People vs.

Isla
686 SCRA 267
G.R. No. 199875
November 21, 2012
Facts:
On July 25, 1997, two separate Informations for Frustrated Murder
and Rape were filed before the RTC, docketed as Criminal Case Nos. Q-97-
72078 and Q-97-72079, respectively. These informations read:

According to AAAs account on July 21, 1997, at around 3:00 oclock in the afternoon, she was inside her
rented house together with her two children, aged 1 years old and 9 months old, respectively.
Edwin Isla was standing by the door of her kitchen.
She was poked with a knife and was pulled inside the bedroom Isla warned her that if she resist she will
stab her.
While raping her she stabbed AAA and when she tries to shout for help he stabbed her again. AAA was
taken to the East Avenue Medical Center.
AAA sustained 11 body injuries, 2 which were stab wounds and 6 incised wounds and 2 contusions.

Issue:
Whether or not there insanity on the part of Isla?

Held:
There is no insanity because on December 17, 2010, the CA denied the appeal and affirmed the RTC
decision which found Isla to have acted with discernment when he committed the crimes. According to
CA, Isla exactly knew that what he was doing was evil so much so that he had to employ cunning means,
by discreetly closing the windows, and the door of house and by resorting to threats and violence, to
ensure the consummation of his dastardly deed.


People vs. Neverio
597 SCRA 149
G.R. No. 182792
August 25, 2009
Facts:
AAA lives with her family in Barangay Sagurong, Pili, Camarines Sur.
In the morning of June 29, 2001 AAA, then 20 years old, was alone in their home cooking.
Suddenly, Pepito AAAs cousin, entered the kitchen by lifting the bamboo barrier with a bolo. Pepito
then poked a fan knife to AAAs neck, and she was dragged to her brothers room by Pepito. Then Pepito
raped AAA.
Pepito threatened AAA that he will kill her if she tells anyone about this.
AAA kept silent about the incident.
On July 27,2001, Pepito committed the same abuse against AAA at around five oclock in the afternoon
while AAA is all alone.
Issue:
Whether or not there is intimidation?
There is intimidation. Force or intimidation is necessary in rape is relative, for largely depends on the
circumstances of the rape as well as the size, age, srength and relation of the parties.
The act of holding a knife by itself strongly suggestive force or atleast intimidation, and threatening the
victim with a knife is sufficient to bring a woman to submission.
As for the damages, we find that an award of exemplary damages in the amount of PHP 30000 was
awarded.






Alba vs. Yupangco
622 SCRA 503
G.R. No. 188233
June 29, 2010
Facts:
Querubin L. Alba and Rizalinda D. De Guzman (petitioners) filed separate complaints for illegal dismissal
and payment of retirement benefits against Y.L. Land Corporation and Ultra Motors Corporation,
respectively. Robert L. Yu pangco (respondent) was impleaded in his capacity as President of both
corporations. The complaints were consolidated before Labor Arbiter Patricio L. Libo-on
By Decision of October 25, 1999, the Labor Arbiter rendered judgment in favor of petitioners, disposing
as follows:
Issue:
Is the liability solidary or joint?
Facts:















Guilang vs. Bedania
588 SCRA 73
G.R. No. 162987
May 21, 2009
Facts:
On October 25, 1994, at about 5:45 in the afternoon, petitioner Genaro M. Guilang (Genaro) was driving
his brand new Toyota Corolla GLI sedan with connduction sticker No. 54- DFT(car) along Emilio
Aguinaldo Highway in Cavite.
The truck entered the opposite lane of the highway, Generos car hit the right portion of the truck. The
truck dragged Genaros car some five meters to the road.
All the passengers who suffered severe injury were rushed to De La Salle University Medical Center in
Cavite for treatment.
The car was a wrecked totally while the truck sustained minor damage.
It was not yet dark when the incident happened.
Issue:
Is there Negligence on whose part?
Held:
There is Negligence on the part of Genaro. The CA concluded that the collision was caused by
















Lequin vs. Vizconde
603 SCRA 407
G.R. No. 177710
October 12, 2009
Petitioner Ramon Lequin, husband of petitioner Virginia Lequin, is the brother of respondent Salome L.
Vizconde and brother in law of respondent Raymundo Vizconde.
In 1995 the petitioners bought the subject lot consisting of 10,115 square meters from one Carlito de
Leon.
The sale was negotiated by Raymundo Vizcunde
In 1997 respondents represented to petitioners that they had also bought from Carlito de Leon a 1,012-
square meter lot adjacent to petitioners property and built a hose thereon.
de Leon confirmed however the 1,012 square meter lot claimed by respondents is part of the 10,115-
square meter lot petitionerss bought from him.
In july 2000, petitioners tried to develop the dried up canal located between their 500- square meter lot
and the public road.
Carito de Leon told petitioners that what he had sold to respondents was the dried up canal or sapang
patay and that the 1,012 sauare meter lot claimed by respondents really belongs to petitioners.
On July 13, 2001, petitioners filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Contract, Sum of Money and
Damages against respondents.
ISSUE:
(A)Whether or not there is a fraud or deceit?
Held:
(A)There is no fraud because THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, WTH ALL DUE REPECT, ERRED IN
FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FRAUD ON THE PART OF THE RESPONDENT- VIZCONDES. The trial court
found inter alia lack of consideration in the contract of sale while the appellate court
In revising the decision of trial court, merely ruled that the contract of Sale is not simulated.