Volume IX, Issue No. 33 January-March 2007

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

January to March 2007 Volume IX, Issue No. 33

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

SUPREME COURT

RE

PU

BLIC

OF THE PHILIP

PI N

ES

BATAS AT BAYAN

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS2

PHILJAACADEMIC PROGRAMS

44TH AND 45TH ORIENTATION SEMINAR-WORKSHOP FOR NEWLY APPOINTED JUDGES

The 44th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for NewlyAppointed Judges was held on January 31 toFebruary 8, 2007, at the PHILJA DevelopmentCenter, Tagaytay City. In attendance were forty-five (45) judges, comprising forty-two (42) newlyappointed judges and three (3) promoted judges.

A. NEW APPOINTMENTS

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IIHon. Oscar T. ZaldivarRTC Br. 7, Aparri, Cagayan

REGION III

Hon. Liberty O. CastañedaRTC Paniqui, Tarlac

REGION IV

Hon. Ulysses D. DelgadoRTC Br. 44, Mamburao, Mindoro OccidentalHon. Mary Josephine P. LazaroRTC Br. 74, Antipolo City, RizalHon. Wilfredo D. MayorRTC Br. 14, Nasugbu, BatangasHon. Daniel C. VillanuevaRTC Br. 54, Lucena City

REGION VIIHon. Toribio S. QuiwagRTC Br. 27, Lapu-Lapu City

REGION IXHon. Ernesto Maximo Victor E. LaurelRTC Br. 30, Aurora, Zamboanga del Sur

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Hon. Voltaire P. AgasMeTC Br. 35, Quezon CityHon. Felicitas O. Laron-CacanindinMeTC Br. 19, ManilaHon. Madonna C. EchiverriMeTC Br. 41, Quezon CityHon. Nadine Jessica Corazon J. FamaMeTC Br. 38, Quezon City

Hon. Marlina M. ManuelMeTC Br. 8, ManilaHon. Bonifacio S. PascuaMeTC Br. 44, Pasay CityHon. Roberto P. QuirozMeTC Br. 10, ManilaHon. Jaime B. SantiagoMeTC Br. 12, ManilaHon. Maria Zoraida S. Zabat-TuazonMeTC Br. 23, Manila

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES

REGION IHon. Roberto R. MabalotMTCC Br. 1, Baguio City

REGION IIHon. Norman C. GañacMTCC Br. 4, Tuguegarao, Cagayan

REGION IVHon. Priscilla U. AcederaMTCC San Pedro, LagunaHon. Carolina I. SisonMTCC Calamba City, LagunaHon. Grace P. Chavez-TyMTCC Br. 3, Lipa City, Batangas

REGION VHon. Lorna O. ReyesMTCC Br. 1, Iriga City

REGION VIHon. Ofelia M. ArtuzMTCC Br. 5, Iloilo City

REGION IXHon. Pablito S. Pielago, Jr.MTCC Br. 2, Pagadian City, Zamboanga del Sur

REGION IXHon. Nancy B. CuaresmaMTCC Br. 1, Zamboanga City

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IHon. Mary George C. CaldonaMTC Mapandan, PangasinanHon. Rebecca A. FernandezMTC Mangaldan, PangasinanHon. Maria Laarni R. ParaynoMTC Binmaley, Pangasinan

REGION IIIHon. Erick A. SaduralMTC Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007 3

REGION IVHon. Elizabeth M. San Juan-MataMTC Gumaca, Quezon

REGION VHon. Jorge John S. AgananMTC Caramon, Camarines Sur

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION IHon. Harriet C. Cabreros12th MCTC Binalonan-Laoac, PangasinanHon. Mario S. DomingoMCTC Magsingal, San Juan, Ilocos SurHon. Marvin A. Galacgac6th MCTC Espiritu-Nueva Era-Ilocos NorteHon. Pedro R. Rosal2nd MCTC San Vicente-San Ildefonso, Ilocos Sur

REGION IIHon. Jesusa L. Carag6th MCTC Solana-Enrile, Cagayan

REGION VHon. Antonio E. De Vera4th MCTC Gubat-Prieto-Diaz, SorsogonHon. Amado D. Dimaano1st MCTC Casiguran-Juban, Sorsogon

REGION VIIIHon. Ateneones S. Bacale2nd MCTC Biliran-Cabugayan, BiliranHon. Mario N. Melchor, Jr.6th MCTC Calubian-San Isidro, Leyte

REGION XIIHon. Annabelle D.P. Piang1st MCTC Parang-Matanong-Buldon-Barira,Maguindanao

2. PROMOTIONS



Hon. Thelma Bunyi-MedinaRTC Br. 32, ManilaHon. Ma. Theresa G. EstoestaRTC Br. 7, Manila

REGION XHon. Gil G. BollozosRTC Br. 21, Cagayan de Oro City

On the other hand, the 45h Orientation Seminar-Workshop was held on March 14 to 22, 2007, at thePHILJA Development Center, Tagaytay City. In

attendance were fifty (50) participants, comprisingforty-seven (47) newly appointed judges and three(3) promoted judges.

A. NEW APPOINTMENTS


REGION IIHon. Reymundo L. AumentadoRTC Br. 20, Cauayan, IsabelaHon. Marivic A. Cacatian-BeltranRTC Br. 3, Tuguegarao, Cagayan

REGION IIIHon. Evelyn A. Atienza-TurlaRTC Br. 40, Palayan, Nueva Ecija

REGION IVHon. Sonia T. Yu-CasanoRTC Br. 31, San Pedro, Laguna

REGION VHon. Domingo B. Maristela, Jr.RTC Br. 49, Cataingan, Masbate

REGION VIHon. Globert J. JustaleroRTC Br. 32, Iloilo City

REGION VIIHon. Edito Y. EnemecioRTC Br. 25, Danao City, Cebu

REGION VIIIHon. Lauro Andres P. Castillo, Jr.RTC Br. 36, Carigara, LeyteHon. Crescente F. Maraya, Jr.RTC Br. 11, Calubian, Leyte

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL JUDICIAL CAPITAL REGION

Hon. Rossi S. Mantala-CastroMeTC Br. 28, Manila

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES

REGION IVHon. Agripino R. BravoMTCC Br. 2, Lipa City, Batangas

REGION VIHon. Jose Paolo G. AriolaMTCC Br. 1, Bacolod City, Negros Occidental

REGION XHon. Rico A. TanMTCC Br. 3, Ozamis City, Misamis Occidental

(Continued on NEXT page)


MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IIHon. Olga L. OlerianaMTC Peñablanca, Cagayan

REGION IIIHon. Leo Cecilio D. BautistaMTC Nampicuan, Nueva EcijaHon. Ronald P. SandovalMTC Sta. Rosa, Nueva Ecija

REGION IVHon. Ralph S. ArellanoMTC Br. 2, San Pedro, LagunaHon. Patricia Angeles C. FidelMTC Cuenca, BatangasHon. Edwina M. PerezMTC San Antonio, Quezon

REGION VHon. Eli C. PosugacMTC Siruma, Camarines Sur

REGION VIHon. Dyna Doll Chiongson TrocioMTC Binalbagan, Negros Occidental

REGION VIIIHon. Fabio T. Albao, Jr.MTC Liloan, Southern LeyteHon. Marisa R. PosionMTC Leyte, Leyte

REGION XIHon. Joseph A. PalmesMTC Tampakan, South Cotabato

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION IHon. Alan M. Ordoño1st MCTC San Juan-San Gabriel, La Union

REGION IVHon. Librado P. Chavez5th MCTC Talisay-Laurel, BatangasHon. Josielyn D. Lara-De Luna5th MCTC Carmona-Gen. Mariano Alvarez, CaviteHon. Marienette D. Padua1st MCTC Lucban-Sampaloc, Quezon

REGION VHon. Mary Flor D. Tabigue-Logarta6th MCTC Cataingan-Pio V. Corpus-Esperanza, MasbateHon. Diana Tambago Sanchez7th MCTC Mobo-Milagros, Masbate

REGION VIHon. Sebastino A. Baguio6th MCTC Dumalag-Tapaz, Capiz

REGION VIIHon. Ciriaco Z. Bautista8th MCTC Candijay-Anda, BoholHon. Samuel A. Biliran16th MCTC Carmen-Batuan, BoholHon. Azucena C. Macalolot-Credo5th MCTC Trinidad-San Miguel-Bien Unido, BoholHon. Perpetuo C. Magallano, Jr.9th MCTC Guindulman-Duerto, BoholHon. Olivia M. Mende15th MCTC Bilar-Sevilla, BoholHon. Jorge T. Uba7th MCTC Alicia-Mabini, BoholHon. Laebeth L. Varquez3rd MCTC Inabanga-Buenavista, Bohol

REGION VIIIHon. Reynaldo A. Alconaba4th MCTC San Julian-Sulat, Eastern SamarHon. Jacinto B. Elle4th MCTC San Juan-St. Bernard, Southern LeyteHon. Ana Lesa Sarsoza-Radaza9th MCTC Bato-Matalom, Leyte

REGION IXHon. Reymar L. Lacaya3rd MCTC Sindangan-Siayan-Bacungan-PonotZamboanga del Sur

REGION XHon. Armando S. Adlawan6th MCTC Bonifacio-Don Mariano Marcos, Misamis OccidentalHon. Romualdo L. Banan4th MCTC Balingasag-Lagonglong, Misamis OrientalHon. Roy P. Murallon5th MCTC Clarin-Tudela, Misamis Occidental

REGION XIHon. Teodulfo L. Vega3rd MCTC Kapalong-Talaingod, Davao del Norte

REGION XIIHon. Mahadi Mama Pimping7th MCTC Ditsaan-Ramain-Bubong, Lanao del Sur

2. PROMOTIONS


REGION IV

Hon. Teodoro N. SolisRTC Br. 25, Biñan, Laguna


12TH PRE-JUDICATURE PROGRAM

The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), inpartnership with the Integrated Bar of thePhilippines (IBP), conducted the 12th Pre-JudicatureProgram (PJP) on February 20 to March 27, 2007,at the IBP Multi-Purpose Hall, 4th Floor, IBPBuilding, Ortigas Center, Pasig City.

Three hundred twenty-three (323) lawyerssuccessfully completed the PJP while two hundredthirty-seven (237) lawyers attended for MCLEcompliance only. They were broken down asfollows:

REGION VIHon. Kathrine A. GoRTC Br. 59, San Carlos City, Negros Occidental

REGION XHon. Solayman G. Macato-onRTC Br. 24, Cagayan de Oro City

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

CEDAW, GENDER SENSITIVITY,AND THE COURTS

PHILJA, in partnership with the Committee onGender Responsiveness in the Judiciary (CGRJ) —Sub-Committee on Training and Capacity-Building,Ateneo Human Rights Center, and the UnitedNations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM),conducted three (3) batches of the Seminar-Workshopon CEDAW, Gender Sensitivity, and the Courts, at theTraining Center, Centennial Bldg., Supreme Court,in the first quarter of the year.

The first two batches were conducted onJanuary 25 to 26, 2007, and February 22 to 23, 2007,wherein a total of thirty-one (31) and thirty-four(34) lawyer-participants from Supreme Court,Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and the Courtof Tax Appeals attended, respectively.

On the other hand, the third batch of theseminar-workshop transpired on March 29 to 30,2007, which was attended by a total of thirty-three(33) judges-participants from the National CapitalJudicial Region.

Participants of the Seminar-Workshop on CEDAW,Gender Sensitivity, and the Courts, with Justice AmeurfinaA. Melencio Herrera, PHILJA Chancellor (center) onJanuary 25 to 26, 2007 .

Batch Day Category No. of Participants

1 1st to 3rd PJP 26

2

4thPJP 29

MCLE 31

5thPJP 29

MCLE 30

6thPJP 29

MCLE 30

3 7th - 9thPJP 29

MCLE 23

4

10thPJP 29

MCLE 24

11thPJP 29

MCLE 20

12thPJP 29

MCLE 18

5

13thPJP 30

MCLE 29

14thPJP 31

MCLE 20

15thPJP 33

MCLE 12


SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

DEMOCRACY AND LAW AT THE SERVICE

OF THE HUMAN PERSON

The Academy, in collaboration with the Valuesfor Development Foundation, Inc. (VDFI), and incooperation with the Ramon Aboitiz Foundationconducted the Seminar on Democracy and Law at theService of the Human Person, on February 15 to 16,2007, at the Eduardo Aboitiz Development StudyCenter, Ramon Aboitiz Foundation, Inc., 35 LopezJaena St., Cebu City. A total of thirty-one (31)participants comprising four (4) Court of AppealsJustices, fifteen (15) Regional Trial Court Judges,three (3) practicing lawyers, two (2) members ofthe academe, two (2) representatives of theCommission on Human Rights, and five (5)members of the VDFI attended the said program.

This was the second seminar of its kind byPHILJA in partnership with the VDFI. The pilotseminar which was held in Tagaytay City two yearsago brought together Justices from the SupremeCourt, selected lawyers, and businessmen.

STRENGTHENING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF

THE CODE OF MUSLIM PERSONAL LAWS

OF THE PHILIPPINES

The Philippine Judicial Academy, in cooperationwith The Asia Foundation (TAF), and the UnitedStates Agency for International Development(USAID), conducted the seminar-workshop entitledStrengthening the Implementation of the Code of MuslimPersonal Laws of the Philippines last March 26 to 29,2007, at the Dynasty Court Hotel, Cagayan de OroCity. A total of thirty-five (35) participants attendedthe said program. This was the third, in a series offive (5) seminars to update and enlighten judgesand lawyers on the Islamic Law or PresidentialDecree No. 1083.

Topics discussed were Comparative Studies andOverview of Shari’a Court System; Arbitration Lawand Alternative Dispute Resolution Law of thePhilippines; Internally Displaced Persons (IDP)Rights and Guiding Principles on Shari’a Court

LAW AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

FOR THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY

PHILJA, in partnership with the Ateneo LawSchool, the Ateneo de Manila – Department ofEconomics, and in cooperation with the BritishEmbassy conducted the Seminar-Workshop on Lawand Economic Development Issues for the PhilippineJudiciary, on March 27 to 28, 2007, at the QuezonCity Sports Club, E. Rodriguez Sr., Blvd., QuezonCity. A total of twenty-two (22) participants fromthe Court of Tax Appeals attended, comprising five(5) justices and seventeen (17) lawyers.

Just like the previous seminar-workshops onthe same topic, it aimed to provide the participantsa better understanding on issues relating to money,economics, and trade laws, regulations andremedies.

Topics discussed were Basic Economics;International Economics and Sovereignty;Historical Overview of the Bretton Woods Systems;Legal Structure of the World Trade Organizationand the Regulation of Trade; Do Trade RemediesReally Remedy?; Regional Trading Agreements –Building Blocks or Stumbling Blocks?; DisputeSettlement in Local Courts; and The Color ofMoney, In God We Trust.

System for Internally Displaced Persons; BasicComputer Training; Comparative Analysis ofMarriage and Divorce under the Family Code andMuslim Code; The New Code of Conduct for CourtPersonnel; Comparative Studies on Civil andIslamic Law on Succession; Islamic Law on Personand Family Relations; Guidelines on theAccomplishments of Monthly Reports and FinancialConcern; Right Responses to the Age-Old Problemsof Mindanao and the Autonomous Region;Strengthening and Reformation of Shari’a Court;AGAMA Arbitration Council Proceeding Underthe Shari’a Court; and Human Rights Perspective.A workshop concluded the final day of the seminar.


CONVENTIONS

PWJA

The Philippine Judicial Academy and thePhilippine Women Judges Association (PWJA)conducted the Annual Convention-Seminar of thePhilippine Women Judges Association with the theme:“Judicial Power Rightly Wielded Makes ADifference” on March 1 to 2, 2007, at the ManilaHotel. A total of two hundred ninety-eight (298)participants registered in the convention-seminar.Also in attendace were lady justices of the SupremeCourt, Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, andCourt of Tax Appeals.

In his Message, Guest Speaker Chief JusticeReynato S. Puno, mentioned that the PWJAConvention is the celebration of women througha show of intelligence, industry and independenceand its members managed to carve a career in theJudiciary.

PACE

The Academy and the Philippine Associationof Court Employees (PACE) conducted the NationalConvention-Seminar of the Philippine Association of Courtof Employees, on March 29 to 31, 2007, at the PuntaVilla Resort, Iloilo City. A total of one thousandtwo hundred eighty-seven (1, 287) participantsattended the said convention-seminar.

With the theme, “Bringing Court Employees to aHigher Level of Professionalism through PACE,” theconvention-seminar brought the participants to theutmost level of professionalism throughdiscussions on the following topics: RecordsManagement; Decorum In and Out of Court; LegalFees and Revenues; Career Enhancement; andRecent Supreme Court Decisions on AdministrativeCases Involving Court Personnel.

JUDICIAL MOVES

Supreme CourtAssociate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura

appointed on January 22, 2007

ON MEDIATION

BASIC MEDIATION COURSE

PHILJA and the Philippine Mediation Centerconducted the Basic Mediation Training Course in two(2) batches namely, Batangas Mediation Programand Bulacan Mediation Program in the first quarterof the year.

The Batangas Mediation Program wasconducted on January 22 to 25, 2007, at the HotelPontefino, Batangas City with a total of twenty-nine (29) participants. The Bulacan MediationProgram was conducted on March 20 to 23, 2007,at the Barcie International Malolos City, Bulacan,with a total of thirty-five (35) participants inattendance.

Lectures presented were on the following topics:Social and Cultural Context in Negotiation/Mediation; Legal versus Problem-Solving Mindsets;Mediation as Essentially Assisted Negotiation; ThePhilippine Judicial System: An Overview;Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM); Conflict Managementand Dispute Resolution; Overview/Fundamentalsof Communications; The Stages of Mediation andCommunication Skills which includes six (6) stages;Parties to the Mediation Process; WritingCompromise Agreements; The Administrative andProcedural Aspects of Court-Annexed; The Rulesand Guidelines on the Mediation Fees; The Mediatoras an Officer of the Court; The Mediator An aProfessional Mediator; and The GrievanceMachinery in Court-Annexed Mediation.

ORIENTATION SEMINAR ON THE PMCOPERATION AND GRIEVANCE MACHINERY

The Philippine Judicial Academy and thePhilippine Mediation Center conducted theOrientation Seminar on the PMC Operation and GrievanceMachinery last February 12, 2007, at the BacolodL’Sea Restaurant, Bacolod City, Negros Occidental.A total of thirty-one (31) participants attended theorientation-seminar. The orientation-seminarfocused on the discussion of Operating System ofPMC Structure under CAM-JRO Management andGrievance Machinery.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURTTTTT8

LAUNCHING AND PRESENTATION OF THE NEWCODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR THEPHILIPPINE JUDICIARY (ANNOTATED)

The Philippine Judicial Academy andUniversity of the Philippines Institute of JudicialAdministration (UP-IJA), in collaboration with theUnited States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID) and the American BarAssociation — Rule of Law Initiative (ABA-ROLI),launched the New Code of Judicial Conduct for thePhilippine Judiciary (Annotated), on February 20, 2007,at the Justices’ Lounge, Supreme Court.

PHILJA’s, Department of Ethics and JudicialConduct worked on the annotations to Canons 1to 3, while UP-IJA covered Canons 4 to 6. FederalAppeals Judge Margaret McKeown, US Court ofAppeals for the 9th Circuit, and her staff providedthe annotations on U.S. and international case law.

The launch was a brief and simple ceremonywith the meaningful participation of distinguishedguests from Supreme Court, Court of Appeals,Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals, Office ofthe Court Administrator, Trial Courts, Universityof the Philippines Law Center and internationalfunding agencies.

PHILJA’S 11TH FOUNDATION DAY

On March 12, 2007, the Philippine JudicialAcademy marked its eleventh year of inception.On this day, PHILJA personnel attended a HumanResource Development session on RecordsManagement conducted by Presiding JudgeMarivic T. Daray, of the Regional Trial CourtBranch 18, Davao del Sur. The activity is part ofPHILJA’s efforts to achieve an effective andorganized implementation of standard workprocedures. Judge Daray spoke about the Japanese5S, which mean seiri or sort (clearing the workarea); seitori or set in order (designating locations);seiso or shine (cleanliness and workplaceappearance); seiketzu or standardize (everyonedoing things the same way); and shitsuze orsustain (ingraining the 5S’s into the culture). It isa system to reduce waste and optimize productivitythrough the maintenance of an orderly workplacefor consistently favorable operational outcomes.

ON PHILJAThe Basic Mediation Programs, underway in theprovinces of Batangas and Bulacan, are effectivelyincreasing awareness among different sectoralgroups of the benefits of alternative disputeresolution.

Newly appointed judges hailed the 44th and 45th

Orientation Seminar-Workshops as programsinvaluable to their successful assumption to dutyfor providing them with the necessary knowledgeand guidelines for effective case and courtmanagement, conduct of trial proceedings andhandling of administrative matters. A total ofninety-five (95) judges (90 newly appointed and 5newly promoted) were one in rating the saidseminar-workshops 100% in profitability.

Equally noteworthy is the tie-up between theMandatory Continuing Legal Education Programof the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and theAcademy’s 12th Pre-Judicature Program designedfor lawyers aspiring for judgeship. Many of theparticipants taking the course only for MCLE creditsexpressed interest in attending the full course tocomplete the required units for the 2007-2010 MCLEcompliance period. We are proud of our PHILJAacademic experts for their excellent and interactivelectures.

Attendees at the Seminar on Democracy and Lawat the Service of the Human Person, PHILJA’s secondcollaboration with the Values for DevelopmentFoundation, Inc., included Court of Appeals Justicesand RTC Judges stationed in Cebu City, members ofthe academe and practitioners of private law firms.They engaged in freewheeling and productivediscussions after the lectures on the essence ofdemocracy and the rule of law with emphasis onthe importance of values and human relations.

We continue to strengthen the implementation ofthe Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippineswith the conduct of the 4th Seminar involving Shari’acourt interpreters, stenographers, sheriffs andclerks – court personnel who support the Shari’ajudges in the successful implementation of theIslamic Law (P.D. 1083).

The quarter was hectic but fulfilling, with bothseminar participants and staff coming away fromthe programs with a high feeling of accomplishment.PHILJA carries on despite all odds, aware of itsimportant role in achieving judicial excellence.

(Continued from page 1)

FFFFFrom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’s Desks Desks Desks Desks Desk

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007 NEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURTTTTT 9

Actions and utterances in judicial proceedings sofar as the actual participants therein are concernedand preliminary steps leading to judicial actionof an official nature have been given absoluteprivilege.

Since the newsletter was presented during thepreliminary investigation, it was vested with aprivileged character. While Philippine law is silenton the question of whether the doctrine of absoluteprivilege extends to statements made in preliminaryinvestigations or other proceedings preparatory tothe actual trial, the US case of Borg v. Boas (231 F2d 788) makes a categorical declaration of theexistence of such protection:

“It is hornbook learning that the actionsand utterances in judicial proceedings so faras the actual participants therein areconcerned and preliminary steps leadingto judicial action of an official nature havebeen given absolute privilege. Ofparticular interest are proceedings leadingup to prosecutions or attemptedprosecutions for crime x x x [A] writtencharge or information filed with theprosecutor or the court is not libelousalthough proved to be false and unfounded.Furthermore, the information given to aprosecutor by a private person for thepurpose of initiating a prosecution isprotected by the same cloak of immunityand cannot be used as a basis for an actionfor defamation.” (Emphasis ours)

The ruling in Borg is persuasive in thisjurisdiction. We see no reason why we shouldadopt it.

(Corona, J., Nicasio I. Alcantara v. Vicente C. Ponceand the People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 156183,February 28, 2007)

REMEDIAL LAW

Doctrine of Apparent Authority.

Apparent authority, or what is sometimesreferred to as the “holding out” theory, or doctrineof ostensible agency or agency by estoppel, has itsorigin from the law of agency. It imposes liability,not as the result of the reality of a contractualrelationship, but rather because the actions of aprincipal or an employer is somehow misleadingthe public into believing that the relationship orthe authority exists. The concept is essentially oneof estoppel and has been explained in this manner:

The principal is bound by the acts of hisagent with the apparent authority whichhe knowingly permits the agent to assume,or which he holds the agent to assume, orwhich he holds the agent out to the publicas possessing. The question in every case iswhether the principal has by his voluntaryact placed the agent in such a situation thata person of ordinary prudence, conversantwith business usages and the nature of theparticular business, is justified in presumingthat such agent has authority to performthe particular act in question.

The applicability of apparent authority in thefield of hospital liability was upheld long time agoin Irving v. Doctor Hospital of Lake Worth, Inc. There,it was explicitly stated that “there does not appear tobe any rational basis for excluding the concept of apparentauthority from the field of hospital liability.” Thus, incases where it can be shown that a hospital, by itsactions, has held out a particular physician as itsagent and/or employee and that a patient hasaccepted treatment from that physician in thereasonable belief that it is being rendered in behalfof the hospital, then the hospital will be liable forthe physician’s negligence.

(Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., Professional Services, Inc.v. Natividad and Enrique Agana, G.R. No. 126297,January 31, 2007)

CIVIL LAW

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS10

Guidelines on the transfer of employees.

Concerning the transfer of employees, these arethe following jurisprudential guidelines: (a) atransfer is a movement from one position toanother of equivalent rank, level or salary withoutbreak in the service or a lateral movement fromone position to another of equivalent rank orsalary; (b) the employer has the inherent right totransfer or reassign an employee for legitimatebusiness purposes; (c) a transfer becomes unlawfulwhere it is motivated by discrimination or bad faithor is effected as a form of punishment or is ademotion without sufficient cause; (d) the employermust be able to show that the transfer is notunreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to theemployee.

(Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., Rural Bank of Cantila, Inc.,and William Hotchkiss III v. Arjay Ronnel H. Julve,G.R. No. 169750, February 27, 2007)

LABOR LAW

Manner of establishing filiation of children.

The Court has laid down the manner ofestablishing the filiation of children, whetherlegitimate or illegitimate, as follows:

The filiation of illegitimate children, likelegitimate children, is established by (1) the recordof birth appearing in the civil register or a finaljudgment; or (2) an admission of legitimate filiationin a public document or a private handwritteninstrument and signed by the parent concerned.In the absence thereof, filiation shall be proved by(1) the open and continuous possession of thestatus of a legitimate child; or (2) any other meansallowed by the Rules of Court and special laws.The due recognition of an illegitimate child in arecord of birth, a will, a statement before a courtof record, or in any authentic writing is, in itself aconsummated act of acknowledgment of the child,and no further action is required. In fact anyauthentic writing is treated not just a ground fromcompulsory recognition; it is in itself a voluntaryrecognition that does not require a separate actionfor judicial approval.

(Callejo, Sr. J., Reynaldo Rodriguez and Nancy A.Rodriguez v. Concordia Ong Lim, Eurestes Limand Elmer LIm, G.R. No. 135817, November 30, 2006)

CIVIL LAW

The approval of the Rehabilitation Plan andappointment of a rehabilitation receiver merelysuspend the actions for claims against thecorporation.

We are not convinced that the approval of theRehabilitation Plan impairs petitioner bank’simpaired lien over the mortgaged properties.Section 6(c) of P.D. 902-A provides that “uponappointment of a management committee,rehabilitation receiver, board or body, pursuant tothis Decree, all actions for claims againstcorporations, partnerships or associations undermanagement or receivership pending before anycourt, tribunal, board or body shall besuspended.”

By that statutory provision, it is clear that theapproval of the Rehabilitation Plan andappointment of a rehabilitation receiver merelysuspend the actions for claims against respondentcorporations. Petitioner bank’s preferred status overthe unsecured creditors relative to the mortgageliens is retained, but the enforcement of suchpreference is suspended. The loan agreementsbetween the parties have not been set aside andpetitioner bank may still enforce its preference whenthe assets of ASB Group of Companies will beliquidated. Considering that the provisions of theloan agreements are merely suspended, there is noimpairment of contracts, specifically its lien in themortgaged properties.

(Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., Metropolitan Bank andTrust Company v. ASB Holdings, Inc., et. al., G.R.No. 166197, February 27, 2007)

MERCANTILE LAW

REMEDIAL LAW

The filing of a complaint or information in courtdoes not prevent the Justice Secretary fromexercising his review power. Neither can suchcomplaint or information deter him from orderingthe withdrawal of the cases. However, he cannotimpose his opinion on the trial court. Thedetermination of the case is within the court’sexclusive jurisdiction and competence.

Under R.A. No. 5180, in connection with Rule112, Section 4 of the Rules of Court, and as furtherimplemented by Department Circular No. 70(otherwise known as the “2000 NationalProsecution Service Rule on Appeal”), the Justice

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSJanuary-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007 11

Secretary is vested with the power to reviewresolutions of the provincial, city prosecutor orchief state prosecutor. He has the power to re-evaluate the position taken by his subordinatesin a case. Corollary to this power, he may alsodirect the public prosecutor to dismiss or causethe dismissal of the complaint or information.

Contrary to the theory of petitioners, the filingof a complaint or information in court does notprevent the Justice Secretary from exercising hisreview power. Neither can such complaint orinformation deter him from ordering thewithdrawal of the case. As a matter of fact, in Crespov. Mogul (GR. No. L-53373, 30 June 1987), wedeclared that the public prosecutor (as the JusticeSecretary’s subordinate) may still opt to withdrawthe Information either upon instruction of theJustice Secretary or for purposes of reinvestigation.

Furthermore, Crespo merely laid down the rulethat, while the Secretary of Justice has the powerto alter or modify the resolution of his subordinateand thereafter direct the withdrawal of the case,he cannot, however, impose his will on the court. Thus,the rule is –

“[O]nce a complaint or information is filedin Court any disposition of the case as itsdismissal or the conviction or acquittal ofthe accused rests [on] the sound discretionof the Court. Although the fiscal retainsthe direction and control of the prosecutionof the criminal cases even while the case isalready in Court[,] he cannot impose hisopinion on the trial court. Thedetermination of the case is within [thecourt’s] exclusive jurisdiction andcompetence. A motion to dismiss the casefiled by the fiscal should be addressed tothe sound discretion of the Court [that]has the option to grant or deny the same.It does not matter if this is done before orafter a reinvestigation or upon instructionsof the Secretary of Justice who reviewedthe records of the investigation.”

(Corona, J., Ernesto Dumlao, Jr., et. al., v. Hon.Rodolfo Ponferrada, Judge of the Regional TrialCourt, Branch 41, Manila, et. al., G.R. No. 146707,November 29, 2006.)

REMEDIAL LAW (continued)

Injunction may only be resorted to when there isa pressing necessity to avoid injuriousconsequences that cannot be remedied under anystandard compensation.

Injunction is an extraordinary remedy to beresorted to when there is a pressing necessity toavoid injurious consequences that cannot beremedied under any standard compensation. A courtmay issue an injunction only if it is fully convincedof its extreme necessity and after it has compliedwith the procedural requirements set by law.

In the absence of fraud, dishonesty orcorruption, the acts of a judge in his judicial capacityare not subject to disciplinary action. However, theassailed judicial acts must not be in gross violationof clearly established law or procedure, with whichevery judge must be familiar. Every judge, whilepresiding over a court of law, must have the basicrules at the palm of his hands and maintainprofessional competence at all times.

(Carpio, J., Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc.,v. Judge Jimmy H.F. Luczon, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-05-1901, November 30, 2006)

The accused may be convicted only of the crimewith which he is charged; exception.

The Constitution mandates that the accused, inall criminal prosecutions, shall enjoy the right tobe informed of the nature and cause of accusationagainst him. From this fundamental preceptproceeds the rule that the accused may be convictedonly of the crime with which he is charged.

An exception to this rule is the rule on variancein Section 4, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court:

Judgment in case of variance between allegationand proof. – When there is variance betweenthe offense charged in the complaint orinformation, and that proved, and the offenseas charged is included in or necessarilyincludes the offense proved, the accused shallbe convicted of the offense proved which isincluded in the offense charged, or of theoffense charged which is included in thatwhich is proved.

(Corona, J., Clement John Ferdinand M. Navarettev. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 147913,January 31, 2007)

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS12

The appellate court may extend the time for thepayment of docket fees if appellant is able to showthat there is a justifiable reason for the failure topay the correct amount of docket fees within theprescribed period.

Section 3, Rule 46 of the 1997 Rules of CivilProcedure provides:

Sec. 3. Contents and filing of petition; effect ofnon-compliance with requirements. – The petitionshall contain the full names and actualaddresses of all the petitioners andrespondents, a concise statement of thematters involved, the factual background ofthe case, and the grounds relied upon forthe relief prayed for.

x x x

The petitioner shall pay the correspondingdocket and other lawful fees to the clerk ofcourt and deposit the amount of P500.00 forcosts at the time of the filing of the petition.

The failure of the petitioner to comply withany of the foregoing requirements shall besufficient ground for the dismissal of thepetition.” (Emphasis supplied)

Thus, a court cannot acquire jurisdiction overthe subject matter of a case unless the docket feesare paid. It is clear that non-compliance with anyof the requirements stated above warrants thedismissal of a petition.

While the Rules of Court must be faithfullyfollowed, however, they may be relaxed forpersuasive and weighty reasons to relieve a litigantfrom an injustice commensurate with his failureto comply with the prescribed procedures. InYambao v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 140894,November 27, 2000), we ruled that the appellatecourt may extend the time for the payment ofdocket fees if appellant is able to show that there isa justifiable reason for the failure to pay the correctamount of docket fees within the prescribed period,like fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence,or a similar supervening casualty without faulton the part of the appellant. In Villamor v. Court ofAppeals (G.R. No. 136858, July 21, 2004), wereinstated the appeal despite appellants failure topay the docket fees after almost one (1) year from

the filing of the notice of appeal. We found thatthere was no deliberate refusal on his part to paythe required docket fee within the reglementaryperiod.

(Sandoval-Gutierrez, J., Leopoldo V. Mendoza v.The Court of Appeals and MerchandisingInspection Company, Ltd., G.R. No. 148505,February 20, 2007)

Requisites of a motion to reopen a case.

A motion to reopen a case to receive furtherproofs was not in the old rules but it wasnonetheless a recognized procedural recourse,deriving validity and acceptance from long,established usage. This lack of a specific provisioncovering motions to reopen was remedied by theRevised Rules of Criminal Procedure which tookeffect on December 1, 2000. The April 1, 2003 orderwas issued under the Revised Rules of CriminalProcedure. Section 24, Rule 119 and existingjurisprudence stress the following for reopening acase: (1) the reopening must be before the finalityof a judgment of conviction; (2) the order is issuedby the judge on his own initiative or upon motion;(3) the order is issued only after a hearing isconducted; (4) the order intends to prevent amiscarriage of justice; and (5) the presentation ofadditional and/or further evidence should beterminated within thirty days from the issuanceof the order.

(Quisumbing, J., Rene Cabarles v. Hon. JudgeBonifacio Sanz Maceda and People of thePhilippines, G.R. No. 161330, February 20, 2007)

Principle of Immutability of Final Judgment.

Under Section 2, Rule 36 of the Rules of Court,a judgment or final order becomes final andexecutory if no appeal or motion for new trial orreconsideration was filed within the periodprovided by the Rules.

Before a judgment becomes final and executory,that judgment may be amended. Upon finality ofthe judgment, the court loses its jurisdiction toamend, modify or alter the same. Except forcorrection of clerical errors or the making of nuncpro tunc entries which causes no prejudice to any

REMEDIAL LAW (continued)

(Continued on page 18)

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007January-March 2007 RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS 13

MINISNISTRATIVE ORDER NO. -2ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 25-2007

RE: DESIGNATION OF SPECIAL COURTS TOHEAR, TRY AND DECIDE CASESINVOLVING KILLINGS OF POLITICALACTIVISTS AND MEMBERS OF MEDIA

(1) Whereas, the preservation of the Rule ofLaw rests upon the Judiciary;

(2) Whereas, the extra-judicial killings ofpolitical activists and members of the media havebeen confirmed by the Report dated January 22,2007 submitted by the Independent Commissionto Address Media and Activists Killings, created byPresident Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo through theissuance of Administrative Order No. 157;

(3) Whereas, in a letter addressed to the ChiefJustice, dated January 31, 2007, President GloriaMacapagal-Arroyo viewed with “alarm andconcern the unabated killings of political activistsand members of media” and recommended thedesignation of Special Courts throughout thecountry that will hear and try these criminal cases;

(4) Whereas, the speedy and expeditiousresolution of these criminal cases deserve the

SUPREME COURT

RESOLUTION of the COURT En Banc datedFebruary 20, 2007, on A.M. NO. 99-10-05-0

RE: PROCEDURE IN EXTRAJUDICIAL ORJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE OF REALESTATE MORTGAGES

Acting on the recommendation of theCommittee on Revision of the Rules of Court, theCourt RESOLVED to adopt the following additionalrules with respect to Extrajudicial or JudicialForeclosure of Real Estate Mortgages:

(1) No temporary restraining order or writ ofpreliminary injunction against theextrajudicial foreclosure of real estatemortgage shall be issued on the allegationthat the loan secured by the mortgage hasbeen paid or is not delinquent unless theapplication is verified and supported byevidence of payment.

(2) No temporary restraining order or writ ofpreliminary injunction against theextrajudicial foreclosure of real estatemortgage shall be issued on the allegationthat the interest on the loan isunconscionable, unless the debtor pays themortgagee at least twelve percent perannum interest on the principal obligationas stated in the application for foreclosuresale, which shall be updated monthly whilethe case is pending.

(3) Where a writ of preliminary injunction hasbeen issued against a foreclosure ofmortgage, the disposition of the case shallbe speedily resolved. To this end, the courtconcerned shall submit to the SupremeCourt, through the Office of the CourtAdministrator, quarterly reports on theprogress of the cases involving ten millionpesos and above.

(4) All requirements and restrictions prescribedfor the issuance of a temporary restrainingorder/writ of preliminary injunction, suchas the posting of a bond, which shall beequal to the amount of the outstandingdebt, and the time limitation for itseffectivity, shall apply as well to a status quoorder.

Upon effectivity of these additional rules, allrules, resolutions, orders and circulars of thisCourt, which are inconsistent therewith, arehereby repealed or modified accordingly.

These additional Rules in the Procedure inExtrajudicial or Judicial Foreclosure of Real EstateMortgages shall take effect on March 10, 2007following their publication in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation not later than February 28, 2007.

February 20, 2007.

(Sgd.) PUNO, CJ, QUISUMBING, YNARES-SANTIAGO, SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, CARPIO,AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, CORONA, CARPIOMORALES, CALLEJO, SR. (on leave), AZCUNA (onofficial leave), TINGA, CHICO-NAZARIO,GARCIA, VELASCO, JR., NACHURA, JJ.


PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS14

A.O. NO. 25-2007 (continued)


Br. 26, ManilaJudge Silvino T. Pampilo, Jr.Br. 39, ManilaJudge Noli C. DiazBr. 50, ManilaJudge William Simon P. PeraltaBr. 95, Quezon CityJudge Henri Jean Paul B. IntingBr. 97, Quezon CityJudge Bernelito R. FernandezBr. 219, Quezon CityJudge Bayani V. VargasBr. 114, Pasay CityJudge Edwin B. RamizoBr. 118, Pasay CityJudge Pedro B. CoralesBr. 129, Kalookan CityJudge Thelma Canlas T. Pe-AguirreBr. 131, Kalookan CityJudge Ma. Teresa Estepa de Guzman-AlvarezBr. 133, Makati CityJudge Napoleon E. InoturanBr. 148, Makati CityJudge Oscar B. PimentelBr. 150, Makati CityJudge Elmo M. AlamedaBr. 157, Pasig CityJudge Esperanza F. VictorinoBr. 265, Pasig CityJudge Edwin A. VillasorBr. 271, Taguig City1

Judge Paz Esperanza M. CortezBr. 160, San Juan2

Judge Amelia Adao FabrosBr. 73, Malabon CityActing Presiding Judge Benjamin M. Aquino, Jr.

Br. 263, Marikina CityJudge David L. Mirando, Jr.Br. 212, Mandaluyong CityJudge Rizalina Capco-UmaliBr. 260, Parañaque CityJudge Jaime M. GurayBr. 255, Las Piñas CityJudge Raul B. VillanuevaBr. 204, Muntinlupa CityJudge Patria Manalastas de Leon

FIRST JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 5, Baguio CityJudge Antonio M. EstevesBr. 62, La Trinidad, BenguetJudge Danilo P. CamachoBr. 14, Laoag CityJudge Francisco Roberto D. QuilalaBr. 28, San Fernando City, La UnionJudge Victor M. ViloriaBr. 37, Lingayen, PangasinanJudge Emma P. BauzonBr. 41, Dagupan CityJudge Emma Manuel TorioBr. 46, Urdaneta CityJudge Tita Rodriguez Villarin

SECOND JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 3, Tuguegarao CityJudge Jezarene C. AquinoBr. 6, Aparri, CagayanJudge Rolando R. VelascoBr. 17, Ilagan, IsabelaJudge Renato P. PineBr. 35, Santiago CityJudge Efren M. CacatianBr. 28, Bayombong, Nueva VizcayaJudge Fernando F. Flor, Jr.

THIRD JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 3, Balanga CityJudge Remegio M. Escalada, Jr.Br. 14, Malolos CityJudge Petrita B. DimeBr. 24, Cabanatuan CityJudge Rodrigo S. CaspilloBr. 33, Guimba, Nueva EcijaJudge Ismael P. CasabarBr. 35, Gapan CityJudge Dorentino Z. Floresta

_____________________________1. Pasig RTC holding office and court sessions at Taguig City.2. Pasig RTC holding office and court sessions at San Juan, M.M.

highest concern by the judiciary, involving as theydo, the most brazen violations of human rights;

Now, Therefore, pursuant to Section 23 of B.P.Blg. 129, in the interest of a speedy and efficientadministration of justice and subject to theguidelines herein set forth, the following branchesof the Regional Trial Courts are hereby designatedto specially and preferentially hear, try and decidecases involving killings of political activists andmembers of the media:


Br. 37, Sto. Domingo, Nueva EcijaJudge Nelson A. TribianaBr. 46, City of San Fernando, PampangaJudge Joselito S. SalvadorBr. 51, Guagua, PampangaJudge Pamela Ann A. MaxinoBr. 61, Angeles CityJudge Bernardita G. ErumBr. 65, Tarlac CityJudge Bitty G. ViliranBr. 70, Iba, ZambalesJudge Clodualdo M. MontaBr. 73, Olongapo CityActing Presiding Judge Josefina D. Farrales

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 3, Batangas CityJudge Ruben A. GalvezBr. 10, Balayan, BatangasJudge Cristino E. JuditBr. 85, Lipa CityActing Presiding Judge Florencio S. ArellanoBr. 88, Cavite CityJudge Agapito S. LuBr. 26, Imus, CaviteJudge Fernando L. FelicenBr. 28, Sta. Cruz, LagunaJudge Mary Ann Enrile Corpus-MañalacBr. 29, San Pablo CityActing Presiding Judge Romulo S.G. VillanuevaBr. 35, Calamba CityJudge Romeo C. de LeonBr. 51, Puerto Princesa CityJudge Jocelyn Sundiang-DiligBr. 56, Lucena CityJudge Norma Chionglo SiaBr. 69, Binangonan, RizalJudge Narmo P. NoblejasBr. 73, Antipolo CityJudge Ronaldo B. MartinBr. 79, Morong, RizalJudge Candido O. delos Santos

FIFTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 6, Legazpi CityJudge Vladimir B. BrusolaBr. 14, Ligao CityJudge Edwin R. Ma-alatBr. 18, Tabaco CityJudge Mamerto M. Buban, Jr.

Br. 40, Daet, Camarines NorteJudge Rolando M. PanganibanBr. 25, Naga CityJudge Jaime E. ContrerasBr. 29, Libmanan, Camarines SurJudge Cecilia B. SolerBr. 31, Pili, Camarines SurJudge Jose C. SarcillaBr. 36, Iriga CityJudge Milagros Gerona QuijanoBr. 45, Masbate CityJudge Manuel L. SeseBr. 53, Sorsogon CityJudge Boanerges C. Candolea

SIXTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 9, Kalibo, AklanJudge Dean R. TelanBr. 11, San Jose, AntiqueJudge Nery G. DuremdesBr. 18, Roxas CityJudge Charlito F. FantilananBr. 26, Iloilo CityJudge Antonio M. NatinoBr. 31, Iloilo CityJudge Rene S. HortilloBr. 38, Iloilo CityJudge Roger B. PatricioBr. 48, Bacolod CityJudge Gorgonio J. Ybañez

SEVENTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 49, Tagbilaran CityJudge Fernando G. Fuentes IIIBr. 7, Cebu CityJudge Simeon P. Dumdum, Jr.Br. 21, Cebu CityJudge Eric Filamor MenchavezBr. 53, Lapu-Lapu CityJudge Benedicto G. CobardeBr. 28, Mandaue CityJudge Marilyn Yap-LaguraBr. 34, Dumaguete CityJudge Rosendo B. Bandal, Jr.Br. 38, Dumaguete CityJudge Teresita Abarquez Galanida




EIGHTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 9, Tacloban CityJudge Rogelio C. SesconBr. 29, Catbalogan, SamarJudge Agerico A. Avila

NINTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 8, Dipolog CityJudge Porfirio E. MahBr. 16, Zamboanga CityJudge Jesus C. Carbon, Jr.Br. 21, Pagadian CityJudge Rolando L. Goan

TENTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 5, Butuan CityJudge Augustus L. CaloBr. 10, Malaybalay CityJudge Josefina Gentile S. BacalBr. 12, Oroquieta CityJudge Bernadette Paredes-EncinarealBr. 18, Cagayan de Oro CityJudge Edgardo T. Lloren

ELEVENTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 1, Tagum CityJudge Danilo C. BeloBr. 11, Davao CityJudge Virginia H. EuropaBr. 18, Digos CityJudge Albert S. AxalanBr. 35, General Santos CityJudge Oscar P. Noel, Jr.

TWELFTH JUDICIAL REGION

Br. 3, Iligan CityJudge Albert B. AbraganBr. 10, Marawi CityActing Presiding Judge Moslemen T.Macarambon

In determining whether the crime is a “politicalkilling,” the following factors, among others, shallbe considered: (1) political affiliation of the victim;(2) method of attack; and (3) reports that stateagents are involved in the commission of the crimeor have acquiesced in them.

For purposes of this Administrative Order, allsingle-sala courts are considered special courts for

the cases involving killings of political ideologistsand members of media and for this reason shallgive priority to these cases in their trial calendars.In stations where there are no Special Courtsdesignated for the purpose, the branches where thesaid cases are raffled shall observe the hereinguidelines.

The cases referred to herein shall undergomandatory continuous trial and shall beterminated within sixty (60) days fromcommencement of trial. Judgment thereon shallbe rendered within thirty (30) days fromsubmission for decision unless a shorter period isprovided by law or otherwise directed by thisCourt.

Where trial has already begun, the same shallcontinue to be heard by the respective branches towhich they have been originally assigned. Forpurposes hereof, a criminal case is considered begunwhen the accused or any of them had already beenarraigned. The periods mentioned in paragraph 2above shall be followed.

The Special Courts here designated shallcontinue to be included in the raffle of cases,criminal and civil, provided that the ExecutiveJudges of the RTCs concerned shall exclude thedesignated Special Courts from such rafflewhenever in their judgment the caseload of thesecourts shall prevent them from conducting thecontinuous trial of the special cases herein specified.

The Branches thus designated as Special Courtsshall continue to perform their functions as suchwithin the purview of this Administrative Ordereven after the resignation, retirement, death,dismissal from the judicial service, transfer, detailor promotion of the incumbent judges appointed/designated to preside over them. Their successors,whether permanent or temporary, shall act asPresiding Judges of these Special Courts unless theSupreme Court otherwise directs.

No postponement or continuance shall beallowed except for clearly meritorious reasons.Pleadings or motions found to have been filed fordilatory purposes shall constitute direct contemptand shall be punished accordingly.

In the event of inhibition of the judge of adesignated Special Court, the following guidelinesshall be observed: (a) where there is only one



ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 02-2007

TO: ALL JUDGES, OFFICIALS, ANDEMPLOYEES OF THE TRIAL COURTS

SUBJECT: REITERATION OF ADMINISTRATIVECIRCULAR NO. 2-99 DATEDJANUARY 15, 1999 ON “STRICTOBSERVANCE OF WORKING HOURSAND DISCIPLINARY ACTION FORABSENTEEISM AND TARDINESS”

In view of the complaints received by thisOffice, on the non-observance by some judges andcourt personnel of the prescribed office hours,Administrative Circular No. 2-99 dated January 15,1999 with modifications is hereby reiterated for strictcompliance.

By reason of the nature and functions of theiroffice, the officials and employees of the Judiciarymust be role models in the faithful observance ofthe constitutional canon that public office is a publictrust. Inherent in this mandate is the observanceof prescribed office hours and the efficient use ofevery moment thereof for public service, if only torecompense the Government, and ultimately, thepeople, who shoulder the cost of maintaining theJudiciary.

I. Accordingly, all courts must observe thefollowing office hours, without, however,prejudice to the approved flexi-time of certainpersonnel:

MONDAY TO FRIDAY8:00 A.M. to 12:00 Noon

1:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M.

SATURDAY

A. The Executive Judges of the MeTCs andMTCCs with multiple branches shall assignby rotation the judges of the said branchesto report for duty on Saturdays from eighto’clock in the morning to one o’ clock in theafternoon, assisted by a skeletal force of thepersonnel, also on rotation, primarily to acton petitions for bail and other urgentmatters.

Special Court in the station, the pairing system formultiple-branch stations subject of Circular No. 7dated September 23, 1974, as amended, shall apply;(b) where there are two Special Courts in the station,the Executive Judge shall immediately assign thecase by raffle to the other or another Special Courtof the same nature. In case the Presiding Judge ofthe other Special Court is also disqualified orinhibits himself/herself, the case shall be forwardedto the pairing judge of the special court whichoriginally handled the said case. If the pairing judgeis also disqualified or inhibits himself/herself, thecase shall be raffled to the other regular courts. Atthe next raffle, an additional case shall be assignedto the disqualified or inhibiting judge/s to replacethe case so removed from his/her/their court; and(c) where a judge in a single-branch voluntaryinhibits himself/herself, the Order of Inhibition shallbe transmitted to the pairing judge who shall thenhear and decide the case. The determination of thepairing judge shall be in accordance with Annex“A” of A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC dated January 27, 2004(Guidelines on the Selection and Appointment ofExecutive Judges and Defining their Powers,Prerogatives and Duties).

A report on the status of these cases shall beattached to the Monthly Report of Cases submittedevery 10th day of the succeeding month to theStatistical Reports Division, Court ManagementOffice, Office of the Court Administrator. Failureto submit such report shall be a ground forwithholding of the salaries and allowances of thejudge/s and clerk/s of court/branch clerk/s of court,officer/s-in-charge concerned without prejudice towhatever administrative sanction the SupremeCourt may impose on them.

This Administrative Order shall take effectimmediately.

March 1, 2007.

(Sgd.) REYNATO S. PUNO Chief Justice

(Sgd.) LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice

Chairperson, Second Division

(Sgd.) CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO Associate Justice

Chairperson, Third Division




The Executive Judges shall act onpetitions for bail and other urgent matterson Saturday afternoons after one o’clock inthe afternoon, Sundays, official holidays andspecial days. Should bail be granted and theapplicant deposits cash as bail, the ExecutiveJudge shall acknowledge in writing and issuea temporary receipt therefor and shall remitimmediately the amount received to the Clerkof Court who shall issue appropriate officialreceipt therefore on the next succeedingbusiness day.

Executive Judges of the RTCs shall assignby rotation the judges of the MTCs inmultiple-branch stations and MCTCs withintheir respective territorial areas to report forduty on Saturdays from eight o’clock in themorning to one o’clock in the afternoon,assisted by a skeletal force of the personnel,also on rotation, primarily to act onpetitions for bail and other urgent matters.(A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC, dated January 27,2004)

B. Court offices (e.g., Office of the Clerk ofCourt) and units which deal directly withthe public, such as receiving, process-serving and cashier’s units, shall maintaina skeletal force on Saturdays from 8:00 A.M.to 12:00 noon, and from 12:30 P.M. to 4:30P.M. Those assigned to work on Saturdaysshall be notified of their assignment at leastthree days in advance. An employee soassigned shall have a full day-off thefollowing week on a day to be specified bythe Justice/Judge concerned. (Manual forClerk of Courts, Chapter II, Section A, 1.)

II. Absenteeism and tardiness, even if such do notqualify as “habitual” or “frequent” under CivilService Commission Memorandum CircularNo. 04, Series of 1991, shall be dealt withseverely, and any falsification of daily timerecords/bundy cards to cover-up for suchabsenteeism and/or tardiness shall constitutegross dishonesty or serious misconduct.

III. Executive Judges shall strictly monitorcompliance with this Circular by the judges andpersonnel under their administrativesupervision.

IV. The Court Administrator through the DeputyCourt Administrators and Assistant CourtAdministrators shall likewise monitorcompliance by Executive Judges and Judgesunder their area of administrative supervision.For your guidance and strict compliance.

12 January 2007.

(Sgd.) REYNATO S. PUNO Chief Justice

A.C. NO. 02-2007 (continued)

party, or where the judgment is void, thejudgment can neither be amended nor alteredafter it has become final and executory. This isthe principle of immutability of final judgmentthat is subject only to a few exceptions.

(Quisumbing, J., Emerlito F. Aguila and DaniloD. Reyes, v. Carmen R. Baldovizo, Edgar R.Baldovizo, and Carmelo R. Baldovizo, G.R. No.163186, February 28, 2007)

DOCTRINAL REMINDERS

REMEDIAL LAW (continued from page 12)

Gross Ignorance of the Law, explained.

To constitute gross ignorance of the law, theacts complained of must not only be contraryto existing law and jurisprudence, but alsomotivated by bad faith, fraud, dishonesty, andcorruption. Gross ignorance of the law is aserious accusation, and a person who accuses ajudge of this very serious offense must be sureof the grounds for the accusation. Good faithand absence of malice, corrupt motives orimproper considerations are sufficient defensesin which a judge charged with ignorance of thelaw can find refuge.

(Chico-Nazario, J., Leonardo R. Ocampo v. Hon.Gina M. Bibat Palamos, A.M. No. MTJ-06-1655,March 6, 2007)

LEGAL ETHICS


OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 03-2007

TO : ALL JUSTICES, JUDGES AND COURTPERSONNEL

SUBJECT: FILIPINO VERSION OF THEECUMENICAL PRAYER FOR THECOURTS

The Supreme Court En Banc in its Resolutiondated 25 October 2006 in A.M. No. 06-10-04-SC,Re: Filipino Version of the Ecumenical Prayer for theCourts, Resolved to APPROVE the following Filipinoversion of the Ecumenical Prayer for the Courts,as submitted by Court of Appeals Justice Jose C.De La Rama (Ret), to wit:

Panalanging EkumenikalUkol sa mga Hukuman

Dios na Makapangyarihan sa lahatNarito po kami sa Inyong Banal na Harapan

bilang Kayo ang aming Pinakamataas na HukomBuong pagpapakumbaba naming hinihiling sa Inyo

na kami ay pagpalain at bigyang-buhayupang ang ano mang iisipin, sasabihin at gagawin

ay maging sang-ayon sa Inyong kalooban.Paliwanagin mo po ang aming isipan

Palakasin ang aming espirituAt puspusin ang aming mga puso ng pag-ibig bilang

makakapatid, ng talino at pang-unawaUpang kami ay maging mabisang daluyan

Ng katotohanan, katarungan at kapayapaanSa among pagpapatuloy ng paglilitis sa araw na ito

Patnubayan mo po kami sa landas ng katwiranUpang matupad at makita sa amin

Ang Inyong higit atwalang katulad na kaluwalhatian.

Amen.”

For your information and guidance.

January 19, 2007.

(Sgd.) CHRISTOPHER O. LOCK Court Administrator


TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OFTHE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO THEBUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE

It has come to the attention of the Court thatin all cases of rehabilitation, insolvency, corporatedissolutions by judicial means and judicialsettlements of estates of deceased persons, theBureau of Internal Revenue is not notified of filingsuch petitions, thereby the interest of thegovernment who has the first preference in theliquidations thereon are prejudiced.

Henceforth, you are hereby directed to notifythe Commissioner of the Bureau of InternalRevenue whenever a petition for theabovementioned cases is filed in your respectivecourts.

Strict compliance herewith is hereby enjoined.

January 24, 2007.



TO : ALL JUDGES OF THE REGIONAL TRIALCOURTS

SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OFTITLES TO LANDS COVERINGTIMBERLAND OR FOREST LAND

The Department of Environment and NaturalResources (DENR) has called the attention of thisOffice regarding the practice of some courts issuingdecrees for the titling of lands covering Timberlandor Forestland without the required Certificationfrom the DENR.

In this connection, you are hereby directed thatbefore acting on applications for the titling of lands,it is a condition that you must require the applicantto submit the required CERTIFICATION issued by



TO : ALL LOWER COURT OFFICIALS ANDPERSONNEL

SUBJECT: RENAMING OF THE EDUCATIONALSUPPORT PROGRAM COMMITTEEFOR THE LOWER COURTS (ESPC-LC)TO THE PERSONNELDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FORTHE LOWER COURTS (PDC-LC)

Pursuant to the Resolution dated 10 October 2006of the Court En Banc in A.M. No. 06-04-09-SC (Re:Career Development and Management Plan for theJudiciary), the Educational Support ProgramCommittee for the Lower Courts (ESPC-LC) hasbeen renamed Personnel Development Committee forthe Lower Courts (PDC-LC) and its area ofresponsibility has been expanded.The Committee iscomposed of the following:

1.Chairperson: ACA Antonio H. Dujua2.Vice Chairperson: Atty. Ciela Marie Uy-Ungson3.Members: Atty. Rene B. Enciso

Ms. Florence J. BautistaMs. Regina J. Sardea1

4. Secretariat:Ms. Maria Rosario G. GaticalesSecretary-RecorderMs. Rhea S. NatulanAssistant Secretary-RecorderMr. Allan D. DasalAide

The PDC-LC now evaluates all applications ofofficials and personnel of the lower courts foravailment of Human Resource DevelopmentPrograms (scholarships, study grants, study leaves,training, seminars, workshops, conferences andconventions). The PDC-LC likewise monitorscompliance by grantees with their obligations underthe services contracts.

For you information and guidance.

February 16, 2007.



TO : ALL JUSTICES OF THE COURT OFAPPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN AND THECOURT OF TAX APPEALS AND JUDGESOF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVELCOURTS

SUBJECT: REQUIRING ALL JUSTICES ANDJUDGES TO SUBMIT THEIRRESPECTIVE E-MAIL ADDRESSES

The Supreme Court has recently embarked onthe total computerization of the entire judiciary. Itis the main core of the judiciary to improve andupgrade judicial facilities and tools as part of ourjudicial reform.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court envisions apaperless communication in all its judicialtransactions and to effect this idea this Courtmandates all Judges and Justices of the Judiciaryto submit their respective e-mail addresses. This isfor the purpose of an easy access among each otherand to have a dynamic and more effectual judicialreform. In the absence of any e-mail address,everyone is enjoined to create one or may submitany e-mail address of any member of your familywherein you can be reached immediately. You maysubmit your e-mail addresses to the Office of theCourt Administrator or you may post the same tothe official e-mail account of the Supreme Court [email protected].

February 8, 2007.


the Community Environment and NaturalResources Office (CENRO) having jurisdictionover the land subject of the application for titling/registration. This supporting document confirmsthe legal classification of the subject land perverification of available records on landclassification and cadastral maps.

For strict compliance.

January 31, 2007.


OCA CIRCULAR NO. 11-2007 (continued)

_____________________________1. Replaced by Atty. Fe Corcelles-Aguila, Judicial Supervisor assigned

to the Office of the Court Administrator by virtue of OCA CircularNo. 15A-2007 dated March 5, 2007.



TO: ALL CLERKS OF COURT OF THECONCERNED FIRST LEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: DESIGNATION AS MUNICIPALCOURT INFORMATION OFFICERSFOR THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE FORTHE POOR PROJECT

WHEREAS, the Access to Justice for the PoorProject is an initiative under the Action Programfor Judicial Reform funded by the EuropeanCommission, the goal of which is to increase accessto justice by the poor and vulnerable groups,especially women and children. To achieve thisgoal, the project aims to (1) enhance the ability ofthe poor and vulnerable groups (poor women andchildren in particular) to pursue justice throughtheir increased knowledge about their basic rightsand the justice system and (2) to strengthen thejustice system to make it more accessible to poorand vulnerable groups;

WHEREAS, the Project shared endeavoramong the following partner agencies: theSupreme Court; Department of Justice; theDepartment of the Interior and Local Government;Alternative Law Groups, Inc.; and the Departmentof Social Welfare and Development as the ExecutingAgency;

WHEREAS, its is imperative that the Projectbe fully supported to ensure its success andattainment of objectives;

WHEREAS, the Municipal Court InformationOfficers (MCIOs) under Component 1 of the Projectare tasked to:

(1) Actively participate in capacity-buildingtraining;

(2) Disseminate information to facilitateaccess to justice by the poor andvulnerable groups especially women andchildren in accordance with theseGuidelines; and

(3) Submit quarterly progress report on theperformance of their duties within ten(10) days of the first month of thesucceeding quarter to the CourtManagement Office, Office of the CourtAdministrator;

WHEREAS, the MCIOs shall be guided by theInformation, Education, Communication (IEC)Guidelines for Municipal Court Information Officersin the performance of their duties as MCIOs for theproject.

WHEREAS, the Clerks of Court of the FirstLevel Courts of the following project areas: OrientalMindoro, Camarines Sur, Capiz, Sultan Kudarat,and Lanao del Norte are deemed the Project’s MCIOspursuant to their mandated duly to provideinformation services under the Revised Manual forClerks of Court;

NOW THEREFOR, the Clerks of Court in thefollowing Project sites are hereby designated asMCIOs:

A. Capiz

1. President Roxas-Pilar MCTC2. Pontevedra-Panay MCTC3. Dao-Ivisan MCTC4. Dumarao-Cuartero MCTC5. Sigma-Sapian-Jamindan MCTC

B. Camarines Sur

1. Magarao-Canaman MCTC2. Tigao-Sagnay MCTC

C. Oriental Mindoro

1. San Teodoro-Baco-Puerto Galera MCTC2. Bansud-Gloria MCTC

D. Sultan Kudarat

1. Bagumbayan-Esperanza MCTC2. Tacurong Shari’a Circuit Court3. Palimbang Shari’a Circuit Court

E. Lanao del Norte

1. Baloi-Pantar-Pantao Ragat MCTC2. Linamon-Matungao-Togoloan MCTC3. Kauswagan-Poona-Piagapo MCTC4. Kolambugan-Tangcal MCTC5. Lala-Salvador MCTC

February 21, 2007.




TO: EXECUTIVE/PRESIDING JUDGES ANDCLERKS OF COURTS/ACCOUNTABLEOFFICERS OF THE REGIONAL TRIALCOURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS,METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS,MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES,MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPALCIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS AND SHARI’ACIRCUIT COURTS

SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION ON ACCEPTANCEOF GOVERNMENT / AGENCYCHECKS AS PAYMENTS OFDOCKET / FILING FEES

Pursuant to the guidelines issued by the Courtin Administrative Circular No. 35-2004 datedAugust 14, 2004, that docket filing fees in conformitywith Rule 141 of the Rules of Court must be paid inthe form of:

1. Cash2. Cashier’s Check3. Manager’s Check

Thus, government offices and othergovernment-owned and controlled corporations(GOCCs) are now requesting exemption from thesaid rule because there are COC’s/OIC’s who refuseto accept the agency checks issued by the concernedoffices for payment of filing fees.

You are therefore advised that GOCCs and itsinstrumentalities are exempt from the saidrequirements and they can pay thru check providedhowever that the check must be signed by the dulyauthorized signatories of the concerned agencies.

The Clerks of Court/Accountable Officers mustensure that the following are present otherwise thesame must be dishonored:

1. date check issued2. complete signatories of the check3. amount in words should tally with the

amount in figures

Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.

February 21, 2007.



TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURTSOF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

SUBJECT: PROCEDURE IN EXTRAJUDICIALOR JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE OFREAL ESTATE MORTGAGES

The Supreme Court En Banc, acting on therecommendation of the Committee on Revision ofthe Rules of Court, in its Resolution dated February20, 2007 in A.M. No. 99-10-05-O Resolved to adoptthe following additional rules with respect toExtrajudicial or Judicial Foreclosure of Real EstateMortgages:

(1) No temporary restraining order or writof preliminary injunction against theextrajudicial foreclosure of real estatemortgage shall be issued on the allegationthat the loan secured by the mortgagehas been paid or is not delinquent unlessthe application is verified and supportedby evidence of payment.

(2) No temporary restraining order or writof preliminary injunction against theextrajudicial foreclosure of real estatemortgage shall be issued on the allegationthat the interest on the loan isunconscionable, unless the debtor paysthe mortgagee at least twelve percent perannum interest on the principalobligation as stated in the application forforeclosure sale, which shall be updatedmonthly while the case is pending.

(3) Where a Writ of preliminary injunctionhas been issued against a foreclosure ofmortgage, the disposition of the case shallbe speedily resolved. To this end, the courtconcerned shall submit to the SupremeCourt, through the Office of the CourtAdministrator, quarterly reports on theprogress of the cases involving ten millionpesos and above.

(4) All requirements and restrictionsprescribed for the issuance of a temporaryrestraining order/writ of preliminaryinjunction, such as the posting of a bond,


which shall be equal to the amount ofthe outstanding debt, and the timelimitation for its effectivity, shall applyas well to a status quo order.

Upon effectivity of these additional rules, allrules resolutions, orders and circulars of this Court,which are inconsistent therewith, are herebyrepealed or modified accordingly.

These additional Rules in the Procedure inExtrajudicial or Judicial Foreclosure of Real EstateMortgages shall take effect on March 10, 2007following their publication in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation not later than February 28, 2007.

The above resolution was published in theFebruary 27, 2007 issue of the Manila Bulletin.

For your information and guidance.

March 5, 2007.



TO: ALL EXECUTIVE JUDGES AND CLERKSOF COURT OF THE REGIONAL TRIALCOURTS

SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY FORA NOTARIAL ACT

You are hereby reminded of the Resolution ofthe Court En Banc dated July 6, 2004 in A.M. No.02-8-13-SC otherwise known as the “2004 Rules onNotarial Practice” which became effective on August1, 2004.

Section 1 of Rule IX thereof provides that acertificate of authority evidencing the authenticityof the official seal and signature of a notary publicshall be issued by the Executive Judge upon requestin substantially the following form:

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY FOR ANOTARIAL ACT

I, (name, title, jurisdiction of the ExecutiveJudge), certify that (name of notary public),the person named in the seal and signatureon the attached document, is a NotaryPublic in and for the (City/Municipality/Province) of the Republic of the Philippinesand authorized to act as such at the time ofthe document’s notarization.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixedbelow my signature and seal of this officethis (date) day of (month) (year)

______________________(official signature)

(seal of Executive Judge)

You are therefore enjoined to strictly observethe above rule. The practice of Clerks of Courtsigning the above mentioned certificate should bestopped immediately until further orders from thisCourt.

March 7, 2007.


PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS

2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events

3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial BuildingPadre Faura St. cor. Taft Ave., Manila, Philippines1000

PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE TO AVOIDPAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE ORIMPRISONMENT OR BOTH.PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA Bulletin

20020020020020066666 Upcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA Events

Volume IX, Issue No. 33 January-March 2007

Documents

Transcript of Volume IX, Issue No. 33 January-March 2007