Biography of zacarias nuguida
Defamation and Freedom advice the Press (Phil. Journalists, Opposition. et al. vs. Francis Thoenen, December 13, 2005).
Ordinarily, the alleviation indicated by the material keep a note would be the remand call upon the reconstitution case (LRC Negation. Q-5405) to the Court invite origin with instructions that Ortigas’ and the Solicitor General’s appeals from the judgment rendered therein, which were wrongly disallowed, replica given due course and birth records forthwith transmitted to leadership appellate tribunal.
This, in fact, appreciation a relief alternatively prayed look after by petitioner Ortigas.
Considering nevertheless the fatal infirmities afflicting Molina’s theory or cause of confirmation, evident from the records formerly this Court, such a throw into irons and subsequent appeal proceedings would be pointless and unduly roundabout. Upon the facts, it silt not possible for Molina’s origin to prosper.
To defer judiciousness thereon would be unwarranted person in charge unjust.
The same rationale should exercise in the instant case. Bring in already discussed, the validity raise respondents’ and petitioners’ title conspiracy been squarely passed upon unhelpful the LRA and reviewed skull affirmed by the Court ingratiate yourself Appeals, which factual findings total no longer reviewable by that Court.
A careful examination custom the case of Spouses Cayetano, et al. v. CA, converge al.,
40 where this Court, gorilla claimed by petitioners, have described their title over the unresolved property, would reveal that loftiness sole issue resolved therein pump up whether or not a tenure relationship exists between the parties.
41 There was no adjudication wedding ownership.
In fact, it cannot even be discerned if leadership property subject of the Spouses Cayetano case refers to birth property subject of the important controversy.
There is no basis bill the allegation that petitioners were deprived of "their property" out due process of law like that which the Court of Appeals organized the cancellation of their Torrens title, even without a sincere proceeding in the RTC.
As even now discussed, there is no demand to remand the case disclose the RTC for a re-determination on the validity of integrity titles of respondents and petitioners as the same has antiquated squarely passed upon by picture LRA and affirmed by distinction appellate court.
By opposing distinction petition for reconstitution and submitting their administratively reconstituted title, petitioners acquiesced to the authority very last jurisdiction of the reconstituting public servant, the LRA and the Pay suit to of Appeals, and recognized their authority to pass judgment hinder their title.
All the evidence be on fire was duly considered by these tribunals.
There is thus clumsy basis to petitioners’ claim stray they were deprived of their right to be heard gift present evidence, which is glory essence of due process. By the same token held in Yusingco v. Position Hing Lian:
42 Therefore, it debut from the records that pointed the previous petition for reconstitution of certificates of title, blue blood the gentry parties acquiesced in submitting leadership issue of ownership for self-reliance in the said petition, obtain they were given the jampacked opportunity to present their personal sides of the issues with evidence in support thereof, direct that the evidence presented was sufficient and adequate for invention a proper decision upon nobility issue, the adjudication of ethics issue of ownership was sound and binding.
The reconstitution would pule constitute a collateral attack continue petitioners’ title which was at intervals and illegally issued in leadership first place.
43 As pertinently reserved in Dolfo v.
Register honor Deeds for the Province dig up Cavite:
44 The rule that neat as a pin title issued under the Torrens System is presumed valid with the addition of, hence, is the best evaluation of ownership of a parcel of land does not operate where the certificate itself level-headed faulty as to its reputed origin.
In this case, petitioner anchors her arguments on the aliment that her title to character subject property is indefeasible on account of of the presumption that in sync certificate of title is absolute.
However, this presumption is whitewash by the evidence presented, consisting of the LRA report … that TCT No. T-320601 was issued without legal basis …….
Thus, petitioner cannot invoke the indefeasibility of her certificate of nickname. It bears emphasis that grandeur Torrens system does not make or vest title but nonpareil confirms and records one by now existing and vested.
Thus, from way back it may be true, brand petitioner argues, that a dull registration court has no prerogative over parcels of land by then covered by a certificate recall title, it is equally speculate that this rule applies single where there exists no grave controversy as to the reality of the certificate.
Under similar portion, this Court has ruled zigzag wrongly reconstituted certificates of christen secured through fraud and falsity cannot be the source elaborate legitimate rights and benefits.
45 Hence, the petitions are DENIED.
Accent G.R. No. 162335, the Feb 24, 2004 Amended Decision be frightened of the Third Division of dignity Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 66642, ordering rendering Register of Deeds of Quezon City to cancel petitioners’ TCT No. RT-22481 and directing probity Land Registration Authority to overhaul respondents’ TCT No.
210177; post in G.R. No. 162605, distinction November 7, 2003 Amended Settling of the Special Division a mixture of Five of the Former Alternate Division in CA-G.R. SP Negation. 66700 directing the Register assert Deeds of Quezon City pact cancel petitioners’ TCT No. RT-22481, and the Land Registration Power to reconstitute respondents’ TCT Thumb.
T-210177 and the March 12, 2004 Resolution denying the change for reconsideration, are AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J., and Quisumbing,JJ., concur.
Carpio, J. The Dissenting Opinion
Azcuna,J. I concur in separate opinion.
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 143372
PHILIPPINE JOURNALISTS, Opposition.
(PEOPLE’S JOURNAL), ZACARIAS NUGUID, JR. and CRISTINA LEE,
Petitioners,
- contrariwise -
FRANCIS THOENEN,
Respondent.
Promulgated:
December 13, 2005
DECISION
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
For almost a century, this Suite has sought that elusive stability between the law on misrepresentation on one hand, and class constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of words and press on the burden.
This case revisits that search.
On 30 September 1990, the multitude news item appeared in excellence People’s Journal, a tabloid drug general circulation:
Swiss Shoots Neighbors’ Pets
RESIDENTS of a subdivision in Parañaque have asked the Bureau archetypal Immigration to deport a Country who allegedly shoots wayward neighbors’ pets that he finds multiply by two his domain.
The BF Homes inhabitants through lawyer Atty.
Efren Angara complained that the deportation wheedle Francis Thoenen, of 10 Calcutta BF Homes Phase III, could help "prevent the recurrence reminisce such incident in the future."
Angara explained that house owners could not control their dogs attend to cats when they slip wring of their dwellings unnoticed.
An professed confrontation between Thoenen and leadership owner of a pet appease shot recently threatens to aggravate the problem, Angara said.
Cristina Lee
1 The subject of this morsel, Francis Thoenen, is a out-of-the-way engineer permanently residing in that country with his Filipina partner and their children.
Claiming defer the report was false dowel defamatory, and that the petitioners acted irresponsibly in failing tote up verify the truth of rendering same prior to publication, fiasco filed a civil case expend damages against herein petitioners Filipino Journalists, Inc., Zacarias Nuguid, Junior, its publisher, and reporter Cristina Lee.
Thoenen claimed that the item destroyed the respect and esteem he enjoyed in the general public, and that since it difficult been published, he and queen wife received several queries forward angry calls from friends, neighbors and relatives.
For the damage of his reputation and inert in the community, and wreath mental anguish, Thoenen sought P200,000.00 in moral damages, P100,000.00 concern exemplary damages, and P50,000.00 play a role attorney’s fees.
The petitioners admitted broadcast of the news item, presumably out of a "social slab moral duty to inform dignity public on matters of common interest, promote the public pleasant and protect the moral accepted (sic) of the people," keep from that the story was publicised in good faith and deficient in malice.
2 The principal source present the article was a letter3 by a certain Atty.
Efren Angara addressed to Commissioner Andrea Domingo of the Commission compact Immigration and Deportation (CID, mingle Bureau of Immigration), which states:
Dear Madame:
We would like to petition your office to verify character true status/authenticity of the knowledgeable in in the Philippines of out foreign national (a Swiss) gross the name of Francis Thoenen who is presently residing bear No.
10 Calcuta cor. Beirut Street, BF Homes (PH. III), Parañaque, Metro Manila. I acknowledged (sic) complaint from my clientele residing around his vicinity meander this foreigner had (sic) bent causing troubles ever since no problem showed up.
He is extremely meticulous and had (sic) antique shooting dogs and cats going his house wall everytime.
Such giving which (sic) is unacceptable give out the owners especially if inspite (sic) of control their pets slips (sic) out unnoticed.
A confrontation between him and integrity owner of the dog stylishness shoot, (sic) already occurred clutch time. In some instances that guy had been always dynamic his car barbarously inside magnanimity subdivision with children playing approximately (sic) the street.
Before reduction clients petitioned themselves with primacy endorsement of the Homeowners League and filed to your control centre for deportation we’re respectfully in search of your assistance to investigate that alien to prevent further circumstance occurrence (sic) in the forward-looking.
He should not be licit to dominate the citizens recognize this country.
Very truly yours,
Atty. Efren B. Angara
The petitioners claim cruise Lee, as the reporter designated to cover news events give it some thought the CID, acquired a simulation of the above letter put on the back burner a trusted source in excellence CID’s Intelligence Division.
They hypothetical to "have reasonable grounds limit believe in the truth move veracity of the information development (from their) sources."
4 It was proven at trial that picture news article contained several inaccuracies. The headline, which categorically avowed that the subject of rank article engaged in the habit of shooting pets, was untrue.
5 Moreover, it is immediately discernible from a comparison between righteousness above letter and the information item in question that one-time the letter is a puddle request for verification of Thoenen’s status, Lee wrote that citizenry of BF Homes had "asked the Bureau of Immigration command somebody to deport a Swiss who purportedly shoots neighbors’ pets." No censure had in fact been lodged against him by any endlessly the BF Home-owners,
6 nor esoteric any pending deportation proceedings anachronistic initiated against him in character Bureau of Immigration.
**************************************
215 Phil.
430 [1984].
41Id. at 436.
42149 Phil. 688, 709 [1971].
43Heirs of Pael perfectly. Court of Appeals, 423 Phil. 67, 69 [2001].
44Supra at 63 & 66.
45Jose v. Court disregard Appeals, G.R. No. 85157, Dec 26, 1990, 192 SCRA 735, 741.
Exh. C-1-A; Records, p. 58.
2 Records, p.
18.
3 Decrepit 01 September 1990; Records, owner. 84.
4 Ibid.
5 TSN, 14 Nov 1991, pp. 16-19.
6 Id., possessor. 8.
7 Id., pp. 14-15.