Office Address  

Address

1009 West Tower, PSE Center, Exchange Road, Ortigas Center Pasig City.

Phone Numbers

(632) 636-7526 | (632) 637-1477
(632) 638-8732 | (632) 637-0376

Fax Number: 
(632) 636-7525

Email Us

bplaw85@yahoo.com / admin@balgoslaw.com

   

Firm Profile

Founded in 1945 by bosom friends, Alejandro F. de Santos, Jose B. Herrera and Artemio Delfino as an informal partnership to engage in the general practice of law, under the name De Santos, Herrera & Delfino.  Subsequently, it became a duly registered professional partnership under the firm name De Santos, Balgos & Perez.  With the demise of founding partner Alejandro F. de Santos in 1985, the remaining partners, Marcial O. T. Balgos and Hernando B. Perez reorganized it under the name Balgos & Perez.  With the departure of Hernando B. Perez upon his becoming the President of the University of Batangas, the firm metamorphosed into Balgos, Gumaru & Jalandoni.  

Although it has remained small, BPLaw is a full service law firm providing services to its clients in the manner as envisaged by its founding partners – without fear or favor, asking for no quarters and not giving any to protect and advance the interests of those who avail of its services.  BPLaw lawyers are dedicated, loyal and fully committed to rendering effective and beneficial representation for its clients. 

EXPERIENCE

BPLaw has handled cases which have established precedents. It handled Marquez vs. Comelec, where the Supreme Court held that one running for a political office is not a fugitive from justice if he leaves the place where a subsequent criminal prosecution was initiated, before the initiation of such proceedings.

It participated as counsel for the intervenor in Bengzon, Jr. vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee where it was established that the Senate cannot investigate an individual already being investigated by the Office of the Ombudsman. In Chung Ka Bio, et al., vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al., the Firm was able to obtain a ruling that  under certain circumstances, the life of a corporation may be deemed to be continued despite failure to organize. In Sobrejuanite vs. ASB Development Corporation, it was able to obtain for its client the ruling that the execution of a final judgment cannot be implemented against a corporation under corporate rehabilitation. In Vda. De Navarro, et al., vs. Taroma, et al., it was able to obtain for its clients the ruling that one cannot avail of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court at the same time that it is seeking relief from the Court of Appeals.

It represented MIA-NAIA Service Operators in MIA-NAIA Service Operators vs. Ombudsman, et al., where it was able to obtain a ruling that the Ombudsman commits an error if he dismisses a case without affording the complainant a full and complete preliminary investigation. In Torralba, et al., vs. Sandiganbayan, et al., it was able to obtained for its clients the ruling that the respondent is entitled to a full and complete preliminary investigation. In BF Homes, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al., it obtained for BF Homes, its client, the ruling that the stay order issued in a rehabilitation case is effective from its date of issue until the corporation is fully rehabilitated.

The Firm is proud to claim the distinction of introducing into Philippine Corporate Rehabilitation practice the ideas of stay, cram down and white knight.

   

Share us  

   

BPLAW Webmail  

   

Who's Online  

We have 9 guests and no members online

   
© Copyright 2014. Balgos Law. All rights reserved.