Archive for the ‘Laws’ Category
Section 6, Rule 2, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice:
SEC. 6. Jurat. – “Jurat” refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion:
(a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document;
(b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules;
(c) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary; and
(d) takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as to such instrument or document.
Rule 2, Section 5, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice
Definition: SEC. 5. Notarial Register. – “Notarial Register” refers to a permanently bound book with numbered pages containing a chronological record of notarial acts performed by a notary public.
definition
Rule 2, Section 4, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice
SEC. 4. Copy Certification. – “Copy Certification” refers to a notarial act in which a notary public:
(a) is presented with an instrument or document that is neither a vital record, a public record, nor publicly recordable;
(b) copies or supervises the copying of the instrument or document;
(c) compares the instrument or document with the copy; and
(d) determines that the copy is accurate and complete.
Commision: Rule 2, Section 3 Rules on Notarial Practice
SEC. 3. Commission. – “Commission” refers to the grant of authority to perform notarial acts and to the written evidence of the authority.
Rule 2 Section 2 2004 Rues on Notarial Practice
SEC. 2. Affirmation or Oath. – The term “Affirmation” or “Oath” refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion:
(a) appears in person before the notary public;
(b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and
(c) avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of the contents of the instrument or document.
RULE I IMPLEMENTATION
SECTION 1. Title. – These Rules shall be known as the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice.
SEC. 2. Purposes. – These Rules shall be applied and construed to advance the following purposes:
(a) to promote, serve, and protect public interest;
(b) to simplify, clarify, and modernize the rules governing notaries public; and
(c) to foster ethical conduct among notaries public.
SEC. 3. Interpretation. – Unless the context of these Rules otherwise indicates, words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular.
Budget and Management Secretary Florencio Abad on Monday announced the soft-launch of the Department’s webpage, www.dbm.gov.ph, aimed to publish among others 2009 releases from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
He said the figures to be made public would be those charged against the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the School Building Program of the Department of Education (DepEd), and the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) of local governments.
He said they continue to develop the website and eyes to publish all the necessary figures by end-October this year, starting with the 2009 figures. He said figures in the prior years would also be uploaded in the coming months.
“We continue to roll-out transparency and accountability reforms in public expenditure, at the same time as we are defending the 2011 Reform Budget in Congress. As the Aquino Administration marks its 100th day in office, we are escalating the drive for transparency and accountability in government,” he said.
Abad said they are maximizing the use of information technology to implement the administration’s bid to address corruption in the government.
“Through this special webpage, we seek to empower the public in being vigilant on where the government spends their hard-earned tax money,” he said.
The Budget and Management chief cited that DBM and other implementing agencies are required under the 2011 Reform Budget to publish in their websites details of appropriation and disbursement of public funds.
He said the soft-launch of their website “will serve as our dry run” as they “are developing our systems and capabilities so that all information about fund releases will be disclosed to the public through the internet in real time.”
“It is not business-as-usual in the Aquino government and in DBM. As guardians of public expenditure, we are committed to taking a proactive and activist stance to ensure that each public peso spent counts in empowering the Filipino people,” he added. (PNA)
The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed from the service a lower court judge who borrowed money amounting to P5,000 from a lawyer who has a pending case in her sala.
In an en banc per curiam decision, the SC said that Judge Victoria Pornillos, of the Malolos City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 10, has violated provisions of the Rules of Court.
The Rules of Court prohibit the borrowing of money from a lawyer who has a pending case in a court of law.
The SC stressed that such offense of the erring judge is also considered as “gross misconduct” for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct.
The SC also found out later that Judge Pornillos did not expeditiously promulgate decision on cases pending in her sala, which violates the Rules of Court and a Circular of the SC.
Record of the case shows that Pornillos oftentimes borrow money from other court employees ranging from P500 to P1,000.
However, such loans were settled by the lady judge herself.
Nonetheless, the SC pointed out that, the settlement of such loans does not mean anything, in the sense that it does not negate the fact that Pornillos violated the Rules of Court and a Circular of the Court. – source: philippine news agency
What is an impossible crime? (2%)
Is an impossible crime really a crime? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1 An impossible crime is an act which would be an offense against person or property, were if not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means (Art. 4, par. 2, RPC)
2 No, an impossible crime is not really a crime. It is only so-called because the act gives rise to criminal liability. But actually, no felony is committed. The accused is to be punished for his criminal tendency or propensity although no crime was committed.
Pia, a bold actress living on top floor of a plush condominium in Makati City sunbathed naked at its penthouse every Sunday morning. She was unaware that the business executives holding office at the adjoining tall buildings reported to office every Sunday morning and, with the use of powerful binoculars, kept on gazing at her while she sunbathed. Eventually, her sunbathing became the talk of the town.
Questions:
1) What crime, if any, did Pia commit? Explain,
2) What crime, if any, did the business executives commit? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
1) Pia did not commit a crime, The felony closest to making Pia criminally liable is Grave Scandal, but then such act is not to be considered as highly scandalous and offensive against decency and good customs. In the first place, it was not done in a public place and within public knowledge or view. As a matter of fact it was discovered by the executives accidentally and they have to use binoculars to have public and full view of Pia sunbathing in the nude.
2) The business executives did not commit any crime. Their acts could not be acts of lasciviousness [as there was no overt lustful act), or slander, as the eventual talk of the town, resulting from her sunbathing, is not directly imputed to the business executives, and besides such topic is not intended to defame or put Pia to ridicule.