BATTLE of the LAWYERS on ANGEL'S COMMUNITY PANTRY?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 เม.ย. 2021
- Justice Buddy distinguishes the people's misconception about the battle of the lawyers and battle of legal opinions, arguments, and legal bases in relation to Angel Locsin's community pantry.
#LegalOpinions
#AngelLocsin
#CommunityPantry
FOLLOW our official Facebook Pages,
Atty. Jeffrey Bajita
/ atty.bajita
Aimsmart Review & Training Center
/ aimsmartcriminologyrev...
For any other concerns about our legal and review services, you may send us a message in the above Facebook Pages, or you may contact us at 09956393691.
Thank you, and may God bless you more.
Background Music Credits:
Summer Nights by LiQWYD / liqwyd Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Unported - CC BY 3.0 Free Download / Stream: bit.ly/summer-nights-liqwyd Music promoted by Audio Library • Summer Nights - LiQWYD...
Upbeat Corporate by JP Bianchini jpbianchini.com Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Unported - CC BY 3.0 Free Download / Stream: bit.ly/upbeat-corporate Music promoted by Audio Library • Upbeat Corporate - JP ...
Track: Good Life - JayJen & Roa [Audio Library Release] Music provided by Audio Library Plus Watch: • Good Life - JayJen & R... Free Download / Stream: alplus.io/good-life - บันเทิง
Mas maintindihan po talaga paghinihimay-himay po atty. gaya po ng ginagawa niyo yung pagpapaliwanag sa batas at mas lalong naiintindihan ng mga viewers at nakikinig sa paliwanag niyo, bukod pa don nakalagay sa screen yung batas na pinag-uusapan na patungkol sa isyung pinag-uusapan at king ano ang paliwanag dito..
Salamat po at malinaw...
Salamat sa pag appreciate sa ating channel.
Atty Buddy ang tanong klng bkit po pag-artista at sikat mayaman nakalabag ng batas hindi agad nahahatulan pero pagsimpleng tao hindi kilala walang yaman kulong agad
Yan po ang realidad ng mundo....
Kaya nga ang batas para lang sa manga mahirap hindi pangmayaman politiko artista silay exempted grabe only in the Philippines kaya useless lang ang batas
Sus yong nagviolate sa curfew is punished what more na may nmatay at no social distancing...tsk tsk tsk
Ibang isyu yan buddy. Salamat sa komento.
@@justicebuddy3154 Ibang isyo lagi sabi niyo. Under na po yan #BayanihanAct yan sumagot po tama po.
@@justicebuddy3154 atty Di ba po pasok sa Malum Prohibitum yung di pagpapauwe sa mga Senior Citizen na alam po natin na bawal na nasa labas dahil sa panahon ngayon?
Hello buddy Arian.
Hindi pa natin natalakay ang Bayanihan Act.
Stick lang tayo sa mga tinalakay.
May ebidensya si brgy. Chairman ng holy spirit atty.
Salamat sa impormasyon buddy.
I love the way you explained rules of laws. Very informative! Salute you to that!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻😊 di nakakalito!😊
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Paano na yung unangbsinabi na 300 lang ang bibigyan, pero nagpose siya sa social media na open sa lahat ang bigayan.
Magandang punto yan buddy.
ang ganda po ng paliwanag mo atty. malinaw na malinaw,,, salamat po sa pag babahagi ng kaalaman s batas..
Salamat sa panonood at pagshare buddy.
Nanunood at nakikinig lamang po ay marami talagang natututunan.n kahit hindi abugado ay naiintidihan,na dapat malaman dn ng bawat pinoy,talagang dapat ay legal n batas,hindi galit ang pnaiiral.salamat po bro.buddy.
Welcome buddy.
Hello, Atty! Thank you for taking the time to discuss this video in such a clear and straightforward manner.
Lesson #56 BATTLE OF THE LAWYERS ON ANGEL’S COMMUNITY PANTRY
BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS OF LAWYERS (Angel’s Community Pantry)
• Is Angel Locsin liable?
• According to Dean Mel Sta. Maria, Angel Locsin is not liable because she had no intention of causing the death of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz and there was no negligence. He stated that Angel Locsin is not liable at all. There is no crime when there is no criminal mind. Neither was their negligence in putting up a table as a community pantry. The table and the food were just there to be approached. There was even no accident due to any action by Angel Locsin. There is just absolutely nothing to make Angel Locsin liable. Being merely an organizer does not equate to liability.
√ It only means that Angel Locsin is not liable, whether it is an intentional or unintentional crime.
• Atty. Trixie Cruz-Angeles stated that, according to Article 12 of RPC, there are two (2) kinds of crime: First is intentional, (a) due to minority, and (b) mental stability. The second is, reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Because you are liable for even the UNINTENDED consequences of your actions
• Is Angel Locsin liable in reckless imprudence resulting in homicide?
√ It depends on the evidence.
√ PS. In any case, there is civil liability even if there is no criminal liability, if damage has occurred, but in this case, it is clear that there is.
• Atty. Libayan has 3 main points of his legal opinion with regards to this particular issue.
First, he tried to counterargue with Dean Mel and Atty. Trixie's legal analysis. Second, Malum Prohibitum means, offense prohibited by statute whether intentional or not. And third is, Article 100, RPC which includes the Criminal and Civil Liability.
• According to Atty. Jeffrey Bajita, Angel Locsin is not criminally liable. Based on Article 3 of RPC, there are two (2) kinds of felonies: DOLO (intentional) and CULPA (not intentional). The intentional crime is not visible in the community pantry of Angel Locsin. Because she had no intention of committing a crime. The only issue is the CULPA or non-intentional crime. He stated that Angel Locsin is not liable whether an intentional or unintentional crime.
• In Article 365, RPC- Quasi Offense. Imprudence and negligence. - Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of Arresto mayor in its maximum period to prison correctional in its medium periods shall be imposed;
-Malum Prohibitum
Art.100, RPC Criminal and Civil Liability
√ However, Angel Locsin is not liable in this article, "Quasi-Offense or reckless imprudence or negligence resulting in homicide," because there must be a direct action indicating the offender or accused was negligent. For example, imagine a vehicle that is driving too fast and, as a result, causes an accident. In that situation, it is clear that the driver was reckless. But in Angel Locsin's case, she was not the direct cause of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz's death.
• Article 100, RPC where it states that every person criminally liable for a felony is civilly liable. But because Angel Locsin is not criminally liable, therefore she is not civilly liable according to this article.
• On the other hand, in Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi- Delict. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Code.
There are requirements to a person be held civil liable:
•Act or omission which causes damage to another.
- the death of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz during the community pantry.
•No pre-existing contractual relationship between the parties.
•Fault or negligence.
I like the way you explained the rules of law! I salute you to that!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 di nakakalito!😍
Thanks for appreciating buddy.
Salamat Atty ng pagbabahagi ng inyong kaalaman sa batas at ang
inyong legal na Opinyon at paliwanag hingil kay Miss Angel Locsin regarding Community Pantry kung may pananagutan ba o wala.
Walang anuman buddy. Share mo pang lagi ang ating mga vlogs para mapanood ng mas maraming tao.
Good day Atty! Thank you for another informative video. I didn't know about the issue regarding angel locsin. Thank for a clear explanation regarding rules of law. Thank you atty!
Good day Atty. Bajita
Thank you for sharing this informative video, I've learned a lot today about clarifying the different legal opinions and analyses with regard to this particular issue.
Good day Sir. Thank you for video for this day. I learned that Ms Angel Locsin is not criminal liable (DOLO) or don't have any intention to kill someone or to make damages because more people believe that her aims is to help someone who needed it. I also learned that there have two ways to commit crime which are DOLO (intentional) and CULPA (unintentional). Godbless always Atty.
#JusticeBuddy
#EACCaviteCriminology
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Loud and clear Atty buddy , Thank you atty , Dami ko nalaman .
Maliwanag Po
God bless you more 🙏
Thanks be to God.
GOOD DAY ATTY.
I HAVE SO MUCH TO LEARN ABOUT THIS DISCUSSION OF YOURS, THANK YOU ATTY.
LESSON #56
BATTLE OF THE LAWYERS, ON ANGEL LOCSIN, COMMUNITY PANTRY.
Other lawyers give their opinions, and saying regarding Ms, Angel LOCSIN case, their legal basis or opinions almost the same. That Ms Angel was not liable in any case.
But some lawyer's say no, they are against and discussing that Ms Angel LOCSIN shall face or liable in certain criminal case.
First point Ms. Angel LOCSIN would not liable for any criminal case.
Because no intentionally to do this crime so, also known as DOLO.
MS. ANGEL LOCSIN ALSO DIDN'T COMMIT ANY RECKLESS NEGLIGENCE AND IMPRUDENCE. REGARDING TO COMMUNITY PANTRY.
MS. ANGEL also wouldn't liable in reckless negligence or imprudence, because she didn't do anything present or proves that she intentionally neglected something for the worst matter happen. She is not directly neglect or cause of death of Mr. Rolando delacruz.
Going to MALUM PROHIBITUM.
WETHER YOU ARE INTENTIONING OR NOT YOU WOULD FACE THIS MALUM PROHIBITUM. DEPENDS WHEN IT HAS DIRECTLY CRIME.
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITY.
PAG MAY PANANAGUTANG KRIMINAL KAALYADO NG PANANAGUTANG SIBIL.
AS GENERAL RULE IF THERE'S NO CRIMINAL OBLIGATION THERE'S NO ANY CIVIL OBLIGATION.
EXEMPTION: ACCORDING TO RA, 9334 ALSO KNOWN AS MINOR AGE.
BUT ALSO HAD CIVIL LIABILITY.
Revised penal code.
No civil liabilities and criminal liability at
365 revise penal code.
But in 2176 revised penal code. it has possibility.
There something dictates which is the evidence to prove it has fault or negligence.
Quasi delict- civil liabilities when it has fault or negligence.
Evidences is a must not just a comments of any netizens. Legal basis and reliable source not any just opinion.
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT THINGS I'VE LEARN IS THIS VIDEO WOULDN'T BATTLE OF THE LAWYERS, BUT BATTLE OF THE EVIDENCES, AND LEGAL BASIS.
#JUSTICEBUDDY
#BSUARASOF
Good day Atty. Thank you for sharing us a very informative video you shared with us. We are so lucky to have a professor who is knowledgeable and excellent in explaining every inquiries in the simplest way. Through this vlog, I was able to understand that it's not the battle of the knowledge of the lawyers but the battle of their legal opinions. Also, it enlightened me about the criminal and civil liability. There is no civil liability if there is no criminal liability since civil liability is rooted to criminal liability. Again, thank you so much Atty. God bless you po.
Ang linaw nman,edi ung hindi pgsunod sa mga protocols at sya ang organizer
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Thanks sir atty sa legal opinion dagdag kaalaman po sa Amin. Godbless po sir
LESSON #56
Another amazing discussion with our very own Atty. Jeffrey Bajita.
Thank you for using your knowledge to educate many students like me. For putting effort to refreshing this topic.
BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS REGARDING TO ANGEL LOCSIN'S ISSUE.
A very understandable discussion about the clarifying of different perspective of attorneys. As per this video, this case is not criminally liable. Ms. Angel Locsin is not guilty of a crime, because no direct liability occurred.
Under Article 3 of The Revised Penal Code, Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo-intenional) but also by means of fault (culpa-not intenional). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
This case will not fall under Article 365, RPC-Quasi-Offense unless it has direct negligence on the part of the victim. According to the legal opinion of our Justice Buddy Atty. Bajita, this will not counted in Civil Liability in this case and if there's possible occurrence it will fall under Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi-Delict. This is the possible liability. The following elements are :
- Act or omission causes damage to another.
- No pre-existing contractual relations.
Malum prohibitum
- An act which is immoral because it is illegal; not necessarily illegal because it is immoral.
#JusticeBuddy
#BSUARASOF
Thanks sa inyong masusing 0aliwanag. Very interesting.‼️good luck.☺️
Welcome and thank you too buddy.
At dahil jan napasubscribed ako sau attorney...slamat sa maliwanag na eksplinasyon....
marame po akong natutunan sa on line thank you atty Jeff
Thanks for watching and sharing buddy. 👍
Thank you po atty sa paliwanag. Sa kaso ni angel locsin inembitahan sa pagpopost sa social media ang mga tao pumunta sa comm pantry nya.. doon palang sya na ang nag drive para pumunta ang mga tao sa comm pantry nya.. pasok sa not intentional.
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Salamat po. Maliwanag po ang explanation,, very informative po.
Thanks buddy.
Di ba direktang pagpapabaya din yung hindi sya nakipag coordinate sa Munisipyo at barangay?
Ang alam ko kung sino ang nag organize sya ang may pananagutan kung walang pantry ni angel walang casualty basahin mo ito
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
pero my iatf protocol po.. iba ang sitwayson ngaun dhil my pandemic.. alam nia di pede ang gatherings, my curfew pa.. pero she invited anyone sa mga tao.. di po ba kpabayaan na yan at pagka irresponsavle na..
sadya lang na gusto nya ipakita na matigas ulo nya.hindi marunong sumunod sa batas... kaya dapat na maparusahan xa.iba yung case nya sa pagkamatay ng tao kase pede nya bayaran ang pamilya nun, pero yung ginawa jya na paglabag sa batas na dapat mapanatili ang social distancing.
@@vanessaerese9532 yes. Hindi intentional pero nagresulta sa trahedya. Alam na may pandemic pero basta ituloy ang activity sabay magyaya sa social media. Dadagsa tlga ang tao. Kahit walng namatay, nagcause naman ng super spreader event. ang problema kasi laging reason is tumutulong lang naman. Kaya yun authorities minsan nagdadalawang isip ikondena kasi papangit image sa netizens/social media. Ang labanan now is ilan followers and likes. Kung marami kang followers, may immunity ka na sa punishment.
Hello, Atty! Thank you for taking the time to discuss this video in such a clear and straightforward manner. I learned from this film that all attorneys and lawyers are pals. Sharing your view is OK, but evaluating the opinions of others is not a smart idea on any given day. Although lawyers are highly unique in their own manner of expressing their thoughts, the purpose of those who wished to start a fight between them is not desirable.
#JusticeBuddy
#EACCaviteCriminology
Tama po kayo. Atty. Libayan.. Ang galing niyo po.. Saludo po ako sa inyo..
magaling ka mag himay sa bawat pag kakapaliwang atty.marami talagang mappulot na aral sayo.
Ang linaw ng explanation mo sir.... Hnd ko malilimutan sir nong nag review ako sa equipp tacloban... Hehe nagpapa music kanang mga anime para ma relax ang isipan namin😂.
Walang anuman buddy. Share mo pang lagi ang ating mga vlogs para mapanood ng mas maraming tao.
Kasuhan ang me kasalanan mahirap mn o mayaman.
Now ko Lang kayo napanood❤️thanks☺️
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Salamat at natututo kami tungkol sa mga bata..
Basic argument.
May butas talaga ang batas 😅
Kaya mong gawing ginto ang tanso at ginto sa tanso.
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Tingin ko kaya s'ya nagtayo n'un para ipamukha sa gobyerno na marami nangangailangan ng tulong, bitter pa rin kasi sa pagsasara ng abs-cbend. Dinahilan n'ya na lang na kasi B-day n'ya at gusto n'ya raw kuno tumulong sa mga taong na displace ng pandemic. Kala n'ya ganun ganun na lang ang paggawa ng ganun bagay lalo na if it involves a lot of people which might create a pandemonium along the way. Kahit hindi ako lawyer tingin ko meron s'yang criminal liability, lalo na during this times of pandemic, kung saan bawal ang pago-organize ng social gathering or anything to that effect w/c will attract or create mass gathering of the people, so much so when there are obvious violations of the safety protocols. Yung namatay wala s'ya liability dun, ung pago-organize lang ng ganitong uri ng mass gathering lalo na ng walang coordination sa authorities. Whether the intention is good or bad, but the mere fact that there are an on-going restrictions among the citizens to limit their activities and movements to avoid the further spread of the virus, is a culpable violation of the law. Dito sa Qatar, gawin mo 'yan at mag-organize ka lalo na ng ganyang karaming tao kahit mabuti pa intensyon mo, sigurado kulong ka right there and then, baka putol pa kamay mo in the end.
Korek! Ang dami ng healthworkers ang asar kay Angel. 2x na kasi niya ginawa yan. Una yung big rally nila sa abs. Parang wala siyang malasakit sa frontliners.
Nasusundan ko po atty dahil po,malinaw nman po ang inyong pagkakasabi.
Salamat buddy
Sana po meron din Battle of Legal opinion NG LAWYERS AT JUSTICES SA SC sa BBM CASE
Meron naman.. nde lang mahalaga mapag usapan..
Copy atty,ang galing ng paliwanag m,marami akong natutunan.bago mong tgasunod from davao city
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Salamat po sir saliwanag mo.God bless you always
May God bless you more buddy.
You're right attorney. Sapat at matibay na ebidensya ang labanan. Ang batas at korte lang mag decide if there is/are criminal or civil or both liabilities.
Salamat buddy.
Lesson #56
Battle of the Lawyers on Angel's Community Pantry:
Angel Locsin is it Liable on the circumstances of her Community Pantry at Quezon City?
There are two types or class, the intentional and unintentional.
Malum Prohibitum- it is an act that doesn't need if it is in tension or an intention if you did something wrong or against the law weather you you have intention or nothing so that it is classified as Malum Prohibitum.
Article 3 of Revised Penal Code
Dolo (Intentional)- it is something to do with intention to make an act that is planned and organize.
Culpa ( Unintentional)- it is something to do with not intentional like when the accidents in driver's. they are an intentional because it is accidents and no one want to happen that.
Art 365 RPC Quasi offense
Negligence Imprudence - Neglect on doing the right thing but in the case of Ange Locsin She didn't had negligent on her community pantry. Its like that she didn't expected the numbers of people who joined her community pantry. But in this case only the evidence will tell the truth on all times.
Angel Lovsin is not criminal liable because she doesn't have direct to neglected an accused.
Art 100, RPC - Criminal and Civil Liability
- Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.It is a root of criminal liability and the general rule is if it is not criminal liable so that she is not also a liable for civil. There is an exception in criminal liability like the teenagers who are below 15 years old are not qualified to sentence in jail.
But if the cases are only for civil liability if focuses on the damage that causes on the offended parties. In this case for Angel Locsin there have a civilly liable.
Art 2176 Civil Code- Quasi - Delict
- civil code of the Philippines. It talks about the civil damages.
Act or omission causes damage to another- In this cases there is a person who died in Community Pantry so that it has a civil damages
No pre-existing contractual relation- Angel Locsin doesn't have a direct contract or she doesn't know personally the person who died.
Fault or negligence- a wrong and neglecting of something but evidence will say that truth .
#JusticeBuddy
#BSUARASOF
malinaw po ang paliwanag mo atty J B.
yes ang galing ni atty magpaliwanag..
Salamat buddy.
Tama ka Justice Buddy battle of opinion lang iyan
Salamat sa panonood at pagshare buddy.
Nasundan atty. Ang galing po ng paliwanag.
Salamat buddy
Atty. malinaw na malinaw ang ganda ng paliwanag niyo
SALAMAT BUDDY.
Good day buddy. Thank you for wonderful discussion and clarifying to us different perspective of attorneys. very clear and understandable atty, very well said. And Ms. Angel Locsin does not have any liability since there is no direct intention to have violation
#JusticeBuddy
#EACCaviteCriminology
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
sana atty mag collab kayo ni atty.libayan salute sa lahat ng abogado .. nakakaentertain po talagang matuto sa batas salamat po atty
sana nga, kahit minsan lang. haha. tapos topic yung about kay ivana at anti-mendicancy law kasi they have their own opinions and maganda kung maririnig ng mga manonood yung sides nila at mawitness din sana kung paano nila pag-uusapan ito in a professional way
maganda yan para mag argumento sila ng live
Hello buddies.
Nice suggestion.
Okay ako makipag collab basta batas ang pag uusapan. 👍
Very well said Justice , Atty, Prop. Bajita ❤️❤️❤️❤️
Thanks buddy. Share mo pang lagi ang ating mga vlogs para mapanood ng mas maraming tao.
@@justicebuddy3154 yess po❤️❤️❤️
Can i share it to facebook?
Or Twitter
Dapat po ito ung pinapanood para magkaroon tayo ng kaalaman sa batas.1
Salamat sa pag endorso buddy.
Good day po Justice buddy atty Bajita. Thank you po sa panibagong lesson na mas lalo po naming naiintindihan sa inyong pag papaliwanag,
LESSON 56
Battle of the Lawyers on Community Pantry
Battle of Legal Opinions about Community Pantry of Angel Locsin .
Can Angel Locsin be held liable?
No. Angel Locsin is not at all responsible. When there is no criminal thought, there is no crime. There was no carelessness in erecting a table as a community pantry. The table and food were simply waiting to be approached. There was no accident as a result of Angel Locsin's actions. Angel Locsin can't be held responsible for anything. Being an organizer alone does not imply culpability. - Mel Sta Maria, Dean. It simply indicates that Angel Locsin is not responsible for any crime, whether intentional or inadvertent. Papasok ang irresponsible behavior that resulted in homicide. Because you are responsible for the repercussions of your actions, even if they are unintended. In this scenario, may civil liability po kahit walang criminal liability, kung mqy damage ma nangyari, malinawag na meron. -Atty Angeles, Trixie Cruz
Two forms of crimes the intentional and unintentional crime.
During the course of his live stream, Atty. Libayan tried to argue with Dean Mel and Atty. Trixie.
The Malum Prohibitum and the Art 100, RPC Criminal And Civil Liability were also mentioned by Atty. Libayan.
According to Attorney Bajita. There are two types of crimes in Bajita: DOLO (intentional) and CULPA (not intentional). The intentional crime is not visible in Angel Locsin's community pantry. Because she has no intention of committing a crime. The only problem is CULPA, which stands for non-intentional crime. Angel Locsin is not responsible for any crime, whether deliberate or inadvertent.
• Article 365, RPC- Quasi offense
365. Imprudence and negligence. - Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayorin its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium periods shall be imposed;
366. -Malum Prohibitum -an offense prohibited by statute but not inherently evil or wrong
367. -Art.100, RPC- Criminal and Civil Liability
368. Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
369. - Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi- Delict. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Code.
#JUSTICEBUDDY
#BSUARASOF
Ang galing ng paliwanag mo atty.
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Pero atty. How about the rules and law about SOP for pandemic
Gotcha Atty..You hit the target..kudos.
Thanks buddy.
LESSON #56
BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS REGARDING TO ANGEL LOCSIN'S ISSUE.
A very understandable discussion about the clarifying of different perspective of attorneys. As per this video, this case is not criminally liable. Ms. Angel Locsin is not guilty of a crime, because no direct liability occurred.
Under Article 3 of The Revised Penal Code, Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo-intenional) but also by means of fault (culpa-not intenional). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
This case will not fall under Article 365, RPC-Quasi-Offense unless it has direct negligence on the part of the victim. According to the legal opinion of our Justice Buddy Atty. Bajita, this will not counted in Civil Liability in this case and if there's possible occurrence it will fall under Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi-Delict. This is the possible liability. The following elements are :
➡️Act or omission causes damage to another.
➡️No pre-existing contractual relations.
Malum prohibitum
➡️An act which is immoral because it is illegal; not necessarily illegal because it is immoral.
#JusticeBuddy
#BSUARASOF
Attry..wla ba tlgang directang kpabayaan c angel??? Sample po...ikw ay isang jeepny driver. Ang inyung jeep ay minon lng seating capacity na 30..tpos my pasahiro na 100..anung gagawin sa 70? Ipilit isakay o pauwin? Pra hinde na madisgrasya..salamat po..
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Lesson #56 BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS REGARDING TO ANGEL LOCSIN'S ISSUE.
- A very understandable discussion about the clarifying of different perspective of attorneys. As per this video, this case is not criminally liable. Ms. Angel Locsin is not guilty of a crime, because no direct liability occurred. Under Article 3 of The Revised Penal Code, Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo-intenional) but also by means of fault (culpa-not intenional). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
- This case will not fall under Article 365, RPC-Quasi-Offense unless it has direct negligence on the part of the victim. According to the legal opinion of our Justice Buddy Atty. Bajita, this will not counted in Civil Liability in this case and if there's possible occurrence it will fall under Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi-Delict. This is the possible liability. The following elements are :
- Act or omission causes damage to another.
- No pre-existing contractual relations.
Malum prohibitum
- An act which is immoral because it is illegal; not necessarily illegal because it is immoral.
#BSUARASOF
#JusticeBuddy
Good job sir!
Akala ko po Justice kayo nung una kong mabasa.
Hahaha salamat buddy sa panonood.
Galing nyo po magpaliwanag...
Salamat buddy.
Good Day Atty. Thanks for this kinds of topics, recently issued. Ms. Angel Locsin is not guilty of a crime, as per this video, because no direct liability occurred. If the argument falls under Art. 365 of the amended penal code or a quasi-offense, she will be held criminally liable. And, under Art. 2176 of the civil code, or Quasi-Delict, if an offence causes harm to another and there are no pre-existing binding relationships. #JusticeBuddy #EacCaviteSchoolOfCriminology
Lesson #56 Battle of the Lawyers on Angel's Community Pantry:
There are two types or class, the intentional and unintentional. Malum Prohibitum- it is an act that doesn't need if it is in tension or an intention if you did something wrong or against the law weather you you have intention or nothing so that it is classified as Malum Prohibitum. Article 3 of Revised Penal Code Dolo (Intentional)- it is something to do with intention to make an act that is planned and organize. Culpa ( Unintentional)- it is something to do with not intentional like when the accidents in driver's. they are an intentional because it is accidents and no one want to happen that. Art 365 RPC Quasi offense Negligence Imprudence - Neglect on doing the right thing but in the case of Ange Locsin She didn't had negligent on her community pantry. Its like that she didn't expected the numbers of people who joined her community pantry. But in this case only the evidence will tell the truth on all times. Angel Lovsin is not criminal liable because she doesn't have direct to neglected an accused.
Art 100, RPC - Criminal and Civil Liability - Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.It is a root of criminal liability and the general rule is if it is not criminal liable so that she is not also a liable for civil. There is an exception in criminal liability like the teenagers who are below 15 years old are not qualified to sentence in jail. But if the cases are only for civil liability if focuses on the damage that causes on the offended parties. In this case for Angel Locsin there have a civilly liable.
Art 2176 Civil Code- Quasi - Delict - civil code of the Philippines. It talks about the civil damages.Act or omission causes damage to another- In this cases there is a person who died in Community Pantry so that it has a civil damages No pre-existing contractual relation- Angel Locsin doesn't have a direct contract or she doesn't know personally the person who died. Fault or negligence- a wrong and neglecting of something but evidence will say that truth . #JusticeBuddy
#BSUARASOF
ang galing ng paliwanag mo atty, salute to you sir, maliwanag at detalyado.. sir may suggestion lang ako( just disregard po kung uncomfortable ka atty, dahil i admire and salute you dahil sa matuwid at matalinong pananaw mo, not to mention na gustong gusto namin ang comedy na isinisingit mo to lighten up the discussion).. sana po atty, mabawasan ng konti ang lalim ng boses, para mas magaan ang dating sa listeners atty.. but then again, kung uncomfortable ka atty, ok lang po.. hanga pa din ako sayo bilang lawyer. more power po sir!
Salamat buddy. Pasensya na, ganito talaga ako magsalita. 😊
@@justicebuddy3154 thank you atty, the fact still remains, mahusay po kayo magpaliwanag.. will pray for you atty and will support your channel. god bless po.
Quasi delict-civil damages- Fault o negligence ,mahirap icontrol Ang tao 'matigas Ang ulo'kahit strict rules Ang ipatupad Group ni Angel,evidence ? big crowd but uncontrollable crowd so anong kasalanan ni Angel yan. Not guilty. Thank you Justice Buddy!
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Thank's atty justice Bajita
Bakit ang iba atty daldal nang daldal bunganga na bunganga gusto nila pakulong agad.
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
I enjoyed this video Atty! A glimpse sa nangyayari sa loob ng korte.😀
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Good Day Atty! Thank you for explaning about Community Pantry of Ms. Angel Locsin, different lawyers share their opinions about community pantries. Angel locsin is not liable for the caused of death of tatay Rolando Dela Cruz due to haved a community pantry Art.365 Quasi offense.
Dolo(Intentional )
Culpa(Not Intentional) Malum prohibitum(Illegal possession of firearms)
Art.100 RPC(Criminal and Civil Liability) (No Civil no Criminal Liability; exception is no criminal but with civil liability(art. 11 paragraph 4) Thankyou sir Godbless.
#JusticeBuddy
#EACCaviteCriminology
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Good day Atty. Thank you for sharing another knowledgeable lesson, I learned a lot in your very understandable discussion about clarifying the different legal opinions and analyses with regard to this particular issue.
Lesson #56 BATTLE OF THE LAWYERS ON ANGEL’S COMMUNITY PANTRY
BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS OF LAWYERS (Angel’s Community Pantry)
• Is Angel Locsin liable?
• According to Dean Mel Sta. Maria, Angel Locsin is not liable because she had no intention of causing the death of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz and there was no negligence. He stated that Angel Locsin is not liable at all. There is no crime when there is no criminal mind. Neither was their negligence in putting up a table as a community pantry. The table and the food were just there to be approached. There was even no accident due to any action by Angel Locsin. There is just absolutely nothing to make Angel Locsin liable. Being merely an organizer does not equate to liability.
√ It only means that Angel Locsin is not liable, whether it is an intentional or unintentional crime.
• Atty. Trixie Cruz-Angeles stated that, according to Article 12 of RPC, there are two (2) kinds of crime: First is intentional, (a) due to minority, and (b) mental stability. The second is, reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Because you are liable for even the UNINTENDED consequences of your actions
• Is Angel Locsin liable in reckless imprudence resulting in homicide?
√ It depends on the evidence.
√ PS. In any case, there is civil liability even if there is no criminal liability, if damage has occurred, but in this case, it is clear that there is.
• Atty. Libayan has 3 main points of his legal opinion with regards to this particular issue.
First, he tried to counterargue with Dean Mel and Atty. Trixie's legal analysis. Second, Malum Prohibitum means, offense prohibited by statute whether intentional or not. And third is, Article 100, RPC which includes the Criminal and Civil Liability.
• According to Atty. Jeffrey Bajita, Angel Locsin is not criminally liable. Based on Article 3 of RPC, there are two (2) kinds of felonies: DOLO (intentional) and CULPA (not intentional). The intentional crime is not visible in the community pantry of Angel Locsin. Because she had no intention of committing a crime. The only issue is the CULPA or non-intentional crime. He stated that Angel Locsin is not liable whether an intentional or unintentional crime.
• In Article 365, RPC- Quasi Offense. Imprudence and negligence. - Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of Arresto mayor in its maximum period to prison correctional in its medium periods shall be imposed;
-Malum Prohibitum
-Art.100, RPC- Criminal and Civil Liability
√ However, Angel Locsin is not liable in this article, "Quasi-Offense or reckless imprudence or negligence resulting in homicide," because there must be a direct action indicating the offender or accused was negligent. For example, imagine a vehicle that is driving too fast and, as a result, causes an accident. In that situation, it is clear that the driver was reckless. But in Angel Locsin's case, she was not the direct cause of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz's death.
• Article 100, RPC where it states that every person criminally liable for a felony is civilly liable. But because Angel Locsin is not criminally liable, therefore she is not civilly liable according to this article.
• On the other hand, in Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi- Delict. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Code.
There are requirements to a person be held civil liable:
•Act or omission which causes damage to another.
- the death of Mr. Rolando Dela Cruz during the community pantry.
•No pre-existing contractual relationship between the parties.
•Fault or negligence.
#JusticeBuddy
#BSUARASOF
Maganda po.. Bago lng.. I just. Subscribe. God bless u po at inggattts
Salamat sa panonood, pag subscribe at pagshare buddy.
Dba pagpapabaya yon atty? 300 lng pala bibigyan pero nag-invite sya sa kanyang social media accts. (million followers). natural dadagsain, imposible nmn n d nya aasahan yon, dba dapat may ginawa na syang paghahanda sakaling dagsain, tapos yong hnd rn pakikipagcoordinate sa mga kinauukulan, di rn ba masasabi yon na kakulangan o pagpapabaya?
I Mario marqueses agree with the opinion of atty. Mel ata. Maria wherein very well explain that angel locsin is not criminally liable due to not deliberate or otherwise negligence. Tnx Mario.
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Best professor ka Sir!salute!
Batas kasi natin nakapiring talaga, may nakita ng mali, kita na lahat wala pa din daw krimin, ilulusot at ilulusot pa din, allowing na sikat at may pera, condolence nlang po sa namatay, kunsensya nalang.
What i know about civil liability based on art 2176 (when proven), the penalty is more on damages which will be identified by the court. Am i correct?
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Walang derektang pagpapabaya pero kung walang ganun wala dapat ng yari
May liability tlga base sa article 2176 civil code quasi delict
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Npkalinaw po ng pliwanag ño atty.at nsundan ko ng husto
Salamat sa panonood buddy.
Galing mo atty..kaano ano mo si sec roque magka mukha mo at sa pagsasalita..sa panawnaw ko lang poh keep safe
Salamat buddy.
Hindi ko kaano-ano si Sec. Roque. Hehe
Dapat patas ang batas walang mahirap at walang mayaman
Tama ka buddy
nice malinaw po ..
Salamat buddy
yung di pag sunod po sa quarantine protocol ? di puwedeng batayan
Just an opinion atty. was she coordinated first to brgy captain nor pnp? Because she knew on her first stand, first wave to her fans as an artist that people conjested to see her. Especially this community pantry and she is an artist. And she need to follow the protocols on social distancing and to prioritize the señior ctzns, pregnants and PWDs. She knew what really happen in the first place what PINOYS do if their is/are artists, (Conjested) she need to face criminal charges!! She is not a kid anymore. She is adult enough.
As she an artist she needed to coordinated first in brgy because she knew what people do, if their is/are artists.
Anong sinasabi ni Atty sta Maria na walang kapabayaan??? Eh ano ang tawag sa hindi pagsunod sa social distancing, walang coordinasyon sa mga authority...
Ang Gling mo atty malinaw kuhang kuha nmin
Salamat buddy.
Malum prohibitum is one that refers to the revised penal code.
Pag civil po ba may vail?
LESSON #56
1. Battle of the Lawyers on Angel's Community Pantry
A. Angel Locsin is it Liable on the circumstances of her Community Pantry at Quezon City?
There are two types or class, the intentional and unintentional.
-Malum Prohibitum- it is an act that doesn't need if it is in tension or an intention if you did something wrong or against the law weather you have intention or nothing so that it is classified as Malum Prohibitum.
*Article 3 of Revised Penal Code*
1. Dolo (Intentional)
-it is something to do with intention to make an act that is planned and organize.
2. Culpa ( Unintentional)
- it is something to do with not intentional like when the accidents in driver's. they are an intentional because it is accidents and no one want to happen that.
* Art 365 RPC Quasi offense*
Negligence Imprudence - Neglect on doing the right thing but in the case of Ange Locsin She didn't had negligent on her community pantry. Its like that she didn't expected the numbers of people who joined her community pantry. But in this case only the evidence will tell the truth on all times. And Angel Locsin is not criminal liable because she doesn't have direct to neglected an accused.
* Art 100, RPC - Criminal and Civil Liability*
-Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.It is a root of criminal liability and the general rule is if it is not criminal liable so that she is not also a liable for civil. There is an exception in criminal liability like the teenagers who are below 15 years old are not qualified to sentence in jail.
But if the cases are only for civil liability if focuses on the damage that causes on the offended parties. In this case for Angel Locsin there have a civilly liable.
* Art 2176 Civil Code- Quasi - Delict*
• A civil code of the Philippines. It talks about the civil damages..
A. Act or omission causes damage to another
-In this cases there is a person who died in Community Pantry so that it has a civil damages
B. No pre-existing contractual relation
-Angel Locsin doesn't have a direct contract or she doesn't know personally the person who died.
- Fault or negligence- a wrong and neglecting of something but evidence will say that truth .
God bless u always idol Engel Locsin😍😍😍😍
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
Thank you Atty. Bajita for Lesson #56
BATTLE OF LEGAL OPINIONS ABOUT COMMUNITY PANTRY OF ANGEL LOCSIN
- Is Angel Locsin liable?
No. Angel Locsin is not liable at all. There is no crime when there us no criminal mind. Neither was there negligence in putting up a table as community pantry. The table and the food were just there to be approached. There was even no accident due to any action of Angel Locsin. There us just absolutely nothing to make Angel Locsin liable. Being merely an organizer does not equate to liability.
- Dean Mel Sta Maria
- Two forms of crimes the intentional and unintentional crime .
- Sa pangalawang pag pasok ang reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Because you are liable for even the UNINTENDED consequences of your action. - Atty Trixie
-During the course of his live stream, Atty. Libayan tried to counter argue with Dean Mel and Atty. Trixie.
-The Malum Prohibitum and the Art 100, RPC Criminal And Civil Liability were also mentioned by Atty. Libayan.
• According to Atty. Bajita, there are two forms of crimes the DOLO (intentional) and CULPA ( not intentional).The intentional crime is not visible in the community pantry of Angel Locsin. Because she has no intention of committing a crime.The only issue is the CULPA, or non -intentional crime. Angel Locsin is not liable whether Intentional or unintentional crime.
• Article 365, RPC- Quasi offense
-Imprudence and negligence. - Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayorin its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium periods shall be imposed;
-Malum Prohibitum -an offense prohibited by statute but not inherently evil or wrong is malum prohibitum and, therefore, does not demand mens rea.
-Art.100, RPC- Criminal and Civil Liability
368. Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
- Article 2176, Civil Code-Quasi- Delict. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this chapter.
Paano po kung may violation sa pinapasunod ng IATF like di pwede ang mass gathering, social distancing etc.?
Ibang isyu yan buddy.
Salamat sa panonood.
ayus atty. himay na himay
Share mo pang lagi ang ating mga vlogs para mapanood ng mas maraming tao.
Dapat bang pag argument pa yan? Isa lng ang totoo. Yun yung, you are responsible for all your actions. Yun lng.
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
nagpost xa sa kanyang social midia nag imbita xa sa kanyang millions followers anyone is welcome tapos 300 lang pala ang ipamimigay.
Hindi pupunta ang mga tao Kung alam nila 300 lng ang ipamimigay, , SINADYA ni ANGEL LOCSIN na DAGSAIN cya ng maraming tao. . Para ipa mukha sa gobyerno na maraming tao ppunta sa lugar nya. . KASALANAN ni ANGEL LOCSIN sa una at huli. . HAWA-HAWA na sa covid Walang paki alam si ANGEL kung may mamatay. .
LESSON #56
BATTLE of the LAWYERS on Angel's Community Pantry
•According to Article 3 of the Revised Penal Code, There are two (2) ways in committing an offense
• Dolo (Intentional)
• Culpa (not intentional)
• Malum Prohibitum - it commits a crime whether intentionally or not intentional
• Article 365, RPC - QUASI OFFENSE - It involves negligence and imprudence.
Angel Locsin is NOT LIABLE because she doesn't have direct negligence about the community pantry that she conducted.
According to Article 100, RPC Criminal and civil liability- Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
As a general rule, if there's no criminal liability therefore, there's also no civil liability.
Example of Exception: Article 11 ,(4) of RPC - Avoidance of greater evil or injury.
Civil Code of the Philippines: Article 2176, RPC Civil code - QUASI DELICT
Possible civil liability
1. Act or omission which causes damage to other
2. No pre- existing contractual relations
3. Fault or negligence
good job attorney your the best
Thanks buddy Zeny.
Napakalinaw po ng mga evidences na fault at negligence unang una Hindi nila na assist ang social distancing at pinaghintay nila ng matagal ang mga Tao wala silang pakialam sa paghihirap ng mga tao sa pila
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
One who is criminally liable is civilly liable.
Yon oh...Nebrija Ang argumento dapat isyo base hwag atakuhin Ang pagkatao NG isang tao.
Salamat sa panonood at komento buddy.
ang galeng nyo talaga atty Jeff
Salamat sa Dios ❤️