Municipality of Sta. Fe vs. Aritao

8/10/2019 Municipality of Sta. Fe vs. Aritao

1/11

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 140474 September 21, 2007

MUNICIPALITY OF STA. FE, Petitioner,

vs.MUNICIPALITY OF ARITAO,Respondent.

D E C I S I O N

ACUNA, J.:

This is an appeal by petition for revie on certiorari !nder R!le "# of the R!les of Co!rt of the

Septe$ber %&, '((( De)ision'of the Co!rt of *ppeals +C* affir$in- in totothe *!-!st /,'(( Orderof the Re-ional Trial Co!rt +RTC of 0ayo$bon-, N!eva Vi1)aya, 0ran)h 2,

hi)h dis$issed Civil Case No. 2' for la)3 of 4!risdi)tion.

On O)tober '5, '(2&, petitioner 6!ni)ipality of Sta. Fe, in the Provin)e of N!eva Vi1)aya, filed

before the RTC of 0ayo$bon-, N!eva Vi1)aya, 0ran)h 2, Civil Case No. 2' for theDeter$ination of 0o!ndary Disp!te involvin- the baran-ays of 0antinan and Canab!an. *s the

parties failed to a$i)ably settle d!rin- the pre7trial sta-e, trial on the $erits ens!ed.

The trial as al$ost over, ith petitioner8s reb!ttal itness already !nder )ross7e9a$ination,

hen the )o!rt, reali1in- its oversi-ht !nder e9istin- la, ordered on De)e$ber (, '(22, thes!spension of the pro)eedin-s and the referral of the )ase to the San--!nian- Panlalai-an of

N!eva Vi1)aya.%In t!rn, the San--!nian )on)erned passed on the $atter to its Co$$ittee on

:e-al *ffairs, Ordinan)es and Resol!tions, hi)h re)o$$ended adoptin- Resol!tion No. 5"

dated Septe$ber '", '(/( of the for$er $e$bers of its Provin)ial 0oard.

"

Said resol!tionprevio!sly resolved to ad4!di)ate the baran-ays of 0antinan and Canab!an as parts of

respondent8s territorial 4!risdi)tion and en4oin petitioner fro$ e9er)isin- its -overn$entalf!n)tions ithin the sa$e. S!bse;!ently, as per Resol!tion No. %#/ dated Nove$ber '%, '(2(,

the San--!nian- Panlalai-an approved the Co$$ittee8s re)o$$endation b!t endorsed the

bo!ndary disp!te to the RTC for f!rther pro)eedin-s and preservation of thestatus quopendin-finality of the )ase.

0a)3 in the RTC, respondent $oved to )onsider Resol!tion No. 5" as final and e9e)!tory. In its

Order dated Febr!ary ', '((',#the trial )o!rt, hoever, resolved to deny the $otion r!lin- that

sin)e there as no a$i)able settle$ent rea)hed at the ti$e the Provin)ial 0oard had e9)eeded its

a!thority in iss!in- a


2/11

bo!ndary disp!tes already belon-ed to the San--!nian- Panlalai-an and no lon-er ith the

trial )o!rt, pri$arily )itin- the do)trine laid don by this Co!rt inMunicipality of Sogod v.

Rosal./

On *!-!st /, '((, the trial )o!rt resolved to -rant the $otion, th!s>

* )lose st!dy of the de)ision of the ?onorable S!pre$e Co!rt in the 6!ni)ipality of So-od )ase

in relation to this )ase palpably shos that, )ontrary to the )lai$ of respondent 6!ni)ipality of

Sta. Fe, thro!-h )o!nsel, it involves bo!ndary disp!te as in this )ase.

*s to the appli)able la on the ;!estion of hi)h a-en)y of the @overn$ent )an ta3e )o-ni1an)eof this )ase or hether or not this Co!rt sho!ld pro)eed in e9er)isin- 4!risdi)tion over this )ase,

the sa$e AhadB been s;!arely resolved by the A?onorableB S!pre$e Co!rt in the 6!ni)ipality of

So-od )ase in this ise>


3/11

body. This r!le, hoever, is not itho!t e9)eption. It is not appli)able hen the )han-e in

4!risdi)tion is )!rative in )hara)ter. *s far as bo!ndary disp!tes are )on)erned, the '(2/

Constit!tion is the latest ill of the people, therefore, the sa$e sho!ld be -iven retroa)tive effe)ton )ases pendin- before )o!rts after its ratifi)ation. It $andates that


4/11

*s early as O)tober ', '('/, the pro)ed!re for the settle$ent of $!ni)ipal bo!ndary disp!tes

as already set forth hen *)t No. /'' or the Revised *d$inistrative Code +R*C too3 into

effe)t.'*t that ti$e, Se)tion '5/ of the la provided>

SECTION '. Se)tion To tho!sand one h!ndred si9ty7seven of the Revised *d$inistrative

Code, as a$ended, is hereby f!rther a$ended to read as follos>


5/11

SEC. ''2.Jurisdictional Responsibility for Settlement of Boundary Dispute. 0o!ndary disp!tes

beteen and a$on- lo)al -overn$ent !nits shall, as $!)h as possible, be settled a$i)ably. To

this end>

9 9 9

+b 0o!ndary disp!tes involvin- to + or $ore $!ni)ipalities ithin the sa$e provin)e shall

be referred for settle$ent to the san--!nian- panlalai-an )on)erned.

9 9 9

+e In the event the san--!nian fails to effe)t an a$i)able settle$ent ithin si9ty +5& days fro$the date the disp!te as referred thereto, it shall iss!e a )ertifi)ation to that effe)t. Thereafter, the

disp!te shall be for$ally tried by the san--!nian )on)erned hi)h shall de)ide the iss!e ithin

si9ty +5& days fro$ the date of the )ertifi)ation referred to above.

SEC. ''(.#ppeal. ithin the ti$e and $anner pres)ribed by the R!les of Co!rt, any party$ay elevate the de)ision of the san--!nian )on)erned to the proper Re-ional Trial Co!rt havin-

4!risdi)tion over the area in disp!te. The Re-ional Trial Co!rt shall de)ide the appeal ithin one

+' year fro$ the filin- thereof. Pendin- final resol!tion of the disp!ted area prior to the disp!teshall be $aintained and )ontin!ed for all le-al p!rposes.&

This Co!rt a-rees ith petitioner8s )ontention that the trial )o!rt had 4!risdi)tion to ta3e

)o-ni1an)e of the )o$plaint hen it as filed on O)tober '5, '(2& sin)e the prevailin- la then

as Se)tion '5/ of the R*C, as a$ended by Se). 'of R.*. No. 5'2, hi)h -ranted the Co!rtof First Instan)e +no RTC the 4!risdi)tion to hear and de)ide )ases of $!ni)ipal bo!ndary

disp!tes. The ante)edents of theMunicipality of Sogod )ase reveal that it dealt ith the trial

)o!rt8s dis$issal of )ases filed for la)3 of 4!risdi)tion be)a!se at the ti$e of the instit!tion of the)ivil a)tions, the la in for)e as the old provision of Se). '5/ of the R*C, hi)h e$poeredthe provin)ial boards, not the trial )o!rts, to hear and resolve s!)h )ases.

The $ain point of in;!iry, hoever, is hether the C* erred in affir$in- the trial )o!rt8s

dis$issal of the instant )ase for la)3 of 4!risdi)tion on the -ro!nd that at the ti$e of the filin- ofthe $otion to dis$iss the ori-inal 4!risdi)tion to hear and de)ide, the )ase had been vested on the

San--!nian- Panlalai-an and no lon-er on the RTC.

The Co!rt r!les that the appellate )o!rt did not err. The differen)e in the fa)t!al settin-

notithstandin-,Municipality of Sogodstill applies in the sense that si$ilar thereto the penden)y

of the present )ase has also been overta3en by events the ratifi)ation of the '(2/ Constit!tionand the ena)t$ent of the :@C of '(('.

*s shon above, sin)e the effe)tivity of R.*. No. 5'2, the San--!nian- Panlalai-an has been

the pri$ary trib!nal responsible in the a$i)able settle$ent of bo!ndary disp!tes beteen ora$on- to or $ore $!ni)ipalities lo)ated in the sa$e provin)e. ith the :@C of '((',

hoever, a $a4or )han-e has been introd!)ed that in the event the San--!nian fails to effe)t a

settle$ent, it shall not only iss!e a )ertifi)ation
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt20


6/11

to that effe)t b!t $!st also for$ally hear and de)ide the )ase ithin the re-le$entary period.

R!le III of the R!les and Re-!lations I$ple$entin- the :@C of '((''o!tlines the pro)ed!re for

the settle$ent of bo!ndary disp!tes as follos>

*RT. '/."rocedures for Settling Boundary Disputes. $ The folloin- pro)ed!res shall -overn

the settle$ent of bo!ndary disp!tes>

+a. Filin- of petition The san--!nian )on)erned $ay initiate a)tion by filin- a petition,

in the for$ of a resol!tion, ith the san--!nian havin- 4!risdi)tion over the disp!te.

+b. Contents of petition The petition shall state the -ro!nds, reasons or 4!stifi)ationstherefore.

+). Do)!$ents atta)hed to petition The petition shall be a))o$panied by>

+' D!ly a!thenti)ated )opy of the la or stat!te )reatin- the :@ or any other

do)!$ents shoin- proof of )reation of the :@G

+ Provin)ial, )ity, $!ni)ipal or baran-ay $ap, as the )ase $ay be, d!ly )ertifiedby the :60G

+% Te)hni)al des)ription of the bo!ndaries of the :@s )on)ernedG

+" ritten )ertifi)ation of the provin)ial, )ity, or $!ni)ipal assessor, as the )ase

$ay be, as to territorial 4!risdi)tion over the disp!ted area a))ordin- re)ords in)!stodyG

+# ritten de)larations or sorn state$ents of the people residin- in the disp!tedareaG and

+5 S!)h other do)!$ents or infor$ation as $ay be re;!ired by the san--!nianhearin- the disp!te.

+d. *nser of adverse party pon re)eipt by the san--!nian )on)erned of the petition

to-ether ith the re;!ired do)!$ents, the :@ or :@s )o$plained a-ainst shall be

f!rnished )opies thereof and shall be -iven fifteen +'# or3in- days ithin hi)h to filetheir ansers.

+e. ?earin- ithin five +# or3in- days after re)eipt of the anser of the adverseparty, the san--!nian shall hear the )ase and allo the parties )on)erned to present their

respe)tive eviden)es.

+f. =oint hearin- hen to or $ore san--!nians 4ointly hear a )ase, they $ay sit enbancor desi-nate their respe)tive representatives. here representatives are desi-nated,

there shall be an e;!al n!$ber of representatives fro$ ea)h san--!nian. They shall ele)t
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt21


7/11

fro$ a$on- the$selves a presidin- offi)er and a se)retary. In )ase of disa-ree$ent,

sele)tion shall be by drain- lot.

+-. Fail!re to settle In the event the san--!nian fails to a$i)ably settle the disp!teithin si9ty +5& days fro$ the date s!)h disp!te as referred thereto, it shall iss!e a

)ertifi)ation to that effe)t and )opies thereof shall be f!rnished the parties )on)erned.

+h. De)ision ithin si9ty +5& days fro$ the date the )ertifi)ation as iss!ed, the

disp!te shall be for$ally tried and de)ided by the san--!nian )on)erned. Copies of thede)ision shall, ithin fifteen +'# days fro$ the pro$!l-ation thereof, be f!rnished the

parties )on)erned, DI:@, lo)al assessor, Co$ele), NSO, and other N@*s )on)erned.

+i. *ppeal ithin the ti$e and $anner pres)ribed by the R!les of Co!rt, any party $ay

elevate the de)ision of the san--!nian )on)erned to the proper Re-ional Trial Co!rthavin- 4!risdi)tion over the disp!te by filin- thereith the appropriate pleadin-, statin-

a$on- others, the nat!re of the disp!te, the de)ision of the san--!nian )on)erned and the

reasons for appealin- therefro$. The Re-ional Trial Co!rt shall de)ide the )ase ithinone +' year fro$ the filin- thereof. De)isions on bo!ndary disp!tes pro$!l-ated 4ointly

by to + or $ore san--!nian- panlalai-an shall be heard by the Re-ional Trial Co!rt

of the provin)e hi)h first too3 )o-ni1an)e of the disp!te.

*RT. '2.Maintenance of Status %uo. Pendin- final resol!tion of the disp!te, the stat!s of theaffe)ted area prior to the disp!te shall be $aintained and )ontin!ed for all p!rposes.

*RT. '(. &fficial 'ustodian. The DI:@ shall be the offi)ial )!stodian of )opies of all

do)!$ents on bo!ndary disp!tes of the :@s.

Notably, !nli3e R.*. No. 5'2 and 0.P. %%/, the :@C of '((' -rants an e9panded role on theSan--!nian- Panlalai-an )on)erned in resolvin- )ases of $!ni)ipal bo!ndary disp!tes. *sidefro$ havin- the f!n)tion of brin-in- the )ontendin- parties to-ether and intervenin- or assistin-

in the a$i)able settle$ent of the )ase, the San--!nian- Panlalai-an is no spe)ifi)ally vested

ith ori-inal 4!risdi)tion to a)t!ally hear and de)ide the disp!te in a))ordan)e ith thepro)ed!res laid don in the la and its i$ple$entin- r!les and re-!lations. This sit!ation, in

effe)t, reverts to the old r!le !nder the R*C, prior to its a$end$ent by R.*. No. 5'2, !nder

hi)h the provin)ial boards ere e$poered to investi-ate, hear the parties and event!allyde)ide the )ase on the basis thereof. On the other hand, !nder the :@C of '((', the trial )o!rt

loses its poer to try, at the first instan)e, )ases of $!ni)ipal bo!ndary disp!tes. Only in the

e9er)ise of its appellate 4!risdi)tion )an the proper RTC de)ide the )ase, on appeal, sho!ld any

party a--rieved by the de)ision of the San--!nian- Panlalai-an elevate the sa$e.

Considerin- the fore-oin-, the RTC )orre)tly dis$issed the )ase for la)3 of 4!risdi)tion.()!phi(

nder the r!les, it as the responsibility of the )o!rt to dis$iss an a)tion


8/11

and $ay be str!)3 don at any ti$e by this Co!rt as it o!ld never be)o$e final and

e9e)!tory.%:i3eise, the standin- r!le is that dis$issal of a )ase for la)3 of 4!risdi)tion $ay be

raised at any sta-e of the pro)eedin-s sin)e 4!risdi)tion is )onferred by la and la)3 of it affe)tsthe very a!thority of the )o!rt to ta3e )o-ni1an)e of and to render 4!d-$ent on the a)tionG"

otherise, the inevitable )onse;!en)e o!ld $a3e the )o!rt8s de)ision a

9 9 9 It ill be a f!tile a)t for the Co!rt to r!le on the )ase )on)ernin- a bo!ndary disp!te if itsde)ision ill not after all be folloed by the people )on)erned be)a!se the de)ision is totally

!na))eptable to the$. ?o then )an the Co!rt enfor)e its de)isionH 9 9 9.5

Petitioner, hoever, )ontends that the provisions of the '(2/ Constit!tion and the :@C of '(('on the settle$ent of $!ni)ipal bo!ndary disp!tes sho!ld be applied prospe)tively. The Co!rt is

not !n$indf!l of the r!le that here a )o!rt has already obtained and is e9er)isin- 4!risdi)tion

over a )ontroversy, its 4!risdi)tion to pro)eed to the final deter$ination of the )ase is not affe)ted

by ne le-islation pla)in- 4!risdi)tion over s!)h pro)eedin-s in another trib!nal./*n e9)eption

to this r!le, hoever, lies here the stat!te either e9pressly provides or is )onstr!ed to the effe)tthat it is intended to operate on a)tions pendin- before its ena)t$ent. 2?en)e, this Co!rt has held

that a la $ay be -iven retroa)tive effe)t if it so provided e9pressly or if retroa)tivity isne)essarily i$plied therefro$ and no vested ri-ht or obli-ation of )ontra)t is i$paired and it

does not deprive a person of property itho!t d!e pro)ess of la.(

It is readily apparent fro$ the provisions of the '(2/ Constit!tion and the :@C of '((' that their

ne provisions and re;!ire$ents re-ardin- )han-es in the )onstit!tion of politi)al !nits areintended to apply to all e9istin- politi)al s!bsidiaries i$$ediately, i.e., in)l!din- those ith

pendin- )ases filed !nder the previo!s re-i$e, sin)e the overar)hin- )onsideration of these ne

provisions is the need to e$poer the lo)al -overn$ent !nits itho!t f!rther delay.

F!rther$ore, the RTC )an still revie the de)ision of the San-!nian- Panlalai-an !nder thene set7!p, in the e9er)ise of its appellate 4!risdi)tion, so no s!bstantial pre4!di)e is )a!sed by

alloin- retroa)tivity.

The Co!rt, therefore, sees no error, $!)h less -rave ab!se of dis)retion, on the part of the C* in

affir$in- the trial )o!rt8s dis$issal of petitioner8s )o$plaint.

?EREFORE, the petition is DENIED for la)3 of $erit.

No )osts.

SO ORDERED.

A!OLFO S. ACUNA

*sso)iate =!sti)e

E CONCR>
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt29http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#fnt29


9/11

REYNATO S. PUNO

Chief =!sti)e

Chairperson

ANGELINA SAN!O"AL#GUTIERRE

*sso)iate =!sti)e

RENATO C. CORONA

*sso)iate =!sti)e

CANCIO C. GARCIA

*sso)iate =!sti)e

C E R T I F I C * T I O N

P!rs!ant to Se)tion '%, *rti)le VIII of the Constit!tion, it is hereby )ertified that the )on)l!sions

in the above De)ision had been rea)hed in )ons!ltation before the )ase as assi-ned to the riter

of the opinion of the Co!rt8s Division.

REYNATO S. PUNOChief =!sti)e

Foot$ote%

'Penned by *sso)iate =!sti)e De$etrio @. De$etria, ith *sso)iate =!sti)es Ra$on *.

0ar)elona and 6er)edes @o1o7Dadole )on)!rrin-.

Penned by =!d-e =ose 0. Rosales.

%Re)ords, pp. '/%7'/".

"Rollo, pp. '"&7'"%.

#Id. at 5.

5Re)ords, pp. '(7&.

/@.R. Nos. %2&"7#, Septe$ber ", '((', &' SCR* 5%.

2

Rollo, p. /.

(Id. at 27(.

'&Id. at %7".

''Id. at '&"7'.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt11


10/11

'See"rovince of 'amarines *orte v. "rovince of %ue+on, @.R. No. 2&/(5, Nove$ber 2,

'(2(, '/( SCR* %%, %#.

'%E$phasis provided.

'"

Se). " of R.*. No. 5'2 provides that it shall ta3e effe)t !pon its approval. The *)t,hoever, as p!blished in the Offi)ial @a1ette +55 O.@. %", //(57//(2 on *!-!st ",

'(/&.

'#*N *CT PRESCRI0IN@ T?E PROCEDRE FOR T?E SETT:E6ENT OF

6NICIP*: OR 0*RRIO 0OND*R DISPTES.

'5Se). %" of the Code stated that it shall ta3e effe)t one $onth after its p!bli)ation in the

Offi)ial @a1ette, hi)h as on Febr!ary '", '(2% +/( O.@. /.

'/Se). %% of 0.P. 0l-. %%/.

'2nders)orin- provided.

'(Se). #%5 of the :o)al @overn$ent Code of '(('. See alsoMathay v. 'ourt of #ppeals,@.R. No. '"%/", De)e$ber '#, '(((, %& SCR* /&%, /'&G#ngobung v. '&M-',

@.R. No. '5#/5, 6ar)h #, '((/, 5( SCR* "#, ##G y v. rampe, @.R. No. ''/#//,

De)e$ber ', '((#, #& SCR* #&&, #'&G /arcia v. '&M-', @.R. No. '''#'', O)tober

#, '((%, / SCR* '&&, ''&G andvardone v. '&M-', @.R. No. ("&'&, De)e$ber ,'((', &" SCR* "5", "/&.

&nders)orin- provided.

'*d$inistrative Order No. /& iss!ed on Febr!ary ', '((.

Se). , R!le ( of the R!les of Co!rt.

%B"0 v. #-S Management 1 Development 'orp.,@.R. No. '#'2', *pril '", &&", "/SCR* #5", #/"G#2" Mutual Benefit #ssociation, 0nc. v. *-R', @.R. No. '&'((,

=an!ary 2, '((/, 5/ SCR* "/, 5%G andDuero v. 'ourt of #ppeals, "" Phil. ', "

+&&.

"2rancel Realty 'orp. v. Sycip, @.R. No. '#"52", Septe$ber 2, &, "5( SCR* "",

"%'.#Duero v. 'ourt of #ppeals, "" Phil. ', " +&&.

5Rollo, p. (.

/Philippine :on- Distan)e Telephone Co$pany v. D!lay, @.R. No. #%""5, *pril ',

'(2(, '/ SCR* %', "'.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt27


11/11

2*tlas Fertili1er Corporation v. Navarro, No. :7/&/", *pril %&, '(2/, '"( SCR* "%,

"%5 )itin-Beng+on v. 0nciong, (' SCR* "2, #5.

(Co$$issioner of Internal Reven!e v. 6ar!beni Corporation, @.R. No. '%/%//,De)e$ber '2, &&', %/ SCR* #/5, #2/7#22 and Ca$a)ho v. Co!rt of Ind!strial

Relations, 2& Phil. 2"2, 2## +'("2.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt29http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/sep2007/gr_140474_2007.html#rnt29

Documents

Municipality of Sta. Fe vs. Aritao