BAR TOPIC: POLITICAL LAW; EXPROPRIATION; JUST COMPENSATION

The rationale for imposing the interest is to compensate the respondent for the income it would
have made had it been properly compensated for its properties at the time of the taking. The
need for prompt payment and the necessity of the payment of interest is to compensate for any
delay in the payment of compensation for property already taken.

The award of interest is imposed in the nature of damages for delay in payment which makes
the obligation on the part of the government one of forbearance to ensure prompt payment of
the value of the land and limit the opportunity loss of the owner. Therefore, there is no need for
the payment of 1 % interest per annum to cover for the increase in value of real properties.

(Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Phil-Agro Industrial Corporation, G.R. No. 193987, March 13,
2017)

REMEDIAL LAW; FACTUAL FINDINGS OF TRIAL COURT

It is settled that "factual findings of the trial court and its evaluation of the credibility of
witnesses and their testimonies are entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on
appeal, unless the trial court is shown to have overlooked, misapprehended, or misapplied any
fact or circumstance of weight and substance.

(People of the Philippines vs. King Rex Ambatang, G.R. No. 205855, March 29, 2017)

REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE, ALIBI AS DEFENSE

It is well settled that positive identification by the prosecution witnesses of the accused as
perpetrators of the crime is entitled to greater weight than their denials and alibis. For the
defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place at
the time of the commission of the crime but also that it was physically impossible for him to be
at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity. The excuse must be so airtight that it would
admit of no exception. Where there is the least possibility of accused-appellant's presence at
the crime scene, as in this case, the alibi will not hold water.

(People of the Philippines vs. King Rex Ambatang, G.R. No. 205855, March 29, 2017)

REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE, INCONSISTENCIES IN TESTIMONIES

We have time and again said that a few discrepancies and inconsistencies in the testimonies of
witnesses referring to minor details and not actually touching upon the central fact of the crime
do not impair the credibility of the witnesses. Instead of weakening their testimonies, such
inconsistencies tend to strengthen their credibility because they discount the possibility of their
being rehearsed.

(People of the Philippines vs. King Rex Ambatang, G.R. No. 205855, March 29, 2017)

CRIMINAL LAW; BOOK II; MURDER

Finding an accused in possession of the weapon used to kill and apprehending him or her in
such a manner that his or her participation in a murder is conspicuous, is not among the
requisites to be convicted of murder.

(People of the Philippines vs. King Rex Ambatang, G.R. No. 205855, March 29, 2017)

CIVIL LAW; BOOK II, CONSIGNATION

Note that PNB's deposit of the subject monthly rentals in a non-drawing savings account is not
the consignation contemplated by law, precisely because it does not place the same at the
disposal of the court. Consignation is necessarily judicial; it is not allowed in venues other than
the courts.

Although it is true that consignment has a retroactive effect, such payment is deemed to have
been made only at the time of the deposit of the thing in court or when it was placed at the
disposal of the judicial authority.

(Philippine National Bank vs. Lilibeth Chan, G.R. No. 206037, March 13, 2017)

CIVIL LAW; BOOK II, FORECLOSURE

It is settled that a mortgagee has the light to recover the deficiency resulting from the
difference between the amount obtained in the sale at public auction and the outstanding
obligation of the mortgagor at the time of the foreclosure proceedings.

(Philippine National Bank vs. Lilibeth Chan, G.R. No. 206037, March 13, 2017)

LEGAL ETHICS; VIOLATION OF SUSPENSION ORDER

During the suspension period and before the suspension is lifted, a lawyer must desist from
practicing law. It must be stressed, however, that a lawyer's suspension is not automatically
lifted upon the lapse of the suspension period. The lawyer must submit the required documents
and wait for an order from the Court lifting the suspension before he or she resumes the
practice of law.
(Rose Yap Paras vs. Justo de Jesus Paras, A.C. No. 5333, March 13, 2017)