<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LEXOTERICA:  A PHILIPPINE BLAWG</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Updates and Articles on Philippine Law and Jurisprudence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 01:48:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='lexoterica.wordpress.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/osd.xml" title="LEXOTERICA:  A PHILIPPINE BLAWG" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>December 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Legal and Judicial Ethics</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 01:47:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ramon G. Songco</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=4052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected December 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on legal and judicial ethics: Affidavit of Desistance; no effect on disciplinary proceeding.  It bears to stress that a case of suspension or disbarment is sui generis and not meant to grant relief to a complainant in a civil case but is [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=4052&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">rgslexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>December 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Criminal Law and Procedure</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dominador Maphilindo O. Carrillo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=4045</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected December 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on criminal law and procedure: 1.         REVISED PENAL CODE Aggravating circumstances; treachery. There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=4045&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">dmoclexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>December 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Commercial Law</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 12:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hector M. de Leon Jr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=4024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected December 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on commercial law: Corporation; contracts before incorporation. With respect to petitioners’ contention that the Management Contract executed between respondent and petitioner Lucila has no binding effect on petitioner corporation for having been executed way before its incorporation, this Court finds the same [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=4024&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/december-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Hector</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>November 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Political Law</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vicente D. Gerochi IV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=4015</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected November 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on political law. Constitutional Law Agrarian reform; control over agricultural lands.  Upon review of the facts and circumstances, the Court concluded that the farm worker beneficiaries (FWBs) will never have control over the agricultural lands as long as they remain as stockholders [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=4015&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">vdglexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>November 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Legal and Judicial Ethics</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/19/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/19/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ramon G. Songco</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=4005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected November 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on legal and judicial ethics: Attorney; aiding illegal practice of law.  It has been established that Dela Rosa who is not a member of the Bar misrepresented herself as respondent’s collaborating counsel.  There was also sufficient evidence to prove that respondent allowed [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=4005&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/19/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">rgslexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>November 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Labor Law and Procedure</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-labor-law-and-procedure/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-labor-law-and-procedure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Leslie C. Dy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Labor Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=3998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected November 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on labor law and procedure: Award of attorney’s fees; concepts.  There are two commonly accepted concepts of attorney’s fees – the ordinary and extraordinary.  In its ordinary concept, an attorney’s fee is the reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer by his client [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=3998&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-labor-law-and-procedure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Leslie</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>November 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Criminal Law and Procedure</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:15:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dominador Maphilindo O. Carrillo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Remedial Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=3989</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected November 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on criminal law and procedure: 1.         REVISED PENAL CODE Malversation of public funds; elements.The elements of the crime of malversation of public funds are as follows: (a) that the offender is a public officer; (b) that he had the custody or control [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=3989&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-criminal-law-and-procedure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">dmoclexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>November 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Commercial Law</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Dec 2011 17:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hector M. de Leon Jr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=3980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected November 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on commercial law: Corporations; piercing the corporate veil.  Piercing the veil of corporate fiction is warranted only in cases when the separate legal entity is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, or defend crime, such that in the case [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=3980&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/november-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-commercial-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Hector</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>October 2011 Supreme Court Decisions on Political Law</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/october-2011-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/october-2011-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:32:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vicente D. Gerochi IV</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=3972</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected October 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on political law: Constitutional Law Constitutionality of RA 10153. Republic Act 10153 reset the ARMM elections from August 8, 2011, to the second Monday of May 2013 and every three years thereafter, to coincide with the country’s regular national and local elections. The [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=3972&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/october-2011-supreme-court-decisions-on-political-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">vdglexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>October 2011 Philippine Supreme Court Decisions on Legal and Judicial Ethics</title>
		<link>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/october-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/october-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:44:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ramon G. Songco</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philippines - Cases]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/?p=3953</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are selected October 2011 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on legal and judicial ethics: Attorney; dishonesty.  It is clear from the records that respondent Atty. Ediza deceived the Spouses Floran when he asked them to unknowingly sign a deed of sale transferring a portion of their land to him.   Respondent also [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=lexoterica.wordpress.com&amp;blog=6852486&amp;post=3953&amp;subd=lexoterica&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lexoterica.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/october-2011-philippine-supreme-court-decisions-on-legal-and-judicial-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">rgslexoterica</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
