Baes Villarin Gonzales Ampong Servacio & Quisaot Law Offices

26/12/2025

Discussing trial strategy and legal theory with our boss PBL

04/08/2025

ESTATE TAX is different from REAL PROPERTY TAX

REAL PROPERTY tax, is a yearly tax imposed by a local government unit on land and buildings based on their assessed value, and is paid annually by property owners to fund local services. This is paid to the City or Municipal government.

In contrast, ESTATE tax is a one-time tax levied by the national government on the transfer of a deceased person’s assets to their heirs, based on the net value of the estate at the time of death. While real estate tax is tied to ownership of property, estate tax arises only upon death and applies to the total value of the decedent’s assets, including but not limited to real property. This tax must be paid to the BIR within one year after the death of the decedent.

04/08/2025

The (SC) has clarified that being listed in a corporation’s General Information Sheet (GIS) is not enough to prove someone is a stockholder.

In a Resolution written by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the SC’s First Division granted a motion for reconsideration of its earlier Decision and ruled that Ma. Christina Patricia C. Lopez (Christina) and John Rusty Lito Lopez (John Rusty) are not stockholders of LC Lopez and Conqueror, despite being listed in the companies’ GIS submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The case stemmed from special stockholders’ meetings held by the two companies to elect new board members. Christina and John Rusty sent proxies to participate, but the companies rejected them, stating that their principals were not registered stockholders. The meetings proceeded, and new directors were elected.

Christina and John Rusty challenged the elections before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), arguing that their exclusion invalidated the election due to a lack of quorum. The RTC ruled in their favor, relying on the GIS as proof of their stockholder status.

However, the Court of Appeals reversed the RTC’s decision, pointing out that their names did not appear in the companies’ stock and transfer books.

The SC initially upheld the RTC’s decision, considering the GIS and witness testimonies as sufficient evidence. Respondent board of directors, however, moved for reconsideration.

In granting the motion, the SC clarified that the stock and transfer book is the primary and official record of a corporation’s stockholders. A person must also present a stock certification issued in their name to prove ownership of shares.

Under Section 62 of the Revised Corporation Code, a transfer of shares is not valid—except between the parties—until it is properly recorded in the company's books.

The SC ruled that being listed in the GIS does not make one a stockholder, and that the stock and transfer book prevails.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/35m52bke.

Read the full text of the Resolution at https://tinyurl.com/5n75bf7s.

Read the Dissenting Opinion of Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario at https://tinyurl.com/a5jwrd4d.

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

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/.

22/05/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that the children remain legitimate even if their parents’ marriage is later declared null and void due to psychological incapacity.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the SC’s Second Division modified the ruling of a Regional Trial Court (RTC) that declared a child illegitimate following the nullity of her parents’ marriage.

The child was born several months before the couple got married. During the marriage, the wife experienced physical, emotional, and verbal abuse from her husband, who himself struggled with alcohol addiction, gambling, and infidelity.

This prompted the wife to file a petition to nullify their marriage, which the RTC granted, declaring the marriage void due to the husband’s psychological incapacity.

However, the RTC also declared their child illegitimate since she was born before their marriage, and her birth certificate did not show she had been legitimated.

The SC affirmed that the marriage was void, but ruled that the child remains legitimate.

The general rule is that when a marriage is nullified, the child is considered illegitimate from the time they were conceived.

However, the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 allows exceptions, such as when the marriage is nullified due to psychological incapacity. This applies whether the child was born before or during the marriage.

The SC emphasized that once a child is legitimated under the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦, there is no legal basis for changing their status back to illegitimate. Allowing this would go against the law’s intent to protect the child’s best interests.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/4yrkc82r.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://tinyurl.com/c673ywxs.

Read the Concurring Opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at https://tinyurl.com/mrx3swc7.

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

09/04/2025

6th Placer of the 2022 Philippine Bar Exams is a TRISKELION!
CONGRATULATIONS Bro. Atty. Gabriel Gil Manlabus Baes (Milaflor Chapter, Calbayog City Council) from University of San Carlos Cebu. A native of Calbayog City.
Salute!

05/04/2025

04/04/2025

ESTATE TAX AMNESTY EXTENDED HANGGANG JUNE 14, 2025!

Mayroon ka bang minanang ari-arian na hindi mailipat sa pangalan mo o maibenta dahil sa hindi mabayarang buwis?

Ngayon na ang tamang panahon para maayos ito sa pamamagitan ng Estate Tax Amnesty (per Republic Act No. 11213 or Tax Amnesty Act, as amended by RA Nos. 11569 and 11956)

Mga Benepisyo:
6% TAX LANG ANG BABAYARAN
WALANG BABAYARANG PENALTIES

Maaaring makita ang karagdagang impormasyon tungkol dito sa nilabas na Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 10-2023 na makikita sa BIR website sa link na ito: https://bit.ly/RR10-2023

03/04/2025

The has taken an important step towards modernizing legal processes by approving the Rules on Electronic Notarization (E-Notarization Rules) – a significant reform that leverages technology to make notarial services more accessible and efficient nationwide.

Under A.M. No. 24-10-14-SC, the Supreme Court En Banc approved the E-Notarization Rules and the Guidelines on the Accreditation of Electronic Notarization Facility Providers (Accreditation Guidelines). These rules introduce Electronic Notaries Public (ENPs), who are authorized to perform notarial acts for individuals located anywhere in the Philippines and, in certain cases, even abroad.

This expanded jurisdiction addresses a key limitation of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (2004 Notarial Rules), where traditional notaries public were restricted to performing notarizations only within their territorial jurisdiction. By allowing ENPs to provide services across the country, the new rules ensure greater accessibility, particularly for those in remote or underserved areas.

The updated framework enables 3 forms of electronic notarization:
- In-Person Electronic Notarization (both principals and witnesses must be physically present)
- Remote Electronic Notarization (principals and witnesses may connect virtually to ENP via videoconferencing)
- Mixed In-Person and Remote

To enhance security, the E-Notarization Rules implements Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) such as facial recognition, biometrics, and one-time passwords, in compliance with regulations set by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. The integrity of the electronic notarial book, or the register showing the chronological record of electronic notarial acts, is also safeguarded against tampering. Additionally, all data stored in the ENFs are protected under the Data Privacy Act.

The E-Notarization Rules applies exclusively to electronic documents in Portable Document Format (PDF) or Portable Document Format Archival (PDF/A). Paper documents with handwritten signatures, notarial wills, and depositions will continue to follow the 2004 Notarial Rules.

A part of the Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations 2022-2027 (SPJI), this initiative aligns with the Supreme Court’s commitment to innovation and expanded access to justice by allowing notarization for electronic documents, including remote notarization through accredited software applications. This reform supplements the traditional mode of notarization under the 2004 Notarial Rules and marks a key milestone in the Court’s ongoing digital transformation.

The E-Notarization Rules takes effect 15 days after its publication on March 9, 2025.

Read the press release in full at https://tinyurl.com/5e9e7h4a.

Read the full text of A.M. No. 24-10-14-SC, Rules on Electronic Notarization, at https://tinyurl.com/55zvmbrf.

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