This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-04-14 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The Regional Office found the allegation of theft unsupported by evidence while that of subleasing as proven by the statement of a certain Francisco Maala and affidavit of one Camilo Moskito. Both the DARAB and the Court of Appeals did not make a finding on this point. Not being a trier of facts, this Court cannot pass upon these factual issues. It is futile to determine the truth or falsity of these accusations in view of the equity principle that the DARAB applied. In reversing the Regional Office's decision to turn over possession of the land to petitioner, the DARAB applied the equity principle that he who comes to court must come with clean hands.[18] Otherwise, he not only taints his name, but also ridicules the very structure of established authority.[19] A court may deny a litigant relief on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair, dishonest, fraudulent, or deceitful as to the controversy in issue.[20] We agree with the DARAB that we cannot close our eyes and remain indifferent to the perpetuation of an act that the law has long ago declared illegal and contrary to public policy. The Court cannot allow petitioner to invoke Section 27(2) of RA 3844 prohibiting subletting when he himself violated Sections 4 and 5 of the same RA 3844 outlawing share tenancy. | |||||