Fxclearing.com SCAM! – G R NO. 174153 RAUL L. LAMBINO AND ERICO B. AUMENTADO, TOGETHER WITH 6,327,952 REGISTERED VOTERS, PETITIONERS, VS. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.ALTERNATIVE LAW GROUPS, INC., INTERVENOR.ONEVOICE INC., CHRISTIAN S. MONSOD, RENE B. AZURIN, MANUEL L. QUEZON III, BENJAMIN T. TOLOSA, JR., SPhilippinesN V. OPLE, AND CARLOS P. MEDINA, JR., INTERVENORS.ATTY. PETE QUIRINO QUADRA, INTERVENOR.BAYAN REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON DR. CAROLINA PAGADUAN-ARAULLO, BAYAN MUNA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON DR. REYNALDO LESACA, KILPhilippinesNG MAYO UNO REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GENERAL JOEL MAGLUNSOD, HEAD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GENERAL DR. GENE ALZONA NISPEROS, ECUMENICAL BISHOPS FORUM REPRESENTED BY FR. DIONITO CABILLAS, MIGRANTE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON CONCEPCION BRAGAS-REGALADO, GABRIELA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GENERAL EMERENCIANA DE JESUS, GABRIELA WOMEN’S PARTY REPRESENTED BY SEC. GEN. CRISTINA PALABAY, ANAKBAYAN REPRESENTED BY CHAIRPERSON ELEANOR DE GUZMAN, LEAGUE OF FILIPINO STUDENTS REPRESENTED BY CHAIR VENCER CRISOSTOMO PALABAY, JOJO PINEDA OF THE LEAGUE OF CONCERNED PROFESSIONALS AND BUSINESSMEN, DR. DARBY SANTIAGO OF THE SOLIDARITY OF HEALTH AGAINST CHARTER CHANGE, DR. REGINALD PAMUGAS OF HEALTH ACTION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, INTERVENORS. LORETTA ANN P. ROSALES, MARIO JOYO AGUJA, AND ANA THERESA HONTIVEROS-BARAQUEL, INTERVENORS. LUWALHATI RIACASA ANTONINO, INTERVENOR. ARTURO M. DE CASTRO, INTERVENOR. TRADE UNION CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES, INTERVENOR. LUWALHATI RICASA ANTONINO, INTERVENOR. PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION ASSOCIATION PHILCONSA, CONRADO F. ESTRELLA, TOMAS C. TOLEDO, MARIANO M. TAJON, FROILAN M. BACUNGAN, JOAQUIN T. VENUS, JR., FORTUNATO P. AGUAS, AND AMADO GAT INCIONG, INTERVENORS. RONALD L. ADAMAT, ROLANDO MANUEL RIVERA, AND RUELO BAYA, INTERVENORS. PHILIPPINE TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS ORGANIZATION PTGWO AND MR. VICTORINO F. BALAIS, INTERVENORS. SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MANUEL VILLAR, JR., INTERVENOR. SULONG BAYAN MOVEMENT FOUNDATION, INC., INTERVENOR. JOSE ANSELMO I. CADIZ, BYRON D. BOCAR, MA. TANYA KARINA A. LAT, ANTONIO L. SALVADOR, AND RANDALL TABAYOYONG, INTERVENORS. INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES, CEBU CITY AND CEBU PROVINCE CHAPTERS, INTERVENORS. SENATE MINORITY LEADER AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL, JR. AND SENATORS SERGIO R. OSMEGA III, JAMBY MADRIGAL, JINGGOY ESTRADA, ALFREDO S. LIM AND PANFILO LACSON, INTERVENORS. JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA AND PWERSA NG MASANG PILIPINO, INTERVENORS. G.R. NO. 174299 MAR-LEN ABIGAIL BINAY, SOFRONIO UNTALAN, JR., AND RENE A.V. SAGUISAG, PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN BENJAMIN S. ABALOS, SR., AND COMMISSIONERS RESURRECCION Z. BORRA, FLORENTINO A. TUASON, JR., ROMEO A. BRAWNER, RENE V. SARMIENTO, NICODEMO T. FERRER, AND JOHN DOE AND PETER DOE, RESPONDENTS.D E C I S I O N Supreme Court E-Library – FXCL STOLE MONEY!

 

                                                                  Philippines Anti-Cybercrime Police Groupe MOST WANTED PEOPLE List!

 

 

 

#1 Mick Jerold Dela Cruz

Present Address: 1989 C. Pavia St. Tondo, Manila

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#2 Gremelyn Nemuco

Present Address; One Rockwell, Makati City

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#3 Vinna Vargas

Address: Imus, Cavite 

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#4 Ivan Dela Cruz

Present Address: Imus, Cavite

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#5 Elton Danao

Permanent Address: 2026 Leveriza, Fourth Pasay, Manila 
Present Address: Naic, Cavite

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#6 Virgelito Dada

Present Address: Grass Residences, Quezon City 

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#7 John Christopher Salazar

Permanent address: Rivergreen City Residences, Sta. Ana, Manila

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#8 Xanty Octavo 

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#9 Daniel Boco

Address: Imus, Cavite

 

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

 

 

#10 James Gonzalo Tulabot

Permanent Address: Blk. 4 Lot 30, Daisy St. Lancaster Residences, Alapaan II-A, Imus, Cavite 
Present Address: Pasay City

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#11 Lea Jeanee Belleza

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

#12 Juan Sonny Belleza

If you have any information about that person please call

to Anti-Cybercrime Department Police of Philippines:

Contact Numbers:

Complaint Action Center / Hotline:
Tel. +63 (8) 723-0401 local 7491
Smart/Viber: +63 961 829 8083

       

 

FXCL SCAM Company Details:

OUTSTRIVE SOLUTIONS PH CALL CENTER SERVICES

OUTSTRIVE SOLUTIONS PH CALL CENTER SERVICES



MALACAÑANG served warning today that the Office of the President would take appropriate administrative action against provincial, city, and municipal officials committing acts of oppression or persecution, especially against their subordinate officers and employees. The President also told Castrillo to help in the preparation of an amendment to the landed estate law so that taxes could be collected on the lots owned by the tenants immediately upon the signing of the deed of sale and not wait for 10 years. The President was informed by the delegation that since the new tariff order had gone into effect, the NASSCO was selling its steel bars at higher prices. Upon hearing this complaint, the President called up by telephone NASSCO General Manager Bernardo Abrera and told him not to raise the price of NASSCO steel. The President said that the NASSCO was established to stabilize prices and help the people, not to make money. The national theater will be for music, drama, and other forms of theatrical exhibitions for art and culture.

Article 1980 of the Civil Code expressly provides that “x x x savings x x x deposits of money in banks and similar institutions shall be governed by the provisions concerning simple loan.” There is a debtor-creditor relationship between the bank and its depositor. The depositor lends the bank money and the bank agrees to pay the depositor on demand. The savings deposit agreement between the bank and the depositor is the contract that determines the rights and obligations of the parties. Acting on the motion for reconsideration of Solidbank, the appellate court affirmed its decision but modified the award of damages. The appellate court deleted the award of exemplary damages and attorney’s fees. Invoking Article 2231 of the Civil Code, the appellate court ruled that exemplary damages could be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence. Since Solidbank was guilty of simple negligence only, the award of exemplary damages was not justified. Consequently, the award of attorney’s fees was also disallowed pursuant to Article 2208 of the Civil Code.

SPEAKER OR PRESIDING OFFICER, HON. JOSE G. DE VENECIA, REPRESENTATIVE

In the Philippine setting, this Court has likewise refused to be straitjacketed by the stare decisis rule in order to promote public welfare. In La Bugal-B’laan Tribal Association, Inc. v. Ramos, we reversed our original ruling that certain provisions of the Mining Law are unconstitutional. Similarly, in Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, we overturned our first ruling and held, on motion for reconsideration, that a private respondent is bereft of the right to notice and hearing during the evaluation stage of the extradition process. In 1996, the Movement for People’s Initiative sought to exercise the sovereign people’s power to directly propose amendments to the Constitution through initiative under Section 2, Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution.
HOUSE LED BY HON. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM FUENTEBELLA, RESPONDENTSINTEGRATED
In culpa contractual, once the plaintiff proves a breach of contract, there is a presumption that the defendant was at fault or negligent. The burden is on the defendant to prove that he was not at fault or negligent. In contrast, in culpa aquiliana the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the defendant was negligent. Diaz has established that Solidbank breached its contractual obligation to return the passbook only to the authorized representative of L.C. There is thus a presumption that Solidbank was at fault and its teller was negligent in not returning the passbook to Calapre. The burden was on Solidbank to prove that there was no negligence on its part or its employees. We hold that Solidbank is liable for breach of contract due to negligence, or culpa contractual. The Court further renders judgment in favor of defendant bank pursuant to its counterclaim the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as attorney’s fees.

MGA MANGGAGAWANG PILIPINO, INC., ITS OFFICERS AND MEMBERS,

The Delfin Petition stated that the Petition for Initiative would first be submitted to the people and would be formally filed with the COMELEC after it is signed by at least twelve per cent (12%) of the total number of registered voters in the country. It thus sought the assistance of the COMELEC in gathering the required signatures by fixing the dates and time therefor and setting up signature stations on the assigned dates and time. The action taken was in direct compliance with this rule.The question, therefore, is as to the validity of this rule, and not what methods the Speaker may of his own motion resort to for determining the presence of a quorum, nor what matters the Speaker or clerk may of their own volition place upon the journal. Neither do the advantages or disadvantages, the wisdom or folly, of such stole my deposit a rule present any matters for judicial consideration. With the courts the question is only one of power.The Constitution empowers each house to determine its rules of proceedings. It may not by its rules ignore constitutional restraints or violate fundamental rights, and there should be a reasonable relation between the mode or method of proceedings established by the rule and the result which is sought to be attained. But within these limitations all matters of method are open to the determination of the House, and it is no impeachment of the rule to say that some other way would be better, more accurate, or even more just. It is no objection to the validity of a rule that a different one has been prescribed and in force for a length of time. The power to make rules is not one which once exercised is exhausted.

No less than Senior Justice Reynato S. Puno concurred with the resolution of the Court. It behooved Justice Puno to dissent from the ruling of the Court on the motion for reconsideration of petitioners precisely on the ground that there was no doctrine enunciated by the Court in Santiago. Neither did Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban, who was a member of the Court. The principles above stated are, we think, conclusively established by the authority of adjudged cases.

WILLIAM B. FUENTEBELLA, THE SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT,

M. V. Arguelles, chairman; and Juan Salcedo, Jr., Vidal A. Tan, Eduardo Quisumbing, and Ramon R. Angeles, members. After their induction, the committee members said they aimed to coordinate all scientific researches and activities for more effective results in pursuance of the government’s economic program. January 30.—PRESIDENT Magsaysay today administered the oath of office to the five members of the Science Advisory Committee. The committee’s main function is to foster more interest in scientific research and development as advocated by the President in his state-of-the-nation speech. The committee was created by the President through Executive Order No. 141. The President said that one of the functions of this committee would be to coordinate the work of the no-dollar export office with that of the Central Bank so that the amount of the commodities to be imported into the country through the no-dollar import process would be deducted from what would be allowed by the Central Bank in the allocation of dollars for these commodities. The President pointed out that in this manner dollar allocations would be lessened by the corresponding equivalent of the goods imported through barter. January 29.—PRESIDENT Magsaysay today ordered that henceforth only those commodities which the government, through its proper agencies, considers urgent and essential in insuring normal levels in the cost of living, should be imported under the no-dollar law and under existing barter trade agreements. He further directed that such imported commodities should be disposed of through the NAMARCO after paying the barter-exporters a price allowing reasonable profit.
fxcl scam fxcl scam
For following the Court’s ruling in Santiago, no grave abuse of discretion is attributable to the Commision on Elections. In the United States, the prevailing rule, as enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bank of Marin v. England, 385 U.S. 99 , is that the bank-depositor relationship is governed by contract, and the bankruptcy of the depositor does not alter the relationship unless the bank receives notice of the bankruptcy. However, the Supreme Court of some states, like Arizona, have held that banks have more than a contractual duty to depositors, and that a special relationship may create a fiduciary obligation on banks outside of their contract with depositors. See Stewart v. Phoenix National Bank, 49 Ariz. 34, 64 P. 2d 101 ; Klein v. First Edina National Bank, 293 Minn. 418, 196 N.W. Under Article 1172, “liability may be regulated by the courts, according to the circumstances.” This means that if the defendant exercised the proper diligence in the selection and supervision of its employee, or if the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, then the courts may reduce the award of damages. Diaz was guilty of contributory negligence in allowing a withdrawal slip signed by its authorized signatories to fall into the hands of an impostor. The appellate court ruled that the degree of diligence required from Solidbank is more than that of a good father of a family. The business and functions of banks are affected with public interest.

In this thorny matter of the people’s initiative, I concur with the erudite and highly persuasive opinion of Justice Reynato S. Puno upholding the people’s initiative and raise some points of my own. However, as pointed out by Justice Puno in his dissent, there is no quantitative or qualitative test that can establish with definiteness the distinction between an amendment and a revision, or between a substantial and simple change of the Constitution. The dissent of Justice Puno has already a well-presented discourse on the difference between an “amendment” and a “revision” of the Constitution. The Temporary Restraining Order issued on 18 December 1996 is made permanent as against the Commission on Elections, but is LIFTED as against private respondents. Petitioner Aumentado aptly refers to the comment of the late Senator Raul Roco that the Santiago ruling “created a third specie of invalid laws, a mongrel type of constitutional but inadequate and, therefore, invalid law.” Memorandum for Aumentado, p. 54. Any present determination by the Court on the sufficiency of the petitions constitutes in effect a trial de novo, the Justices of the Supreme Court virtually descending to the level of trial court judges. Whenever the President transmits to the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting President. The House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure.

Banks are obligated to treat the accounts of their depositors with meticulous care, always having in mind the fiduciary nature of their relationship with their clients. The Court of Appeals found Solidbank remiss in its duty, violating its fiduciary relationship with L.C. The Court of Appeals pointed out that the teller of Solidbank who received the withdrawal slip for P300,000 allowed the withdrawal without making the necessary inquiry. The appellate court stated that the teller, who was not presented by Solidbank during trial, should have called up the depositor because the money to be withdrawn was a significant amount. Diaz, Solidbank would have known that the withdrawal was unauthorized. The teller did not even verify the identity of the impostor who made the withdrawal. Thus, the appellate court found Solidbank liable for its negligence in the selection and supervision of its employees.

In Perlman v. First National Bank of Chicago, the Supreme Court of Illinois dismissed the appeal as it was unable to reach a decision because two judges recused themselves and the remaining members of the Court were so divided, it was impossible to secure the concurrence of four judges as is constitutionally required. Supreme Court when the Justices of that Court are equally divided, i.e. affirm the judgment of the court that was before it for review. The affirmance is a conclusive determination and adjudication as between the parties to the immediate case, it is not authority for the determination of other cases, either in the Supreme Court or in any other court. It is not “entitled to precedential weight.” The legal effect of such an affirmance is the same as if the appeal was dismissed. In T.N.F., a majority of the justices sitting did not agree on a common rationale, as two of four participating justices agreed that the state’s one-year statute of limitations applied, one justice concurred in the result only, and one justice dissented. There was no “narrower” reasoning agreed upon by all three affirming justices. The concurring justice expressed no opinion on the statute of limitations issue, and in agreeing with the result, he reasoned that ICWA did not give the plaintiff standing to sue. The two-justice plurality, though agreeing that the state’s one-year statute of limitations applied, specifically disagreed with the concurring justice on the standing issue. Because a majority of the participating justices in T.N.F. did not agree on any one ground for affirmance, it was not accorded stare decisis effect by the state Supreme Court. The only basis used by the COMELEC to dismiss the petition for initiative was this Court’s ruling in Santiago v. COMELEC that R.A.
PHILIPPINES,PETITIONERS, VS. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SPEAKER JOSE G.
We would be amenable except that, as we clarified a while ago, this process of initiative is limited to the matter of amendment and should not expand into a revision which contemplates a total overhaul of the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I think this Congress, particularly this House, cannot ignore or cannot be insensitive to the call for initiative and referendum. Maybe we should have done it in 1988 but that too had already passed, but it is only February 1989, Mr. Speaker, and we have enough time this year at least to respond to the need of our people to participate directly in the work of legislation. In a very limited extent, the system is provided for in our Local Government Code today. On initiative, for instance, Section 99 of the said code vests in the barangay assembly the power to initiate legislative processes, to hold plebiscites and to hear reports of the sangguniang barangay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.