What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 4:30pm Tuesday 9am - 4:30pm Wednesday 9am - 4:30pm Thursday 9am - 4:30pm Friday 9am - 4:30pm

Conducto Law Office

Home
Philippines
Antipolo
Conducto Law Office

We welcome your inquiries and are ready to discuss how we can assist you.

We are a full-service law firm handling Litigation (Civil, Criminal, & Corporate), Notarization, Real Estate Transfer and Estate Tax, Family Law, Labor Law, Immigration, Business and Tax Consultancy, Data Privacy, and Regulatory Compliance For questions about our services, case evaluations, or to schedule a consultation, you can reach us at [email protected] or message us here on Facebook.

10/08/2026

#𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒖𝒄𝑻𝒐𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 #𝑳𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒍𝑼𝒑𝒅𝒂𝒕𝒆: 𝑺𝑪 𝑹𝒖𝒍𝒆𝒔: 𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑳𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒅 𝑫𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒆 𝑾𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝑳𝒐𝒕 𝑵𝒖𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑫𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒐𝒇 𝑺𝒂𝒍𝒆

In the case of 𝑺𝒑𝒐𝒖𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝑨𝒃𝒂𝒚, 𝑺𝒓. 𝒗. 𝑺𝒑𝒐𝒖𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝒀𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒈, 𝒆𝒕 𝒂𝒍., 𝑮.𝑹. 𝑵𝒐. 266298, 𝑫𝒆𝒄. 3, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that a person buys real property not by its technical lot number but as they see the property in its actual setting, with its visible monuments, boundaries, and improvements. The lot number appearing in the document of sale is not, by itself, determinative of the identity of the land conveyed. Ordinary persons, who are not knowledgeable in the science of surveying, cannot be expected to discern the identity of the land by its technical description and to determine the exact extent or location of the property just by examining a written instrument or land title.

Here, the Spouses Abay purchased a parcel of land from Crispin and the Gallardos, having in mind as Lot 7, which forms part of Lot 6012-E. However, after 20 years of possession, Spouses Young unlawfully entered the subject property, asserting they are the registered owner of the land as evidenced by the TCT. It was only during the course of the proceeding that it was discovered that Spouses Abay purchased Lot 6036-B, not the disputed Lot 7.

The Supreme Court further ruled that all the requisites of reformation are present in the case: (1) there must have been a meeting of the minds of the parties to the contract; (2) the instrument does not express the true intention of the parties; and (3) the failure of the instrument to express the true intention of the parties is due to mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct, or accident.

Follow us for more LEGAL updates!

07/08/2026

𝐃𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐁𝐈𝐑 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐫 𝐮𝐧𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲?

You may be eligible for the 𝐁𝐈𝐑'𝐬 𝐎𝐧𝐞-𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐱 𝐀𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦—but not every case qualifies.

Before taking any action, let us review your situation. A proper assessment today could save you significant time, penalties, and unnecessary costs.

Send 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐨 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞 a message for a consultation. We'd be happy to help.

05/08/2026

#𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒖𝒄𝑻𝒐𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 #𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒅𝑶𝒇𝑻𝒉𝒆𝑾𝒆𝒆𝒌: 𝑺𝒖𝒃 𝑱𝒖𝒅𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝑹𝒖𝒍𝒆

Sub Judice is a Latin term which refers to 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐚 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭; or 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. In essence, the sub judice rule restricts comments and disclosures pertaining to pending judicial proceedings. The restriction applies to litigants and witnesses, the public in general, and most especially to members of the Bar and the Bench. (𝑅𝑒: 𝑆ℎ𝑜𝑤 𝐶𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑂𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑀𝑎𝑦 11, 2019 𝑖𝑛 𝐺.𝑅. 𝑁𝑜. 237428 [𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑣. 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑜], 𝐴.𝑀. 𝑁𝑜. 18-06-01-𝑆𝐶, 17 𝐽𝑢𝑙𝑦 2018)

Under the sub judice rule in 𝐒𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝟗 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐈 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐏𝐑𝐀𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭, lawyers are prohibited from using any forum or medium to comment or publicize opinion pertaining to a pending proceeding before any court, tribunal, or other government agency that may:

1) cause a pre-judgment, or
2) sway public perception so as to impede, obstruct, or influence the decision of such court, tribunal, or other govenm1ent agency, or which tends to tarnish the court’s or tribunal’s integrity, or
3) impute improper motives against any of its members, or
4) create a widespread perception of guilt or innocence before a final decision.

Any person who would violate this rule may be liable for 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭 under Sec. 3(d), Rule 71 of the Rules of Court.

03/08/2026

Recently, our Senior Partner 𝐀𝐭𝐭𝐲. 𝐑𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐨 𝐈𝐈 was invited by the Quezon City Sangguniang Panlungsod to deliver a seminar entitled: “𝐂𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐎𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐁𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐲 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐬”.

The session was attended and participated by legislative officers from the different offices of councilors of Quezon City, and employees and officials of the Office of the Secretary to the Sanggunian Panlungsod of Quezon City.

In his lecture, Atty. Conducto discussed the legal and practical advantages of codifying piecemeal yet related ordinances as well as the steps in codifying them, specifically the best practices in other jurisdictions. In his lecture, he emphasized that "the process of codification is not simply copy-pasting or collating all the existing ordinances but more complex than that to ensure a cohesive body of law." Through actual examples, participants appreciated the principles and concepts discussed to improve local governance and legislative challenges.

Beyond private practice, Atty. Conducto is a distinguished academic and bar review lecturer, specializing in Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Local Government Law, Election Law, Law on Public Officers, and Public International Law across top law schools nationwide. His continuous engagement with local government units reflects a deep commitment to private and public sector governance.

At 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐨 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞, we remain dedicated to advancing legal excellence, whether in private practice or in the public community.

31/07/2026

: 𝐑𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐦 𝐃𝐫𝐮𝐠 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐞𝐬: 𝐕𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐍𝐨𝐭?

In the Philippines, the right to privacy and the protection against unreasonable searches are fundamental guarantees enshrined in our Bill of Rights. However, these rights are not absolute, as they must be balanced with the State’s compelling interest in regulating and promoting the general welfare of the populace.

To comprehensively answer this question, we take a look at the governing mandates of 𝐑.𝐀. 𝟗𝟏𝟔𝟓, the case of 𝑺𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝑱𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝑺𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒕𝒚 𝒗𝒔. 𝑫𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒔 𝑫𝒓𝒖𝒈 𝑩𝒐𝒂𝒓𝒅 (G.R. No 157870, November 3, 2008), and the compliance standards set forth in 𝐃𝐎𝐋𝐄 𝐃𝐎 𝐍𝐨. 𝟓𝟑-𝟎𝟑. Together, we shall arrive at the precise parameters of whether random drug testing is valid or not.

Consistent with the government’s aim of stamping out illegal drug in the country and protecting the well-being of the citizens, random drug testing is 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐝, provided that the testing schedules must be unannounced and ensuring that no biases were observed in selecting the employees. Employers are mandated to maintain absolute confidentiality regarding test results and identities. In the above case, the Court ruled Section 36(d) of R.A. 9165 as constitutional and upheld random drug testing for officers and employees. The law intends to achieve this through the medium, among others, of promoting and resolutely pursuing a national drug abuse policy in the workplace via a mandatory random drug test. Accordingly, the need for drug testing to at least minimize illegal drug use is substantial enough to override the individual's privacy interest under the premises.

Considering the foregoing factors, the reduced expectation of privacy on the part of the employees, the compelling state, and the well-defined limits set forth in the law to properly guide authorities in the conduct of the random testing, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐫𝐮𝐠 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞.

In sum, the validity of random drug testing does not grant the unrestricted intrusion to employees’ right of privacy and unreasonable searches, but rather a regulated measure to protect overall well-being and maintain a drug-free workplace.

29/07/2026

: 𝐑𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐥

The 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐥 is not by any means a perfected contract of sale of real property. At best, it is a 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭, not of the sale of the real property involved, but of the right of the first refusal over the property sought be sold. (𝘙𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘳 𝘋𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘷. 𝘐𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘨 (G.R. No. 140479, March 8, 2001)

The grant must be clear, unequivocal, in writing, and period to exercise is determined. Otherwise, the owner is then allowed to sell the property to another without any liabilities for damages.

It is a common provision stipulated in lease agreements, granting the tenant the first right to buy the leased premises; and in corporate shareholder agreements, granting existing stockholders the first right to purchase shares before offering to outsiders.

27/07/2026

#𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐓𝐨𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 #𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥𝐔𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞: 𝐒𝐂: 𝐀 𝐋𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐚 𝐁𝐮𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐔𝐬𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐓𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥

In the recent case of City of Koronadal, et al. v. Yellow Bus Lines, Inc., G.R. No. 265769, August 12, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that preventing the Yellow Bus Lines Inc, from using its private terminals and charging if for the use of the CKITTC are outright oppressive and confiscatory. It is a violation of their property rights, which cannot be allowed under the guise of performing the local government unit’s duty to its inhabitants under the general welfare clause.

In the present case, following the appointment of the City of Koronadal as the Administrative Seat of Region XII, it passed Ordinance No. 9, series of 2018, creating the City of Koronadal Integrated Transport Terminal Complex (CKITTC) to provide efficient transportation facilities so as to reduce traffic congestion and pollution from vehicular emissions in the city’s business center. Accordingly, Yellow Bus Lines Inc., who have its own private terminals, was forced to use and pay terminal fee for each entry to the CKITTC, resulting to the filing of complaint for injunction against Koronadal City et al.

The Koronadal City et al countered that the issued business permit for Yellow Bus’s use of its own private terminal was before the implementation of the centralized public terminal. Both RTC and CA ruled in favor of Yellow Bus.

The Supreme Court found that both requisites for an injunction to prosper are present in the case: (1) there must be a right to be protected and (2) the acts against which the injunction is to be directed are violative of said right. Hence, the petition is denied. The complaint for injunction is granted and enjoined the City of Koronadal from blocking and rerouting the buses of Yellow Bus Lines and requiring it to use the CKITTC.

Follow for more latest jurisprudence.

24/07/2026

: 𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐁𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭?

At its core, a contract is a meeting of minds between two persons whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other, to give something or to render some service (Article 1305, New Civil Code). Stated differently, a contract is born the moment there is a concurrence of consent, determinate object, and a valid consideration.

That brings us to the question – can a verbal agreement be enforced in court?

For as long as the aforementioned requisites are present, such contracts shall be obligatory, in 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 (Article 1356). In effect, oral or verbal agreements have the force and effect similar to a written contract.

However, while a verbal contract may be valid, it can hardly be enforceable in courts if it falls within the purview of Article 1403, paragraph 2, otherwise known as the Statute of Frauds, where it is required for agreements to be enforceable, that they must be in writing and subscribed by the party. These include: (i) terms not to be performed within a year from the making; (ii) special promise to answer for debt; (iii) made in consideration of marriage; (iv) sale of goods not less than Php500; (v) leasing for more than one year; and (vi) representation as to credit of a third person.

But, how can we invoke enforceability of a verbal agreement?

Considering that no written documentation is present, the party seeking to enforce the verbal agreement bears the burden to prove its existence by presenting witness testimony establishing the actions of the parties, and electronic communications referencing the terms of the agreement.

Ultimately, the enforceability of a verbal contract does not depend on its form, but on the capacity of the claimant to discharge the burden of proof. While reducing an agreement to writing remains the most prudent course of action to ensure legal certainty, a verbal contract remains a fully actionable obligation when backed by competent and admissible proof.

23/07/2026

Today, the entire team of Conducto Law Office comes together to celebrate the birthday of our 𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳, 𝐀𝐭𝐭𝐲. 𝐊𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐏𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐂𝐫𝐮𝐳!

Under your stellar leadership and steadfast commitment to excellence, our Firm continues to reach new heights. Thank you for leading us with such grace, wisdom, and strength. Your dedication to integrity and invaluable mentorship inspires us to pursue success.

Wishing you a wonderful year filled with joy, peace, and prosperity. Happy birthday Atty. Pau!

22/07/2026

#𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐓𝐨𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 #𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐎𝐟𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐖𝐞𝐞𝐤: 𝐔𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐖𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡

𝑼𝒏𝒆𝒙𝒑𝒍𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒅 𝒘𝒆𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒉 is an amount of property and or money 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 to his salary and to his other lawful income. Properties in the name of the spouse and dependents of such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits in the name of or manifestly excessive expenditures incurred by the public official, his spouse or any of their dependents including but not limited to activities in any club or association or any ostentatious display of wealth including frequent travel abroad of a non-official character by any public official when such activities entail expenses evidently out of proportion to legitimate income. (Section 8 of R.A. 3019 as amended)

A public official who has been found to have an unexplained wealth shall be subject to administrative suspension for an indefinite period until the investigation wealth is completed.

Stay tuned for more information.

&CorruptPractices

Address

2nd Floor, Madrid Building, 88 M. L. Quezon Street
Antipolo
1870

Opening Hours

Monday	9am - 4:30pm
Tuesday	9am - 4:30pm
Wednesday	9am - 4:30pm
Thursday	9am - 4:30pm
Friday	9am - 4:30pm

Website

https://conductolaw.com/

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Conducto Law Office posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Want your practice to be the top-listed Law Practice in Antipolo?