Supreme Court briefings on privacy, employment, healthcare, tax, business, and litigation.
Effective September 15, 2026, the Supreme Court’s new MCLE Rules retain 36 credit units per three-year cycle while allowing a general or practice-focused program. Here is what lawyers should check during the transition.
B.M. No. 850The Court excluded evidence outside the warrant’s scope after rejecting the asserted plain-view justification.
G.R. No. 273931The Court explained why an affidavit of desistance did not require dismissal.
G.R. No. 268971The applicable charge and the person’s citizenship matter under the rule.
G.R. No. 256320The parties’ proven agreement can support correction of a deed that identifies the wrong property.
G.R. No. 266298The Court ordered reinstatement after finding no demonstrated intent to leave the job, but did not award backwages on this record.
G.R. No. 267217Team Sual distinguishes historical processing rules and explains why completeness and filing dates must be examined together.
G.R. Nos. 203547 and 203561Trademark protection focused on the stylized mark and related services.
G.R. Nos. 262551, 266971 and 275314The Court dismissed the competing claims arising from a television-ratings controversy.
G.R. Nos. 263599 and 263643Failure to state a cause of action is assessed from the complaint and its attachments.
G.R. No. 262480The Supreme Court’s framework governs AI use in judicial work, including court-bound documents. Authorization, human review, and protection of confidential information remain essential.
A.M. No. 25-11-28-SCThe Court applied a statutory exception to the usual separation between corporate obligations and officers’ personal liability.
G.R. No. 241309The Court considered the notice requirements for a petition filed decades after administrative reconstitution.
G.R. No. 264862The briefer records the return of transferred funds and protection of the remaining balance.
G.R. Nos. 274778, 275405 and 276233The document must be read for the parties’ intent, including conditions that remain unfulfilled.
G.R. No. 242366The relevant payment date did not, by itself, establish a right to a refund.
G.R. No. 271261The Court upheld SEC accreditation for covered audit work, reversing its earlier position on reconsideration.
G.R. No. 246027Clean-looking titles did not protect buyers who overlooked evidence of fraud in the registry records.
G.R. No. 254046The Court allowed a refund under the earlier exemption; subsequent legislation makes the applicable time period essential.
G.R. No. 262092An acquittal does not automatically erase taxes, but the assessment must still be valid.
G.R. No. 259284The Court distinguished identifiable Bar scores from aggregate or genuinely anonymized information.
B.M. No. 4968The Court admitted chat logs and videos used to establish trafficking liability, within the circumstances of the investigation.
G.R. No. 263603The Court invalidated appointment-book and fee-schedule requirements while preserving other tax-record obligations.
G.R. Nos. 211772 and 212178A private complainant’s civil interest does not confer control over the criminal action.
G.R. No. 264237Passing evaluations and unsupported later criticism undermined the hospital’s dismissal of a probationary employee.
G.R. No. 228357The SEC’s benefit payments were disallowed, while the Court separately considered the officers’ liability to return funds.
G.R. No. 251615The Court required a qualifying pre-existing condition, intentional concealment, and a connection to the claimed disability.
G.R. No. 242928The Court set third-doctor referral guidelines but denied the claim because the contrary medical opinion lacked adequate support.
G.R. No. 253480The Court examined actual control and economic dependence when assessing Lazada riders’ working relationship.
G.R. No. 246892Try a broader keyword or clear the filters.