Legal Insights

Positive Identification and Circumstantial Evidence in B.P. 22 Cases: Proving Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt

How Philippine courts use eyewitness identification and circumstantial evidence to convict in Bouncing Checks Law cases, explained through a recent Supreme Court ruling.

Dishonored Checks and Moral Turpitude: Dismissal in Public Service

A court employee's conviction for violating Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law) constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude, warranting dismissal from public service.

Proof of Notice of Dishonor: A Critical Safeguard in Bouncing Check Cases

Learn how the Supreme Court requires strict proof of written notice of dishonor before convicting under the Bouncing Checks Law.

Bouncing Checks Law: When Acquittal Does Not Erase Civil Liability

Philippine Supreme Court clarifies that acquittal in a B.P. 22 case does not automatically extinguish civil liability for dishonored checks.

Bouncing Checks LAW Restructuring Agreements DO NOT Automatically Extinguish Criminal Liability

A restructuring agreement does not automatically extinguish criminal liability for bouncing checks. Learn the legal distinction.

Bouncing Checks and Due Process: The Notice Requirement in BP 22 Cases

Philippine Supreme Court clarifies that proof of receipt of notice of dishonor is essential to convict under BP 22, the bouncing checks law.

Bouncing Checks LAW Intent NOT A Defense Strict Liability Prevails

Written Notice of Dishonor Is Essential in B.P. 22 Cases: Bax v. People

The Supreme Court clarifies that oral demands do not suffice—written notice of dishonor is required to convict under the Bouncing Checks Law.

Insufficient Evidence and Due Process When Accusations Fail to Convict

A corporate officer's conviction under the Bouncing Checks Law requires proof of written notice of dishonor actually received by the accused.

Curing Defects: How Amending a Complaint Can Moot a Case in Philippine Bouncing Checks Law (BP 22)

Learn how a second amended complaint cured defects in a BP 22 case and rendered a certiorari petition moot under Philippine rules.

Bouncing Checks Law: Insufficient Funds and the Necessity of Demand

Understand BP 22's rules on insufficient funds, notice of dishonor, and when demand is truly required.

Partial Payment and Fulfillment of Obligations: Creditor Rights Under B.P. 22

When does partial payment satisfy a debt? The Supreme Court clarifies creditor rights and the Bouncing Checks Law in Alonto v. People.

Bouncing Checks and Guarantees: Alonto v. People and the Reach of BP 22

The Supreme Court clarifies when a postdated check issued as a guarantee still violates the Bouncing Checks Law, BP 22.

Bouncing Checks LAW Knowledge OF Insufficient Funds IS NOT A Defense

Bouncing Checks Law: When Fear and Necessity Do Not Excuse Issuing Bad Checks

The Supreme Court clarifies when uncontrollable fear and state of necessity cannot excuse liability under the Bouncing Checks Law.

B.P. 22 Conviction Requires Proof of Written Notice of Dishonor: The Sia Case

Conviction under the Bouncing Checks Law requires proof the accused received written notice of dishonor. The Sia case explains why.

Checks AS Guarantee Lagman VS People When A Bounced Check Becomes A Crime

The Supreme Court clarifies when a check issued as a guarantee, not payment, falls under the Bouncing Checks Law.

Insufficient Notice, Insufficient Funds: Safeguarding Rights in Bouncing Check Cases

A Supreme Court ruling explains why proper written notice of dishonor is essential before a person can be convicted under the Bouncing Checks Law.

Bouncing Checks LAW Compensation AS A Defense AND THE Impact OF Administrative Circular 12 2000

Moral Turpitude and Bouncing Checks: Disqualifying Election Candidates in the Philippines

The Supreme Court rules that conviction for violation of B.P. Blg. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law) involves moral turpitude, disqualifying candidates from public office.

Bouncing Checks Law: When Issuing Postdated Checks Leads to Imprisonment

The Supreme Court affirms imprisonment for twelve counts of B.P. 22 violations, clarifying when fines alone are insufficient and why each worthless check is a separate offense.

Bouncing Checks Law: When Courts May Impose Fine Instead of Imprisonment

Philippine Supreme Court ruling on B.P. 22 violations explains when fines replace imprisonment and clarifies due process rights in bouncing checks cases.

Bouncing Checks Law: When Courts May Impose Fine Instead of Imprisonment

The Supreme Court clarifies that under BP 22, courts may impose only a fine instead of imprisonment, depending on the circumstances.

Bouncing Checks Law: The 90-Day Rule and Proof of Knowledge Under BP 22

Presenting a check after 90 days does not bar prosecution under BP 22—knowledge of insufficient funds can still be proven by other evidence.