[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
45 views1 page

Espanol v. Chairman

Uploaded by

Aldrin Tang

1) Maria Espanol received a pension from the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) as a widow of a WWII veteran until PVA issued a policy in 1951 canceling pensions for those also receiving a pension from the U.S. Veterans Administration, including Espanol. 2) However, in 1973 the court declared the 1951 PVA policy void, giving Espanol a cause of action against PVA. Her right of action accrued on this date. 3) The court ruled that prescription of Espanol's action should run from June 27, 1973, when the policy was declared void, not from 1951 when the policy was issued, because administrative policies only have the force of law once declared valid

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Espanol v. Chairman

Uploaded by

Aldrin Tang
45 views1 page
1) Maria Espanol received a pension from the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) as a widow of a WWII veteran until PVA issued a policy in 1951 canceling pensions for those also receiving a pension from the U.S. Veterans Administration, including Espanol. 2) However, in 1973 the court declared the 1951 PVA policy void, giving Espanol a cause of action against PVA. Her right of action accrued on this date. 3) The court ruled that prescription of Espanol's action should run from June 27, 1973, when the policy was declared void, not from 1951 when the policy was issued, because administrative policies only have the force of law once declared valid

Original Description:

Oblicon

Original Title

Espanol v. Chairman.docx

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

1) Maria Espanol received a pension from the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) as a widow of a WWII veteran until PVA issued a policy in 1951 canceling pensions for those also receiving a pension from the U.S. Veterans Administration, including Espanol. 2) However, in 1973 the court declared the 1951 PVA policy void, giving Espanol a cause of action against PVA. Her right of action accrued on this date. 3) The court ruled that prescription of Espanol's action should run from June 27, 1973, when the policy was declared void, not from 1951 when the policy was issued, because administrative policies only have the force of law once declared valid

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
45 views1 page

Espanol v. Chairman

Uploaded by

Aldrin Tang
1) Maria Espanol received a pension from the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) as a widow of a WWII veteran until PVA issued a policy in 1951 canceling pensions for those also receiving a pension from the U.S. Veterans Administration, including Espanol. 2) However, in 1973 the court declared the 1951 PVA policy void, giving Espanol a cause of action against PVA. Her right of action accrued on this date. 3) The court ruled that prescription of Espanol's action should run from June 27, 1973, when the policy was declared void, not from 1951 when the policy was issued, because administrative policies only have the force of law once declared valid

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

ESPANOL v CHAIRMAN, PHILIPPINE VETERANS -It is only when the last element that occurs that a cause of action

ADMINISTRATION may be brought; and when the right of action accrues.


137 SCRA 314 -However, admin policies have the force of law. Therefore, PVA did
not infringe any right when it issued the policy canceling the
June 29, 1985
pension, as it was presumed to be legal and valid.
FACTS:
-But in June 27, 1973, the Court declared in another case that the
-Maria Espanol is a widow of a deceased WWII veteran. She and her admin policy is void.
minor children receives pension from Philippine Veterans
-It is only that time that Espanol has a cause of action against PVA.
Administration (PVA).
Her right of action accrued on the day the Court declared the policy
-On Nov. 1, 1951, PVA issued a policy canceling the pensions of void. -Therefore, the 10 year prescription should run from June 27,
those who are pensionaries of U.S.VA. Espanol was one of those. -In 1973. (ART. 1144)
1974, Espanol filed for mandamus to restore and continue her
-Decision of CFI affirmed.
pension.
DOCTRINE: Prescription of action starts on the day the defendant
-CFI ruled in her favor.
violated the right of the plaintiff. Teehankee, J., dissenting: The
-PVA appealed that the action has already prescribed. action prescribed on Nov. 1, 1961; 10 years after. The action was
filed too late after over 22 years; only in 1973.
ISSUE:
WON Espanol's action has already prescribed.
HELD:
-No.
-THE RIGHT OF ACTION ACCRUES WHEN THERE EXISTS A
CAUSE OF ACTION. 3 Elements of Cause of Action:
1. A right in favor of the plaintiff.
2. A duty arising from that right, to be done by the defendant.
3. Violation of such right through the act or omission of the
defendant.

You might also like