attyphiljuris.blogspot.com

STATEMENT OF THE CASE This case involves a dispute between the Heirs of the late Apolinario Caburnay (petitioners) and the Heirs of Teodulo Sison (respondents). The petitioners claim that they entered into a sale agreement with Teodulo Sison regarding a parcel of land, but upon Teodulo’s death, the sale was not completed, and the respondents, after executing an extrajudicial settlement of the estate, transferred the property to Jesus Sison, one of the heirs. The petitioners seek to declare the sale valid, and the property title in Jesus' name null and void, asserting that they had partially paid for the property. Respondents argue that the sale was invalid due to lack of consent from Teodulo's second wife, Perla, and that the action is barred by prescription. "In a nutshell, the present case involves a husband (Teodulo), who has married twice and has children (petitioners) from the first marriage. After the death of his first wife (Perpetua) and while married to his second...

  SC Declares Unconstitutional COMELEC Resolution Prohibiting Carrying of Knives: Unreasonable and Overly Broad The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional the COMELEC Resolution No. 10015 provision prohibiting the carrying of knives and other bladed instruments during the election period.  In this case ,  the Court ruled that the prohibition was unreasonable, overly broad, and beyond the authority of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). The case involved Jovit Buella , who was charged for carrying a folding knife outside his residence during the 2016 elections. The Court found that COMELEC failed to properly define what constitutes a "deadly weapon," arbitrarily including all bladed instruments in its prohibition. This criminalized even the possession of ordinary tools like kitchen knives, utility blades, and carpentry tools , which have legitimate uses. Justice Leonen, in his concurring opinion, stressed that the blanket ban on knives violated due process ...

" The sale of a conjugal property requires the consent of both the husband and the wife. The absence of the consent of one renders the sale null and void, while the vitiation thereof makes it merely voidable. Only in the latter case can ratification cure the defect. ” - SC STATEMENT OF THE CASE This case involves Spouses Antonio and Luzviminda Guiang (petitioners) who purchased a portion of conjugal property from Judie Corpuz , the husband of Gilda Corpuz (private respondent), without Gilda’s consent. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Koronadal, South Cotabato and subsequently the Court of Appeals (CA) ruled the sale null and void under Article 124 of the Family Code , which requires spousal consent for the disposition of conjugal property. The petitioners, claiming that the transaction was merely voidable and later ratified through an amicable settlement , sought relief from the Supreme Court (SC). Arguments Petitioners (Spouses Guiang): The Deed of Transfer of Righ...