legal Free Legal Advice

[Dr_PepPeR]

Good morning Dr. pepper.. thanks for your reply.

 

The proponent suggested that these forfeited Marcos properties be sold back to the Marcoses so that BIR can generate billions of revenue from the transaction. Is that possible? It was of judicial notice that there was no interested bidder when they were auctioned off. She termed it as "the goose that lay the golden egg."

 

The conflict, as I understand it, is that all properties of the Marcoses are claimed to be "ill-gotten" by the PCGG so they were part of the sequestered lot, but as these Tacloban properties are ancestral properties, they should not be part of the sequestration. The proponent now questions the propriety of the sequestration power of the PCGG over the levy power of the BIR.

 

Pardon my ignorance but I assumed that the Tacloban properties were never sequestered by the PCGG. I remember the heady days when the PCGG was issuing sequestration orders right and left but if at this time they were left alone by the PCGG, then they would have a very weak case of going after the said properties or the proceeds of the sale of these properties.

 

In any case, I feel that the proceeds from the BIR levy, if ever the sale is realized, should properly go to the BIR and thus indirectly goes to the national government. The Marcoses could have bought it back from the auction sale, if they so desired. But I guess what you mean is do a negotiated sale back to the Marcoses. But maybe I digress. I submit that the levy power of the BIR takes precedence over the sequestration power of the PCGG IF A CONFLICT EXISTS. From what I read, there is no conflict at all with respect to the Tacloban properties. I think...

[rapturousone]

sorry,

ok, here's what I meant: Since I'm living here in the Philippines, Could I appoint someone; a friend or relative or even the american lawyer himself to represent me in order to file against the person who swindled me, whom is already an american citizen?

 

That would depend on the procedural law of the state where you will file the suit. First, you need to determine if you have the standing (i.e., whether under the laws of that state you have the right to file the suit). Second, you need to determine if under the laws of that state the suit can be filed and/or prosecuted in your absence.

[jopoc]

sorry,

ok, here's what I meant: Since I'm living here in the Philippines, Could I appoint someone; a friend or relative or even the american lawyer himself to represent me in order to file against the person who swindled me, whom is already an american citizen?

 

 

saan ka ba niloko?

[WayKurat]

try to downlod k-light codec pack

 

 

I downloaded the codec pack but i still can't open the file. any other suggestions?

 

Smoking Aces.DTS.NTSC.DVDR-XPDVD.avi this is the file I want to open. what program do I have to download to open the said file?

[rickyv]

salamat po, thank you.

[charmed shannen]

thank you Dr. Pepper. At least, i have another insight on the matter. Pag pina discuss sa akin ng boss ko ito, may masasabi ako. kaso lang, sana hindi ikaw ang boss ko

[fauxhead]

I disagree. If there is a conflict between a sequestration order and a BIR levy, the sequestration order should prevail.

 

Won't you agree that the BIR levy would be invalid and ineffective should these properties be deemed ill-gotten? Why should the government settle for just a slice when it can take the whole goddamned cake? If they are deemed ill-gotten, then they are not supposed to be part of the estate. Thus, until the issue of sequestration be ventilated and clarified in the proper judicial forum, the BIR's claim should be suspended. In effect, the BIR can make a reassessment of the estate tax should the courts decide that the property is not ill-gotten.

 

 

 

Pardon my ignorance but I assumed that the Tacloban properties were never sequestered by the PCGG. I remember the heady days when the PCGG was issuing sequestration orders right and left but if at this time they were left alone by the PCGG, then they would have a very weak case of going after the said properties or the proceeds of the sale of these properties.

 

In any case, I feel that the proceeds from the BIR levy, if ever the sale is realized, should properly go to the BIR and thus indirectly goes to the national government. The Marcoses could have bought it back from the auction sale, if they so desired. But I guess what you mean is do a negotiated sale back to the Marcoses. But maybe I digress. I submit that the levy power of the BIR takes precedence over the sequestration power of the PCGG IF A CONFLICT EXISTS. From what I read, there is no conflict at all with respect to the Tacloban properties. I think...

[WayKurat]

anybody? please with opening these files.

[Kurtsky Keigee]

I downloaded the codec pack but i still can't open the file. any other suggestions?

 

Smoking Aces.DTS.NTSC.DVDR-XPDVD.avi this is the file I want to open. what program do I have to download to open the said file?

 

Hmmmm.. try VLC media player its free

search sa google

[kupsi]

yung sakin galing lang dito sa MTC.

 

nung una ayaw din tumakbo. and me missing files daw.

 

kinalikot ko lang ng paulit-ulit, ayun, tumakbo na.

 

not sure what caused/cured the problem.

[rick9plus]

Good day all.

 

I have a friend who got married in Manila City Hall last year. She is supposed to get married by the judge but later found out on the marriage certificate that the guy who performed the ceremony is a reverend. Is this practice legal? What is the easiest way to find out if the marriage is legal?

 

Please advise.

[rocco69]

Good day all.

 

I have a friend who got married in Manila City Hall last year. She is supposed to get married by the judge but later found out on the marriage certificate that the guy who performed the ceremony is a reverend. Is this practice legal? What is the easiest way to find out if the marriage is legal?

 

Please advise.

 

The marriage is legal. I am assuming that the "reverend" is duly authorized by his religious sect to solemnize marriage hence under the Family Code, he would have authority to solemnize marriage (see Art. 7[2] of the Family Code), thus even if he wasn't a judge, the marriage would still be valid.

 

In fact, even assuming that he had no authority to perform marriages, since your friend thought the guy who performed the marriage was authorized to do so, the marriage would still be valid, as provided for by Article 35(2) of the Family Code.

 

Art. 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:

(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to perform marriages UNLESS SUCH MARRIAGES WERE CONTRACTED WITH EITHER OR BOTH PARTIES BELIEVING IN GOOD FAITH THAT THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER HAD THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DO SO;

[WayKurat]

I have tried vlc ayaw pa din

[jkoa]

Hello, i am in in need of a lawyer to draft a contract for me. I need it ASAP. please pm me if there's anyone who could help. Thanks!

Edited February 24, 2007 by jkoa

[jake_roxas]

Good day all.

 

I have a friend who got married in Manila City Hall last year. She is supposed to get married by the judge but later found out on the marriage certificate that the guy who performed the ceremony is a reverend. Is this practice legal? What is the easiest way to find out if the marriage is legal?

 

Please advise.

 

to confirm just check with the office of the civil registry if all the documents and your marriage had been registered.

[jake_roxas]

Hello, i am in in need of a lawyer to draft a contract for me. I need it ASAP. please pm me if there's anyone who could help. Thanks!

 

what type of contract?

[TMX_626]

I have done my research on voidable marriages.

 

If a couple is married with the failure to secure a marriage license prior to the ceremony, is the marriage valid? The couple has been living in for 2yrs.

 

thanks in advance!

[rocco69]

I have done my research on voidable marriages.

 

If a couple is married with the failure to secure a marriage license prior to the ceremony, is the marriage valid? The couple has been living in for 2yrs.

 

thanks in advance!

 

I'd say the marriage is void from the very beginning. Unless it falls under the following:

 

1. where they got married and one of the parties was at the point of death

2. where they were living in a place where there is no means of transportation to get to the Civil Registrar

3. if it was a marriage between members of ethnic cultural communities or Muslims and celebrated according to their customs and traditions

[TMX_626]

I'd say the marriage is void from the very beginning. Unless it falls under the following:

 

1. where they got married and one of the parties was at the point of death

2. where they were living in a place where there is no means of transportation to get to the Civil Registrar

3. if it was a marriage between members of ethnic cultural communities or Muslims and celebrated according to their customs and traditions

 

many thanks sir!

 

you are a big help!

 

so either one of the couple may file the motion to void the marriage? any indication sir kung magkano ang inaabot? or any legal entanglements that we should expect? :mtc:

Edited February 24, 2007 by TMX_626

[Kurtsky Keigee]

Hmmm..

Download Gspot. search sa google

Post mo info dito might be able to help you

[The Designer]

i tried updatin my media player [from 10 to 11] last night, it turns out pirata pala windows ko, now i cant use my media player...

 

wat can i do to get it back kahit na media player 10 na lang, without the online validation from windows?

 

another option is im gonna get a media player 10 installer and remove the media player and install the new one.

 

un n lang ba talaga magagawa ko? pm naman. help. haha =) thanks in advance

 

Try to use system restore first, it worked for one of my PCs here in the office with the same problem as yours, if possible, choose a date before you installed MP 11 and not on the day and time before you installed it :cool:

[TMX_626]

Allow me to give you plain advice: What do you mean by her parents are after you? Do they want you to marry the girl?-If that is the case, they canot legally do that. Wala ka kasing consent-which is a requisite of marriage. Do thay want you to support your kid? - the girl can as the court to do that by filing a case for support, kahit hindi kayo kasal, you have an equal obligation for rearing your kid. Kung hindi naman masamang babae yung girl, meaning hindi naman lasingera or addict or p#ta at may means of living, at yung kid mo is less than 12 years old, wag mo nang habulin pa to be in your custody - magastos at walang kasiguraduhan na makukuha mo. just give support as best as you can, after all anak mo yun, your kid carries your genes and is the means of perpetuating you for all eternity. :hypocritesmiley:

 

 

sir, would this mean that the father cannot ask for a reasonable visitation right? like for example, the mother of the child only allows visitation of the child on Sundays; explicitly saying that the child cannot go with the father for a trip to the mall or an amusment park, least to say eat out at a fastfood joint.

 

Is that reasonable?

[TMX_626]

1. any of the spouses can file for annulment

 

2. infidelity per se is not a ground for annulment, it is a ground for legal separation. if you want it to be a ground for annulment, apply it as a a psychological incapacity. make it look like an incurable psych prob of the husband.

 

Esq. Jopoc,

 

With my current enlightenment on viodable marriages, it is to my understanding that you cannot file for annulment if the marriage is to be considered void from the start. Is this correct? Should I file for a motion to declare my marriage void, due to lack of (or the failure to secure) the requisite Marriage License?

 

Psychological incapacity is hard to admit, though, it is not the truth that I want the public to know and accept.

 

thank you ulit... for any assistance.

 

Edited February 25, 2007 by TMX_626

[kaplogan]

im in need of a lawyer...sino ba pwede? magkano consultation fee?

[Dr_PepPeR]

I disagree. If there is a conflict between a sequestration order and a BIR levy, the sequestration order should prevail.

 

Won't you agree that the BIR levy would be invalid and ineffective should these properties be deemed ill-gotten? Why should the government settle for just a slice when it can take the whole goddamned cake? If they are deemed ill-gotten, then they are not supposed to be part of the estate. Thus, until the issue of sequestration be ventilated and clarified in the proper judicial forum, the BIR's claim should be suspended. In effect, the BIR can make a reassessment of the estate tax should the courts decide that the property is not ill-gotten.

 

Yes you may be correct.