- Petitioner
- Union Bank of the Philippines
- Respondent
- People
- Citation
- G.R. No. 192565
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Division
- En Banc
- Ponente
- Brion, J.
- Decided
- February 28, 2012
Summary
Union Bank and Desi Tomas challenged the venue for perjury prosecution, arguing that Pasay City (where the false Certificate against Forum Shopping was filed) rather than Makati City (where it was notarized) was the proper venue. The Supreme Court En Banc denied their petition, clarifying that under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, perjury committed through making a false affidavit is consummated where the oath is taken, not where the document is subsequently used. The Court resolved conflicting jurisprudence by distinguishing between perjury by false testimony (venue where testimony given) and perjury by false affidavit (venue where oath administered), holding that all essential elements of perjury were committed in Makati City where Tomas subscribed and swore to the false certification before a notary public.
Intellegal Wiki · Key Holding
Perjury committed by a false affidavit is consummated where the affiant subscribes and swears to it, which fixes the venue for the offense (Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code).
An editorially maintained summary of the rule this Supreme Court decision is cited for — not legal advice.