Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 798 views

    Grave Coercion

    Uploaded by

    Imelda Arreglo-Agripa
    The court ruled that if an element of grave coercion is lacking under Article 286, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime instead falls under Article 287, paragraph 2 of unjust vexation. The decision involved a case where respondents padlocked leased premises and cut off facilities, which was found to constitute unjust vexation rather than grave coercion since no violence was used. Unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code broadly includes any conduct that could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person, even without physical or material harm.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Grave Coercion

    Uploaded by

    Imelda Arreglo-Agripa
    798 views2 pages
    The court ruled that if an element of grave coercion is lacking under Article 286, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime instead falls under Article 287, paragraph 2 of unjust vexation. The decision involved a case where respondents padlocked leased premises and cut off facilities, which was found to constitute unjust vexation rather than grave coercion since no violence was used. Unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code broadly includes any conduct that could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person, even without physical or material harm.

    Original Description:

    law

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The court ruled that if an element of grave coercion is lacking under Article 286, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime instead falls under Article 287, paragraph 2 of unjust vexation. The decision involved a case where respondents padlocked leased premises and cut off facilities, which was found to constitute unjust vexation rather than grave coercion since no violence was used. Unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code broadly includes any conduct that could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person, even without physical or material harm.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    798 views2 pages

    Grave Coercion

    Uploaded by

    Imelda Arreglo-Agripa
    The court ruled that if an element of grave coercion is lacking under Article 286, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime instead falls under Article 287, paragraph 2 of unjust vexation. The decision involved a case where respondents padlocked leased premises and cut off facilities, which was found to constitute unjust vexation rather than grave coercion since no violence was used. Unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code broadly includes any conduct that could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person, even without physical or material harm.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    The court ruled that if the second element of grave coercion under Article 286, par.

    1 of the
    Revised Penal Code is lacking, the crime committed falls under the second paragraph of Article
    287 of the same Code. The fallo of the decision reads: G.R. No. 165065
    September 26,
    2006
    MELCHOR G. MADERAZO, SENIFORO PERIDO, and VICTOR MADERAZO, JR.,
    petitioners,
    vs.
    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

    The second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code which defines and
    provides for the penalty of unjust vexation is broad enough to include any human
    conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm, could
    unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person.
    JOSEPH
    ANTHONY
    M.
    G.R. No. 179243
    ALEJANDRO, FIRDAUSI I.Y.
    ABBAS, CARMINA A. ABBAS
    and
    MA.
    ELENA
    GO
    FRANCISCO,
    Petitioners,
    Present:

    CORONA,* C.J.,
    versus -

    LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,**
    PERALTA, J., Acting Chairperson,
    ABAD, and

    ATTY. JOSE A. BERNAS, ATTY.


    MARIE
    LOURDES
    SIABERNAS, FERNANDO AMOR,
    EDUARDO AGUILAR, JOHN
    DOE and PETER DOE,
    Respondents.

    VILLARAMA, JR.,*** JJ.

    Promulgated:

    September 7, 2011
    In the crime of grave coercion, violence through material force or
    such a display of it as would produce intimidation and,
    consequently, control over the will of the offended party is an
    essential ingredient. People v. Alfeche, Jr., G.R. No. 102070, July
    23, 1992, 211 SCRA 770, 779.
    *
    *
    *

    There is intimidation when one of the parties is compelled by a


    reasonable and well-grounded fear of an imminent and grave evil
    upon his person or property, or upon the person or property of his
    spouse, descendants or ascendants, to give his consent. Lee v.
    Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 90423, September 6, 1991, 201 SCRA
    405, 408. Civil Code, Art. 1335.
    Material violence is not indispensable for there to be intimidation.
    Intense fear produced in the mind of the victim which restricts or
    hinders the exercise of the will is sufficient. People v. Alfeche, Jr.,
    G.R. No. 102070, July 23, 1992, 211 SCRA 770, 779.
    The OCP held that respondents could not be charged with grave
    coercion as no violence was employed by the latter. In padlocking
    the leased premises and cutting off of facilities, respondents Amor
    and Aguilar were found to be probably guilty of the crime of
    unjust vexation.

    You might also like