Legal Insights
Plain-language guides and case briefs on Philippine law — researched from the firm's law library of 184,000+ statutes, Supreme Court decisions, and agency issuances, and written so non-lawyers can understand and act on them.
Piercing the Corporate Veil: Clarifying Liability for Subsidiary Obligations
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies when a parent corporation may be held liable for its subsidiary's obligations, and when it cannot.
Reconstitution of Lost Titles and Agrarian Reform: Strict Compliance and Beneficiary Rights
Explore the Junio v. Garilao ruling on land reclassification, CARP exemptions, and why strict compliance matters in agrarian reform cases.
Due Process and Illegal Dismissal: Why Employers Bear the Burden of Proof in Termination Cases
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies procedural rules on indispensable parties in illegal dismissal cases and the employer's burden of proof.
Reconstitution of Lost Title: Supreme Court Clarifies Rules on Proof and Sources
A look at the Supreme Court's ruling on judicial reconstitution of lost titles, clarifying the hierarchy of evidence under RA 26.
Self-Defense vs. Vengeance: Defining the Limits of Justifiable Force in Philippine Law
The Supreme Court clarifies when the defense of another justifies force, and when it becomes criminal vengeance under Philippine law.
Accountability in Public Office: Good Faith Is Not a Free Pass in Malversation Cases
A look at Melchor v. Gironella on administrative liability, good faith, and the burden of proof in public office.
Piercing the Corporate Veil: When Corporate Officers Face Personal Liability in Estafa Cases
When can a corporate officer be personally liable for estafa? The Supreme Court clarifies the limits of corporate personality and criminal liability.
Reconstituting Lost Land Titles: Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Judicial Reconstitution
Supreme Court clarifies the rules and evidence needed to reconstitute a lost or destroyed land title under Republic Act No. 26.
Self-Defense in Homicide Cases: Proving Justification in the Philippines
When claiming self-defense in Philippine homicide cases, the accused bears the burden of proving all elements by clear and convincing evidence. Learn the rules.
Accidental Harm vs Self-Defense: When Can You Claim Innocence in the Philippines
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies when accident or self-defense excuses criminal liability, and why switching defenses on appeal fails.
Defense of Honor Justifying Homicide in Cases of Marital Fidelity
Philippine Supreme Court ruling on when defense of spouse can justify homicide, explaining unlawful aggression requirement.
Incestuous Rape: Credibility of a Victim's Testimony in Cases of Parental Abuse
When a mentally disabled minor is raped, her testimony can convict. The Supreme Court explains why in People v. Mabonga.
The Weight of Eyewitness Testimony in Homicide Cases: People v. Reforma
Eyewitness identification prevails over denial in People v. Reforma, but qualifying circumstances must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Contracts and Consent: How Limited Education and Fraudulent Inducement Can Void a Philippine Contract
Philippine Supreme Court ruling on how fraud, undue influence, and limited education can invalidate contracts, shifting the burden of proof.
When Self-Defense Fails: Unlawful Aggression and Retaliation in Homicide Cases
Understand when self-defense claims fail in Philippine homicide cases, focusing on unlawful aggression and retaliation requirements.
Self-Defense in Philippine Law: Proving Unlawful Aggression for Justification
Learn what Philippine courts require to prove unlawful aggression in self-defense, and why mere threats or insults do not justify killing.
Self Defense Plea Fails Illegal Aggression Must BE Proven FOR Justification IN Homicide Cases
A rape conviction shows that self-defense claims require proof of unlawful aggression, not bare allegations. Learn the legal standard.
Election Law: Ensuring Canvass Board Legitimacy and Preventing Electoral Fraud
The Supreme Court affirms COMELEC's power to nullify proclamations by illegally constituted boards of canvassers and to order recounts to protect electoral integrity.
The Insanity Defense: Establishing the Boundaries of Criminal Responsibility in the Philippines
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies self-defense and treachery rules in a murder appeal, reducing conviction to homicide with precise legal standards.
Unlawful Aggression and Self-Defense: When a Threat Justifies Homicide
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies that a mere threatening act, like drawing a bolo, does not constitute unlawful aggression justifying self-defense in homicide cases.
Buy-Bust Operations Validity and the Principle of Entrapment in Drug Cases
The Supreme Court explains when buy-bust operations are valid and how entrapment differs from instigation in drug cases.
Accidental Shooting Intent and Liability in Firearm Mishaps Under Philippine Law
Philippine Supreme Court ruling on robbery with homicide clarifies criminal liability when killings occur during heists, even if accidental.
Self-Defense and Intent to Kill: The Case of Conrado Casitas
Philippine Supreme Court clarifies when self-defense fails and intent to kill is shown by the number and location of wounds inflicted.
Reconstitution of Lost Title: Supreme Court Clarifies Rules on Proof and Evidence
The Supreme Court clarifies when a lost certificate of title may be reconstituted, ruling on the sufficiency of evidence under Republic Act No. 26.