from the following Information:

                

That on or about the 18th day of March, 2002, at about 12:20 A.M., in the City of Cebu, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, armed with a knife, conniving and confederating together and mutually helping each other, poked said knife at one "AAA" and announced a "hold-up" with deliberate intent, with violence and intimidation upon person, took turns in divesting her bag, with its contents such as wristwatch, one casio calculator; cash money and coin purse with a total value of P2,965.00 from the possession of and belonging to said "AAA" while the latter was walking along Visitacion St., a public highway against her will, to the damage and prejudice of the latter in the amount aforestated, and on the occasion thereof, dragged said victim to a vacant lot and then there take turns in having sexual intercourse with said victim while the other accused held her shoulders, without the consent and against the will of the complainant.

ISSUES:

Whether or  not, the accused appellants Gabuya and Giron interposed a valid defense of denial and alibi.? 

HELD:

NO.

After a careful review of the records of the case, this Court finds the appeal devoid of merit. Both the RTC of Cebu City, Branch 24, and the CA correctly found the appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with rape under Article 294, paragraph 1 of the RPC. Indeed, the State in this case had satisfactorily established the following essential elements of that felony: "a) the taking of personal property is committed with violence or intimidation against persons; b) the property taken belongs to another; c) the taking is done with animo lucrandi, and d) the robbery is accompanied by rape."

Under Article 294, paragraph 1, when robbery is accompanied by rape, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. Although the trial court imposed the death penalty, the CA correctly modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua, without eligibility for parole, pursuant to RA 9346.

The amount of civil damages awarded by the CA, should be modified, however. Based on prevailing jurisprudence, the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages in favor of "AAA" should be increased from P75,000.00 to P100,000.00.14 The same jurisprudential teaching also directs that the award of exemplary damages should also be upgraded from P30,000.00 to P100,000.00.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated June 20, 2013 in CA-GR. CR-H.C. No. 00441, is AFFIRMED, subject to the MODIFICATION that the appellants Ronald Bacalan Gabuya and Ryanneal Meneses Giron are ordered to solidarily pay "AAA" the increased amounts of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity; P100,000.00 as moral damages; and another PI00,000.00 as exemplary damages.

ROBINA FARMS CEBU / UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION v. ELIZABETH VILLA G.R. No. 175869, Apr 18, 2016

ROBINA FARMS CEBU / UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION  v. ELIZABETH VILLA

G.R. No. 175869, Apr 18, 2016

Topic: Overtime Pay, Overtime Work Authorization, Burden of proving entitlement to Overtime Pay

Labor Law Case Digest by John Paul C. Ladiao (12 August 2017)

FACTS:

Respondent Elizabeth Villa brought against the petitioner her complaint for illegal suspension, illegal dismissal, nonpayment of overtime pay, and nonpayment of service incentive leave pay in the Regional Arbitration Branch No. VII of the NLRC in Cebu City.

On April 21, 2003, Labor Arbiter Violeta Ortiz-Bantug rendered her decision finding that Villa had not been dismissed from employment.

Although ordering Villa's reinstatement, the Labor Arbiter denied her claim for backwages and overtime pay because she had not adduced evidence of the overtime work actually performed. The Labor Arbiter declared that Villa was entitled to service incentive leave pay for the period of the last three years counted from the filing of her complaint because the petitioner did not refute her claim thereon.

On February 23, 2005, the NLRC rendered its judgment dismissing the appeal by the petitioner but granting that of Villa.

The decision of the Labor Arbiter is REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one ENTERED declaring complainant to have been illegally dismissed. Consequently, respondents are hereby directed to immediately reinstate complainant to her former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges within ten (10) days from receipt of this decision and to pay complainant Overtime Pay.

According to the NLRC, the petitioner's appeal was fatally defective and was being dismissed outright because it lacked the proper verification and certificate of non-forum shopping.

On September 27, 2006, the CA promulgated its assailed decision dismissing the petition for certiorari.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is hereby ordered DISMISSED for lack of merit. The assailed decision is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION, in that petitioner Lily Ngochua should not be held liable with petitioner corporation.

The petitioner posits that the CA erroneously affirmed the giving of overtime pay and service incentive leave pay to Villa; that she did not adduce proof of her having rendered actual overtime work; that she had not been authorized to render overtime work; and that her availment of vacation and sick leaves that had been paid precluded her claiming the service incentive leave pay.

ISSUE 1:

Whether or not the burden of proving entitlement to overtime pay rests on the employer?

ISSUE 2:

Whether or not any employee could render overtime work without prior authorization by the management?

RULING:

No. The burden of proving entitlement to overtime pay rests on the employee.

No. Any employee can render overtime work only when there was a prior authorization by the management.

We partly agree with the petitioner's position.

Firstly, entitlement to overtime pay must first be established by proof that the overtime work was actually performed before the employee may properly claim the benefit. The burden of proving entitlement to overtime pay rests on the employee because the benefit is not incurred in the normal course of business. Failure to prove such actual performance transgresses the principles of fair play and equity.

And, secondly, the NLRC's reliance on the daily time records (DTRs) showing that Villa had stayed in the company's premises beyond eight hours was misplaced. The DTRs did not substantially prove the actual performance of overtime work. The petitioner correctly points out that any employee could render overtime work only when there was a prior authorization therefor by the management. Without the prior authorization, therefore, Villa could not validly claim having performed work beyond the normal hours of work. Moreover, Section 4(c), Rule I, Book III of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code relevantly states as follows:

Section 4. Principles in determining hours worked. – The following general principles shall govern in determining whether the time spent by an employee is considered hours worked for purposes of this Rule:

    (a)

    x x x.

    (b)

    x x x.

    (c)

    If the work performed was necessary, or it benefited the employer, or the employee could not abandon his work at the end of his normal working hours because he had no replacement, all time spent for such work shall be considered as hours worked, if the work was with the knowledge of his employer or immediate supervisor. (bold emphasis supplied)

    (d)      x x x.

Labor Relations Notes by John Paul Ladiao

Labor Relations Notes by John Paul Ladiao

scribd download link:

https://www.scribd.com/document/354495854/John-Paul-Ladiao-Labor-Relations-Notes

Last day of exhibit of the 18 meter life size 1:1 Gundam RX 78-2 statue in Gundam Front Tokyo in Diver City

Today is the last day of exhibit of the 18 meter life size 1:1 Gundam RX 78-2 statue in Gundam Front Tokyo in Diver City.

In remembrance of last November of 2015, was a dream come true experience together with my wife. 

Me as a Gundam & Anime fan, It was best thing I've ever seen in anything related to japanese anime. 

And to its last day today, I salute!

Tobeyo! tobeyo! tobeyo!

Ginga e mukatte

Tobeyo GUNDAM!

Kido senshi GUNDAM! GUNDAM!

Custom Transformers G1 Blaster Bluetooth Speaker, 100% working

my Custom Transformers G1 Blaster Bluetooth Speaker,
in 100% working capacity as a transforming wireless Bluetooth speaker.

Things that I used:

1. a G1 Blaster Transformer.

2. a Mini Bluetooth Speaker (got one from here: http://www.cdrking.com/?mod=products&type=view&sid=22277&main=167#.WLJnKxogmHt)

3. my hobby grade rotary tool

How i did it:

1. I opened and unscrewed my G1 Blaster's light leg part.

2. I marked and fit the speaker on it.

3. I cut the marked part and smoothed the hole on the right leg, using my rotary tools.

4. Fit and positioned the bluetooth speaker on the hole and glued.

.... and done :)

Cherry Blossoms / Sakura in Haradani-en Garden (原谷苑), Kyoto, Japan

Me and my wife together with our parents arrived nighttime in Dotonbori, Namba, Osaka on April 12, 2016, a couple of days too late for the cherry blossoms, and we didn't give up. All our efforts would come into waste if we cannot have this dream come true experience of cherry blossom viewing (hanami), which is Japan's most awaited seasonal spectacle, after all.

Researching the internet that night on japan-guide: http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e3951_late.html pointed us to: Haradani-en Garden (原谷苑) in Kyoto, Japan. It says that sakura / cherry blossoms there blooms full a few days beyond the end of the main season, located Northwest of central Kyoto. Since Kyoto Station is Just 15 minutes away from Shin-Osaka Station by bullet train, and we got Japan Rail passes that gives us unlimited shinkansen / bullet train rides all over Japan, it is very possible for us to catch the phenomenon there.

Haradani-en is an excellent spot to enjoy large numbers of later blooming weeping cherry trees. The pleasant garden is located in the northern outskirts of Kyoto in the hills above Kinkakuji Temple. Haradani-en Garden charges 1200 yen on weekdays or 1500 yen on weekends and holidays, 9:00am to 5:00pm

How we get there (Its easy and fast so I highly recommend it) :

1. We take the Kyoto City Bus from Kyoto Station to Kinkakuji (Golden Pavilion) Bus Stop.

please see the link: http://www2.city.kyoto.lg.jp/koho/eng/access/transport.html

2. We take taxi from Kinkakuji (Golden Pavilion) to Haradani-en Garden (原谷苑)

it wont cost much, its around 900 yen

We indeed had a very successful, and a dream come true experience of sakura / cherry blossom viewing (hanami), even though we arrived a couple of days too late for the cherry blossoms season, as the pictures below shows: