god bless all! UP fight... lang ng fight.... waaah!!!

Newest rules from the SC...  :)

Here are some of my notes, flowcharts, etc. etc.  :)

My short notes and tables.

IPL - 6 pages
Pescriptive Period in Commercial Law - 2 pages
Indeterminate Sentence Law - 6 pages

Nico

* Edit: Thanks jam for posting the files. 

yeah more commercial law stuff. toink.

some transcripts from jimenez lectures years back. haven't read if they're useful but you never know what might save ya. read at own risk

some transcripts from jimenez lectures years back. haven't read if they're useful but you never know what might save ya. read at own risk

Things to paste on your wall.

1. chart contract vs quasi delict
2. chart vicarious liability
3. chart damages
4. the reviewer i made in 2nd year. its long so just copy and paste the charts you need/doctrines and whatever useful thing it has in there.
5. ok ill throw in my pril reviewer for mam beths class. I forgot kung may charts ako ginawa dun. hehe so ignore if di naman useful.

tips galing sa yahoogroups

•     finders keepers rule
•     settlement of estate and habeas corpus( if not civ, baka rem)
•     reserva troncal
•     iron curtain rule
•     unlawful detainer/forcible entry
•     solidary obligation
•     option to buy vs right of first refusal
•     natural obigation vs civil obligation
•     contract of sale vs contract to sell
•     equitable mortgage
•     1601 and 1616
•     legal redemption
•     1789 and 1808
•     doctrine of apparent authority
•     doctrine of corporate negligence
•     guaranty vs surety
•     pactum commissorium
•     mercury drug case
•     civ code
• arts. 14, 15, 16 (a), 17 (a), and (b), 21, 26, 80, 815, 816, 817, 819, 829, 1039, 1753

for those who were not able to attend his bar review lecture. ;)


LOCAL TAXATION
constitutional basis +++
rationale for withdrawal of tax exemptions (where applicable) +++
fundamental principles +

REAL PROPERTY TAXATION
basis of rpt +++
constitutional exemptions +++
statutory exemptions +++
ad valorem tax on idle lands +++
personal property under civil law but real for  RPT purposes ++
reduction and refund of rpt +

TARIFF & CUSTOMS CODE
exclusive jurisdiction of bureau of customs +++
anti-dumping duty ++
countervailing duty ++
marking duties ++
discriminatory duty ++
flexible tariff clause; scope ++
custom searches ++
exemptions from duties; household and personal effects ++
exemptions from duties; donations +
exemptions from duties; animals +
dutiable value of article subject to ad valorem tax +
   --- transactional value; definition +++
jurisdiction of collector over contraband +
prima facie presumption of fraud +
administrative procedures +

JURISDICTION OF CTA +++

DECISIONS OF CIR OVER DISPUTED ASSESSMENTS ++

INCOME TAXATION
authority of CIR to inquire into bank deposits +++
filing of individual ITR +++
life insurance proceeds +++
returned premiums +++
damages +++
prescriptive period for assessments +++
   - 3-yr period
   - when 3-yr period does not apply
   - false and fraudulent return
   - prima facie evidence of false/fraudulent return
   - suspension of prescriptive periods within which to assess
   - waiver of period to assess
suspension of collection of tax +++
gifts, bequests and devices ++
ordinary and necessary deductions +
charitable contributions +
ITR of married individuals +
withholding tax system +
constructive/indirect methods of income determination +
net worth method +
expenditures method of income determination +
requisites for grant of protest, reinvestigation or reassessment +
BIR actions considered as denials appealable to the CTA +
party who may appeal +
remedies for collection +
   - distraint +
   - actual vs. constructive distraint +
   - lien; kinds of +
compromise +
   - subject and not subjct of compromise +++
abatement +
refund or credit +
prescriptive period for filing court suit for recovery +
prescriptive period for corporate taxpayer +
nature of IR laws +
kinds of IR laws +
authority of CIR to obtain information +
limitations on rule-making power +
net taxable income +
advantages/disadvantages of gross income taxation +
joint purchase of land +
general professional partnership v. general partnership +
exclusions from gross income v. deductions +



---------------------
maybe i missed some. can't say for sure. :)

ito din lang yung niupload ni bobbie kani-kanina lang sa ygroup. from Atty. Marlon Manuel of SALIGAN (former executive director) at ATENEO LAW (instructor).

yung mga sagot sa mga UST tips na nisend ko earlier, sinagot/research din ng ilang SALIGAN interns at resident lawyers. ;-)

How do you reconcile the Substitutionary Doctrine (BAR 2000) with the Contract Bar Rule?

The doctrine basically says the employees can change their bargaining agent even AFTER a CBA has been entered in with the employer. But that is exactly what the Contract Bar is for, right? That is why there is the freedom period within which a CE may validly be initiated.

A sample question could be:
ABC company has just entered in to a CBA with XYZ union. Within 6 months, a majority of XYZ's members decide to form a different union due to differences between them and the minority. They file a petition for certification election with the BLR. The latter refuses to grant their petition by invoking the Contract Bar Rule. The separatist group takes you in as their lawyer and asks you to invoke the Substitutionary Doctrine in arguing their case. How will you argue their case? (5pts)


My current theory is that the Doctrine is premised on the fact that there is a VALID CBA but it is NOT registered. After all, the validity of a CBA is not hinged on its registration. While registration is there only for the purpose of enforcing the Contract Bar Rule. This is the only way I can think of where the two (2) principles may be upheld simultaneously.

If anyone has a better opinion, please share your thoughts. And if you don't have the time to answer, that is ok also since I have this theory of mine to answer with just in case this issue crops up. Hehe.


******************


Consent Election lang pala ang sagot. Hehe. :)

In the event there is a massive disaffiliation while there is a validly existing CBA, the parties may agree to conduct a consent election for the purpose of determining the administrator of the CBA (since the contracting union has been 'disenfranchised') but NOT for determining the bargaining agent for collective bargaining purposes.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advise the group not to insist on their petition for a CE and simply have their new union registered as a legitimate labor organization. The BLR was correct to remind them of the Contract Bar Rule, which applies in this case.
However, I will further tell them to seek the holding of a consent election for purposes of determining majority representation, given the massive disaffiliation which took place. This may be done with or without intervention of the BLR.
A Consent Election is not prohibited by the Contract Bar rule. It does not seek to determine who shall be the bargaining unit's sole and exclusive bargaining agent. Whichever union ends up winning such election shall have all the powers of any legitimate labor organization EXCEPT collective bargaining, which is a prerogative of the exclusive bargaining agent. If the winning union wishes to collectively bargain with the employer, then it must file a petition for CE during the freedom period.

tama ba? sana naman. :D

Just in case he's the examiner...

This is less than 40 pages, font size 12 pa.  It's all I used for our Final exam...

God bless everyone :)

(this one's simply to entertain the possibility that it could be dean rcp who's the bar examiner for poli)

ben also sent around a week ago a our consti II reviewer for RCP's class. if you will notice, rcp's quite fond of US cases, and the somewhat different (albeit sometimes only by nomenclature) tests/doctrines used contained in them. here are some of those which, as far as i can remember remember, he fancies:



DOUBLE NEXUS TEST
(first seen in Flast v. Cohen) It is utilized in determining whether a party has standing as a taxpayer. In order to be a proper party, a person must:
1. establish a logical link between his status (as taxpayer) and the type of legislative enactment concerned. He must sue on the basis of an unconstitutional exercise of congressional power under taxing and spending clause in the articles of the Constitution
2. establish a nexus between his status (as taxpayer) and the precise nature of the constitutional infringement which he alleges.


LEMON TEST
This is used in determining if a statute has violated the non-establishment clause (re religion) of the Constitution. The statute will pass judicial scrutiny if the statute:
1. has secular legislative purpose;
2. its principal/primary effect is one that neither advances nor inhibits religion;
3. it does not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."


HECKLER's VETO
(taken from Wikipedia; i can't find our own references) A heckler's veto occurs when an acting party's right to freedom of speech is curtailed or restricted in order to prevent a reacting party's behavior.
ex. In Feiner v. New York, the US Supreme Court held that the police officers acted within their power in arresting a speaker since the arrest was "motivated solely by a proper concern for the preservation of order and protection of the general welfare."


MILLER TEST
It is used in determining if a particular work is obscene and hence not protected speech. A work is obscene if it:
1. is patently offensive
2. appeals to the prurient interest
3. lacks serious value


FIGHTING WORDS
Simply put, they pertain to words or utterances (speech) that are offensive to the public or will cause any violence. As such, they do not come under the purview of protected speech and may be subjected to state regulation.




(NOTE: this is not complete i'll just add if i remember anything more and i have the time.)

not sure if you guys have this na, haven't been in school eh. But if ever the bar examiner really is him, here's what I got from his site.

i think it was ben who sent it. supposedly from UST. but they were only topics. here are some answers. sort of. i asked a friend to do some research.

it's rather lengthy (8 pages) so make use of it wisely. especially if you know already the answers. ;)

(see attached)

most of us, if not all, probably have this table/info already but just to pave the way for future posts. if possible use this simple format (SUBJ - General Description of the Content).

merci beaocoup!


(see attached file)