Practice question
A manager makes a private work-related complaint to the proper superior, but evidence proves that he knowingly invented the accusation to injure a colleague. He relies on the communication's workplace subject and correct addressee as conclusive immunity. What follows?
- Qualified privilege remains conclusive even when actual malice is proved.
- A proper recipient alone conclusively defeats libel.
- The qualified nature of the privilege requires examination of malice; proved knowing fabrication defeats the proposed automatic immunity.
- Every workplace accusation is absolutely privileged.
- The colleague must first admit the fabrication.
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, specified articles, as amended: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426; Articles 353–355, 358–359 and 361.
- RA 10951, current amended RPC provisions and monetary thresholds: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2017/ra_10951_2017.html; amended honor-offense fines.
- Orillo v People, G.R. No. 206905, January 30, 2023, main decision, libel and qualified privilege: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/jan2023/gr_206905_2023.html
- Causing v People, G.R. No. 258524, April 8, 2026, en banc main resolution on reconsideration, cyberlibel prescription and discovery: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2026/apr2026/gr_258524_2026.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.