Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Yuyu - Case Notes

    Uploaded by

    DC S
    29 views1 page
    The document discusses the standards for determining whether oral statements constitute defamation or slander. It notes that courts consider both the literal meaning of words as well as the context and relationship between the parties involved. Mere angry or profane expressions made in the heat of the moment are less likely to be considered slander if there was no clear intent to insult or malign the other person. One case is described where a police officer was called offensive names publicly but it was ruled to be simple rather than grave slander because the parties knew each other, it occurred during a heated hearing shortly after an incident between them, and seemed to be an emotional outburst rather than an attempt to ridicule the officer.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    yuyu - case notes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses the standards for determining whether oral statements constitute defamation or slander. It notes that courts consider both the literal meaning of words as well as the context and relationship between the parties involved. Mere angry or profane expressions made in the heat of the moment are less likely to be considered slander if there was no clear intent to insult or malign the other person. One case is described where a police officer was called offensive names publicly but it was ruled to be simple rather than grave slander because the parties knew each other, it occurred during a heated hearing shortly after an incident between them, and seemed to be an emotional outburst rather than an attempt to ridicule the officer.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    29 views1 page

    Yuyu - Case Notes

    Uploaded by

    DC S
    The document discusses the standards for determining whether oral statements constitute defamation or slander. It notes that courts consider both the literal meaning of words as well as the context and relationship between the parties involved. Mere angry or profane expressions made in the heat of the moment are less likely to be considered slander if there was no clear intent to insult or malign the other person. One case is described where a police officer was called offensive names publicly but it was ruled to be simple rather than grave slander because the parties knew each other, it occurred during a heated hearing shortly after an incident between them, and seemed to be an emotional outburst rather than an attempt to ridicule the officer.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    160351 April 10, 2006

    NOEL VILLANUEVA, petitioner,

    vs.

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and YOLANDA CASTRO, Respondents.

    we are guided by a doctrine of ancient respectability that defamatory words will fall under one
    or the other, depending not only upon their sense, grammatical significance, and accepted
    ordinary meaning judging them separately, but also upon the special circumstances of the case,
    antecedents or relationship between the offended party and the offender, which might tend to
    prove the intention of the offender at the time.

    Not really to slander but rather to express anger or displeasure. In fact, more often, it is just an
    expletive that punctuates one’s expression of profanity. Obviously, the intention was to show his
    feelings of resentment and not necessarily to insult the latter.

    we held that although the abusive remarks may ordinarily be considered as serious defamation,
    under the environmental circumstances of the case, there having been provocation on
    complainant's part, and the utterances complained of having been made in the heat of
    unrestrained anger

    On the other hand, malice implies an intention to do unjustifiable harm and to injure the
    reputation of the person defamed (Manila Bulletin v. Domingo [2017])

    Oral defamation may either be simple or grave. In the case of De Leon vs. People (G.R. No.
    212623, January 11, 2016,) the accused called the police officer “walanghiya,” “mayabang” and
    “mangongotong” in public.

    In deciding that it was a case of simple and not grave slander, the following were considered:
    first, relationship of the parties. They were not strangers to one another and accused had no
    reason to harbor ill feelings toward complainant. Second is the issue of timing. The utterance
    was made during the first hearing on an administrative case involving the parties, shortly after
    an alleged gun-pointing incident between them, hence there was an element of emotional
    outburst on the part of accused. Third is the issue of animosity. From the foregoing, it can be
    gleaned that the accused’s utterance may be construed as his expression of dismay and not
    necessarily to ridicule or humiliate complainant.

    You might also like