Cerilles Redelosa & Associates Law Firm

04/11/2023

02/05/2023

From Justice Leonen:

Congratulations to all those who will take the new lawyer’s oath today. It reflects our common aspirations for justice, access to justice, the ethics of care as well as civility.

Titles don’t constitute you. They are your license to be able to help others.

Serve the people.

02/05/2023

Serving you from Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.⚖️

02/05/2023

𝗟𝗔𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗦 𝗗𝗜𝗙𝗙𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗙𝗥𝗢𝗠 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗣𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡

𝗟𝗔𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗦

𝙇𝙖𝙘𝙝𝙚𝙨 is defined as the failure or neglect for an unreasonable or unexplained length of time to do that which by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier warranting a presumption that he has abandoned his right, or declined to assert it.

𝙇𝙖𝙘𝙝𝙚𝙨, concerns itself with the effect of delay and not the period of time that has lapsed. It asks the question whether the delay has changed "the condition of the property or the relation of the parties" such that it is no longer equitable to insist on the original right.

𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗣𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡

𝙋𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙘𝙧𝙞𝙥𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 refers to the failure or delay to assert a claim within the period prescribed by law. Through prescription one acquires ownership or other real rights through the lapse of time, in the manner and under the condition laid down by law. Likewise, rights and actions are lost on the same ground.

𝙋𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙘𝙧𝙞𝙥𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 deals with delay itself and thus is an issue of how much time has passed. The time period when prescription is deemed to have set in is fixed by law.

𝗟𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘇𝗼 𝘃. 𝗘𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗼, 𝗚𝗥 𝟮𝟬𝟵𝟰𝟯𝟱, 𝗔𝘂𝗴. 𝟭𝟬, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟮, 𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗥𝗮𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗮𝘂𝗹 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗼

𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗗 𝗙𝗨𝗟𝗟 𝗧𝗘𝗫𝗧: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29549/

05/11/2022

Estate Planning should be considered by everyone. It gives peace of mind and peace among those who are left behind. Give it some thought and plan it.

24/08/2022

Per Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 6-2022, the BIR has removed the five-year validity period on all printed and system-generated receipts/invoices effective on July 16, 2022.

Read the RR's full text here: https://bit.ly/3yzTlny

22/08/2022

SC: Naturalization Does not Apply to Dual Citizens by Birth |

The Supreme Court has held that Filipinos born to one Filipino parent and one foreign parent are considered dual citizens by birth and not by naturalization, regardless of subsequent acts performed to confirm the foreign citizenship.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario, the Supreme Court En Banc granted the Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition filed by Mariz Lindsey Tan Villegas Gana-Carait, and annulled and set aside the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) En Banc Resolution dated September 23, 2021 which denied Gana-Carait’s Motion for Reconsideration of the COMELEC First Division’s Resolution dated February 27, 2019. The said COMELEC resolutions denied the petition to disqualify Gana-Carait as a candidate for Member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the Lone District of Biñan, Laguna for the May 2019 elections, but granted the petition to deny due course to or cancel her certificate of candidacy.

In setting aside COMELEC’s cancellation of a Certificate of Candidacy, the Court held that Gana-Carait, who was born to a Filipino father and an American mother, is a dual citizen by birth, and not by naturalization, and is thus not covered by the provisions of the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act requiring candidates who are dual citizens by naturalization to take an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to renounce their foreign citizenships in order to become eligible for elective office. As a dual citizen by birth, Gana-Carait is considered a Filipino qualified to run for public office.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29129/.

01/08/2022