Scribd
Upload
458 views2 pages

Data Privacy Cases Digest

The document analyzes three Philippine Supreme Court cases. The first case involved notarial violations and privacy issues. The second case struck down regulations as unconstitutional. The third case involved the termination of an employee for disclosing salaries.

Uploaded by

merii
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
458 views2 pages

Data Privacy Cases Digest

The document analyzes three Philippine Supreme Court cases. The first case involved notarial violations and privacy issues. The second case struck down regulations as unconstitutional. The third case involved the termination of an employee for disclosing salaries.

Uploaded by

merii
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

A.C. No. 13678 (Formerly CBD Case No.

18-5805), (2023)

Analysis:

1. Case Identification: A.C. No. 13678 (Formerly CBD Case No. 18-5805),
(2023) [J1] is a disbarment case titled "EHRENFREL C. AZARRAGA,
COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. EDUARDO L. JALBUNA, RESPONDENT."
2. Key Issues: The case involved allegations of: a) Violations of the 2004
Rules on Notarial Practice b) Violation of the Data Privacy Act of 2012 c)
Violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility
3. Court's Findings: a) Notarial Practice: The court found Atty. Jalbuna
guilty of notarial lapses. b) Data Privacy Act: The court ruled in Atty.
Jalbuna's favor, stating his actions were lawful during a legal
proceeding.
4. Penalties Imposed: a) Revocation of Atty. Jalbuna's Notarial
Commission b) Two-year disqualification from being a notary public c)
Three-month suspension from law practice

Conclusion: A.C. No. 13678 (2023) [J1] emphasizes the importance of integrity in
notarial practice. While the court found Atty. Jalbuna guilty of notarial violations, it
dismissed charges under the Data Privacy Act. This case underscores the
Supreme Court's commitment to maintaining high standards in the legal
profession, particularly in notarial duties.

Relevant Legal Source: G.R. No. 213860 (2022) [J1]

Analysis:

1. Case Title: The Philippine Stock Exchange, Inc., Bankers Association of


the Philippines, Philippine Association of Securities Brokers and
Dealers, Inc., Fund Managers Association of the Philippines, Trust
Officers Association of the Philippines, and Marmon Holdings, Inc. vs.
Secretary of Finance, et al.
2. Issue: The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Revenue
Regulations No. 1-2014, Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 5-2014,
and Securities and Exchange Commission Memorandum Circular No.
10-14.
3. Key Points: a) The regulations required submission of an alphabetical
list of payees of dividend payments. b) They prohibited the identification
of PCD Nominees as payees. c) Petitioners raised issues regarding
constitutional rights, privacy, non-impairment of contracts, and
jurisdiction of the agencies issuing the regulations.
4. Court's Ruling: The Supreme Court found the regulations
unconstitutional due to: a) Violations of due process b) Infringement on
the right to privacy c) Impairment of contracts d) The regulations were
outside the scope of authority of the issuing agencies
5. Economic Considerations: While the Court addressed concerns about
economic repercussions, it emphasized the need to uphold
constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Conclusion: In G.R. No. 213860 (2022), the Supreme Court struck down the
challenged regulations, finding them unconstitutional and beyond the authority of
the issuing agencies. This decision underscores the Court's commitment to
protecting constitutional rights, even when balancing against potential economic
impacts.

Relevant Legal Source: G.R. No. 226244 (2021) [J1]

Analysis:

1. Case Title: ANNIEBEL B. YONZON, PETITIONER, VS. COCA-COLA


BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES, INC., RESPONDENT.
2. Key Facts:
o Anniebel B. Yonzon was dismissed from employment by Coca-
Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. for loss of trust and confidence.
o Yonzon disclosed her co-employees' salaries in a Motion to
Resolve before the National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC).
o Coca-Cola issued a Notice to Explain and placed Yonzon on
preventive suspension without pay for 30 days.
o Yonzon was subsequently dismissed for unauthorized
disclosure of confidential company information.
3. Legal Issues:
o Whether Yonzon's dismissal was justified
o Whether Yonzon was in a position of trust and confidence
o Whether Yonzon violated company policy
4. Court's Ruling:
o The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Yonzon, finding that her
termination was unjust.
o The Court determined that Yonzon was not in a position of trust
and confidence.
o The Court found that Yonzon did not violate company policy.
5. Remedies Awarded:
o The Court awarded Yonzon separation pay and backwages.
o The Court denied Yonzon's claim for moral and exemplary
damages.

Conclusion: The Supreme Court's decision in G.R. No. 226244 (2021) [J1]
emphasizes the importance of properly establishing just cause for termination,
especially when alleging loss of trust and confidence. The Court's ruling suggests
that employers must carefully consider an employee's position and the nature of
the alleged violation before terminating employment on these grounds. This case
also highlights the need for clear company policies regarding the handling of
sensitive information.

You might also like