Provincial fiscal dismissed the charges for lack of

This preview shows page 14 - 16 out of 24 pages.

Provincial Fiscal dismissed the charges for lack of merit.Alleging that the filing of said complaint publicly put himto shame as he is a businessman with a gross annualincome of forty million pesos, petitioner filed in the thenCourt of First Instance of Samar an action for damagesbased on Articles 20 and 21 of the Civil Code againstPrivate Respondent To-Chip and her husband Ramon To-Chip, the latter as a nominal party.Both parties appealed to the Court of Appeals.On August 1, 1986, the Court of Appeals, thru its FirstCivil Cases Division composed of justices Ramon G.Gaviola, Jr., Ma. Rosario Quetulio-Losa and Leonor InesLuciano, with Justice Luciano asponente, promulgated adecision reversing the lower court's decision anddismissing the complaint. Petitioner filed a motion forreconsideration assailing the validity of the Court ofAppeals decision on the ground that on August 1, 1986,the appellate court had no jurisdiction to issue saiddecision as two of the three members of the first CivilCases Division had been "effectively disempowered to sitthereon as of July 31, 1986" as a result of thereorganization of said court.2In its resolution of November 7, 1986, the Court ofAppeals denied the motion for reconsideration, which wasalso penned by Justice Luciano and concurred in byJustices Jorge R. Coquia and Emeterio C. Cui states thatthe justices who were not re-appointed because of thereorganization held office in a hold-over capacity until thenewly appointed as well as re-appointed justices tooktheir oath of office before the President at 2:00 o'clock inthe afternoon of August 1, 1986. As the questioneddecision was promulgated at 11:45 A.M. of August 1,1986, the justices who were not re-appointed were stillvalidly performing judicial functions including thepromulgation of decisions.Consequently, petitioner filed the instant petition forreview on certiorari raising, among others, the issue of thejurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to promulgate thedecision of August 1, 1986 as "there was no existingquorum and hence no authority to exercise any judicialpower pertaining to the Court of Appeals."3ISSUE: Whether or not there is authority to exercise anyjudicial power pertaining to the Court of AppealsHELD: No. On July 28, 1986, President Corazon C.Aquino issued Executive Order No. 33. Said executiveorder amends certain sections of the Judiciary Act of 1980and renames the Intermediate Appellate Court as theCourt of Appeals. Pertinent to this case is Section 6thereof which amends Section 11 of the Judiciary Act asfollows:SEC. 11.Quorum.A majority of theactual members of the Court shallconstitute a quorum for its session enbanc.Three members shall constitute aquorum for the sessions of a division. Theunanimous vote of the three numbers of adivision shall be necessary for thepronouncement of a decision or finalresolution,which shall be reached in
15consultation before the writing of theopinion by any member of the division.

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

End of preview. Want to read all 24 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Term
Spring
Professor
N/A
Tags
United States nationality law, Nationality law, petitioner, Corazon Aquino, Philippine nationality law

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture