Author name: Patricia Minimo

Disputes involving refund or delivery of condo units fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the HSAC (formerly HLURB), pursuant to PD 957 and PD 1344.

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a child—born before the parents’ marriage—remains legitimate after that marriage was later declared void ab initio due to psychological incapacity.

This case draws the line between constructive dismissal and legitimate management prerogative. Even when an employee’s duties are changed or reduced, such movement does not automatically amount to unfair treatment—especially if done in good faith and without diminution of pay or rank.

In this case, the Court clarified that theft isn’t limited to the person who literally discovers lost property. Even those who knowingly keep, divide, or misappropriate what isn’t theirs—despite knowing it was merely found—may still be held liable as a “finder in law.”

The Court upheld the presumption of validity of marriage—even when the petitioner later claimed that the person who officiated her wedding was not the judge named in the marriage contract.

When employees are barred from entering their workplace, the question arises: does this amount to dismissal under labor law, or can it be treated as something less than termination? This case explores the boundaries of employer authority, the rights of employees to security of tenure, and how Philippine jurisprudence defines dismissal in the context of workplace access and control.