Want To Acquire A Real Estate License
On the rewarding side is the client that has been underserved by other brokers and in some way comes to you for assist. The Court stated that whereas it could appear that the letter was written by petitioner out of his social responsibility to a member of the affiliation which he heads, and was written to respondent as a reply to the latter’s demand letter sent to a member, however, a studying of the topic letter-reply addressed to respondent does not present any rationalization concerning the standing of Mrs. Quingco and why she is entitled to the premises as towards the claim of respondent’s client. In utilizing words corresponding to “lousy”, “inutile”, “carabao English”, “stupidity”, and “satan”, the letter, as it was written, casts aspersion on the character, integrity and status of respondent as a lawyer which uncovered him to ridicule. The words as written had solely the impact of maligning respondent’s integrity as a lawyer, a lawyer who had served as legal officer within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for thus many years till his retirement and afterwards as guide of the identical company and also a notary public. Needless for you to cite particular provisions of the Revised Penal Code, as the same is irrelevant to the present case. This công ty xây dựng!
Applying by analogy the provisions of Administrative Circular No. 12-2000 and Administrative Circular 13-2001 which modified Administrative Circular No. 12-2000, which laid down a rule of desire in the application of the penalties provided for in B.P. Any of the imputations lined by Article 353 is defamatory; and, underneath the general rule laid down in Article 354, “every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if or not it’s true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it’s shown”. The Court held that for the reason that letter is just not a privileged communication, “malice is presumed” beneath Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code. Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code gives “every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even when it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it’s shown”, besides in the following cases: “(1) a private communication made by any individual to a different in the efficiency of any authorized, ethical, or social obligation; and (2) a fair and true report, made in good faith, with none feedback or remarks, of any judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings which aren’t of confidential nature, or of any statement, report, or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of some other act performed by public officers within the train of their functions”. version!
The Court stated that in an effort to show that a press release falls within the purview of a certified privileged communication underneath Article 354, No. 1, as claimed by petitioner, the following requisites should concur: (1) the one that made the communication had a authorized, moral, or social responsibility to make the communication, or at the very least, công ty thiết kế xây dựng had an interest to guard, which interest could either be his own or of the one to whom it is made; (2) the communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or superior, having some curiosity or obligation within the matter, and who has the ability to furnish the safety sought; and (3) the statements within the communication are made in good religion and with out malice. May we remind you that any attempt in your half to continue harassing the particular person of Mrs. Teresita Quingco of No. 1582 Mngo St., Bgy. The letter was crafted in an injurious means than what is necessary in answering a demand letter which uncovered respondent to public ridicule thus negating good religion and showing malicious intent on petitioner’s part. This article was created by công ty xây dựng!
He never knew respondent prior to the demand letter sent by the latter to Mrs. Quingco who then sought his help thereto. The Court was not persuaded by the argument of the petitioner that his letter was a personal communication made within the performance of his “moral and social obligation as the attorney-in-reality of the administrator of the Rodriguez estate” the place Mrs. Quingco is a recognized tenant and to whom respondent had written the demand letter to vacate, thus in the character of a privileged communication and never libelous. Gauging from the above-mentioned assessments, the words used within the letter dated August 18, 1995 despatched by petitioner to respondent is defamatory. The sufferer of the libelous letter was identifiable as the subject letter-reply was addressed to respondent himself. Petitioner’s subject letter-reply itself states that the identical was copy furnished to all involved. On that same day, Atty. Not personally understanding who the sender was, Atty.
