Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 249 views

    Suplico Vs Neda

    Uploaded by

    Carlyn Belle de Guzman
    1) The document discusses a case regarding the cancellation of the proposed ZTE-NBN Project by President Macapagal-Arroyo in 2007. 2) The Court must take judicial notice of the President's official act of cancelling the project without need for evidence, according to Section 1 of Rule 129 of the Rules of Court. 3) For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy, not an issue that is moot or academic. Since the project was cancelled, there is no live controversy for the court to rule on.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Suplico Vs Neda

    Uploaded by

    Carlyn Belle de Guzman
    249 views2 pages
    1) The document discusses a case regarding the cancellation of the proposed ZTE-NBN Project by President Macapagal-Arroyo in 2007. 2) The Court must take judicial notice of the President's official act of cancelling the project without need for evidence, according to Section 1 of Rule 129 of the Rules of Court. 3) For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy, not an issue that is moot or academic. Since the project was cancelled, there is no live controversy for the court to rule on.

    Original Title

    suplico vs neda

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The document discusses a case regarding the cancellation of the proposed ZTE-NBN Project by President Macapagal-Arroyo in 2007. 2) The Court must take judicial notice of the President's official act of cancelling the project without need for evidence, according to Section 1 of Rule 129 of the Rules of Court. 3) For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy, not an issue that is moot or academic. Since the project was cancelled, there is no live controversy for the court to rule on.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    249 views2 pages

    Suplico Vs Neda

    Uploaded by

    Carlyn Belle de Guzman
    1) The document discusses a case regarding the cancellation of the proposed ZTE-NBN Project by President Macapagal-Arroyo in 2007. 2) The Court must take judicial notice of the President's official act of cancelling the project without need for evidence, according to Section 1 of Rule 129 of the Rules of Court. 3) For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy, not an issue that is moot or academic. Since the project was cancelled, there is no live controversy for the court to rule on.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Case Digest: ROLEX SUPLICO, Petitioner, vs NATIONAL ECONOMIC

    AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, represented by NEDA SECRETARY SECTION 1. Judicial Notice, when mandatory. – A court shall
    ROMULO L. NERI, and the NEDA-INV
    take
    Case Digest:
    judicial notice, without introduction of evidence, of the

    On April 18, 2008, the OSG filed respondents’ reply, reiterating existence

    their position that for a court to exercise its power of and territorial extent of states, their political history, forms

    adjudication,  of government and symbols of nationality, the law of nations,

    there must be an actual case or controversy – one which the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals,

    involves a  the political constitution and history of the Philippines, 

    conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims  the official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial 

    susceptible of judicial resolution; the case must not be moot or  departments of the Philippines, the laws of nature, the measure

    academic or based on extra-legal or other similar of time, and the geographical divisions.  

    considerations 
    not cognizable by a court of justice.
    It is further provided in the above-quoted rule that the court

    Contrary to petitioners’ contentions that these declarations made shall take judicial notice of the foregoing facts without

    by officials belonging to the executive branch on the Philippine introduction of evidence. Since we consider the act of

    Government’s decision not to continue with the ZTE-NBN Project cancellation by President Macapagal-Arroyo of the proposed

    are self-serving, hence, inadmissible, the Court has no alternative ZTE-NBN Project during the meeting of October 2, 2007 with

    but to take judicial notice of this official act of the President the Chinese President in China as an official act of the

    of the Philippines. executive department, the Court must take judicial notice
    of such official act without need of evidence.

    Section 1, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court provides:


    legislation cannot be the basis of Our decision which requires
    Judicial power presupposes actual controversies, the  a judicial finding of facts.
    very antithesis of mootness. In the absence of actual
    justiciable controversies or disputes, the Court generally 
    opts to refrain from deciding moot issues. Where there is 
    no more live subject of controversy, the Court ceases to 
    have a reason to render any ruling or make any pronouncement.

    The rule is well-settled that for a court to exercise 


    its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case 
    or controversy – one which involves a conflict of legal 
    rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible 
    of judicial resolution; the case must not be moot or 
    academic or based on extra-legal or other similar 
    considerations not cognizable by a court of justice.  
    Where the issue has become moot and academic, there 
    is no justiciable controversy, and an adjudication 
    thereon would be of no practical use or value as 
    courts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic 
    questions to satisfy scholarly interest, however 
    intellectually challenging.

    Let it be clarified that the Senate investigation in aid of

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy