Defiance bordering on arrogance

This country is going down further into the pits. It's a sorry spectacle. The military's defiance of the Supreme Court's writ of habeas corpus order is a serious blow to the integrity of the judiciary. It's a slap in the face. Disrespect of the highest order. It's a dangerous precedent indeed, as described by Associate Justice Normandie Pizarro. The orders of the high court would lose its teeth and people would get the idea that they are mere scraps of paper. Why is this happening? It's simple actually. The highest official of our land is setting the example so her subordinates have the guts to do so too. No president after the people power revolution has tested the limits of the constitution and got away with it except this evil one currently in office. If this trend continues, the Supreme Court would no longer be the court of last resort. People will be holding guns instead of pleadings, and they will flock to the mountains instead of Padre Faura. The promulgation will be based on the number of bodies lying on the ground.

Let's just hope the next president (if ever the elections pushes through) will reverse the cancer Arroyo inflicted on our country. Just like how Obama is healing the deep wounds left by George Bush. Let's hope and pray.

But you're a law student...

It's a sunday, sabbath day, rest day. You should be in the mall with your family. Attend church service. Eat in a nice restaurant. Or better yet, catch up on your favorite series or watch the latest movie.

You are tired. It's 2 in the morning. You've been reading since 6 p.m. It's your fourth cup of coffee. You're body says stop but your mind says go. You're nearing a melt down.

You have a high fever. Any amount of coffee can't take away the weakness. You want to sleep all day.

But you can't! You're a law student! Our professor in agency told us one saturday. It's a simple phrase but goes right to the very essence of what Ateneo Law stands for. We are expected to be diligent students. We need to be, because the professors push us to our limits - giving unreasonable case assignments, making complex exam questions, and difficult recit questions. There are moments when the mere thought of the work load is enough to overwhelm your mind.

We're law students. We can't complain. Now you know why the world revolves around law school.

Noli Aurillo: poetry in motion

Our prof. in Sales, Atty. Dy, suggested that we watch Noli Aurillo's videos in youtube. Being a guitarist myself, I was curious how good Aurillo really is so I watched it. I thought Atty. Dy was just exaggerating when he said Noli Aurillo is the best guitarist in the Philippines but now I totally understand what he meant. He's so good that I realize how much unskilled I am.

Aurillo is the best not only because he is very skilled but also because there is poetry by the way he strums, plucks, and even the way he moves his wrists. If Atty. Dy would ask me in one word how to describe Aurillo's music, I'd say: mesmerizing.

What are you waiting for watch the videos now!!

Cabrera vs. CA 163 SCRA 214

Cabrera vs. Court of Appeals, and Felisa Gonzaga, Fernando Gonzaga, Aurora Gonzaga, et al.

163 SCRA 214

June 30, 1988

Facts: The parcel of land in dispute was originally owned by Diego and Patricio Gonzaga, the grandparents of the private respondents herein. In 1921, the tax declaration was in the name of the spouses Gonzaga. In 1944 it was made in the name of their child Eliseo Gonzaga. In 1953, it was changed again in the name of Joaquin Cabrera.

In 1970, private respondents filed a complaint for recovery of the property from the petitioners in the Court of First Instance. They claimed the property by right of succession. Petitioners claimed by virtue of an alleged sale between them and Eliseo.

During the pendency of the complaint, private respondents’ request that the figures “1960” be changed to “1969” was approved without opposition from Cabrera.

CFI decided in favor of private respondents herein. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.

Note: A separate action for registration of the land instituted by Cabrera was pending when the case at the CFI was being heard.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the complaint is barred by laches or prescription?

2. Whether the tax declarations serve as constructive notice because of their nature as public instruments?

3. Whether the action for reconveyance was prematurely filed?

Held:

1. No. The amendment requested by private respondents was allowed without objection from the petitioners. Moreover, this defense should have been pleaded before the amendment was made.

2. No. The Court said it’s strange doctrine that every one is deemed charged with knowledge of every public document simply because it is public in nature. There is no jurisprudence to support the claim.

3. No. The action for reconveyance may be filed even before the issuance of decree of registration. There is no reason why one has to wait for the land to be registered before filing such remedy.

Cabrera’s claim that respondents had no valid grounds to support the action for reconveyance is untenable. The latter had established that the transfer of the land had been made under fraudulent circumstances. They also proved that they didn’t receive notice of the registration proceedings and that no notice had been posted on the subject land as required by law.

You're not an ateneo law student if: