Search results
TIME, INC., petitioner, vs. HON. ANDRES REYES, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, ELISEO S. ZARI, as Deputy Clerk of Court, Branch VI, Court of First Instance of Rizal, ANTONIO J. VILLEGAS and JUAN PONCE ENRILE, respondents. Sycip, Salazar, Luna, Manalo & Feliciano for petitioner. Angel C. Cruz Law Office for respondents.
TIME, INC. v. REYES GR No. L-28882 | May 31, 1971 | Philippine rule on foreign tort. Petitioner: TIME, INC. Respondent: HON. ANDRES REYES, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, ELISEO S. ZARI, as Deputy Clerk of Court, Branch VI, Court of First Instance of Rizal, ANTONIO J. VILLEGAS and JUAN PONCE ENRILE.
The petition alleges that petitioner Time, Inc.,[1] is an American corporation with principal offices at Rockefeller Center, New York City, N.Y., and is the publisher of "Time," a weekly news magazine; the petition, however, does not allege the... petitioner's legal capacity to sue in the courts of the Philippines.[2]
TIME, Inc. v Reyes - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. The case involved a libel suit filed against TIME, Inc. by Mayor Antonio Villegas and Juan Ponce Enrile over an article in TIME Asia magazine.
The Supreme Court ruled that: 1) The Court of First Instance of Rizal did not have jurisdiction over the libel case, as the allegedly libelous publication was not published in Rizal province and the plaintiffs held offices in Manila.
Only last May, in Time, Inc. v. Reyes, 8 in an opinion penned by Justice J. B. L. Reyes, speaking for the Court, it was categorically announced: "The motion to dismiss was predicated on the respondent court's lack of jurisdiction to entertain the action; and the rulings of this Court are that writs of certiorari or prohibition, or both, may issu...
In Time, Inc. vs . Reyes , 29 it was held that the action of a court in refusing to rule or deferring its ruling on a motion to dismiss for lack or excess of jurisdiction is correctable by a writ of prohibition or certiorari sued out in the appellate court even before trial on the merits is had.
