Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 568 views

    D People Vs Angeles

    Uploaded by

    rtsalvador
    1. Maria Tolosa Sardeoa and Marceliano Tolosa paid Samina Angeles money to process their travel and employment documents to work in Paris, France. Precila Olpindo also paid money to Angeles to process travel and employment documents to work in Canada. 2. However, Angeles was not licensed to recruit workers abroad. She claimed the money was just for travel costs and not placement fees, and that it was the complainants' sisters who promised them employment. 3. The trial court found Angeles guilty of illegal recruitment and four counts of estafa. The issue is whether Angeles is indeed guilty of these charges.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    D People Vs Angeles

    Uploaded by

    rtsalvador
    568 views1 page
    1. Maria Tolosa Sardeoa and Marceliano Tolosa paid Samina Angeles money to process their travel and employment documents to work in Paris, France. Precila Olpindo also paid money to Angeles to process travel and employment documents to work in Canada. 2. However, Angeles was not licensed to recruit workers abroad. She claimed the money was just for travel costs and not placement fees, and that it was the complainants' sisters who promised them employment. 3. The trial court found Angeles guilty of illegal recruitment and four counts of estafa. The issue is whether Angeles is indeed guilty of these charges.

    Original Description:

    Angeles vs people digest

    Original Title

    D People vs Angeles

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Maria Tolosa Sardeoa and Marceliano Tolosa paid Samina Angeles money to process their travel and employment documents to work in Paris, France. Precila Olpindo also paid money to Angeles to process travel and employment documents to work in Canada. 2. However, Angeles was not licensed to recruit workers abroad. She claimed the money was just for travel costs and not placement fees, and that it was the complainants' sisters who promised them employment. 3. The trial court found Angeles guilty of illegal recruitment and four counts of estafa. The issue is whether Angeles is indeed guilty of these charges.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    568 views1 page

    D People Vs Angeles

    Uploaded by

    rtsalvador
    1. Maria Tolosa Sardeoa and Marceliano Tolosa paid Samina Angeles money to process their travel and employment documents to work in Paris, France. Precila Olpindo also paid money to Angeles to process travel and employment documents to work in Canada. 2. However, Angeles was not licensed to recruit workers abroad. She claimed the money was just for travel costs and not placement fees, and that it was the complainants' sisters who promised them employment. 3. The trial court found Angeles guilty of illegal recruitment and four counts of estafa. The issue is whether Angeles is indeed guilty of these charges.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    People of the Philippines, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEEVsSamina Angeles y Calma, ACCUSED-APPELLANT Ynares-Santiago, J.

    :FACTS: Acting on their sister PRISCILLA AGONCILLOS advice who was then in France,MARIA TOLOSA SARDEOA and MARCELIANO TOLOSA met with the appellant atExpert Travel Agency and handed over the money required for the processing of their travel and employment documents to Paris, France. Maria gave P107,000.00,P46,000.00 and US$1,500.00 while Marceliano paid P100,000.00, P46,000.00 andUS$1,500.00 to the appellant.Acting on her sister ANALYN OLPINDOS advice who was then in Belgium, PRECILAOLPINDO met with the appellant at Expert Travel Agency and handed over moneyrequired for the processing of her travel and employment documents to Canada.Precila gave $2,500.00.to the appellant.No evidence was adduced in relation to the complaint of VILMA BRINA since she didnot testify in court.ELISA CAMPANIANOS of the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency presented acertification to the effect that the appellant was not duly licensed to recruit workershere and abroad. The appellant averred that she never represented to the complainants that she canprovide them with work abroad. She met Priscilla and Analyn separately abroad whothen asked her to help their siblings in the processing of their travel documents andnothing more. She added that it was Priscilla and Analyn who promised employmentto the complainants. The money she received was not in the form of placement feesbut for the cost of tickets, hotel accommodations and other travel requirements.After trial on the merits, the trial court found the appellant guilty of illegalrecruitment and four (4) counts of estafa. Thus, this recourse. ISSUE:Whether or not the appellant is guilty with four (4) counts of estafa and one (1)count of illegal recruitment.RULING:Article 13 (b) of the Labor Code provides:

    You might also like