Lawyer & Educator
Former Clerk of Court-
Special Commercial Court and Cybercrime Court
Congratulations to the 5,594 successful passers of the 2025 Philippine Bar Examinations. ๐๐ซถ๐ป Your hard work has paid off. May your legal career save and protect, inspire and lead, and contribute to a more just society.โ๏ธ๐
21/12/2025
For checking: Summary of Civ Pro II, including Case Digests, Flowcharts and Tables of Comparison of Appeals & Other Post Judgment Remedies, Procedure in the CA & SC, Provisional Remedies, and Special Civil Actions. ๐
Marami pa magsu-submit bukas.
P.S. I donโt ask my students to do anything I havenโt done myself.
16/12/2025
Todayโs dialogue on VAWC.
15/12/2025
Summary of Appeals & Other Post-Judgment Remedies made by one of my students. May kasama pang ex*****on.
One proof of hard work.
14/12/2025
Grateful always and in all ways. God is good all the time.
God bless the people behind every good work.
HMUA: Joshua Roldan Anciano Dy
-2025
27/11/2025
Iโd like to express my gratitude to Naga City Justice Zone-NCJZ for inviting me as a Resource Speaker for todayโs Talk on the Rule on Cybercrime Warrants. This timely topic will aid law enforcement authorities in investigating crimes perpetrated through computer systems.
Special thanks to the people behind NCJZ with whom I have previously collaborated at RTC Naga during my tenure as the Branch Clerk of Court of Branch 21, the designated Special Commercial Court and Cybercrime Court.
Acknowledgments to:
-Hon. Pablo C. Formaran III, NCJZ Convenor and Executive Judge, RTC Naga;
-Judge Mita Briรฑas, NCJZ Secretariat Head;
-Atty. Raiza Mendiola Ladlad, Regional Court Manager for Region V;
-Honorable Judge Joseph Ladlad of MCTC Capalonga-Sta. Elena, Cam Norte;
-Atty. Vernon Belen, the Acting Clerk of Court of RTC Naga; and
-Sir Nel Urdaneta of the Supreme Court.
It was also a pleasure and an honor meeting my fellow speaker, Honorable Judge Madonna Gay Escio.๐
Know Your Rights Philippines
23/11/2025
Today, I gave an impromptu recitation on the Data Privacy Act and the Cybercrime Prevention Act. ๐
๐
17/11/2025
14/11/2025
FACT: Certain vloggers were invited as resource speakers to the legislative inquiries on FAKE NEWS before the House of Representatives.
ISSUE:
Was their right to freedom of expression violated?
RULING:
No.
The mere act of inviting Abines et al. (the petitioners) as resource persons to an inquiry in aid of legislation did not violate their freedom of expression, as it had no relation at all to their exercise of free speech. It did not, at the very least, regulate the content of their speech or its incidents. More important, it was a mandate from Congress to aid them in crafting sound legislation, not an act to punish them for alleged proliferation of ''fake news" in social media. In other words, the issuance of summons is a matter of procedure to effectively exercise the power of Congress to conduct its legislative inquiry. It was neither a punitive measure in relation to free speech nor an attempt to suppress it.
Since the questioned conduct did not curtail or regulate Abines et al.' s freedom of expression, the perceived chilling effect had no leg to stand on. There was no restraint on the freedom of expression that could trigger its application.
Too, We cannot prohibit Congress from inviting resource persons to legislative inquiries solely because the subject matter involves speech. Congress has the power to regulate certain forms of speech, as some forms are not protected by the Constitution, e.g. those which bring about a general disorder that threaten the State with a clear and present danger or when the utterances involved are "no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step of truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." Surely, Congres can enact laws to penalize unprotected speech.
Disini, Jr. v. Secretary of Justice pronounced:
All penal laws, like the cybercrime law, have of course an inherent chilling effect, an in terrorem effect or the fear of possible prosecution that hangs on the heads of citizens who are minded to step beyond the boundaries of what is proper. But to prevent the State from legislating criminal laws because they instill such kind of fear is to render the state powerless in addressing and penalizing socially harmful conduct. Here, the chilling effect that results in paralysis is an illusion since Section4(a)(3) clearly describes the evil that it seeks to punish and creates no tendency to intimidate the free exercise of one's constitutional rights.
To repeat, since there is neither a law nor a bill, the present action is premature.
Ernesto S. Abines, Jr., et al vs. House of Representatives, et al, G.R. No. 27 101, July 8, 2025, Supreme Court En Banc
13/11/2025
SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS FOR TAKING A DEPOSITION UPON ORAL EXAMINATION
(Section 15, Rule 23)
Things to Remember:
1. Deposition is a method of pre-trial discovery which consists in taking the testimony of a person under oath upon oral examination (oral deposition) or upon written interrogatories.
2. The term deposition also refers to the testimony or statement so taken.
3. Deponent (witness) is the person whose testimony is to be taken.
4. Rule 23 of the Rules of Court, as amended, is about Depositions Pending Actions.
5. Depositions pending actions are those taken during the pendency of a case before the court a quo.
6. Depositions may either be taken:
* upon oral examination (also known as an oral deposition), or
* upon written interrogatories.
7. The illustration below shows the process of taking deposition upon ORAL EXAMINATION.
*Officer=the person who takes the deposition
8. Within the Philippines, depositions may be taken before any judge, notary public, or any person authorized to administer oaths. (Sections 10 & 14, Rule 23)
11/11/2025
Law students understand what this is.
20/11/2025