Baligod Law Office

Baligod Law Office Services Offered: Legal Consultation, Notary Public, Legal Representation, Draft Pleadings & Letters

01/06/2026

This June, the Philippines marks Judiciary Month, celebrating the 125th anniversary of the Supreme Court.

Declared under Presidential Proclamation No. 1265, s. 2026, the observance calls on government agencies, local government units, the private sector, and civil society to support and partake in the commemoration.

Established on June 11, 1901 through Act No. 136 of the Philippine Commission, the Supreme Court has stood as a pillar of justice—first led by Chief Justice Cayetano Arellano.

In line with this milestone year, the Court unveils a series of activities under the theme: “SC: 125 Years of Tradition and Innovation.”

Stay tuned for updates through the official social media channels of the Supreme Court.

12/05/2026

The has clarified that a contractor’s lack of tools, equipment, or machinery does not automatically amount to prohibited labor-only contracting when the contracted work does not require them.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC's Third Division held that MMA Competent Manpower & General Services, Inc. (MMA) is a legitimate job contractor and the employer of petitioners Richard Delera and Dionel Quiling.

MMA is a domestic corporation that offers human resource and support services to clients, including Philippine Foremost Milling Corp. (PFMC), which is involved in flour milling, and Amigo Logistics Corp. (Amigo), which manages logistics such as warehousing and trucking.

MMA assigned petitioners to PFMC and Amigo as feed mill bagger and pollard stacker, respectively. After they were reported for policy violations, MMA preventively suspended but later cleared them of charges.

PFMC and Amigo requested the petitioners’ reassignment. MMA initially had to place them on floating status, but later offered their reassignment to Cavite and Bataan, which they declined. They instead filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, claiming that MMA was a labor-only contractor and that they were regular employees of PFMC and Amigo.

The SC ruled that MMA, which had substantial funds of PHP 27 million, was a legitimate labor contractor even though it lacked tools, equipment, or machinery.

It distinguished between 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴, wherein employers may hire a contractor to perform specific jobs provided it has sufficient funds and tools, and prohibited 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿-𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴, where a contractor merely provides workers without having sufficient funds and tools, and the workers perform tasks directly related to the employer’s main business.

Citing the case of 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘳 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘗𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘊𝘰𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘷. 𝘉𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘨, which provides a limited exception where the work is merely supportive and does not require tools, the SC found that petitioners performed post-production tasks similar to packaging and storing, which merely supported PFMC’s and Amigo’s operations.

Since these duties do not require specialized machinery or technical expertise, the SC ruled that they could be contracted out even without major investment in tools or equipment.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=165353.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164807.

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

If you received a formal demand letter, it is important to know your rights, obligations and possible remedies before ta...
12/05/2026

If you received a formal demand letter, it is important to know your rights, obligations and possible remedies before taking action.

👇

07/05/2026

Pinawalang-sala ng ang isang lalaking nahaharap sa kasong violence against women and their children o VAWC dahil sa pagtanggi umano nitong magbigay ng suportang pinansiyal sa isang batang hindi napatunayang sa kanya. Iginiit nito na nagkakaroon lang ng legal na tungkulin na magbigay ng suportang pinansiyal matapos mapatunayan ang filiation o paternity o ugnayan ng isang anak sa kanyang ama.

Sa desisyong isinulat ni Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, binaliktad ng Ikatlong Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang mga hatol ng Regional Trial Court at Court of Appeals na unang nagdeklarang guilty ang akusado sa kasalanang economic abuse sa ilalim ng Republic Act No. 9262 o ang Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (Anti-VAWC Act).

Nagsampa ng reklamo ang isang babae laban sa kanyang dating kasintahan na inakusahan niyang tumatangging magbigay ng suportang pinansiyal para sa kanyang anak.

Patuloy na itinanggi ng akusado na siya ang ama sa katwirang ipinanganak ang bata walong buwan matapos ang huli nilang pagtatalik.

Sa paglilitis, iprinisinta ng babae ang birth certificate ng bata bilang ebidensya. Gayunpaman, ang bahaging nagsasaad ng pangalan ng ama ay minarkahan ng “N/A” at hindi nilagdaan. Inamin din ng babae na tumanggi ang akusado na magbigay ng suportang pinansiyal dahil nag-aalinlangan ito kung siya nga ang ama ng bata.

Sa pagbaliktad ng hatol sa akusado, ipinaliwanag ng Korte Suprema na para mahatulan ang isang tao sa kasalanang economic abuse sa ilalim ng Section 5(i) ng Anti-VAWC Act, dapat mapatunayan ng prosekusyon na: (1) ang biktima ay isang babae at/o kanyang anak; (2) ang babae ay asawa o kapareha ng akusado, o kaya ay isang taong may anak sa akusado; (3) tumanggi ang akusado na magbigay ng kailangang suportang pinansiyal; at (4) ang pagtanggi ay may layuning magdulot ng paghihirap sa isip o emosyon.

Sa kasong ito, nagpasya ang Korte Suprema na nabigo ang prosekusyon na patunayan ang dalawang mahahalagang elemento: na may anak ang akusado at ang babae, at ginawa para magdulot ng pinsalang sikolohikal ang pagtanggi sa pagbibigay ng suporta.

Dahil hindi napatunayan ang paternity ng akusado sa kasong ito, walang legal na obligasyon na magbigay ng suporta ang maaaring ipataw sa kanya.

Basahin ang press release sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164663.

Basahin ang Desisyon sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164655.

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.


Transfer of Title?Reminder 👇
28/04/2026

Transfer of Title?

Reminder 👇

📣📣 NOTARIAL SERVICES NOW AVAILABLEWe are open daily from 9AM - 6PMContact: 09951774669/baligod.lawoffice@gmail.comLocati...
27/04/2026

📣📣 NOTARIAL SERVICES NOW AVAILABLE

We are open daily from 9AM - 6PM

Contact: 09951774669/[email protected]

Location Near: Dangwa, Tinapayan, Saint Jude College, UST, SM San Lazaro

Congratulations!! 🎉🎉🥳
07/01/2026

Congratulations!! 🎉🎉🥳

To our Dear Clients, We look forward to supporting you even better in the year ahead. Sincerely, Baligod Law Office
05/01/2026

To our Dear Clients,

We look forward to supporting you even better in the year ahead.

Sincerely,

Baligod Law Office

📣📣
24/11/2025

📣📣

Court of Appeals Associate Justice Jose Lorenzo R. dela Rosa, a member of the Remedial Law Department of the Philippine Judicial Academy, discusses key issues on land titles and the steps buyers should take before acquiring properties in Episode 95: Protecting the Integrity of Land Titles.

What is a reconstituted title, and how is it different from the original title or the owner's duplicate? What remedies are available to buyers defrauded by sellers?

This week's podcast is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Facebook, and the website.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4NcLjdE0axrvAej7wGMueu?si=8BzkNdj4QIufZoL1glN-Ow

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ph/podcast/episode-95-protecting-the-integrity-of-land-titles/id1852172756?i=1000737742658

YouTube: https://youtu.be/KRcs30UAwwQ

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1MuvG4RZ8s/

SC website: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/podcasts/

‼️‼️
19/09/2025

‼️‼️

| The Supreme Court (SC) ruled that being irresponsible in doing household chores and taking care of children may be considered evidence of psychological incapacity to comply with marital obligations, a ground for nullification of marriage.

In a 13-page decision authored by Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan, the SC's Third Division has declared void from the beginning the marriage between Arnold Alfonso and Michelle Pamintuan-Alfonso on the ground of the latter's psychological incapacity as provided under Article 36 of the Family Code.

Arnold and Michelle were high school classmates. In 1997, or eight years after their graduation, they unexpectedly met. Since then, they have become close and regularly exchanged phone calls.

Despite being in a relationship with another man, Michelle often visited Arnold's apartment. Later on Michelle and Arnold spent the night at the latter's apartment, where the two engaged in unprotected sexual in*******se that resulted in Michelle's unexpected and unwanted pregnancy.

At first, Michelle was contemplating aborting the child, but Arnold convinced her otherwise and offered marriage. After the wedding, Michelle and Arnold resided at the parental house. They were blessed with three children.

A year later their relationship turned sour. Arnold noticed the changes in Michelle's behavior. Michelle would be verbally aggressive towards him, crying loudly to gain sympathy from their neighbors. She also refused to do household chores or care for their children, instead relying on her mother to fulfill her domestic responsibilities.

Arnold also observed that Michelle has a luxurious lifestyle, which caused her to obtain looming debts from various people. It reached the extent that Arnold's father paid Michelle's debt to save her from being sued.

Over time, Arnold felt Michelle's growing coldness towards him. Michelle disavowed fulfilling his sexual needs by making excuses that she is tired and not in the mood.

Sometime in 2010, Michelle informed Arnold that she had secured a job that required deployment to Bicol for one month. However, to his surprise, Arnold later learned that Michelle was having an affair with another man. Since then, Michelle has refused to communicate with him and their children.

This paved the way for Arnold to file a petition for nullification of their marriage on the ground of Michelle's psychological incapacity to fulfill her marital obligations.

Initially, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted the petition and nullified their marriage, but it was later reversed by the Court of Appeals. This prompted Arnold to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.

In granting Arnold's petition, the high court held that he was able to illustrate that the incapacity of Michelle was so grave or serious that it already impaired her from carrying out the required ordinary marital duties. It gave credence to the psychological report, which diagnosed Michelle with histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder.

The SC also emphasized that the incapacity of Michelle was incurable, as the pattern of persistent failure to assume her essential marital obligations was proven. It also took into account the instance where Michelle entered into an illicit affair with another man.

“In every marriage lies the vinculum juris—the juridical bond that unites the spouses in a legally and morally binding union governed by law. This vinculum juris imposes upon each spouse the essential marital obligations of mutual love, respect, fidelity, and support,” the Supreme Court said.

“Thus, in the present case, we hold that Michelle's psychological incapacity existed prior to and during the celebration of the marriage; the vinculum juris is deemed never to have validly arisen,” it added.

Address

Maria Cristina Street , Sampaloc
Manila
1008

Website

Alerts

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

Share

Category