Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Issue:
Whether or not Cristy Fermin had actual knowledge and
participation is guilty of libel?
Page 1 of 18
ISSUE:
Whether or not The Manila Chronicles published article with a
malicious headline is liable of libel?
FACTS:
1)
1.
3.
After answer and trial the Court of First Instance of Manila rendered
a judgment dismissing the complaint from which the petitioner
appealed to the Court of Appeals. The latter Court, in its decision
promulgated on January 19, 1953, affirmed the judgment of the
court of origin; and the case is now before us on petition for review
on certiorari filed by the petitioner.
ii)
Page 2 of 18
iii)
2)
Page 3 of 18
FACTS:
CFI dismissed the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff had not
proven that defendants had acted maliciously in publishing the
articles, although portions thereof were inaccurate or false.
The headline of the Aug 11 article was given prominence with a 6column (about 11 inches) banner headline of 1-inch types. Its subtitle PCAC raps Policarpio on fraud printed in bold 1 cm type is
not true. Also, the statement in the 1 st paragraph of the article, to
the effect that plaintiff was charged with malversation & estafa by
Page 4 of 18
Page 5 of 18
1.
2.
The August 28, 1997 article, which appeared on pages two (2)
and twenty two (22) of the aforesaid newspaper, reads in full
as follows
Judge Ocampo facing graft raps at Ombud
3.
4.
5.
The August 30, 1997 article, appearing on pages two (2) and
twenty six (26) of the paper, reads
ISSUE:
6.
FACTS:
Page 6 of 18
Sun-Star Daily delayed publication for one day to get the judges
comment. He was quoted in the report as describing the case as
pure harassment and part of the professional hazards of a judge.
3.
4.
Page 7 of 18
1.
2.
FACTS:
1.
2.
Page 8 of 18
3.
On May 11, 1992, the national and local elections were held as
scheduled. When results came out, it turned out that petitioner
failed in his mayoralty bid.
4.
7.
his rivals and voted for other candidates. He asked for actual
reporting.
1.
6.
Inc. the news items lacked truth and fairness, they were not
privileged communications.
Page 9 of 18
3.
YES. Petitioner argues that his cause of action is based on quasidelict which only requires proof of fault or negligence, not proof of
malice beyond reasonable doubt as required in a criminal
prosecution for libel. He argues that the case is entirely different
and separate from an independent civil action arising from libel
Facts:
1.
2.
4.
PDI and its officers argue that petitioners complaint clearly lays a
cause of action arising from libel as it highlights malice underlying
the publications. And as malice is an element of libel, the appellate
court committed no error in characterizing the case as one arising
from libel.
Page 10 of 18
1.
2.
3.
Page 11 of 18
c)
3.
4.
The RTC dismissed the complaint holding that Islamic Dawah et al.
failed to establish their cause of action since the persons allegedly
defamed by the article were not specifically identified. The alleged
libelous article refers to the larger collectivity of Muslims for which
the readers of the libel could not readily identify the personalities of
the persons defamed. Hence, it is difficult for an individual Muslim
member to prove that the defamatory remarks apply to him.
5.
6.
FACTS:
1.
2.
Page 12 of 18
The article was not libelous. Petition GRANTED. The assailed Decision
of the Court of Appeals was REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the decision
of the RTC was reinstated.
1.
6.
7.
2.
3.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
4.
5.
8.
Page 13 of 18
10.
(b)
(c)
3.
4.
5.
Islamic Dawah Council of the Philippines, Inc., seeks in effect to assert the
interests not only of the Muslims in the Philippines but of the whole Muslim
world as well. Private respondents obviously lack the sufficiency of numbers
to represent such a global group; neither have they been able to
demonstrate the identity.
ISSUE:
6.
7.
Page 14 of 18
3.
4.
CASE DIGEST
GR Nos. 161032 and 161176
Attorney Ding So of the Bureau of Customs, petitioner vs. Erwin Tulfo,
respondent
16 September 2008
Facts:
1.
2.
3.
Issues:
1.
2.
3.
Page 15 of 18
YES, For the ruling in Borjal case was not applied to this libel case:
a.
b.
c.
d.
2.
3.
a.
b.
c.
d.
b.
The columns of Tulfo are not fair and true. Tulfo failed to
do research before making his allegations, and it has been
shown that these allegations were baseless.
Velasco, Jr., J:
Elements of fair commentary (to be considered privileged):
a. That it is a fair and true report of a judicial, legislative, or
other official proceedings which are not of confidential
nature, or of a statement, report, or speech delivered in
said proceedings, or of any other act performed by a
public officer in the exercise of his functions;
b. That it is made in good faith;
c. That it is without any comments or remarks.
Page 16 of 18
ISSUES:
Whether or not Yuchengco is liable of imputations and allegations
detrimental to Estrada?
Whether or not the Philippine Daily Inquirer is liable of false and
malicious statements against Estrada?
FACTS:
1.
2.
5.
6.
7.
3.
4.
2.
Page 17 of 18
4.
5.
Page 18 of 18