RIMANDO, Cristine Joy P.

PS 153 SEG
1.
a. Yes, Mrs. Campbell has a right of action against Mr. Babineaux. Her cause of
action would be Mr. Babineaux calling her a prostitute when, in fact, shes a
fitness instructor. By doing so, Mr. Babineaux might not only irrevocably
damage her reputationsince Mr. Babineaux called her so in publicand
possibly lose her job; worst, he might also cause her to be imprisoned and
fined as stated under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, if the
allegations against her were proven to be true. Moreover, Mrs. Campbell, who
apparently has cynophobia, might assume Mr. Babineaux had deliberately let
the dog near her (even though Mr. Babineaux didnt know Mrs. Campbells
phobia of dogs), and thus sees this as a direct attack to her or an act to
intimidate her. Thus the right that was violated was her right to life as a
person.
b. I would ask that we should try to settle our issues between ourselves first, and
if it didnt work, we could always go to the barangay to resolve our issues
there. If we still couldnt arrive at an amicable settlement, then thats the time I
should take my case to the Municipal Trial Court. However, as much as
possible, we should really try to settle our issues on the barangay, if not within
ourselves, before going to the court.
I would file a criminal action against Mr. Babineaux requesting for damages to
be paid, since my reputation will most likely be tarnished and my job could be
affected. The incident also caused me emotional trauma, sleepless nights and
anxiety since I dont know when dog will approach me again.
c. The Municipal Trial Court has the jurisdiction since the punishment for oral
defamation could range from arresto mayor (one month one day six
months) to prision correccional ( six months one day six years). The venue
of the action will be an MTC in Santa Rosa, Laguna or it could be agreed
upon by the two parties.
2. Whether or not the Nuvali Subdivision Association has a locus standi or class
standing is not an issue at all. The issue here is whether or not the Supreme
Court has the jurisdiction over the class suit, which is allegedly about the
sexist remarks of Mr. Babineaux.
According to Article VIII, Section 5 Paragraph 1 of the 1987 Constitution: The
Supreme Court has the power to exercise original jurisdiction over cases
affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and over petitions
for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

The case that the Nuvali Subdivision Association has been planning is not
included in the scope of the judicial power of the Supreme Court. It is
therefore unnecessary to discuss further the locus standi or class standing of
the Nuvali Subdivision Association.