MMSM Law Office

12/01/2026

FYI 📌

05/11/2025

FREE Affidavit of Loss for Cebu FLOOD Victims ⚖️

Many Cebuanos lost their IDs and documents due to the floods brought by Typhoon Tino. 🌀

Hence, MMSM Law Office is offering FREE affidavit drafting & notarization to help replace lost IDs, land titles, and other important documents.📜

Send a chat or email 📧 [email protected]
N.B. Affiant must come personally for notarization (per Notarial Practice Rules).

Standing with Cebu. Let’s rebuild together. 💙❤️
At the same time, we echo the people’s call for accountability and transparency in flood control and disaster response — because true recovery begins with responsibility. 💛🙏



📷ctto

03/10/2025

FREE Affidavit of Loss for Cebu Earthquake Survivors ⚖️

MMSM Law Office is offering FREE affidavit drafting & notarization to help replace lost IDs, land titles, or certificates.

Send a chat or email 📧 [email protected]

✅ Bring proof of residency & list of lost documents
✅ Affiant must come personally for notarization (per Notarial Practice Rules)

Standing with Cebu. Let’s rebuild together. 💙❤️💛

25/09/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that banks may be held liable for moral damages suffered by depositors due to negligence, even if there is no proof of bad faith or malice.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan, the SC’s Third Division ordered Banco de Oro (BDO) to pay Remedios and Angelita Antonino (Antoninos) the proceeds of their time deposit, including PHP 100,000 in moral damages.

The Antoninos, who are U.S. green card holders living abroad, made three time deposit placements totaling over USD 150,000 at BDO’s San Lorenzo Branch in Makati City (BDO San Lorenzo). They had an arrangement with the branch manager that if the deposits were not withdrawn at maturity, they would automatically roll over into interest-bearing savings accounts. The time deposit certificates (TDCs) were not redeemed and were stored in a Banco Filipino deposit box for safekeeping.

Later, Banco Filipino declared bankruptcy and was taken over by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC). It took the Antoninos some time to retrieve their TDCs from the PDIC.
BDO San Lorenzo then ceased operations and closed down without notifying the Antoninos, who only discovered the closure when they tried to withdraw their investments.

They sent several demand letters to BDO, but the bank claimed the deposits had already been withdrawn, citing a demand draft allegedly signed by Angelita. Angelita denied signing the document.

The Antoninos filed a complaint against BDO seeking payment of their time deposit placements.

Ruling in favor of the Antoninos, the SC cited Section 9 of BDO’s terms and conditions for time deposit placements, which requires the surrender of TDCs when withdrawing deposits. Since the Antoninos still had the certificates, the SC concluded that the funds were not withdrawn.

The SC noted that the PNP expert said the signature on the demand draft was likely forged. Immigration and passport records also showed Angelita could not have been in the country to sign the draft. Further, BDO failed to verify the identity of the person who withdrew the funds.

The SC held that these lapses showed BDO’s failure to exercise the required diligence, especially given the large amount involved.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=152203.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=152187.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

27/08/2025

The effectiveness of a special power of attorney (SPA) automatically ends with the death of the person who granted it, and any acts carried out by the agent afterward are void—except under narrow exceptions provided by law, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled.

Click the link in the comments for the full story.

27/08/2025

False Selling Price in Deed of Sale is Perjury |

Any willful and untruthful statement of facts under oath constitutes perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 11594 (2021). The penalty is prision mayor in its minimum period (6 years and 1 day to 8 years).

If committed by a public officer or employee, the penalty is imposed in its maximum period (7 years, 4 months and 1 day to 8 years), with an additional fine of up to PHP1,000,000 and perpetual absolute disqualification from holding any appointive or elective position in the government or any agency, entity, or instrumentality thereof.

📸 Atty. Phil Juris

09/08/2025

📌Please be informed and be aware!

I'm taking the necessary legal actions to stop this. Thank you! 🙏

15/07/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that hiding one’s homosexuality from a spouse can be considered fraud and may be used as a ground to annul a marriage.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC’s Second Division annulled the marriage of a woman whose husband concealed his homosexuality before they got married.

The couple met on social media. On their first date, the woman noticed that the man seemed distant. The man also avoided sitting beside her. When asked about this, the man said he was just shy and lacked confidence.

The two kept a long-distance relationship as the man worked overseas. Notwithstanding this, they got married two years later.

But the man continued to avoid intimacy and often started arguments to avoid his wife. Just two months after the wedding, he returned overseas and stopped communicating with her.

Later, the woman found magazines with half-naked and naked male models among her husband’s things. When she confronted him, he admitted that he was homosexual. The woman then filed for annulment of their marriage.

The SC ruled that the woman’s consent to the marriage was obtained through fraud, and that the marriage must be annulled on the ground of fraudulent concealment of sexuality, following Article 45(3) in relation to Article 46(4) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦.

Article 45 of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 states that a marriage can be annulled if one party’s consent was obtained through fraud, as long as the couple did not continue living together after discovering the fraud. Article 46 further specifies that hiding one’s homosexuality or lesbianism from a spouse is considered fraud.

The SC gave credence to the woman’s allegations, noting that the man’s admission and his unexplained silence when his sexuality was being questioned could not be ignored. It found that the husband intentionally hid his homosexuality to persuade the woman to stay and marry him.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/ywadbxwp.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://tinyurl.com/yjn9a89f.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

11/06/2025

In line with its Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations 2022-2027, the (SC) has amended the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (2004 Notarial Rules) to modernize and streamline notarial reporting.

In an En Banc Resolution in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, the SC approved amendments to the 2004 Notarial Rules, specifically on the submission of copies of notarial entries and instruments acknowledged by notaries public.

Under the Amended 2004 Notarial Rules, notaries public are now required to keep in portable document format (PDF) the certified copy of each month’s notarial entries and the duplicate original copy of instruments acknowledged before them.

These should be emailed to the clerk of court within the first 10 days of the following month using the notary public’s official email address. If there are no entries for the month, a formal statement confirming this must be submitted instead.

All PDF files must be sent as direct attachments to the transmittal email. They must not be submitted as external links to cloud storage, file-sharing platforms, or similar sites. PDF files should not be compressed into archive formats such as ZIP (.zip) or RAR (.rar), and must not require additional extraction or conversion prior to access.

Notaries are prohibited from charging any fees for digitizing, transmitting, or processing these documents.

Courts retaining electronic duplicate original copies of notarized documents are directed to conduct an inventory and assessment of these materials. A report on the results must be submitted to the Office of the Court Administrator, with a copy furnished to the SC’s Management Information Systems Office.

The Amended 2004 Notarial Rules was published on June 6, 2025, in two newspapers of general circulation and shall become effective 15 days from publication or on June 21, 2025.

Read the full text of the SC’s March 4, 2025 Resolution in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Re: 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, at https://tinyurl.com/bdzaatrx.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

15/05/2025