0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
529 Ansichten1 Seite
Two men were caught transporting lumber without proper documents in violation of Section 68-A of P.D. 705. They claimed they were asked to transport the lumber to a furniture shop owner's house. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) filed a case against the men and ordered the lumber forfeited. However, the regional trial court released the lumber. The Supreme Court then ruled that the regional trial court overstepped its jurisdiction, as DENR has the power to confiscate illegally transported lumber. The Supreme Court reversed the regional trial court's decision and found that the two men had violated Section 68-A of P.D. 705 by transporting lumber without permits.
Two men were caught transporting lumber without proper documents in violation of Section 68-A of P.D. 705. They claimed they were asked to transport the lumber to a furniture shop owner's house. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) filed a case against the men and ordered the lumber forfeited. However, the regional trial court released the lumber. The Supreme Court then ruled that the regional trial court overstepped its jurisdiction, as DENR has the power to confiscate illegally transported lumber. The Supreme Court reversed the regional trial court's decision and found that the two men had violated Section 68-A of P.D. 705 by transporting lumber without permits.
Two men were caught transporting lumber without proper documents in violation of Section 68-A of P.D. 705. They claimed they were asked to transport the lumber to a furniture shop owner's house. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) filed a case against the men and ordered the lumber forfeited. However, the regional trial court released the lumber. The Supreme Court then ruled that the regional trial court overstepped its jurisdiction, as DENR has the power to confiscate illegally transported lumber. The Supreme Court reversed the regional trial court's decision and found that the two men had violated Section 68-A of P.D. 705 by transporting lumber without permits.
DENr, VS. GREGORIO DARAMAN Facts: This is a case filed by the DENR represented by RED Israel Gaddi against Gregorio Daraman and Narciso Lucenecio who were caught by one Pablo opinion to transport illegal pieces of lumber using the vehicle of one Baby Lucenecio, the Holy Cross Funeral Services. Here, the respondents alleged without proper documents. Here, Daraman and Lucenecio had no permit to transport lumber although they that one Asan, owner of furniture shop ask the two to bring also some pieces of wood to his house located near the funerals location. DENR employee, saw the vehicle and inspected it, there he saw some lumber and issued an order of forfeiture. The court granted bond and released the funeral car and lumber because it was found out that Daraman and Lucenecio were not owners of the vehicle and lumber. Hence, this complaint was filed. Issue: WON the respondents violated P.D. 705 section 68-A Held: Yes. The court cannot deny the fact that Section 68-A P.D. 705 is also applicable to those who transport lumber without proper documents. Here, Daraman and Lucenecio had no permit to transport lumber although they were only asked to bring the lumber to the house of one Asan. The RTC has overstepped its jurisdiction of the case since DENR was given the power to confiscate the property in favor of the state/government. The release of this property defeated the purpose of section 68-A of P.D. 705. Therefore, SC granted the petition of DENR, RTCs decision was reversed and set aside.