Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Rule 58 Case Digests

Rule 58 Case Digests

Ratings: (0)|Views: 42|Likes:
Published by netbotes

More info:

Published by: netbotes on Jul 02, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/04/2013

pdf

text

original

 
1Rule 58
PNB VS PABALAN
June 15, 1978 (83 SCRA 595)Case: Original action in the Supreme Court
 –
certiorari and mandamus withpreliminary injunction.
FACTS
:PNB questions the legality of the writ of execution, notice of garnishment on fundsof Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration deposited with it on ground of non-suability of a state, alleging that such funds are public in character.
HELD:
 Funds of public corporation which can sue and be sued are not exempt fromgarnishment. PVTA is a public corporation. It is t
o be admitted that ‘the State may
not be sued without its consent.
If the funds appertained to one of the regulardepartments or offices in the government, then certainly such a provision wouldbe a bar to garnishment. In here, garnishment would lie. Funds of a publiccorporation could properly be made the object of a notice of garnishment.
 
2Rule 58
UP VS CATUNGAL, JR.
May 5, 1997 (272 SCRA 221)Case: Certiorari and prohibition. For nullification of orders of respondent judges.
FACTS
:A UP Diliman faculty member is under administrative proceedings in the UP Tribunal forgrave misconduct involving sexual intercourse with minors.
HELD:
 Sec. 3, Rule 58 state the grounds for the grant of preliminary injunction:a) the applicant is entitled to the relief demanded, and the whole or part of suchrelief consists in restraining the commission or continuance of the act or actscomplained of, or in requiring the performance of an act or acts, either for a limitedperiod or perpetually;b) the commission, continuance or non-performance of the act or acts complained of during the litigation would probably work injustice to the applicant;c) a party, court, agency or a person is doing, threatening, or is attempting to do, oris procuring or suffering to be done, some act or acts probably in violation of the rightsof the applicant respecting the subject of the action or proceeding and tending torender the judgment ineffectual.
The court must state its own findings of facts and cite the particular law to justify thegrant of preliminary injunction. Since injunction is the strong arm of equity, he whomust apply for it must come with equity or with clean hands. This is so becauseamong the maxims of equity are: 1. He who seeks equity must do equity; 2)he who comes into equity must do equity.
 –
He who has done inequity shall nothave equity. It signifies that a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on theground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent ordeceitful as to the controversy in issue.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->