LIM, DANIELLE Article III. Section 2. Requisites of a Valid Warrant. Kho v. Lanzanas 489 SCRA 444
FACTS: Shun Yih Chemistry Factory (SYCF), a business in Taiwan and engaged in the manufacture and sale of Chin Chun Su Creams/Cosmetics, appointed Young Factor Enterprises in the Philippines, owned and operated by Quintin Cheng also known as Kho Seng Hiok, as its distributor of Chin Chun Su products in the Philippines for a term of two years beginning 1978. Quintin Cheng sold all his right, title, interest and goodwill in the trademark Chin Chun Su and device to petitioner Elidad Kho. Later, animosity arose between SYCF and Quintin Cheng resulting in the termination of their distributorship agreement on 30 October 1990. SYCF appointed respondent Summerville General Merchandising, represented by Ang Tiam Chay and Victor Chua, as its new exclusive importer, re-packer and distributor of Chin Chun Su products in the Philippines for a period of five years. Before instituting a criminal complaint for Unfair Competition, Summerville General Merchandising applied for the issuance of a search warrant against the Spouses Elidad and Violeta Kho and Roger Kho, since they persisted in manufacturing and selling Chin Chun Su products despite the BFAD order directing them to refrain from doing so. The search warrant was issued against Elidad, Violeta and Roger Kho and its enforcement led to the seizure of several Chin Chun Su products. ISSUES: Whether or not Judge Lanzanas was guilty of grave abuse of discretion in issuing the search warrant and refusing to return the seized objects to petitioners HELD: NO. Examination of the records reveal that the judge adhered to the prescribed procedure for the issuance of the search warrant. There was: (1) the examination under oath or affirmation of the Complainant and his witnesses and, in this case, Judge Enrico A. Lanzanas personally examined complainant- policewoman SPO4 Nedita Alvario Balagbis, and Mr. Victor Chua, the representative/officer of Summerville General Merchandising, at the hearing on the application for Search Warrant No. 99-1520 held on 10 January 2000 (2) an examination personally conducted by then Presiding Judge Lanzanas, in the form of searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath, of the complainant and witnesses on facts personally known to them; and (3) the taking of sworn statements, together with the affidavits submitted, which were duly attached to the records. In determining probable cause in the issuance of a search warrant, the oath required must refer to the truth of the facts within the personal knowledge of the applicant or his witnesses, because the purpose thereof is to convince the committing magistrate, not the individual making the affidavit and seeking the issuance of the warrant, of the existence of probable cause. The affidavit of SPO4 Nedita Balagbis and Victor Chua for the application of a search warrant showed that Summerville General Merchandising represented by Mr. Victor Chua sought the assistance of the police station in connection with the proliferation of fake Chin Chun Su products. Together, they made a surveillance of two places. In those two places, they were able to verify that plastic containers were being labeled with Chin Chun Su stickers filled with cream.
Clearly, probable cause existed for the issuance of the warrant based on the affidavits. The surveillance conducted by SPO4 Nedita Balagbis on the basis of reliable information that Elidad, Violeta and Roger Kho were engaged in the illegal manufacture and sale of fake Chin Chun Su products enabled her to gain personal knowledge of facts indicating that an offense involving violation of intellectual property rights was being committed by the Khos and that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched. This fact was sufficient justification for the examining judge, in this case Judge Lanzanas, to conclude that there was probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant. At the hearing conducted by Judge Lanzanas, SPO4 Nedita Balagbis and Victor Chua testified on the affidavits they separately executed, and essentially stated therein upon inquiry by Judge Lanzanas that indeed several fake Chin Chun Su products were loaded to a tricycle and brought to a warehouse in Topacio Street. In People v. Tee, it was held that a magistrate’s determination of probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant is paid great deference by a reviewing court, as long as there was substantial basis for that determination. Substantial basis means that the questions of the examining judge brought out such facts and circumstances as would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed, and the objects in connection with the offense sought to be seized are in the place sought to be searched. There was no irregularity or abuse of discretion on the part of Judge Lanzanas for issuing the assailed search warrant. He had complied with the procedural and substantive requirements for issuing a search warrant.
