Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 75 views

    People vs. Ochoa Digest Final

    Uploaded by

    Elyn Apiado
    1) Ochoa allegedly recruited Robert Gubat to work as a factory supervisor in Taiwan through her agency Axil International. Gubat paid Ochoa an 18,800 peso reservation fee but was unable to leave the country as promised. 2) Records from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) show that Ochoa was not licensed or authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment on her own. 3) Ochoa was found guilty of illegal recruitment. Under Philippine law, illegal recruitment involves convincing someone to pay money for overseas employment by giving the impression you have the ability to send them abroad for work, even if you are not properly licensed.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Ochoa Digest Final

    Uploaded by

    Elyn Apiado
    75 views2 pages
    1) Ochoa allegedly recruited Robert Gubat to work as a factory supervisor in Taiwan through her agency Axil International. Gubat paid Ochoa an 18,800 peso reservation fee but was unable to leave the country as promised. 2) Records from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) show that Ochoa was not licensed or authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment on her own. 3) Ochoa was found guilty of illegal recruitment. Under Philippine law, illegal recruitment involves convincing someone to pay money for overseas employment by giving the impression you have the ability to send them abroad for work, even if you are not properly licensed.

    Original Title

    8. People vs. Ochoa Digest Final.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Ochoa allegedly recruited Robert Gubat to work as a factory supervisor in Taiwan through her agency Axil International. Gubat paid Ochoa an 18,800 peso reservation fee but was unable to leave the country as promised. 2) Records from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) show that Ochoa was not licensed or authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment on her own. 3) Ochoa was found guilty of illegal recruitment. Under Philippine law, illegal recruitment involves convincing someone to pay money for overseas employment by giving the impression you have the ability to send them abroad for work, even if you are not properly licensed.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Ochoa Digest Final

    Uploaded by

    Elyn Apiado
    1) Ochoa allegedly recruited Robert Gubat to work as a factory supervisor in Taiwan through her agency Axil International. Gubat paid Ochoa an 18,800 peso reservation fee but was unable to leave the country as promised. 2) Records from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) show that Ochoa was not licensed or authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment on her own. 3) Ochoa was found guilty of illegal recruitment. Under Philippine law, illegal recruitment involves convincing someone to pay money for overseas employment by giving the impression you have the ability to send them abroad for work, even if you are not properly licensed.

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. No.

    173792: August 31, 2011 his personal knowledge, that is, which are derived from his perception. A
    witness, therefore, may not testify as to what he merely learned from
    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROSARIO "ROSE" others either because he was told, or he read or heard the same. Such
    OCHOA, Accused-Appellant. testimony is considered hearsay and may not be received as proof of the
    truth of what he has learned. This is known as the hearsay rule.
    LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:
    The law, however, provides for specific exceptions to the hearsay rule.
    FACTS: One of the exceptions is the entries in official records made in the
    performance of duty by a public officer. In other words, official entries are
    Ochoa, allegedly recruiter of Axil International Agency was introduced to admissible in evidence regardless of whether the officer or person who
    Robert Gubat, a licensed electrical engineer. Ochoa told Gubat that one made them was presented and testified in court, since these entries are
    of her applicants was already leaving for Taiwan and that as an engineer, considered prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. Other
    Gubat was qualified to work as a factory supervisor and could leave for recognized reasons for this exception are necessity and trustworthiness.
    Taiwan in two weeks. That the total application expenses would amount The necessity consists in the inconvenience and difficulty of requiring the
    to ₱100,000.00, and the down payment was ₱50,000.00. Gubat was able official's attendance as a witness to testify to innumerable transactions in
    to actually pay Ochoa ₱18,800.00 as reservation fee at the agency. the course of his duty. This will also unduly hamper public business. The
    trustworthiness consists in the presumption of regularity of performance
    Despite Ochoa's renewed promise, Gubat was not able to leave the of official duty by a public officer.
    country. Ochoa failed to comply with the demand of Gubat’s, to return the
    documents and money. As found in the office’s records, appellant, in her personal capacity, is
    neither licensed nor authorized to recruit workers for overseas
    POEA certified that Ochoa in her personal capacity, is neither licensed employment. It bears stressing, too, that this is not a case where a
    nor authorized by the POEA to recruit workers for overseas employment. certification is rendered inadmissible because the one who prepared it
    was not presented during the trial. To reiterate, an officer of the licensing
    ISSUE: branch of the POEA, in the person of Ms. Aquino, testified on the
    document. Hence, its execution could be properly determined, and the
    Whether or not Ochoa was guilty of illegal recruitment in large scale? veracity of the statements stated therein could be ascertained.

    HELD:

    Yes.

    It is well-settled that to prove illegal recruitment, it must be shown that


    appellant gave complainants the distinct impression that she had the
    power or ability to send complainants abroad for work such that the latter
    were convinced to part with their money in order to be employed.

    Section 36, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, states that a
    witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of or comes from

    Page 1 of 2
    Page 2 of 2

    You might also like