res communis, res nullius, things that are prohibited law, things not capable of
appropriation.
Purely personal right are non transmissible since it is extinguished by death unless
it is transmissible (filing an action for legitimacy) (patrimonial rights)
Non transmissible: voting right,
Transmissible: obligations if purely personal, non transferrable by law, non
transferrable)
Debts are transmissible. 2 thoughts.
Debts only involves the estate of the debtor.
Debts involves the
Provisional order – a temporary protection order issued by the court in relation to
marriage disputes at any time during the proceeding, with or without hearing.
(related to support pendent lite, administrat
Who may file. – spouses, immediate family.
A court order whereby all the property subject to dispute in a legal action is plac
ed under the dominion and control of an independent person known as a receiver
.
Writ of amparo. Why there is no docket fees. Because it may stand as a deterrent
for pauper litigants.
Lee v porn lawphil
Livares v cebu lawphil
Receivership, support pendente lite,
Replevin. Read all the cases given by judge Javier.
Guiding principle is the prevention of imminent danger to the property. If an
action by its nature, does not require such protection or reservation, said remedy
cannot be applied for and granted.
Xxx
The general rule is that neither party to a litigation should be appointed as
receiver without the consent of the other because a receiver should be a person
indifferent to the parties and should be impartial and disinterested. 18 The receiver
is not the representative of any of the parties but of all of them to the end that
their interests may be equally protected with the least possible inconvenience and
expense.
Xxx
The power to appoint a receiver must be exercised with extreme caution. There
must be a clear showing of necessity therefor in order to save the plaintiff from
grave and irremediable loss or damage. 20 It is only when the circumstances so
demand, either because there is imminent danger that the property sought to be
placed in the hands of a receiver be lost or because they run the risk of being
impaired, endeavouring to avoid that the injury thereby caused be greater than the
one sought to be avoided
a) The order was improperly or irregularly issued or enforced;
(b) Any of the material allegations in the petition, or any of the contents of any
attachment to the petition thereto, or its verification, is false; and
(c) The specific personal or real property ordered preserved is not in any manner
connected with the alleged unlawful activity as defined in Section 3(i) of Republic
Act No. 9160, as amended by Republic Act No. 9194.
No counterbond to discharge the asset preservation order shall be allowed except
for compelling reasons.
So far in civpro 2
Protection order in vawc
Hold depature order
Vawc
The rule on the writ of amparo
Habeas data
Habeas corpus
Am no. 5-11-04-SC
Rule 56,57,58
TRO
CTA
Sandigan bayan ra 10660
https://www.philstar.com/business/2010/03/17/558255/purpose-receivership
prayer of the court
Ecumenical Prayer for the Courts
Almighty God, we stand in Your Holy Presence as our Supreme Judge.
We humbly beseech You to bless and inspire us so that what we think,
say and do will be in accordance with Your will.
Enlighten our minds, strengthen our spirit and fill our hearts with fraternal love,
wisdom and understanding, so that we can become effective channels of truth, justice and peace.
In our proceedings today, guide us in the path of righteousness for the fulfillment of Your greater glory.
Amen.
Jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan
TORTS AND DAMAGES
CASE no.1
Facts:
Petitioner filed a complaints for damages against defendant company for the injury
that he suffered while he was working due to an accident that involves a faulty rail
used by the company as road for the transportation of heavy materials from the
harbor to the dock.
The defendant argued that the petitioner was at fault because it was a company
prohibition to stand by the side of a hand car and that petitioner got injured
through his own negligence. The defendant anchors his argument from an american
decision that "the parties being mutually in fault, there can be no apportionment of
damages. The law has no scales to determine in such cases whose wrongdoing
weighed most in the compound that occasioned the mischief."
A.M. No. 05-11-04-SC |
Rules of Procedure in Cases
of Civil Forfeiture, Asset
Preservation under R.A.
9160
