BCH & Partners

21/01/2026

The 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 has suspended the sentence of a child in conflict with the law (CICL), reaffirming the intent of Republic Act No. 9344, or the 𝘑𝘶𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘞𝘦𝘭𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘈𝘤𝘵, to promote the best interests and rehabilitation of the child.

In a Decision written by then Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, the SC 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 denied the appeal of ###265302 (accused) and found him guilty of qualified r**e of a minor, imposing a penalty of 12 years to 14 years, eight months and one day in prison.

It remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to order the accused's confinement in an agricultural camp or other training facility under Section 51 of the law.

The accused, who was 15 years old at the time of the incident, was charged with ra**ng his five-year-old playmate.

The RTC found ###265302 guilty of statutory r**e after he turned 18 years old. It imposed on him the penalty of imprisonment for eight years and one day to 14 years, eight months and one day, but it suspended his sentence, following Section 38 of RA 9344.

A few months later, the RTC issued an arrest warrant, and ###265302 was detained at the New Bilibid Prison. The Court of Appeals denied his appeal.

The SC affirmed ###265302’s conviction but clarified that the crime was qualified r**e and ordered the suspension of his sentence.

Section 40 of RA 9344 provides that when the CICL reaches 18 while under suspended sentence, the court may discharge them, order the ex*****on of their sentence, or extend the suspended sentence for a period or until they reach the maximum age of 21 years old.

In this case, the accused, who was transferred to the Davao Prison and Penal Farm, is now 25 years old.

Nonetheless, the SC extended the suspension of his sentence to fulfill the law’s legislative intent, which prioritizes the child offender’s restoration, rehabilitation, and reintegration into the community.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159175.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159085.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

21/01/2026

We’re looking for a highly organized and motivated individual to join our team.
If you’re a college graduate, computer literate, and eager to learn, we’d love to hear from you. ⚖️

📩 Send us a message or submit your application today.

22/10/2025

Solicitor General Darlene Berberabe said the Office of the Solicitor General no longer automatically appeals annulment and declaration of nullity of marriage cases granted by regional trial courts, and conducts an assessment first to determine whether a ruling should be challenged.

01/09/2025

Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Michael Frederick L. Musngi, who served as Bar Examiner in Remedial Law in 2022, discusses the circumstances under which shortcuts in public procurement, or government procurements without public bidding, may be justified in Episode 83: When Procurement Violation Does Not Amount to Graft.

What is RA 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and who and what are covered under this law? Why are there strict rules for the procurement of goods in government? In a procurement case, how does graft manifest?

This week's podcast is available on Spotify, the website, and YouTube.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0nqiLrzC3WeehAHJw0Dadr?si=keKV821ET3O6sJiGYeC2Ew

SC website: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/podcasts/

YouTube: https://youtu.be/d0f0Qio-aB0

19/08/2025

21/07/2025

Happy birthday, Atty.Hernandez! Wishing you a year filled with continued success, good health, and prosperity. 🥳🎂🎈

04/07/2025

03/07/2025

The (SC) has ruled that a land sale made through a verbal, unwritten agreement can be considered valid and binding—as long as it has been partly or fully carried out.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan, the SC’s Third Division upheld the verbal sale of land between Marcos Batara (Batara) and his nephew Benedicto Ocampo (Ocampo). Even without a written contract, the SC found the sale valid because Ocampo had already received the land title, moved into the property, and made improvements on it.

The land was registered in the name of Batara, who passed away in 1974. His children, Noblesa and Ernesto, only learned of their father’s ownership of the property in 2007, when they received a notice to pay unpaid real estate taxes on the land and found out that the same was being occupied by their cousin, Ocampo.

Noblesa and Ernesto filed a case to reclaim the land from Ocampo, saying they were the rightful heirs. Ocampo, on the other hand, claimed he bought the land from Batara while the latter was still alive. After Batara died, Ocampo kept paying installments to Marcelo, Batara’s brother.

Ocampo admitted that the sale was not evidenced by any written document because Batara died before they could execute the necessary instruments. But Ocampo provided the owner’s copy of land title as proof, claiming Batara gave it to him after the initial payment in 1972.

Ruling in Ocampo’s favor, the SC said that under the Civil Code, a sale of land must be in writing to be enforced in court. This written document serves as proof that both parties agreed to the sale.

However, the sale is still considered valid even without a written contract if it has already been fully or partly carried out. In such cases, a verbal agreement can still be legally binding, and witnesses may be allowed to testify to prove that the sale happened.

In this case, the sale was partially executed as Ocampo had partially paid for the land, taken possession of it, received the land title, and paid real property taxes. The SC thus admitted the testimonies of Ocampo and his witnesses, which proved the sale.

The SC, however, found that Ocampo’s payments to Batara’s brother Marcelo were ineffective because he was not authorized to accept them on behalf of his brother’s heirs.

Therefore, while the sale remains valid, Ocampo must pay the remaining balance of the purchase price, with interest, to Noblesa and Ernesto.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/yeapyzcd.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://tinyurl.com/msxr7hsd.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

03/07/2025

Hinatulan ng na guilty sa simple theft o pagnanakaw ang mga manager ng isang pizza restaurant dahil sa pagbulsa ng mga service charge na dapat sana ay ibinahagi sa kanilang mga kapwa empleyado.

Sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., pinatawan ng Second Division ng Korte ang mga manager ng Shakey’s branch sa Angono, Rizal na sina Janice Teologo at Jennifer Delos Santos ng parusang anim na buwang pagkakakulong at inutusan silang bayaran ang kapwa nila empleyado ng kaukulang parte nila ng service charge kasama ang interes.

Isa sa mga trabaho nina Teologo at Delos Santos bilang manager ay ibigay ang sweldo at bahagi ng service charge ng kanilang mga empleyado.

Taong 2009 nang magsumbong ang mga empleyado ng Shakey’s sa Angono, Rizal sa Big G PhilFoods & Entertainment, Inc. (Big G), may-ari ng nasabing sangay ng Shakey’s, na hindi nila natatanggap ang kanilang bahagi ng service charge. Dagdag pa nila, kahit wala silang natanggap, napilitan silang pumirma sa mga dokumento ng payroll dahil ayon sa mga manager, patakaran umano ito ng kumpanya.

Hinatulan ng Regional Trial Court at ng Court of Appeals ang mga manager, kabilang ang dalawang hindi pa nahuhuli, ng qualified theft dahil sa kabiguang ipamahagi ang service charge at pag-abuso sa tiwala ng kanilang employer, ang Big G.

Pero binago ng Korte Suprema ang hatol at ginawang simple theft na lang.

Sa ilalim ng Revised Penal Code, ang theft o pagnanakaw ay nangyayari kapag ang isang tao ay kumuha ng isang bagay na pag-aari ng iba nang walang pahintulot, na may layong makinabang mula dito, nang hindi gumagamit ng karahasan o puwersa. Nagiging qualified theft kapag may nasasangkot na pag-abuso sa tiwala o kumpiyansa ng employer.

Sa kasong ito, ibinulsa ng mga manager ang service charge na nakalaan sana para sa kapwa nila empleyado. Ang mga biktima sa kasong ito ay ang mga empleyado at hindi ang employer. Dahil walang special trust relationship sa pagitan ng mga manager at rank-and-file na manggagawa, walang pang-aabuso sa tiwala o kumpiyansa upang maging qualified ang pagnanakaw.

Basahin ang press release sa https://tinyurl.com/5458j2j6.

Basahin ang Desisyon sa https://tinyurl.com/56unjbn7.

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

04/04/2025

Mga mommies at daddies, ingat sa mga “pa-contest” sa social media!

May nakita ka bang post na nanghihikayat sa parents na mag-comment ng pictures ng kanilang babies kapalit ng pera o premyo? Mukhang harmless, pero delikado!

⚠️ Maaaring magamit ang pictures sa online sexual abuse and exploitation of children (OSAEC).

⚠️ Nagbibigay ito ng impormasyon na available sa publiko at maaring magamit ng masasamang loob.

Huwag hayaang maging biktima ang inyong anak! Think before you post. Protektahan natin ang privacy at digital future nila.

Para sa mas ligtas na internet para sa kabataan, bisitahin ang Kabataang Digital webpage: https://privacy.gov.ph/kd/

08/01/2025

The Supreme Court (SC) En Banc has approved the Rule on Family Mediation (Rule) in a resolution dated November 5, 2024 in A.M. No. 24-02-06-SC. This initiative aims to address the emerging need for family mediation, both domestic and international, enhance the efficiency of family courts, reduce court backlogs, and promote the best interests of the child. The Rule also introduces innovations in dealing with family cases.

The Rule describes family mediation as a process in which a mediator, acting as an impartial third party, facilitates the resolution of family disputes and helps the parties in reaching voluntary agreements.

Family mediation, a non-adversarial process, should include children and give them a chance to share their thoughts on issues that impact them. The process must focus on what is best for the child and the family.

The Rule is limited to suits between spouses; parents and children; other ascendants and descendants; siblings; relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity (by blood) or affinity (by marriage); and parties in a common-law, dating or sexual relationship, former or present.

The Rule took effect 15 calendar days after publication. It was published in a newspaper of general circulation on December 14, 2024.

Following the Rule’s approval, the Committee, together with the Philippine Judicial Academy, shall prepare for the Application, Training, and Accreditation of Family Mediators.

Read the full text of the Press Release: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-approves-rule-on-family-mediation/

Read the full text of the Resolution: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/24-02-06-sc-the-rule-on-family-mediation/



Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/