This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2016-02-03 |
JARDELEZA, J. |
||||
| While the general rule laid down in Tang (which limits the availability of the remedy of certiorari under Rule 65 only to parties in the proceedings before the lower court) must be strictly adhered to, it is not without exception. In Republic v. Eugenio, Jr.,[37] we allowed the wife of a respondent in two cases filed by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to challenge via certiorari the inquiry orders issued by the respective regional trial courts. There, we found that the wife had adequately demonstrated her joint ownership of the accounts subject of the inquiry orders. Thus, notwithstanding the fact that she was not named as a respondent in the cases filed by the AMLC or identified as a subject of the inquiry orders, we ruled that her joint ownership of the accounts clothed her with standing to assail, via certiorari, the inquiry orders authorizing the examination of said accounts in violation of her statutory right to maintain said accounts' secrecy.[38] | |||||
|
2013-03-06 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| That a freeze order can be issued upon the AMLC's ex parte application further emphasizes the law's consideration of how critical time is in these proceedings. As we previously noted in Republic v. Eugenio, Jr.,[36] "[t]o make such freeze order anteceded by a judicial proceeding with notice to the account holder would allow for or lead to the dissipation of such funds even before the order could be issued." | |||||
|
2011-06-08 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| On the one hand, Republic Act No. 1405 provides for four (4) exceptions when records of deposits may be disclosed. These are under any of the following instances: a) upon written permission of the depositor, (b) in cases of impeachment, (c) upon order of a competent court in the case of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials or, (d) when the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation, and e) in cases of violation of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA), the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) may inquire into a bank account upon order of any competent court. [22] On the other hand, the lone exception to the non-disclosure of foreign currency deposits, under Republic Act No. 6426, is disclosure upon the written permission of the depositor. | |||||
|
2010-02-16 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| It is conceded that while the fundamental law has not bothered with the triviality of specifically addressing privacy rights relative to banking accounts, there, nevertheless, exists in our jurisdiction a legitimate expectation of privacy governing such accounts. The source of this right of expectation is statutory, and it is found in R.A. No. 1405,[39] otherwise known as the Bank Secrecy Act of 1955. [40] | |||||