TITLE: In Re Myron Farber

CITATION: 394 A.2d 330; 78 N.J. 259 (1978)

TOPIC: Newsman's Privilege

FACTS:
X, a reporter and a news organization, were charged with contempt of court for
failure to disclose information sought by subpoenas duces tecum by the State of
New Jersey in a criminal case. X contended they had a privilege to remain silent
with respect to confidential information that emanated from the "free speech" and
"free press" clauses of the U.S. Constitutional Amendment I. Is X correct?

ANSWER:
No.

As a general rule, since a newsman's interest in the gathering of news is an

indispensable component in its dissemination and a vital incident to freedom of the
press, that interest is entitled to protection.

However, in the case at bar, the state constitutional guarantee of a criminal

defendant's right to confront witnesses prevailed over the state statute granting
privilege to newspersons regarding their sources of confidential information.
TITLE: Air Philippines Corporation vs. Pennswell, Inc.
CITATION: 540 SCRA 215, G.R. No. 172835 December 13, 2007
TOPIC: Trade Secrets

FACTS:
P sold to A various goods. For failure of A to pay, P filed a complaint for sum of
money. In its answer, A contended that it refused to pay because it was defrauded
by P in that P’s products are identical with products A had previously purchased and
that P merely altered the names and labels of such goods. During trial, A filed a
motion to compel P to give a detailed list of the ingredients and chemical
components of its products. If you are the judge, will you grant the motion?

ANSWER:
No.

Jurisprudence provides that trade secrets are of a privileged nature. The protection
that the Philippine jurisdiction affords to trade secrets is evident in our laws.

In the case at bar, the revelation of X’s trade secrets serves no better purpose to
the disposition of the main case which is on the collection of a sum of money. Y
received X’s goods in trade in the normal course of business. There are defenses
under the laws of contracts and sales available to Y.

NICE TO KNOW:
There are other privileged matters that are not mentioned by Rule 130, among
which are the following: (a) editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of
published news, (b) voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted,
(c) trade secrets, (d) information contained in tax census returns, and (d) bank
deposits.
TITLE: People vs. Paragsa
CITATION: 84 SCRA 105, No. L-44060 July 20, 1978
TOPIC: Admissions Against Interest

FACTS:
A criminal case for rape was filed against X. During trial, the victim M did not rebut
the testimony of the X and his witnesses to the effect that X and M were actually
sweethearts and that they had had two previous sexual communications. Is there
an implied admission by M?

ANSWER:
Yes.

Before the silence of a party can be taken as an admission of what is said, it must
appear: (1) that he heard and understood the statement; (2) that he was at liberty
to interpose a denial; (3) that the statement was in respect to some matter
affecting his rights or in which he was then interested, and calling, naturally, for an
answer; (4) that the facts were within his knowledge; and (5) that the fact admitted
or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be material to the issue.

In this case, these requisites of admission by silence are present. Hence, the silence
of M on the facts asserted by the accused and his witnesses may be safely
construed as an admission of the truth of such assertion.