The Law Offices of Ugay and Partners

05/12/2023

Congratulations!!!

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=369014769123357&id=100080445101466&mibextid=CDWPTG

12/01/2023

“With renewed commitment, we wish the nation strength as we endeavor to make the new year better than the last.

May we all have a happy and prosperous new year.”

Read the 2023 New Year Message of Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo. 🥳

08/01/2023

08/01/2023

"No one can whistle a symphony. It takes a whole orchestra to play it."

💖Looking forward to a great year 2023💖

06/12/2022

The Supreme Court En Banc today tackled possible actions regarding statements made by a certain Lorraine Badoy, containing threats against Judge Marlo A. Magdoza-Malagar of the Manila Regional Trial Court, Branch 19.

The Court also STERNLY WARNS against inciting violence through social media and other means that endanger the lives of judges and their families. Such acts SHALL LIKEWISE BE CONSIDERED A CONTEMPT OF THE COURT and will be dealt with accordingly.

06/12/2022

SC Dismisses Petition Alleging Monopoly in Securities Market |��The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition alleging that certain government regulations enabled a group to establish a monopoly and impose unfair competition in the market for fixed-income securities and the over-the-counter market for government securities.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the Court dismissed the Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction filed by Luis R. Villafuerte, Caridad R. Valdehuesa, and Norma L. Lasala that sought to nullify various rules, orders, issuances, and acts of public respondents Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), Secretary of Finance, and the National Treasurer which purportedly allowed the PDS Group to establish a monopoly and impose unlawful restraint of trade in the securities market.

In dismissing the petition, the Court held that aside from failing to establish the necessary legal standing to file the petition before it, the petitioners also failed to show a clear disregard of the relevant constitutional provision on monopoly which would have otherwise required immediate action. It reiterated that monopoly is not prohibited per se but is only regulated or disallowed when public interest so requires. It has been recognized that securities markets may regulate their own operations by requiring membership in a Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO) under the principle of self-regulation, consistent with the State policy to ‘establish a socially conscious, free market that regulates itself.’ Thus, the membership requirement in an SRO does not necessarily violate the constitutional provision on monopoly.

Read the case digest at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29297/ and the decision in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29283/. The Separate Concurring Opinion by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen may also be read at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29287/.

06/12/2022

Supreme Court Issues TRO in No Contact Apprehension Policy Petitions |

The Court has issued a temporary restraining order enjoining all respondents, including all those implementing MMDA Resolution No. 16-10, s. 2016, and all ordinances subject of the petitions from carrying out the No Contact Apprehension Policy (NCAP) programs and ordinances and the Land Transportation Office from giving out motorist information to all local government units, cities, and municipalities enforcing NCAP programs.

The case was also set for oral arguments in the afternoon of 24 January 2023. The SC PIO will be creating a microsite in the SC website in connection with the case and where the public may access and view all pertinent pleadings.

Read the Notice of Resolution at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29468/.

06/12/2022

NBI Arrests Man Posing as SC Official on Facebook |

On August 20, 2022 in Parañaque City, operatives of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) arrested Mark Jasper C. Reyes a.k.a. Mark Gil Cloma De Guzman, a native of Cauayan City, Isabela, who has been misrepresenting himself as Atty. Jed Sherwin G. Uy, Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Technology Officer of the Supreme Court, and using his alleged connections in the government in exchange for money.

The NBI has already charged Reyes for estafa, computer-related Identity Theft, multiple counts of Computer-related Forgery, violation of Anti-Alias Law, and Usurpation of Authority before the Office of the City Prosecutor in Parañaque.

The arrest spawned from the complaints of the real Atty. Uy and Christine Chung dela Rosa. In her complaint, Dela Rosa claimed that on August 8, 2022, Reyes contacted her through Facebook and posed as Atty. Uy. She said that Reyes discussed issues concerning a decision of the Court of Appeals in a case involving her late father and bragged about his government connections.

Atty. Uy, who heads the Management Information Systems Office of the SC, personally appeared before the NBI SAU to execute an affidavit to deny any involvement and to clear his name. He also informed SAU that the suspect is similarly engaged in other fraudulent activities victimizing a lawyer-doctor and a Mayor in Palawan and in Lamitan, Basilan.

In a statement by Supreme Court Spokesperson Atty. Brian Hosaka, he said: “We are grateful to the NBI for their swift action which led to the arrest of the alleged impostor. The Supreme Court treats all allegations of malfeasance seriously, and will cause an immediate investigation of any purported illegal activities in the Judiciary. We also encourage the public to report to us any purported misconduct or wrongdoing by a judge, court official, or employee in order for us to investigate the matter immediately.”

06/12/2022

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/.

06/12/2022

SC Champions FILSCAP’s Rights over Copyrighted Works |

Championing the intellectual property rights of those in the music industry, the Supreme Court has granted the petition of the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Inc. (FILSCAP) to reverse and set aside the rulings denying its right to collect license fees and/or royalties over copyrighted works of its member artists.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda, the Court En Banc ordered respondent Anrey, Inc. to pay FILSCAP ₱10,000.00 as temperate damages for the unlicensed public performance of the copyrighted songs on FILSCAP’s repertoire and ₱50,000.00 as attorney’s fees, plus interest at the rate of 12% per annum from September 8, 2009 until June 30, 2013, and thereafter, 6% per annum from July 1, 2013 until finality of the Court’s judgment. Such amount shall be subject to interest at the rate of 6% per annum reckoned from the date of finality of this judgment until fully satisfied.

The Court held that playing radio broadcasts containing copyrighted music through loudspeakers (radio-over-loudspeakers) is a performance. Restaurants that play radio broadcasts over their speakers to enhance profit by providing entertainment to the public, particularly to their customers who pay for the dining experience, do not constitute fair use.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29122/

11/08/2022

SC Reiterates Rule in Judicial Recognition of Foreign Divorce |

The Supreme Court has reiterated the rule that in petitions for judicial recognition of foreign divorce, one must prove not only the fact of divorce but also the national law of the foreign spouse for the divorce ruling to be legally recognized in the Philippines.

In a 10-page Decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the Court remanded to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Pedro City, Laguna, Branch 93 for further proceedings and reception of evidence on the Japanese law on divorce the petition for judicial recognition of foreign divorce filed by a Filipino citizen who divorced her Japanese husband in 2007.

The Court held that while Jocelyn established the fact of divorce by submitting the Acceptance Certificate as authenticated by the Philippine Embassy in Tokyo, Japan, she was not able to establish the law of Japan on divorce.
The Court underscored that for a petition for judicial recognition of foreign divorce to prosper, the party pleading it must prove the fact of divorce and the national law of the foreign spouse.

Under Article 26 of Executive Order No. 209, series of 1987, as amended, or The Family Code of the Philippines, a divorce between a foreigner and a Filipino may be recognized in the Philippines as long as it was validly obtained according to the foreign spouse’s national law. Before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by the court, the party pleading it must first prove the fact of divorce and its conformity to the foreign law allowing it.

Read the case digest at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29120/ and the decision in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29085/.