Atty. Carol Q Solatorio

16/10/2026

When a passenger bus ran over and killed Loreta J. Yu on EDSA, her husband Luisito filed a suit for damages against the driver, the actual operator (R Transport Corporation), and the registered owner (Metro Manila Transport Corporation).

MMTC pointed at R Transport, claiming it had transferred the bus under an installment sale.

R Transport pointed back at MMTC, arguing that under the Registered Owner Rule, only the registered owner can be held liable for transport accidents.

R Transport also claimed it was a diligent employer, pointing to oral testimonies from its staff about their standard hiring processes.

The case reached the Supreme Court, which rejected these arguments.

The Court clarified that the Registered Owner Rule protects injured victims, not negligent operators. It does not shield an unregistered transferee from liability under Article 2180 of the Civil Code.

Both the registered owner and the actual operator are held solidarily liable to ensure the victim's family is compensated.

Furthermore, the Court emphasized that employers cannot defeat the presumption of negligence with words alone. Companies must provide concrete documentary proof—such as tests, records, and training logs—to demonstrate proper selection and supervision of their drivers.

📚 R Transport Corporation v. Luisito G. Yu
G.R. No. 174161 | February 18, 2015

🖋️ Justice Diosdado M. Peralta

15/10/2026

Still carrying a laminated Senior Citizen ID? You can leave it at home!

Filipino seniors can now use the Digital National Senior Citizen ID (NSCID) right inside the eGovPH app — and it has the exact same legal power as the physical card (NCSC Public Advisory No. 1, Series of 2026).

Who can get it?

✅ Filipino, 60 years old and above
✅ Have an existing OSCA record
✅ Already registered with PhilSys (have a PSN)

Meet all three? It usually appears automatically once you verify your identity in the eGovPH app. No extra application needed!

What you can use it for:

✅ 20% discount + VAT exemption on medicines, food, transport & more
✅ Government services, banking, priority lanes
✅ Anywhere the physical OSCA ID is accepted

Over 1.3 million seniors have already activated theirs. Prefer the plastic card? Totally fine — both remain valid. Just keep the physical one as backup in places that aren't familiar with the digital version yet.

Helping a parent, lolo, or lola? Share this with them.

The digital ID is free, always in your pocket, and super convenient.

Full step-by-step guide here (link in the comments) 👇

11/10/2026

The 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤, during its session on October 7, 2026, approved amendments to the 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 (A.M. No. 25-03-14-SC) to make it easier for Filipino spouses to prove a foreign divorce when seeking its recognition in Philippine courts.

Under the amendments, which will take effect 15 days after they are posted on the Supreme Court Website, Filipino spouses seeking recognition of a foreign divorce under Article 26(2) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 will no longer need to prove the applicable foreign law when filing their petition. They will only need to prove that the foreign divorce took place.

The amendments introduce Section 48-A of Rule 39, which presumes that a foreign divorce between a Filipino and a foreign spouse allows the foreign spouse to remarry under foreign law, unless the divorce decree itself states that it is only a limited divorce.

The party opposing the petition now bears the burden of proving that the divorce is not absolute.

The new rule also presumes that an English translation of a foreign divorce document is accurate if the translator certifies its accuracy under oath.

These presumptions are disputable; they may be challenged with contrary evidence, under Section 3 of Rule 131.

The amendments, however, leave the existing legal framework unchanged. A petition for judicial recognition of a foreign divorce is still required, and the substantive requirements of Article 26(2) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 remain the same.

Recognition of a foreign divorce may still be opposed on grounds such as lack of jurisdiction, lack of notice, fraud, or a clear mistake of law or fact.

The amendments were approved upon the recommendation of Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, and in consultation with Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier and Jhosep Y. Lopez, and the Sub-Technical Working Group on the Concerns of Overseas Working Filipinos Regarding the Recognition of Foreign Divorce Decrees/Reports (Sub-TWG).

During consultations with the Sub-TWG, the Department of Foreign Affairs identified several challenges. Foreign family laws are often spread across different jurisdictions, making them difficult to obtain. Some countries have no designated official who can certify these laws, while foreign ministries generally do not provide official English translations.

Through these amendments, the Supreme Court aims to remove unnecessary barriers and make it easier for Filipinos to exercise their rights under the law.

Read the full text of the Press Briefer at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=174621.

The full text of the Supreme Court 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 Resolution A.M. No. 25-03-14-SC shall be uploaded to the Supreme Court Website once available.

11/10/2026

11/10/2026

(POLITICAL LAW) JUSTICE RICARDO R. ROSARIO PENNED CASE: Crisol, Jr. v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 235764 (2021) [Per J. Rosario, En Banc]

In order for a superior public officer to be made civilly liable for acts done in the performance of his official duties, there must be a clear showing of bad faith, malice, or gross negligence. For negligence to be considered gross, there must be an act or omission to act in a situation where there is a duty to act, not inadvertently but willfully and intentionally with a conscious indifference to consequences in so far as other persons or the government may be affected.

10/10/2026

Civil Law Series : Succession

Know your rights

09/10/2026

𝐂𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥 𝐋𝐚𝐰: 𝐃𝐨𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐒𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬
𝐀𝐭𝐭𝐲. 𝐋𝐢𝐩’𝐬 𝐉𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐚𝐲, possible bar question, not an official prediction.