EPISODE 14

UNDER THE LAW

WITH ATTY MOX
1. PEOPLE V ALAGDON G.R. No. 262686 OCTOBER 11 2023
Issue : WHICH SHALL PREVAIL, THE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED OR THE REGULARITY IN THE
PERFORMANCE OF DUTY UNDER RA 9165?

2. SOUTH COTABATO INTEGRATED PORT SERVICES,

INCORPORATED V MAKAR PORT
LABOR ORGANIZATION G.R No. 235569 DECEMBER 13,
2023
Issue : IS THE NON REMITTING THE MONEY TO THE
UNION A ULP OR INTRA UNION DISPUTE?

3. REBUELTA V. REBUELTA, INC. G.R. No. 222105

DECEMBER 13, 2023
Issue : WHAT IS ADULTERY?
 WHICH SHALL PREVAIL, THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF
THE ACCUSED OR THE
REGULARITY IN THE
PERFORMANCE OF DUTY UNDER
RA 9165?

PEOPLE V ALAGDON G.R. No. 262686 OCTOBER 11 2023

 ARTICLE III
BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a

criminal offense without due process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall
enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial,
to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory
process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the
production of evidence in his behalf. However, after
arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the
absence of the accused provided that he has been duly
notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
 NISPEROS V PEOPLE
• In order to guide the bench, the bar, and the
public, particularly our law enforcement
officers, the Court hereby adopts the
following guidelines:

• 1. The marking of the seized dangerous

drugs must be done:
• a. Immediately upon confiscation;
• b. At the place of confiscation; and
• c. In the presence of the offender ( unless the
offender eluded the arrest);
 NISPEROS V PEOPLE
• 2. The conduct of inventory and taking of photographs of
the seized dangerous drugs must be done:
• a Immediately afier seizure and confiscation;

• b. In the presence of the accused, or the person/s from

whom such items were confiscated and/or seized, or
his/her representative or counsel; and

• c. Also in the presence of the insulating witnesses, as

follows:
• i. xxxxxx
• ii. if the seizure occurred after the effectivity of R.A. No.
10640, or from August 7, 2014 onward, the presence of
two (2) witnesses, namely, an elected public official; and a
National Prosecution Service representative or a media
representative.
 NISPEROS V PEOPLE
• 3. In case of any deviation from the
foregoing, the prosecution must
positively acknowledge the same and
prove
• (1) justifiable ground/s for
noncompliance and
• (2) the proper preservation of the
integrity and evidentiary value of the
seized item/s. (Italics in the original)
 IS THE NON REMITTANCE OF MONEY
TO THE UNION A ULP OR INTRA UNION
DISPUTE?

SOUTH COTABATO INTEGRATED PORT SERVICES,

INCORPORATED V MAKAR PORT
LABOR ORGANIZATION G.R No. 235569 DECEMBER 13, 2023
FACTS
 RULING
• The Med-Arbiter has no jurisdiction
over the Petition filed by Marigon

• XXXX If the allegations in the complaint

involve ULP, it is the Labor Arbiter who
has jurisdiction pursuant to Article 224
of the Labor Code. ULP generally refers
to acts that violate the worker's right to
self-organization.
ARTICLE 259. [248] Unfair Labor Practices of
Employers.- It shall be unlawful for an employer to
commit any of the following unfair labor practices:
• (a) To interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their
right to self-organization;
• (b) To require as a condition of employment that a person or an employee
shall not join a labor organization or shall withdraw from one to which he
belongs;
• ( c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union
members when such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in
the exercise of their right to self-organization;
• ( d) To initiate, dominate, assist or otherwise interfere with the formation
or administration of any labor organization, including the giving of
financial or other support to it or its organizers or supporters;
• ( e) To discriminate in regard to wages, hours of work and other terms
and conditions of employment in order to encourage or discourage
membership in any labor organization ....
• (f) To dismiss, discharge or otherwise prejudice or discriminate against an
employee for having given or being about to give testimony under this
Code;
• (g) To violate the duty to bargain collectively as prescribed by this Code;
• (h) To pay negotiation or attorney's fees to the union or its officers or
agents as part of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any
other dispute; or
• On the other hand, a Med-Arbiter is an officer in the
DOLE Regional Office or BLR who is authorized to hear
and decide representation cases, inter/intra-union dispute
x x x x.

• An "intra-union dispute" refers to any conflict between

and among union members, including grievances arising
from any violation of the rights and conditions of
membership, violation of or disagreement over any
provision of the union's constitution and by-laws, or
disputes arising from chartering or affiliation of union."
Rule XI, Section 1 of DOLE Department Order No. 40-03, as
amended by DOLE Department Order No. 40-F-03-08, enumerates
the instances considered as intra-union dispute, to wit:

• SECTION 1. Coverage. - A inter/intra-union disputes

shall include:
• (a) conduct or nullification of election of officers of
unions and workers' association;
• (b) audit/accounts examination of union or workers'
association funds;
• ( c) deregistration of collective bargaining agreements;
• ( d) validity/invalidity of union affiliation or disaffiliation;
• ( e) validity/invalidity of acceptance/non-acceptance for
union membership;
• (f) validity/invalidity of voluntary recognition;
• (g) opposition to application for union or cba
registration;
Rule XI, Section 1 of DOLE Department Order No. 40-03, as
amended by DOLE Department Order No. 40-F-03-08, enumerates
the instances considered as intra-union dispute, to wit:

• (h) violations of or disagreements over any provision of the

constitution and by-laws of a union or workers' association;
• (i) disagreements over chartering or registration of labor
organizations or the registration of collective bargaining
agreements;
• j) violations of the rights and conditions of membership in a
union or workers' association;
• (k) violations of the rights of legitimate labor organizations,
except interpretation of collective bargaining agreements;
• (l) validity/invalidity of impeachment/expulsion/suspension
or any disciplinary action meted against any officer and
member, including those arising from non-compliance with
the reportorial requirements under Rule V;
• (m) such other disputes or conflicts involving the rights to
self organization, union membership and collective
bargaining:
1.) between and among legitimate labor organizations;
2) between and among members of a union or workers'
• Xxx Based on the foregoing rules and principles,
the determination of whether jurisdiction was
properly acquired by Med-Arbiter Demetillo, will
depend on the allegations of Marigon in the
Petition which he captioned as one filed for
"UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE FOR
ILLEGALLY AND UNREASONABLY
WITHHOLDING THE UNION DUES
COLLECTED FROM UNION MEMBERS.“xxx
 Marigon has no
authority to file the
petition.
 WHAT IS
ADULTERY?
REBUELTA V. REBUELTA, INC. G.R. No.
222105 DECEMBER 13, 2023
FACTS
 ADULTERY UNDER RPC

• Under Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, "Adultery

is committed by any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not her husband ... "

• On the other hand, a married man is liable for

concubinage only when he does any of the three acts
specified in Article 334 of the Revised Penal Code, to
wit:
• a. keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling; or
• b. having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances with a woman who is not his wife; or
• c. cohabiting with her in any other place
• The authority to determine probable cause on the part of
the public prosecutor and the judge has already been
delineated. The determination by the public prosecutor is
executive, the purpose of which is for filing a criminal
information in court, and determining if there is enough
evidence to support it.
• On the otherhand, the determination by a judge is a
judicial function, which is being exercised to determine if
there is a necessity to place the accused under custody. In
doing so, the judge will determine the existence of
probable cause independent of the findings of the
prosecutor and will have no capacity to review the
determination made by the latter.
• The standards to be observed in the determination of
probable cause is that of whether the facts are sufficient
to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been
committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof.
A judge is not required to probe the evidence with the
end of procuring a conviction; it will suffice if the
evidence establishes reasonable belief that the act or
omission constitutes the offense charged.

• Xxxx To reiterate, probable cause only demands

reasonable belief or probability that a crime has been
committed. Evidence tending to establish guilt beyond
reasonable doubt are proper in a trial, and not in the
judicial determination of probable cause xxx