Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
FACTS:
1.
The private respondents spouses Sanson filed with the
Aklan MCTC a complaint for forcible entry and damages with a
prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory
injunction against the petitioners and other John Does
numbering about 120.
7.
The respondent Judge subsequently denied the
petitioners MR and to Defer Enforcement of Preliminary
Mandatory Injunction.
2.
The private respondents alleged in their complaint that:
(1) they are the registered owners of the disputed land; (2)
they were the disputed lands prior possessors when the
petitioners armed with bolos and carrying suspected firearms
and together with unidentified persons entered the disputed
land by force and intimidation, without the private
respondents permission and against the objections of the
private respondents security men, and built thereon a nipa
and bamboo structure.
3.
In their Answer, the petitioners denied the material
allegations and essentially claimed that: (1) they are the actual
and prior possessors of the disputed land;
(2) on the contrary, the private respondents are the intruders;
and (3) the private respondents certificate of title to the
disputed property is spurious. They asked for the dismissal of
the complaint and interposed a counterclaim for damages.
4.
The MCTC, after due proceedings, rendered a decision in
the private respondents favor, finding prior possession through
the construction of perimeter fence in 1993.
5.
6.
On appeal, Judge Marin granted the private respondents
motion for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory
injunction upon posting of a bond. The writ authorizing the
immediate implementation of the MCTC decision was actually
issued by respondent Judge del Rosario after the private
respondents had complied with the imposed condition. The
8.
Meanwhile, the petitioners opposed the motion for
demolition. The respondent Judge nevertheless issued via a
Special Order a writ of demolition to be implemented fifteen
(15) days after the Sheriffs written notice to the petitioners to
voluntarily demolish their house/s to allow the private
respondents to effectively take actual possession of the land.
9.
The petitioners thereafter filed a Petition for Review of
the Permanent Mandatory Injunction and Order of Demolition in
CA.
10.
Meanwhile, respondent Sheriff issued the Notice to
Vacate and for Demolition. Hence, the present petition for
certiorari with writs of amparo and habeas data.
ISSUE: W/N petition for certiorari with writ of amparo and
habeas data is proper
HELD:
No. We find the petitions for certiorari and issuance of a writ of
habeas data fatally defective, both in substance and in form.
The petition for the issuance of the writ of amparo, on the
other hand, is fatally defective with respect to content and
substance.
Based on the outlined material antecedents that led to the
petition, that the petition for certiorari to nullify the assailed
RTC orders has been filed out of time. Based on the same
material antecedents, we find too that the petitioners have
been guilty of willful and deliberate misrepresentation before
this Court and, at the very least, of forum shopping. In sum, the
petition for certiorari should be dismissed for the cited formal
deficiencies, for violation of the non- forum shopping rule, for
having been filed out of time, and for substantive deficiencies.
To start off with the basics, the writ of amparo was originally
conceived as a response to the extraordinary rise in the
number of killings and enforced disappearances, and to the
perceived lack of available and effective remedies to address
these extraordinary concerns. It is intended to address
violations of or threats to the rights to life, liberty or security,
as an extraordinary and independent remedy beyond those
available under the prevailing Rules, or as a remedy
supplemental to these Rules. What it is not, is a writ to protect
concerns that are purely property or commercial. Neither is it a
writ that we shall issue on amorphous and uncertain grounds.
Consequently, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo in line with the
extraordinary character of the writ and the reasonable
certainty that its issuance demands requires that every
petition for the issuance of the
Facts:
v.
Macapagal-Arroyo
189155 07 September 2010
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND:
Supreme Court: Petition for the issuance of Writs of Amparo
and Habeas Data
Court of Appeals: Upon order of the Supreme Court, the Court
of Appeals summarily heard the Original
Action for Petition of Amparo. Thereafter, the Court of Appeals
issued a judgment which is the subject of the present Petition
for Review on Certiorari.
FACTS:
Melissa Roxas, an American citizen of Filipino descent, while in
the United States, enrolled in an exposure program to the
Philippines with the group Bagong Alyansang MakabayanUnited States of America (BAYAN- USA) of which she is a
member.
On 19 May 2009, after doing survey work in Tarlac, Roxas and
her companions rested in the house of Mr. Jesus Paolo in Sitio
Bagong Sikat. While Roxas and her companions were resting,
15 heavily armed men in civilian clothes forcibly entered the
house and dragged them inside a van. When they alighted
from the van, she was informed that she is being detained for
being a member of Communist Party of the Philippines-New
Peoples Army (CPP-NPA). She was then separated from her
companions and was brought to a room, from where she could
hear sounds of gunfire, noise of planes taking off and landing,
and some construction bustle.
She was interrogated and tortured for 5 straight days to
convince her to abandon her communist beliefs. She was
informed by a person named RC that those who tortured her
came from the Special Operations Group and that she was
abducted because her name is included in the Order of
Battle.
On 25 May 2009, Roxas was finally released and was given a
cellular phone with a sim card. She was
sternly warned not to report the incident to the group
Karapatan or something untoward will happen to her and her
family. After her release, Roxas continued to receive calls from
RC thru the cell phone given to her. Out of apprehension, she
threw the phone and the sim card.
Hence, on 01 June 2009, Roxas filed a petition for the issuance
of Writs of Amparo and Habeas Data before the Supreme Court,
impleading the high- ranking officials of military and Philippine
Facts:
A letter was sent to the Meralco admin department in bulacan
denouncing Lim, an administrative clerk. She was ordered to be
transferred to Alabang due to concerns over her safety. She
complained under the premise that the transfer was a denial of
her due process. She wrote a letter stating that:
It appears that the veracity of these accusations and threats
to be [sic] highly suspicious, doubtful or are just mere jokes if
they existed at all. She added, instead of the management
supposedly extending favor to me, the net result and effect of
management action would be a punitive one. She asked for
deferment thereafter. Since the company didnt respond, she
filed for a writ of habeas data in the Bulacan RTC due to
meralcos omission of provding her with details about the
report of the letter. To her, this constituted a violation of her
liberty and security. She asked for disclosure of the data and
measures for keeping the confidentiality of the data.
Meralco filed a reply saying that the jurisdiction was with the
NLRC and that the petition wasnt in order.
Trial court ruled in her favor.
In the SC, Meralco petitioned that Habeas Data applies to
entities engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data
or information regarding an aggrieved partys person, family or
home
Issue: Is Habeas Data the right remedy for Lim?
Held: No, petition dismissed
Ratio:
Section 1. Habeas Data. The writ of habeas data is a remedy
available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or
security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or
omission of a public official or employee or of a private
individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or
storing of data or information regarding the person, family,
home and correspondence of the aggrieved party
Its a forum for enforcing ones right to the truth. Like amparo,
habeas data was a response to killings and enforced
disappearances.
The officer shall state in the return how the judgment was
enforced and complied with by the respondent, as well as all
objections of the parties regarding the manner and regularity
of the service of the writ. The court shall set the return for
hearing with due notice to the parties and act accordingly. [24]
E. Practical Applicability of the Rule
For purposes of discussion, recall the hypothetical situation
under the Statement of the Legal Argument in Contemplation.
The woman in this case is the aggrieved party. Considering as
such, she is entitled to the protection of the law and may avail
of the remedy under the writ of habeas data. In connection
with this, the aggrieved partys right to privacy in life has been
violated by an unlawful act of her partner.
It is submitted that the guys act of uploading the recorded
intercourse in a website, leaving it in open virtual space, and
giving other net surfers the free hand to download the same
video for whatever pleasure they may obtain is in violation of
the partners right to privacy in life. The legal basis that the
aggrieved party may invoke is found in the Civil Code under
Article 26 which provides that:
Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and
peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The
following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a
criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages,
prevention and other relief:
(1) Prying into the privacy of anothers residence:
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family
relations of another;
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or
other personal condition.
The requirement of the rule that the act or omission causing
the violation must be unlawful is thus satisfied under the
premises. It also shows that the gathering, collecting, storing or
using of data by the guy without the consent of his partner is
unlawful and even vexatious. The term data as used in the Rule
may be interpreted to mean information, in its ordinary sense.
Such data or information may include any ephemeral,
However, our rules can only do so much. The writ may not
practically order the destruction of residual copies of the data
or those downloaded by third parties prior to the enforcement
of the writ. A net surfer who comes across the uploaded
incriminating photo or video may retrieve or download the
same in his personal laptop or even cellphone. It would be
impractical for the writ to run against said person.
2. Other situations where the writ is applicable.
Websites can be likened to a residence of a person (whether a
natural or a juridical person) in the cyberspace, as in personal
home page or company website. In an ever evolving age of
information technology, there have been millions of websites
developed and maintained in the world wide web from gaming
sites, to online libraries, auction site, entertainment, news, and
even pornographic sites. A social networking site provides for a
forum where its members can socialize electronically. Other
sites offer special features such as audio or video streaming
where a registered user may upload, view, or download text
data or video format.
Such is the trend that almost all facets of human interests can
be linked and embodied in a website. A virtual world is now
existing out there where netizens are its inhabitants. Just like
in the physical world, social interaction using the internet
services such as chatting, email, and web forum, produce
consequences and other nuances which must be dealt with.
Ordinary human endeavors have been coercively or voluntarily
given counterpart in the intangible world of the web. We now
engage in online banking and shopping, peer to peer gaming,
videoconferencing, among others. Even several government
services can now be availed via the net such as civil
registration,
passport
application,
and
other
similar
bureaucratic transactions.
Consequently, problems arising out of human interaction in the
physical world can also be experienced by the actors and key
players in the cyberspace. Legal consequence is only one
notion to consider amidst the various issues that transpire in
the internet. Concepts such as internet privacy, internet
reputation, cybercrimes, and web jurisdiction have come into
fore in a quite different manner. So greatly different from the