Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 47 views

    Persons Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lau Nunez
    The document discusses two court cases: 1) Famanila v. Court of Appeals - The petitioner signed a receipt releasing the respondents from liability for an injury suffered while working. The court upheld the validity of the release, finding that the petitioner signed it voluntarily with an understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration was reasonable. 2) Elegado v. Hon. Court of Tax Appeals - The petitioner argued a first tax assessment against an estate was invalid because it was based on a return filed by foreign lawyers unaware of Philippine tax laws. The court rejected this argument, finding all are equally bound by the country's laws regardless of ignorance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Persons Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lau Nunez
    47 views2 pages
    The document discusses two court cases: 1) Famanila v. Court of Appeals - The petitioner signed a receipt releasing the respondents from liability for an injury suffered while working. The court upheld the validity of the release, finding that the petitioner signed it voluntarily with an understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration was reasonable. 2) Elegado v. Hon. Court of Tax Appeals - The petitioner argued a first tax assessment against an estate was invalid because it was based on a return filed by foreign lawyers unaware of Philippine tax laws. The court rejected this argument, finding all are equally bound by the country's laws regardless of ignorance.

    Original Description:

    Preliminary Title Cases

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses two court cases: 1) Famanila v. Court of Appeals - The petitioner signed a receipt releasing the respondents from liability for an injury suffered while working. The court upheld the validity of the release, finding that the petitioner signed it voluntarily with an understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration was reasonable. 2) Elegado v. Hon. Court of Tax Appeals - The petitioner argued a first tax assessment against an estate was invalid because it was based on a return filed by foreign lawyers unaware of Philippine tax laws. The court rejected this argument, finding all are equally bound by the country's laws regardless of ignorance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    47 views2 pages

    Persons Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lau Nunez
    The document discusses two court cases: 1) Famanila v. Court of Appeals - The petitioner signed a receipt releasing the respondents from liability for an injury suffered while working. The court upheld the validity of the release, finding that the petitioner signed it voluntarily with an understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration was reasonable. 2) Elegado v. Hon. Court of Tax Appeals - The petitioner argued a first tax assessment against an estate was invalid because it was based on a return filed by foreign lawyers unaware of Philippine tax laws. The court rejected this argument, finding all are equally bound by the country's laws regardless of ignorance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    FAMANILA v.

    COURT OF APPEALS

    G.R. No. 150429, August 29, 2006

    FACTS
    Private respondent NFD International Manning Agents, Inc. hired the services of petitioner as
    Messman for Hansa Riga, a vessel registered and owned by its principal and co-respondent,
    Barbership Management Limited. Petitioner while performing his duties suffered a sudden
    attack of left cerebral haemorrhage. Petitioner underwent a brain operation and later was
    repatriated to the Philippines. He was examined, and declared permanently, totally disabled.
    Thereafter, authorized representatives of the respondents convinced him to settle his
    claim. Petitioner accepted the offer as evidenced by his signature in the Receipt and Release
    dated February 28, 1991. His wife, Gloria Famanila and one Richard Famanila, acted as
    witnesses in the signing of the release.Petitioner filed a complaint with the NLRC, the latter
    dismissed the complaint on the ground of prescription. Petitioner claims that he did not
    sign the Receipt and Release voluntarily or freely because he was permanently disabled and in
    financial constraints. These factors allegedly vitiated his consent which makes the Receipt and
    Release void and unenforceable.
    ISSUE
    WON Petitioner’s waiver valid.
    HELD
    YES. It is true that quitclaims and waivers are oftentimes frowned upon and are considered as
    ineffective in barring recovery for the full measure of the worker's right and that
    acceptance of the benefits therefrom does not amount to estoppel. The reason is plain.
    Employer and employee, obviously do not stand on the same footing. However, not all waivers
    and quitclaims are invalid as against public policy. If the agreement was voluntarily entered into
    and represents a reasonable settlement, it is binding on the parties and may not later be
    disowned simply because of change of mind. It is only where there is clear proof that the waiver
    was wangled from an unsuspecting or gullible person, or the terms of the settlement are
    unconscionable on its face, that the law will step in to annul the questionable transaction. But
    where it is shown that the person making the waiver did so voluntarily, with full
    understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration for the quitclaim is credible and
    reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as a valid and binding undertaking, as in this
    case.
    ELEGADO v. HON. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

    G.R. No. L-68385, May 12, 1989


    FACTS
    Warren Taylor Graham, an American national formerly resident in the Philippines, died in
    Oregon, U.S.A. As he left certain shares of stock in the Philippines, his son, Ward Graham, filed
    an estate tax return, with the Philippine Revenue Representative in San Francisco, U.S.A. The
    decedent's will had been admitted to probate in the Circuit Court of Oregon. Ward Graham, the
    designated executor, then appointed Ildefonso Elegado, the herein petitioner, as his attorney-
    in-fact for the allowance of the will in the Philippines. The petitioner argues that the first
    assessment is not binding on him because it was based on a return filed by foreign lawyers who
    had no knowledge of our tax laws or access to the Court of Tax Appeals.
    ISSUE
    WON the petitioner’s contention, pertaining to the first assessment making him excused,
    correct.
    HELD
    NO. The petitioner cannot be serious when he argues that the first assessment was invalid
    because the foreign lawyers who filed the return on which it was based were not familiar with
    our tax laws and procedure. The petitioner suggesting that they are excused from compliance
    therewith because of their ignorance, is incorrect. If our own lawyers and taxpayers cannot
    claim a similar preference because they are not allowed to claim a like ignorance, it stands to
    reason that foreigners cannot be any less bound by our own laws in our own country. A more
    obvious and shallow discrimination than that suggested by the petitioner is indeed difficult to
    find.

    You might also like