DMMMSU-MLUC College of Law

20/05/2026

19/05/2026

The has ruled that the unilateral imposition of reduced workdays and worker rotation scheme amounts to constructive dismissal.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, the SC En Banc found Fiber Textile Manufacturing Corp. (FMC) liable for constructively dismissing seven production workers after reducing their six-day workweek to only two to three days and implementing a work rotation plan without their consent, despite FMC’s claim that the workers agreed to the temporary scheme during a meeting on the shortage of raw materials.

The workers filed a complaint for constructive dismissal, claiming that they were effectively dismissed when they were told not to return to work.

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the workers, but the National Labor Relations Commission and the Court of Appeals upheld FMC’s actions as a valid exercise of management prerogative.

The SC disagreed. It emphasized that while employers may adopt flexible work arrangements during economic difficulties or national emergencies, these arrangements must comply with the requirements set out in Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Department Advisory No. 2, Series of 2009.

The SC explained that employers must first consult affected employees and obtain the voluntary support of the majority of workers. Employers must also notify the DOLE before implementing the arrangement and prove that the company is suffering from actual or reasonably imminent economic difficulties.

In this case, the SC held that FMC failed to prove that the workers voluntarily agreed to the reduced workdays and worker rotation scheme. The Court ruled that informing employees of the arrangement does not equate to securing their consent.

FMC also failed to notify the DOLE before implementation and failed to prove that it was suffering from actual or imminent economic difficulties that would justify the reduction of workdays.

The SC emphasized that while employers may adopt flexible work arrangements to prevent business losses, such measures must be exercised in good faith and with due regard to the rights of workers.

FMC’s unlawful reduction of workdays amounted to constructive dismissal because it resulted in diminished salaries, making continued employment unreasonable for the workers.

In his Concurring Opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen stressed that the requirement of mutual consent in flexible work arrangements originates from the consensual nature of employment contracts, such that employers cannot unilaterally alter work schedules in a manner that diminishes employees’ pay.

In his Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa agreed that FMC remained liable for constructive dismissal for failing to prove that the workers voluntarily agreed to the reduced workdays and work rotation plan. However, he emphasized that FMC had no raw materials to work with for several months, significantly affecting production operations. Thus, he stated that FMC faced a reasonably imminent economic difficulty that could justify the temporary adoption of flexible work arrangements.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166287

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166264

Read the full text of the Concurring Opinion at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166269

Read the full text of the Concurring and Dissenting Opinion at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166274

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/

19/05/2026

The has clarified that the rules on modifying circumstances—factors that can lessen or increase penalties—apply in cases of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide involving a motor vehicle.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC En Banc upheld Noli Z. Ilon’s (Ilon) conviction for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, but reduced his sentence because he voluntarily surrendered to the police.

Under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), reckless imprudence is acting without intent to harm but still causing injury or death to another due to a clear lack of precaution. The SC emphasized that motorists are expected to drive at a reasonable speed suited to road and weather conditions, especially near intersections. In this case, Ilon admitted that he failed to slow down despite knowing he was approaching an intersection. He even increased his speed, leading him to hit the trisikad that caused Lee de la Cruz’s death.

The SC clarified that Ilon’s voluntary surrender should be appreciated as a mitigating circumstance that reduces his penalty. It explained that while Article 365 of the RPC generally allows trial courts to impose penalties without applying the rules on mitigating and aggravating circumstances under Article 64 of the RPC, this does not apply when reckless imprudence results in death involving a motor vehicle. In such cases, Article 64 must be followed.

The SC reviewed the amendments to Article 365—from Act No. 3992, or the Revised Motor Vehicle Law, passed in 1932, through Batas Pambansa Blg. 398 passed in 1983—and found that Congress consistently retained the clause excluding cases where death results from reckless imprudence involving motor vehicles from the usual discretion given to trial courts. This means that courts must apply Article 64 to determine the proper penalty.

The SC observed, however, an inconsistency: reckless imprudence resulting in homicide with the use of a motor vehicle may be mitigated, while those resulting in serious bodily injury or damage to property are left to the discretion of the trial courts. Finding this distinction unjust, the SC directed that copies of its Decision be furnished to the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, to alert its co-equal branches of this inconsistency and for possible legislative action.

Ilon was sentenced to up to two years and four months in prison and ordered to pay the heirs of de la Cruz PHP 629,883.45 in damages.

In his Concurring Opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen noted that piecemeal amendments to the RPC have led to inconsistencies in criminal law. He called for the consolidation of all criminal provisions into a single, unified code to ensure fairness, clarity, and the orderly administration of justice.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166162

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/260538-noli-z-ilon-vs-people-of-the-philippines/

Read the full text of the Concurring Opinion at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/260538-concurring-opinion-senior-associate-justice-marvic-m-v-f-leonen/

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/

18/05/2026

Please note that only the Juris Doctor Qualifiers are eligible to enroll as 1st Year Students. Admission for AY 2026-2027 is closed for the Juris Doctor Program.

17/05/2026

Let us be vigilant witnesses to how our Political Law (as defined in People v. Perfecto and Macariola v. Asuncion) is redefined by current events.

𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐆 𝐀𝐍𝐆 𝐌𝐀𝐘 𝐀𝐋𝐀𝐌!

𝐆𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐥 𝐮𝐩, 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐰𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬!

The Supreme Court of the Philippines has posted the pleadings in current cases involving public interest: 𝐆.𝐑. 𝐍𝐨. 278747 (𝐑𝐨𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐨 𝐑𝐨𝐚 𝐃𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐑𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚 𝐑𝐨𝐬𝐚 𝐯. 𝐇𝐨𝐧. 𝐋𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧, 𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐥.), and these documents serve as windows into how the law is argued, defended, and tested. Knowledge of current cases keeps one sharp, relevant, and ready to engage with the evolving legal landscape.

Please scan the QR Code below or on the official page of the Supreme Court of the Philippines and read the pleadings in full. Don’t just glance—explore. See how issues are presented, how facts are organized, and how reasoning unfolds. Being informed means you’re not just reacting to headlines; you’re understanding the foundations of decisions that shape the nation’s jurisprudence.

So take the time. Read, reflect, and discuss with your peers. The more you immerse yourself in these cases, the more prepared you’ll be to navigate your own future in the legal profession.

𝑹𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓: 𝐈𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒆𝒅 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒔 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒅𝒗𝒐𝒄𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒔, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒅𝒗𝒐𝒄𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒔 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒂 𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒆𝒓 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝒔𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎.

Credits: Supreme Court PH

17/05/2026

Ka-Elyucano, panatilihin natin ang ligtas na espasyo dito sa La Union, anuman ang iyong kasarian!😊

Bilang parte ng ating , patuloy nating isinusulong ang respeto sa bawat isa ngayong International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, and Transphobia.

Hayaan nating manaig ang kabutihan sa pakikipagkapawa-tao, anuman ang kanilang kasarian!

15/05/2026

It takes a village to raise a lawyer. May our qualifiers each have a village supporting their journey to attain the title Attorney.

IT TAKES A VILLAGE TO RAISE A LAWYER

People love the final image. The oath. The roll signing. The name with an Atty. in front. What rarely gets seen is the village behind every lawyer.

No one gets here alone. Behind every lawyer is a family who adjusted their lives. Parents worried in silence and paid fees before they made sense. Siblings learned to wait and give space. Partners carried emotional weight when stress overflowed. Meals waited. Plans moved. Patience stretched. Their support never appeared on any transcript, but it carried the heaviest load.

There are classmates who shared notes, reviewers, coffee, and panic. The ones who answered messages at midnight. The ones who explained topics twice without judgment. Competition existed, but solidarity carried people through. Law school breaks people down, and classmates help build each other back up. This journey does not reward solo survival. It survives on shared struggle.

There are professors who pushed harder than felt fair and expected more. Some were kind. Some were strict. All left marks. They shaped how minds think, argue, and respect the law. They set standards and gave warnings. Lessons stayed long after grades faded.

Friends outside law school mattered too. They never fully understood the pressure, but they stayed. They forgave missed messages. They pulled you out for food. They celebrated small wins. They reminded you there was life beyond cases and exams. They kept you human.

Even strangers played a role. Baristas who remembered orders. Guards who offered quiet encouragement. Bartakers we meet on social media groups who generously share their notes. Small kindness mattered on days when motivation ran low.

A lawyer does not rise alone. Every success carries fingerprints from many hands. So when someone becomes a lawyer, the title belongs to many. Thank you to everyone who showed up, stayed patient, and believed when belief ran low. This profession carries names, but behind every name stands a village.

Photo: PhilSTAR

15/05/2026

Congratulations to our qualifiers and welcome to DMMMSU-MLUC College of Law!

Instructions sent through email.

15/05/2026

The has ruled that non-verbal threatening gestures with criminal intent may be considered grave threats under the 𝘙𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘗𝘦𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 (𝘙𝘗𝘊).

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, the SC’s Third Division acquitted Gregory Israel of grave threats after finding no criminal intent in his gesture of pretending to shoot and behead two individuals.

But it clarified that the crime of grave threats may be committed through non-verbal gestures and not only through spoken or written words.

Israel, who claimed to be a Belgian architect allowed to practice his profession in the Philippines, was hired by Belgian business partners Christine Helena Amanda Navez and Olivier Edmund Denonville for the construction of their building. After Israel refused to correct the construction defects in the said building, Navez and Denonville filed a case for damages against him.

Sometime in 2017, while Navez and Denonville were on their way home from the airport, they nearly collided with Israel’s motorcycle. The latter then allegedly made two overt gestures: pointing his fingers at Navez’s head as if pulling a gun trigger and drawing his fingers across his neck as if threatening to behead Navez.

Israel was convicted of grave threats. When his conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, he sought relief from the SC, arguing that he had no criminal intent when he performed the acts, and that Article 282 of the 𝘙𝘗𝘊 does not cover pure non-verbal gestures.

The SC acquitted Israel after finding that criminal intent was not proven. But it disagreed with his other argument, ruling that non-verbal gestures may be considered grave threats.

To convict for grave threats, the 𝘙𝘗𝘊 requires two elements: the 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗿 𝘂𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘀 and the 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲.

The SC held that Article 282 of the 𝘙𝘗𝘊 does not differentiate between threats conveyed verbally and those expressed through non-verbal gestures. What matters is the communication of a threat intended to intimidate.

Although the second paragraph of the provision specifies that threats can be conveyed orally or in writing, it does not exclude threats conveyed through non-verbal means. Therefore, threats can be either verbal or non-verbal.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166072.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164941.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

15/05/2026

14/05/2026

May 14, 2026 | IBP Statement on the Reported Shooting at the Philippine Senate