Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 487 views

    People v. Pletcha, GR.R. No. 19029 June 27, 1977

    Uploaded by

    brahms
    Tito Pletcha Jr. invoked self-help to defend land he inherited 19 years ago against workers constructing a fence for Radeco Corporation who leased the land without a court order. Pletcha asked them to stop until a resurvey but was ignored, fighting them off. He was convicted of grave coercion but appealed. The Court of Appeals held that Pletcha's action was a legitimate exercise of self-help as the usurpers' possession was incomplete and they refused his reasonable request to stop construction pending resolution, justifying his use of force to drive them away. The Civil Code and principle of self-defense authorize property owners to reasonably repel invasions or usurpations of their property.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Pletcha, GR.R. No. 19029 June 27, 1977

    Uploaded by

    brahms
    487 views1 page
    Tito Pletcha Jr. invoked self-help to defend land he inherited 19 years ago against workers constructing a fence for Radeco Corporation who leased the land without a court order. Pletcha asked them to stop until a resurvey but was ignored, fighting them off. He was convicted of grave coercion but appealed. The Court of Appeals held that Pletcha's action was a legitimate exercise of self-help as the usurpers' possession was incomplete and they refused his reasonable request to stop construction pending resolution, justifying his use of force to drive them away. The Civil Code and principle of self-defense authorize property owners to reasonably repel invasions or usurpations of their property.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Tito Pletcha Jr. invoked self-help to defend land he inherited 19 years ago against workers constructing a fence for Radeco Corporation who leased the land without a court order. Pletcha asked them to stop until a resurvey but was ignored, fighting them off. He was convicted of grave coercion but appealed. The Court of Appeals held that Pletcha's action was a legitimate exercise of self-help as the usurpers' possession was incomplete and they refused his reasonable request to stop construction pending resolution, justifying his use of force to drive them away. The Civil Code and principle of self-defense authorize property owners to reasonably repel invasions or usurpations of their property.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    487 views1 page

    People v. Pletcha, GR.R. No. 19029 June 27, 1977

    Uploaded by

    brahms
    Tito Pletcha Jr. invoked self-help to defend land he inherited 19 years ago against workers constructing a fence for Radeco Corporation who leased the land without a court order. Pletcha asked them to stop until a resurvey but was ignored, fighting them off. He was convicted of grave coercion but appealed. The Court of Appeals held that Pletcha's action was a legitimate exercise of self-help as the usurpers' possession was incomplete and they refused his reasonable request to stop construction pending resolution, justifying his use of force to drive them away. The Civil Code and principle of self-defense authorize property owners to reasonably repel invasions or usurpations of their property.

    Copyright:

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

    Philippines v.

    Pletcha
    G.R. No. 19029-CR, June 27, 1977, 22 CA Rep. 807
    Sison, J.

    FACTS:
    Tito Pletcha, Jr., farmer, invoking self-help in defense of the land he inherited from his father 19 years ago
    against the workers of Radeco Corporation, who without court order, were constructing a fence in a
    hacienda allegedly leased by the corporation from a certain Lopinco. Claiming actual possession and
    ownership and believing that the land sought to be fenced was an integral part of the land he inherited,
    Pletcha asked the group to desist from fenicing pending a resurvey he proposed, but he was totally ignored,
    thus he fought off and prevented the workers. As a result of such resistance he was prosecuted and convicted
    of grave coercion by the Municipal Trial Court. Pletcha appealed the decision of the MTC with the Court of
    Appeals.

    ISSUE: Whether the appellants action is a legitimate exercise of a private citizens selfhelp.

    HELD: Yes. In the instant case,the usurpers possession has not yet become complete and the complainants
    were in the act of building a fence. Such an act constitutes force in contemplation of the law. This act of
    trespass justified the appellant to drive them away, even by means of bolo because they refused to listen to
    his appeal which is reasonable. The appellant need not rush to the court to seek redress before reasonably
    resisting the invasion of his property. The situation required immediate action and Art. 429 gave him the self
    executory mechanics of self-defense and self-reliance. The provision in Art 429 of the New Civil Code
    confirms the right of the appellant, an owner 28 and lawful possessor, to use reasonable force to repel an
    invasion or usurpation, actual, threatened or physical of his property. The principle of self-defense and the
    protective measures related thereto, covers not only his life, but also his liberty and property. The principle
    of self-help authorizes the lawful possessor to use force, not only to prevent a threatened unlawful invasion
    or usurpation thereof; it is a sort of self-defense. It is lawful to repel force by force. He who merely uses
    force to defend his possession does not possess by force. The use of such necessary force to protect
    propriety or possessory rights constitutes a justifying circumstance under the Penal Code. 

    You might also like