Volume XVI, Issue No. 64 October-December 2014

VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 641

VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 64OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2014 ISSN 2244-5862

These last three months saw us wrapping up our activities for

2014. I am happy to note that we were able to finish most, if not

all, of the projected activities in our calendar. During this quarter,

we held the 4th and 5th Orientation Seminar-Workshops for Newly

Appointed Sheriffs and Process Servers in Tagaytay City and Cebu

City, respectively; a seminar for RTC Executive Judges, 1st to 3rd

Vice Executive Judges, Single Sala Court Judges of Luzon and the

National Capital Judicial Region in Tagaytay City; and two Career

Enhancement Programs for RTC Clerks of Court of the 7th and

the 10th Judicial Regions in Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro City,

respectively. These completed our regular programs for the

period.

For our Special Focus Programs, we had: the 11th Metrobank

Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture by retired Supreme Court

Associate Justice Jose C. Vitug on “Coping with the Changing

Landscape in Civil Law” held at the Court of Appeals Auditorium;

a seminar-workshop for Substantive Law and Jurisprudence on

Intellectual Property in Cebu City for the Clerks of Court of Special

Commercial Courts of Regions VI, VII, and VIII and Selected

Court Attorneys of the Court of Appeals of the Cebu City Station;

and another on Procedural, Substantive Law and Jurisprudence

on Intellectual Property for Selected Commercial Court Judges

and Pairing Court Judges of the National Capital Judicial Region

and the 1st to 5th Judicial Regions, in Pasay City. A roundtable

discussion (RTD) was likewise held in Makati City on Issues and

Concerns Relating to Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement.

Several seminar-workshops also took place, such as that on

Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Rule of Law for Executive

and Vice Executive Judges of Regions VI, VII, and VIII in Cebu

City; one for Special Commercial Court Judges and Pairing Court

Judges of the National Capital Judicial Region and 1st to 5th Judicial

Regions in Pasay City; one on Dangerous Drugs Law for Judges,

Prosecutors and Law Enforcers of the 4th Judicial Region; and

one on Various Laws and Rules Relating to Money Laundering

and Other Financial Crimes for Judges in the 4th Judicial Region,

both held in Palawan. A Competency Enhancement Training for

Judges and Court Personnel Handling Cases Involving Children

(Pasay City) and a Personal Security Training (PST) for Judges

(Tagaytay City) were also held.

At the initiative of the Office of the Chief Justice, an

“Overview of Investment Treaty Arbitration and the

International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes

(ICSID) Rules” which featured two lecturers of note, Ms. Meg

Kinnear, ICSID Secretary General and Ms. Martina Polasek, ICSID

Senior Legal Counsel/Team Leader, was delivered at the Supreme

Court En Banc Session Hall in November.

Rounding up the year’s activities, PHILJA continued to assist

in the Enhanced Justice on Wheels Program (EJOW) by delivering

the segment on Information Dissemination through a Dialogue

among Barangay Officials and Court Officials in the Cities of

Malaybalay and Cagayan de Oro in Misamis Oriental.

From the Chancellor’s Desk

(Next page)

OCTOBER - DECEMBER 20142

PHILJA also assisted in the successful Philippine Judges

Association Midterm Convention in Albay with the theme “PJA:

Triumph Over Adversities” and in the 21st National Convention

Seminar of the Philippine Trial Judges League, Inc. (PTJLI), with

the team “Advancing Justice Amidst Challenging Times,” in Aklan.

The Academy, thru the Philippine Mediation Center Office

(PMCO), conducted a number of activities in support of

Alternative Dispute Resolution, as follows: Refresher/Advanced

Courses for Court-Annexed Mediators for the Bulacan, Nueva

Ecija, Tarlac, Cavite, and Rizal Mediation Programs (Tagaytay

City) and the Metro Manila Mediation Programs (Manila).

We took note of the new rulings, doctrinal reminders and

recent resolutions, circulars and orders from the Supreme Court

as well as the Office of the Court Administrator.

To our officials and staff, thank you for giving your best to

the Academy. This made 2014 one of our strongest years.

To our development partners, thank you for the steadfast

assistance to us for the attainment of common goals.

To the Supreme Court, we cannot thank you enough for

your trust and solid support for all our trainings, programs, and

activities.

The biggest thanks goes to the Almighty for having let us

finish 2014 successfully.

ADOLFO S. AZCUNA

Chancellor

ContentsFrom the Chancellor’s Desk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Trainings, Programs, and Activities . . . . . . . .

Doctrinal Reminders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Circulars

OCA Circular No. 128-2014 — Reiteration ofOCA Circular No. 33-2003 dated April 8, 2003(Re: Compliance with Memorandum CircularNo. 2 dated May 26, 1980 [Re: Submission tothe NBI of Report on Decisions in CriminalCases, Pursuant to RA No. 157, in Relation toCircular Nos. 37 and 42, dated October 7,1953 and May 15, 1969, respectively, of theDepartment of Justice, and MemorandumCircular No. 1 dated February 13, 1978 of thisCourt]) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OCA Circular No. 134-2014 — Submission ofProject Procurement Management Plan(PPMP) for Year 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OCA Circular No. 136-2014 — CaseDecongestion Status and Monthly Reports . .

OCA Circular No. 143-2014 — Delivery ofSupplies, Furniture, Equipment, LibraryMaterials, Accountable Forms and OtherMaterials Needed by the Trial Courts . . . . . .

OCA Circular No. 144-2014 — ClarificatoryIssuance Relative to OCA Circular No. 10-2014dated January 20, 2014 (Re: Requirement ofthe Law on Adoption Cases) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OCA Circular No. 148-2014 — Reiteration ofthe 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (A.M. No.02-8-13-SC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OCA Circular No. 156-2014 — Automation ofthe Payroll System for All Pensioners/Judgesand Survivorship Pensioners . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Orders

Memorandum Order No. 26-2014 —

Reorganizing the Committee on GenderResponsiveness in the Judiciary . . . . . . . . . . .


Reorganizing the Committee for theDecongestion of Provincial, City andMunicipal Jails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Appointing the Two OCA Assistant Chiefs ofOffice (Office of Administrative Services,Office of the Court Administrator) . . . . . . . . .

First Quarter 2015 Trainings, Programs, andActivities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

3

14

18

18

19

19

20

20

21

21

22

23

24

In Pursuit of Judicial Excellence

From the Chancellor’s Desk(Continued from page 1)


The Philippine Judicial Academy

(PHILJA), in coordination with the

Program Management Office

(PMO) of the Supreme Court,

launched the publication entitled

Citizen’s Handbook on

Environmental Justice for the

Autonomous Region of Muslim

Mindanao on October 1, 2014, at

the Mamitua Saber Research and

Technology Center (MSRTC), Mindanao State University, Marawi

City. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDEF), Tanggol Kalikasan

(TK), Regional Human Rights Commission-ARMM (RHRC), and

Mindanao State University (MSU) provided valuable support

for the project.

The Citizen’s Handbook on Environmental Justice for ARMM

(Handbook for ARMM, for brevity) is a follow-up publication to

Access to Justice: A Sourcebook on Environmental Rights and

Legal Remedies and the Citizen’s Handbook on Environmental

Justice produced by PHILJA and PMO of the Supreme Court, in

Citizen’s Handbook on Environmental Justice

for the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao Launched

Trainings, Programs, and Activities

cooperation with the UNDP. The Sourcebook is a resource

material for environmental advocates and a guide to

understand the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

promulgated by the Supreme Court.

Like the Citizen’s Handbook on Environmental Justice, the

Handbook for ARMM is a citizen-friendly material designed to

help ordinary people or laypersons understand the key role

citizens play in the protection and promotion of the environment

and to encourage citizen participation in the enforcement of

environmental laws. Aside from introducing the reader to

several important concepts in environmental law to better

understand and appreciate environmental law enforcement,

the Handbook for ARMM presented Islamic principles and

imperatives to show the sacred teachings related to the

protection of land and natural resources from abuse and misuse.

Since this was tailor-made for the ARMM, the national laws are

supplemented by relevant local laws passed by the ARMM

Regional Assembly and their implementing rules and regulations,

in the hope that the Handbook for the ARMM will contribute

towards enforcing environmental laws to protect and preserve

our fragile environment.


PHILJA Holds Lecture on ICSID Rules

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno and Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna present the Plaque of Appreciation to Ms. Meg Kinnear,

International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Secretary-General for her lecture on Investment Treaty Arbitration and

the ICSID Rules held on November 24, 2014 at the Supreme Court En Banc Session Hall.

On November 24, 2014, PHILJA, upon the directive of the Chief Justice, organized a special lecture entitled An Overview of

Investment Treaty Arbitration and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Rules at the Supreme

Court En Banc Session Hall, with Ms. Meg Kinnear and Ms. Martina Polasek, Secretary-General and Senior Legal Counsel/Team

Leader of ICSID, respectively, as lecturers. In attendance were 211 participants comprising SC and PHILJA officials and employees,

CA justices and lawyers, CTA justices, RTC/MeTC judges, and other guests.

Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna welcomed the lecturers and guests followed by a message from Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A.

Sereno. Ms. Kinnear and Ms. Polasek comprehensively discussed Introduction to ICSID; ICSID and Investment Laws and Treaties;

Trends in Investment Agreements and Investment Disputes; ICSID Dispute Settlement; ICSID Proceedings; Conduct of an ICSID

Convention Arbitration; Jurisdiction under the ICSID Convention (Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention); Exclusion of Any Other

Remedy (Article 26 of the ICSID Convention); Who Decides the Dispute?; Post-Award Remedies; Annulment: Article 52 of the ICSID

Convention and Grounds; Recognition and Enforcement of Awards; Designations by the Philippines of Competent Courts of Other

Authorities for Recognition and Enforcement; Compliance with ICSID Awards; ICSID and Philippines; and Philippines and Investment

Treaties. Handouts on ICSID Caseload-Statistics were distributed to the participants.

Established in 1966 by the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States

(the ICSID Convention), ICSID is an independent, depoliticized and effective investment dispute settlement institution that provides

for settlement of disputes by conciliation, arbitration or fact-finding. It promotes international investment by providing confidence

in the dispute resolution process, as well as greater awareness of international law on foreign investment and the ICSID process.


The 11th Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture featuring the topic Coping with the Changing

Landscape in Civil Law was delivered by retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Jose C. Vitug,

the 2014 holder of the Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair in Civil Law and Chair of PHILJA’s

Commercial Law Department, on October 8, 2014 at the Court of Appeals Auditorium. Two

hundred ninety-five participants composed of SC and PHILJA officials and employees, CA officials

and employees, lower court employees and other guests attended the lecture.

PHILJA Chancellor Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna formally welcomed the participants. Mr. Aniceto

M. Sobrepeña, President of Metrobank Foundation, Inc., delivered a message. Justice Vitug’s

lecture was outlined as follows: Prefatory; The Legal Systems of the World; Increasing

Preponderance in the Application of Equity and Practical Realties; The Marriage Institution; Effects

of Advances in Science and Technology; Coming Up: A Borderless Society; The Judicial System; The

Legal Profession; The Academe; and The Not-Too-Distant Future. After the lecture, Professor

Pacifico Agabin, Chair of PHILJA’s Constitutional Law Department, and Professor Ruben F. Balane,

Chair of PHILJA’s Civil Law Department, gave their reactions. Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A.

Sereno delivered the Closing Remarks.

The Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture is endowed by the Metrobank

Foundation, Inc. to assist PHILJA’s judicial education programs by providing grants to its Corps of

Professors to write and publish books and treatises with innovative concepts and approaches in

designated areas of law. Since 2004, 11 PHILJA Professors have delivered professorial chair

lectures in various fields of law.

Eleventh Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture


Special HRD Session: Kids at Work

On October 30, 2014, PHILJA gathered their employees’ children, grandchildren, and nephews/nieces in a special human resource

development session entitled Kids at Work held at the SC Training Center. The activity was designed to familiarize the children with

the different community helpers and their functions. They were encouraged to come dressed in community helpers’ costumes.

The program began with a prayer and singing of the national anthem led by participants Sophia Castillo and Samvielle Valdez,

respectively. The morning session was devoted to activities such as singing of action songs and story-telling that presented the

functions and importance of community helpers; parade of PHILJA Kids at Work where the children showcased their costumes; and

Treat or Treats at PHILJA. Early bird and best in costume awards were given to deserving children as judged by Ms. Ma. Beatriz A.

Azcuna, Atty. Eric Voltaire A. Pablo and Ms. Minerva C. Briones. Tattoo and photo booth sessions were held in the afternoon.

Thirty-eight children aged 2-10 participated in this activity.


Seminars

4th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed

Sheriffs and Process Servers (Batch 2)

Date: October 14–16, 2014

Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City

Participants: 22 newly appointed sheriffs and 31 newly

appointed process servers, namely:

I. SHERIFFS

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION I

Mr. Junar G. Armida

RTC, OCC, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte

Mr. Juvy G. Funtila

RTC, Branch 23, Candon City, Ilocos Sur

Mr. Eric F. Ollero

RTC, Branch 41, Dagupan City, Pangasinan

Ms. Conchita T. Pagteilan

RTC, Branch 36, Bontoc, Mt. Province

REGION II

Ms. Jessiebelle M. Dela Peña

RTC, Branch 32, Cabarroguis, Quirino

Mr. Paterno D. Palogan

RTC, Branch 20, Cauayan City, Isabela

REGION III

Ms. Vivian F. Beltran

RTC, Branch 23, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija

Mr. Glenn P. Carlos

RTC, Branch 58, Angeles City, Pampanga

Ms. Andrea C. Eduardo

RTC, Branch 27, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija

Ms. Marife M. Nucum

RTC, Branch 51, Guagua, Pampanga

REGION V

Ms. Marilyn L. Añonuevo

RTC, Branch 49, Cataingan, Masbate

Mr. Hector O. Dipasupil

RTC, Branch 41, Daet, Camarines Norte

Mr. Jay B. Intia

RTC, Branch 39, Daet, Camarines Norte

Mr. Jose Andreo M. Rili

RTC, OCC, Naga City, Camarines Sur

Mr. Zaldy C. Sarcilla

RTC, Branch 28, Naga City, Camarines Sur

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Mr. Pablo C. Sevilla

MeTC, Branch 56, Malabon City

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES

REGION I

Mr. Mario Manolito S. Del Val

MTCC, Branch 3, Baguio City, Benguet

Mr. Vanny D. Meneses

MTCC, Branch 3, Dagupan City, Pangasinan

Mr. Ernesto T. Pulido, Jr.

MTCC, OCC, San Fernando City, La Union

REGION III

Ms. Gebeth R. Macaraig

MTCC, OCC, San Jose City, Nueva Ecija

REGION V

Mr. Elmer E. Bagsic

MTCC, Branch 1, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon

Mr. Aldrin A. Hernandez

MTCC, Branch 1, Naga City, Camarines sur

II. PROCESS SERVERS

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

Mr. Tomas Macpel A. Corral*

CTA, Quezon City


REGION I

Mr. Elmer B. Azurin

RTC, Branch 24, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur

Mr. Romeo M. Gonzales

RTC, OCC, Batac City, Ilocos Norte

Mr. Joey Vincent T. Liwaliw

RTC, Branch 36, Bontoc, Mt. Province

Mr. Manolo V. Mariano III

RTC, Branch 6, Baguio City, Benguet

Mr. Daniel D. Peralta

RTC, Branch 49, Urdaneta City, Pangasinan

Mr. Eduardo G. Tenedero

RTC, OCC, Candon City, Ilocos Sur

REGION II

Ms. Armie-Lou C. Amistad

RTC, Branch 20, Cauayan, Isabela

Mr. Reinville B. Fernandez

RTC, Branch 28, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya

* Was issued a certificate of partial attendance only due toincomplete attendance.

Orientation Seminars


REGION III

Mr. Narciso M. Ramos

RTC, OCC, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija

Mr. Lutgardo A. Ferrer

RTC, Branch 42, City of San Fernando, Pampanga

REGION V

Ms. Julian P. Brocales

RTC, OCC, Naga City, Camarines Sur

Mr. Christopher S. Lucido

RTC, Branch 3, Legazpi City, Albay


REGION I

Mr. Marcelo B. Avelino

MTCC, Alaminos City, Pangasinan

Mr. Esteban F. Engngeg

MTCC, Branch 2, Baguio City, Benguet

REGION II

Mr. Robert C. Gosiengfiao

MTCC, OCC, Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

REGION III

Mr. Aris C. Tuazon

MTCC, Branch 1, City of San Fernando, Pampanga

Mr. Reynold L. Yabut

MTCC, OCC, City of San Fernando, Pampanga

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION I

Mr. John G. Baetiong

MTC, San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte

Ms. Florence D. Flora

MTC, Naguilian, La Union

Mr. Victor Benedict R. Torio

MTC, Mapandan, Pangasinan

REGION II

Mr. Joel S. Patricio

MTC, Echague, Isabela

Ms. Melanie Rose F. Trinidad

MTC, Branch 3, Lal-lo, Cagayan

REGION III

Mr. Jay Jay M. Dantis

MTC, San Miguel, Bulacan

Mr. Reggie C. Farmer

MTC, San Leonardo, Nueva Ecija

Mr. Rodrigo C. Galos

MTC, Paombong, Bulacan

Mr. Walvie O. Minola

MTC, San Antonio, Zambales

REGION V

Mr. Glody N. Bigueras

MTC, Mercedes, Camarines Norte

Mr. Ricky J. Mañago

MTC, Basud, Camarines Norte

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION I

Mr. Garry Glenn C. Danao

3rd MCTC: Tubao-Pugo, La Union

REGION III

Mr. Jake A. Piñol

4th MCTC: Moncada-San Manuel-Anao, Tarlac

5th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly AppointedSheriffs and Process Servers

Date: November 4–6 , 2014

Venue: BE Hotel, Mactan, Cebu

Participants: 13 newly appointed sheriffs and 27 newly

appointed process servers, namely:

I. SHERIFFS


REGION VI

Mr. Ramil G. Facurib

RTC, Branch 39, Iloilo City, Iloilo

REGION VII

Mr. Henri Voltaire T. Sojor

RTC, OCC, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental

REGION VIII

Mr. Lauro Romanus Ceasar P. Castillo III

RTC, OCC, Tacloban City, Leyte

Mr. Mario A. Sabarillo

RTC, Branch 5, Oras, Eastern Samar

REGION X

Mr. Alan M. Banaag

RTC, Branch 40, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental

Mr. Antonino L. Mabale


REGION XI

Ms. Mylene C. Novo

RTC, OCC, Tandag City, Surigao del Sur


REGION VII

Ms. Millen D. Lawas

MTCC, Danao City


REGION X

Mr. Edward Noel L. Casals

MTCC, Branch 1, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte

REGION XI

Mr. Ramonito F. Catubag

MTCC, Tagum City, Davao del Norte

Ms. Vivian P. Dela Cruz

MTCC, OCC, Davao City, Davao del Sur

Ms. Janeta S. Pazo

MTCC Tandag City, Surigao del Sur

Mr. Darwin Trumata

MTCC, Branch 4, Davao City, Davao del Sur

II. PROCESS SERVERS


REGION VI

Mr. Reneboy B. Banggay

RTC, Branch 54, Bacolod City, Negros Occidental

Ms. Carmela A. Cayao

RTC, Branch 48, Bacolod City, Negros Occidental

REGION VII

Mr. Orville A. Baldado, Jr.

RTC, Branch 36, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental

Mr. Filemon B. Repollo, Jr.

RTC, Branch 43, Tanjay, Negros Oriental

Mr. Leonilo Q. Villoga

RTC, Branch 66, Talisay City, Cebu

REGION VIII

Ms. Emmelou C. Cheng

RTC, Branch 5, Oras, Eastern Samar

REGION IX

Mr. Ruben S. Languita

RTC, Branch 16, Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur

REGION X

Mr. Solomon D. Borres


Mr. Jupe R. Jabien


Mr. Elias L. Lutao


REGION XI

Mr. Noel D. Ma-aya

RTC, Branch 35, General Santos City, South Cotabato

Mr. Randie D. Sullano

RTC, Branch 30, Tagum City, Davao del Norte


REGION VI

Mr. Constantino P. Gulmatico

MTCC, Branch 9, Iloilo City, Iloilo

REGION VII

Mr. Ricky C. Sucayre

MTCC, Branch 1, Mandaue City, Cebu

Ms. Jinky T. Cabrillos

MTCC, OCC, Talisay City, Cebu

Mr. Felix R. Encila

MTCC, OCC, Madaue City, Cebu

REGION X

Mr. Carlo T. Aranas

MTCC, Branch 2, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION VII

Mr. Michael Niño C. Olivar

MTC, Dalaguete, Cebu

REGION VIII

Ms. Julian M. Lobenia II

MTC, Taft, Eastern Samar

REGION XI

Mr. Karlo C. Tan

MTC, Maco, Compostela Valley

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION VIII

Mr. Raul B. Abrea

9th MCTC: Bato-Matalom, Leyte

Mr. Jillver T. Galit

4th MCTC: Catubig-Las Navas, Northern Samar

Mr. Romualdo L. Oreo, Jr.

6th MCTC: Villareal-Pinabacdao, Samar

Ms. Maria Donnalith P. Tomenio

2nd MCTC: Oras-Jipapad, Eastern Samar

REGION X

Mr. Serlanhder O. Dela Cruz

2nd MCTC: Tubay-Santiago, Agusan del Norte

REGION XI

Mr. Elton Fren S. Margate

3rd MCTC: Lupon-Banaybanay, Davao Oriental

REGION XII

Mr. Regin B. Er-er

6th MCTC: Tubod-Baroy-Magsaysay, Lanao del Norte


Seminar for Executive Judges (RTC Vice Executive Judges,1st to 3rd Vice Executive Judges, and Single Sala CourtsJudges of Luzon and the NCJR)

Date: November 27–28, 2014


Participants: 48 RTC judges

FOR SELECTED COMMERCIAL COURT JUDGES AND PAIRING COURT JUDGES OF

THE NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION, FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH,

AND FIFTH JUDICIAL REGIONS

Date: November 21, 2014

Venue: Traders Hotel, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City


Information Dissemination through a Dialogue between

Barangay Officials and Court Officials

CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY

Date: October 23, 2014

Venue: City Tourism Hall, City Hall, Cagayan de Oro City

Misamis Oriental

Participants: 85 barangay officials

MALAYBALAY CITY


Venue: Kaamulan Open Theater, Malaybalay City

Participants: 135 barangay officials

Seminar-Workshop on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and

Rule of Law for Executive and Vice Executive Judges of Regions

VI to VIII


Venue: Radisson Blu Hotel, Cebu City

Participants: 23 RTC and MTCC judges

Competency Enhancement Training for Judges and Court

Personnel Handling Cases Involving Children



Participants: 69 RTC judges, clerks of court/officers in charge,

court interpreters, court social workers, prosecutors, PAO

lawyers, and representatives from Consuelo Foundation and

CPU-PGH

Seminar-Workshop for Special Commercial Court Judges and

Pairing Court Judges of the National Capital Judicial Region,

First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Judicial Regions


Venue: Traders Hotel, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City


An Overview of Investment Treaty Arbitration and theInternational Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes(ICSID) Rules

Date: November 24, 2014

Venue: SC En Banc Session Hall, SC New Building, Manila

Participants: 211 SC, CA, and CTA justices, SC, CA and PHILJA

officials and employees, RTC and MeTC judges, SC choir and

other guests

Career Enhancement Program for RTC Clerks of Court

REGION X


Venue: Seda Centrio, Cagayan de Oro City

Participants: 46 RTC clerks of court

REGION VII

Date: December 2–4, 2014

Venue: Hotel Elizabeth, Cebu City

Participants: 54 RTC clerks of court

11th Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair LectureFeaturing the Topic on “Coping with the ChangingLandscape in Civil Law”


Venue: Court of Appeals Auditorium, Court of Appeals, Manila

Participants: 295 SC, CA and PHILJA officials and employees,

MeTC judges, clerks of court, and legal researchers, and other

guests

Seminar-Workshop on Procedural, Substantive Law andJurisprudence on Intellectual Property

FOR CLERKS OF COURT OF SPECIAL COMMERCIAL COURTS REGIONS VI TOVIII AND SELECTED COURT ATTORNEYS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS—CEBU

CITY STATION


Venue: Best Western Plus Lex Hotel, Cebu City

Participants: 47 RTC clerks of court and CA–Cebu City Station

lawyers

Orientation Seminar-Workshop

for Executive Judges

Career Enhancement Programs

Special Focus Programs


Seminar-Workshop on Dangerous Drugs Law for Judges,Prosecutors and Law Enforcers of the Fourth JudicialRegion


Venue: Aziza Hotel, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan

Participants: 62 RTC judges, prosecutor, and law enforcers

Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and Rules Relatingto Money Laundering and Other Financial Crimes forJudges in the Fourth Judicial Region


Venue: Sheridan Hotel, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan


Personal Security Training for Judges

Date: December 2–4, 2014


Participants: 56 RTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC judges

Philippine Judges Association (PJA) Midterm Convention

Theme: PJA: Triumph Over Adversities


Venue: Oriental Hotel, Legazpi City, Albay


Convention-Seminars

Roundtable Discussion

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Programs

Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed Mediators

BULACAN, NUEVA ECIJA, TARLAC, CAVITE AND RIZAL MEDIATION PROGRAMS



Participants: 54 mediators

Roundtable Discussion on Issues and Concerns Relatingto Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement


Venue: Dusit Thani Hotel, Makati City

Participants: 38 Philippine (RTC) judges, Myanmar judges, and

representatives from Department of Justice, Intellectual

Property of the Philippines and Supreme Court Subcommittee

on Intellectual Property

METRO MANILA MEDIATION PROGRAM


Venue: Court of Appeals Auditorium, Manila

Participants: 51 mediators

21st National Convention and Seminar of the PhilippineTrial Judges League, Inc. (PTJLI)

Theme: Advancing Justice Amidst Challenging Times


Venue: Crown Regency Resort and Convention Center, Boracay

Island, Malay, Aklan

Participants: 229 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC and SHCC

judges


Court of Appeals Justices Jose C. Reyes, Jr. (seated left) and Myra G. Fernandez (seated right) with the participants of the Seminar for

Executive Judges (RTC Vice Executive Judges, 1st to 3rd Vice Executive Judges, and Single Sala Courts Judges of Luzon and the NCJR) held on

November 27–28, 2014, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.

PHILJA Executive Secretary and Acting Chief of the Philippine Mediation Center Office Justice Marina L. Buzon, (seated center) with the

participants of the Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed Mediators (Bulacan, Nueva Ecija, Tarlac, Cavite and Rizal Mediation

Programs) held on October 16–17, 2014, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.

PHILJA Chancellor, Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna addresses the participants of the Roundtable Discussion on Issues and Concerns Relating to

Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement held on October 23–24, 2014, at the Dusit Thani Hotel, Makati City.


Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna (seated center, second row), with the facilitators and participants of the Competency Enhancement Training

for Judges and Court Personnel Handling Cases Involving Children held on November 11–13, 2014, at the PHILJA Training Center,

Tagaytay City.

Judge Eugene C. Paras, Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court Branch 58, Makati City and Executive Vice President of the Philippine

Judges Association (PJA) speaks before the members of the Association during their Midterm Convention held on October 14–16, 2014,

at the Oriental Hotel, Legazpi City, Albay.

CDO Exec. Judge Dennis Z. Alcantar (seated left), and Supreme Court Deputy Court Administrator Jenny Lind Aldecoa-Delorino (seated

right) answer questions from the barangay officials of Cagayan de Oro City during the Information Dissemination through a Dialogue

between Barangay Officials and Court Officials held on October 23, 2014, at the City Tourism Hall, City Hall, Cagayan de Oro City.


Definition and nature of consignation.

x x x consignation [is] the act of depositing the thing due with

the court or judicial authorities whenever the creditor cannot

accept or refuses to accept payment, and it generally requires

a prior tender of payment. It should be distinguished from

tender of payment which is the manifestation by the debtor

to the creditor of his desire to comply with his obligation,

with the offer of immediate performance. Tender is the

antecedent of consignation, that is, an act preparatory to the

consignation, which is the principal, and from which are derived

the immediate consequences which the debtor desires or seeks

to obtain. Tender of payment may be extrajudicial, while

consignation is necessarily judicial, and the priority of the first is

the attempt to make a private settlement before proceeding to

the solemnities of consignation. Tender and consignation, where

validly made, produces the effect of payment and extinguishes

the obligation.

Peralta, J., Elizabeth Del Carmen v. Spouses Restituto Sabordo and Mima

Mahilum-Sabordo, G.R. No. 181723, August 11, 2014.

Right of a buyer in a foreclosure sale.

The buyer in a foreclosure sale becomes the absolute owner of

the property purchased if it is not redeemed during the period

of one year after the registration of the sale. As such, he is

entitled to the possession of the said property and can demand

it at any time following the consolidation of ownership in his

name and the issuance to him of a new transfer certificate of

title. The buyer can in fact demand possession of the land even

during the redemption period except that he has to post a bond

in accordance with Section 7 of Act No. 3135, as amended. No

such bond is required after the redemption period if the property

is not redeemed. Possession of the land then becomes an absolute

right of the purchaser as confirmed owner. Upon proper

application and proof of title, the issuance of the writ of

possession becomes a ministerial duty of the court.

Peralta, J., Fe H. Okabe v. Ernesto A. Saturnino, G.R. No. 196040, August 26,

2014.

Competition, when is it considered unfair; its

characteristics.

In order to qualify the competition as “unfair,” it must have two

characteristics: (1) it must involve an injury to a competitor or

trade rival, and (2) it must involve acts which are characterized

as “contrary to good conscience,” or “shocking to judicial

sensibilities,” or otherwise unlawful; in the language of our law,

these include force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any

other unjust, oppressive or high-handed method. The public injury

or interest is a minor factor; the essence of the matter appears

to be a private wrong perpetrated by unconscionable means.

Here, both characteristics are present.

First, both parties are competitors or trade rivals, both being

engaged in the manufacture of plastic-made automotive parts.

Second, the acts of the petitioner were clearly “contrary to

good conscience” as petitioner admitted having employed

respondent’s former employees, deliberately copied

respondent’s products and even went to the extent of selling

these products to respondent’s customers.

To bolster this point, the CA correctly pointed out that

petitioner’s hiring of the former employees of respondent and

petitioner’s act of copying the subject plastic parts of respondent

were tantamount to unfair competition.

Peralta, J., Willaware Products Corporation v. Jesichris Manufacturing

Corporation, G.R. No. 195549, September 3, 2014.

Land Registration Law.

Under Section 6, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, a final and

executory judgment may be executed by the prevailing party as

a matter of right by mere motion within five years from the

entry of judgment, failing which the judgment is reduced to a

mere right of action which must be enforced by the institution

of a complaint in a regular court within 10 years from finality of

the judgment.

It appears that no motion or action to revive judgment was

ever filed by the respondents — the prevailing party in Civil Case

No. 15357, to execute and enforce the August 8, 1978 decision.

The title to the subject property, therefore, remained registered

under the petitioner’s name. As the petitioner argued, his title

had already become incontrovertible since the Torrens system

of land registration provides for the indefeasibility of the decree

of registration and the certificate of title issued upon the

expiration of one year from the date of entry of the registration

decree.

Civil Law

Land Registration Law


We cannot, however, allow the petitioner to maintain his

title and benefit from the fruit of his and his predecessors’

fraudulent acts at the expense of the respondents who are the

rightful owners of the subject property. The Torrens system of

registration cannot be used to protect a usurper from the

true owner, nor can it be used as a shield for the commission

of fraud, or to permit one to enrich oneself at the expense of

others.

Notwithstanding the indefeasibility of the Torrens title, the

registered owner can still be compelled under the law to

reconvey the property registered to the rightful owner under

the principle that the property registered is deemed to be held

in trust for the real owner by the person in whose name it is

registered. The party seeking to recover title to property

wrongfully registered in another person’s name must file an

action for reconveyance within the allowed period of time.

An action for reconveyance based on an implied or

constructive trust prescribes in 10 years from the issuance of

the Torrens title over the property. There is, however, an

exception to this rule where the filing of such action does not

prescribe, i.e. when the plaintiff is in possession of the subject

property, the action, being in effect that of quieting of title

to the property, does not prescribe.

In the present case, the respondents, who are the plaintiffs

in Civil Case No. 18421 (the action for annulment and cancellation

of title filed in 2013), have always been in possession of the

subject property. Worth noting are the CA’s findings on this

respect:

x x x Of course, the defendant-appellant (petitioner

herein) has a certificate of title in his favor. But it cannot

be denied that he has never been in possession of the

subject property. Neither did he exercise acts of

ownership over the said land since the time he allegedly

purchased it from his father in 1977. Similarly, the

defendant-appellant was not able to show that his

predecessor-in-interest, Jose Campit, claimed

ownership or was ever in possession of the said land.

The defendant-appellant has admitted that he has paid

realty tax covering the subject land only once when he

applied for the issuance of title in his favor.

x x x x

On the other hand, the continuous possession of the

subject premises by the plaintiffs-appellees has not been

denied or disputed by the defendants-appellants (sic).

The possession in the concept of an owner by the

plaintiffs-appellees has also been confirmed by witness

Charlie Martin. (Emphasis ours)

Considering that the action for annulment and cancellation

of title filed by the respondents is substantially in the nature of

an action for reconveyance based on an implied or constructive

trust, combined with the fact that the respondents have always

been in possession of the subject property, we shall treat Civil

Case No. 18421 as an action to quiet title, the filing of which

does not prescribe. Thus, we find the respondents’ filing of Civil

Case No. 18421 to be proper and not barred by the time

limitations set forth under the Rules of Court in enforcing or

executing a final and executory judgment.

Brion, J., Juanario G. Campit v. Isidra B. Gripa, Pedro Bardiaga, and Severino

Bardiaga, represented by his son Rolando Bardiaga, G.R. No. 195443,

September 17, 2014.

Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate fiction.

The doctrine of piercing the corporate veil applies only in three

basic instances, namely: a) when the separate and distinct

corporate personality defeats public convenience, as when the

corporate fiction is used as a vehicle for the evasion of an existing

obligation; b) in fraud cases, or when the corporate entity is

used to justify a wrong, protect a fraud, or defend a crime; or c)

is used in alter ego cases, i.e., where a corporation is

essentially a farce, since it is a mere alter ego or business

conduit of a person, or where the corporation is so organized

and controlled and its affairs so conducted as to make it

merely an instrumentality, agency, conduit or adjunct of

another corporation.

Piercing the corporate veil based on the alter ego theory

requires the concurrence of three elements, namely:

1. Control, not mere majority or complete stock control,

but complete domination, not only of finances but of

policy and business practice in respect to the transaction

attacked so that the corporate entity as to this

transaction had at the time no separate mind, will or

existence of its own;

2. Such control must have been used by the defendant to

commit fraud or wrong, to perpetuate the violation of

a statutory or other positive legal duty, or dishonest

and unjust act in contravention of plaintiff’s legal right;

and

3. The aforesaid control and breach of duty must have

proximately caused the injury or unjust loss complained

of.

The absence of any of these elements prevents piercing the

corporate veil.

In the present case, the attendant circumstances do not

establish that WPM is a mere alter ego of Manlapaz.

Brion, J., WPM International Trading, Inc. and Warlito P. Manlapaz v. Fe Corazon

Labayen, G.R. No. 182770, September 17, 2014.

Commercial Law


Estafa, elements of syndicated estafa.

Under Section 1 of PD No. 1689, there is syndicated estafa if the

following elements are present: 1) estafa or other forms of

swindling as defined in Articles 315 and 316 of the RPC was

committed; 2) the estafa or swindling was committed by a

syndicate of five or more persons; and 3) the fraud resulted in

the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or

members of rural banks, cooperatives, “samahang nayon[s],”

or farmers associations or of funds solicited by corporations/

associations from the general public.

The factual circumstances of the present case show that

the first and second elements of syndicated estafa are present;

there is probable cause for violation of Article 315(2)(a) of the

RPC against the petitioners. Moreover, in Dy’s supplemental

complaint-affidavit, he alleged that the fraud perpetrated

against him was committed, not only by Ngo and the petitioners,

but also by the other officers and directors of State Resources.

The number of the accused who allegedly participated in

defrauding Dy exceeded five, thus satisfying the requirement

for the existence of a syndicate.

However, the third element of the crime is patently lacking.

The funds fraudulently solicited by the corporation must come

from the general public. In the present case, no evidence was

presented to show that aside from Dy, the petitioners, through

State Resources, also sought investments from other people.

Dy had no co-complainants alleging that they were also deceived

to entrust their money to State Resources. The general public

element was not complied with. Thus, no syndicated estafa

allegedly took place, only simple estafa by means of deceit.

Brion, J., Ma. Gracia Hao and Danny Hao v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No.

183345, September 17, 2014.

order of arrest or may order the bond for his appearance to be

forfeited and confiscated, or both.” (Underscoring supplied)

Jurisprudence dictates that the primary requisite before a

bench warrant shall be issued is that the absent-party was duly

informed of the hearing date but unjustifiably failed to attend

so. As stated above, complainant was undeniably notified of

the June 8, 2011 hearing but she failed to attend.

Mendoza, J., Esther P. Magleo v. Presiding Judge Rowena De Juan-Quinagoran

and Branch Clerk of Court Atty. Adonis Laure, Both of Branch 166, Regional

Trial Court, Pasig City, A.M. No. RTJ-12-2336 (formerly A.M. OCA-IPI No. 11-

3695-RTJ), November 12, 2014.

Demurrer to Evidence.

An order granting an accused’s demurrer to evidence is a

resolution of the case on the merits, and it amounts to an

acquittal. Generally, any further prosecution of the accused

after an acquittal would violate the constitutional proscription

on double jeopardy. To this general rule, however, the Court

has previously made some exceptions.

People v. Tan eruditely instructs that double jeopardy will

not attach when the trial court acted with grave abuse of

discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, such as

where the prosecution was denied the opportunity to present

its case or where the trial was a sham. In addition, in People v.

Bocar, the Court ruled that there is no double jeopardy when

the prosecution was not allowed to complete its presentation

of evidence by the trial court.

The circumstances obtaining in this controversy placed it

within the realm of the exception.

The records demonstrate that the prosecution, with

respondent O ilink International Corporation as private

complainant, had not yet rested its case when the Demurrer to

Evidence was filed and eventually granted by the RTC Branch

161.

x x x x

The RTC Branch 161 should have ruled on the prosecution’s

Formal Offer of Evidence before acting on petitioner’s Demurrer

to Evidence. Having failed to do so, there is nary a doubt that no

double jeopardy attached. Petitioner’s blind insistence that she

is made to face trial after having been acquitted carries no

conviction.

Mendoza, J., Esther P. Magleo v. Presiding Judge Rowena De Juan-Quinagoran

and Branch Clerk of Court Atty. Adonis Laure, Both of Branch 166, Regional

Trial Court, Pasig City, A.M. No. RTJ-12-2336 (formerly A.M. OCA-IPI No. 11-

3695-RTJ), November 12, 2014.

Criminal Law

Remedial Law

Bench warrant defined.

A bench warrant is defined as a writ issued directly by a judge to a

law-enforcement officer, especially for the arrest of a person who

has been held in contempt, has disobeyed a subpoena, or has to

appear for a hearing or trial. The provision on bench warrant is

expressed under Section 9, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court which

states that “[w]hen a respondent released on bail fails to appear

on the day fixed for the hearing, the court may issue another


Arbitration

The policy in favor of arbitration has been affirmed in our Civil

Code, which was approved as early as 1949. It was later

institutionalized by the approval of Republic Act No. 876, which

expressly authorized, made valid, enforceable, and irrevocable

parties’ decision to submit their controversies, including

incidental issues, to arbitration. The Court recognized this policy

in Eastboard Navigation, Ltd. v. Ysmael and Company, Inc.:

As a corollary to the question regarding the existence

of an arbitration agreement, defendant raises the issue

that, even if it be granted that it agreed to submit its

dispute with plaintiff to arbitration, said agreement is

void and without effect for it amounts to removing said

dispute from the jurisdiction of the courts in which the

parties are domiciled or where the dispute occurred. It

is true that there are authorities which hold that “a

clause in a contract providing that all matters in dispute

between the parties shall be referred to arbitrators and

to them alone, is contrary to public policy and cannot

oust the courts of jurisdiction” (Manila Electric Co. v.

Pasay Transportation Co., 57 Phil., 600, 603), however,

there are authorities which favor “the more intelligent

view that arbitration, as an inexpensive, speedy and

amicable method of settling disputes, and as a means of

avoiding litigation, should receive every encouragement

from the courts which may be extended without

contravening sound public policy or settled law” (3 Am.

Jur., p. 835). Congress has officially adopted the modern

view when it reproduced in the new Civil Code the

provisions of the old Code on Arbitration. And only

recently it approved Republic Act No. 876 expressly

authorizing arbitration of future disputes. (Emphasis

supplied)

In view of our policy to adopt arbitration as a manner of

settling disputes, arbitration clauses are liberally construed to

favor arbitration. Thus, in LM Power Engineering Corporation

v. Capitol Industrial Construction Groups, Inc., this court said:

Being an inexpensive, speedy and amicable method of

settling disputes, arbitration—along with mediation,

conciliation and negotiation—is encouraged by the

Supreme Court. Aside from unclogging judicial dockets,

arbitration also hastens the resolution of disputes,

especially of the commercial kind. It is thus regarded

as the “wave of the future” in international civil and

commercial disputes. Brushing aside a contractual

agreement calling for arbitration between the parties

would be a step backward.

Consistent with the above mentioned policy of

encouraging alternative dispute resolution methods,

courts should liberally construe arbitration clauses.

Provided such clause is susceptible of an interpretation

that covers the asserted dispute, an order to arbitrate

should be granted. Any doubt should be resolved in

favor of arbitration. (Emphasis supplied)

A more clear-cut statement of the state policy to encourage

arbitration and to favor interpretations that would render

effective an arbitration clause was later expressed in Republic

Act No. 9285:

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. — It is hereby declared the

policy of the State to actively promote party autonomy

in the resolution of disputes or the freedom of the party

to make their own arrangements to resolve their

disputes. Towards this end, the State shall encourage

and actively promote the use of Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR) as an important means to achieve

speedy and impartial justice and declog court dockets.

As such, the State shall provide means for the use of

ADR as an efficient tool and an alternative procedure

for the resolution of appropriate cases. Likewise, the

State shall enlist active private sector participation in

the settlement of disputes through ADR. This Act shall

be without prejudice to the adoption by the Supreme

Court of any ADR system, such as mediation,

conciliation, arbitration, or any combination thereof

as a means of achieving speedy and efficient means of

resolving cases pending before all courts in the

Philippines which shall be governed by such rules as

the Supreme Court may approve from time to time.

x x x x

SEC. 25. Interpretation of the Act. — In interpreting the

Act, the court shall have due regard to the policy of the

law in favor of arbitration. Where action is commenced

by or against multiple parties, one or more of whom are

parties who are bound by the arbitration agreement

although the civil action may continue as to those who

are not bound by such arbitration agreement. (Emphasis

supplied)

Thus, if there is an interpretation that would render effective

an arbitration clause for purposes of avoiding litigation and

expediting resolution of the dispute, that interpretation shall

be adopted.

Leonen, J., Gerardo Lanuza, Jr. and Antonio O. Olbes v. BF Corporation, Shangri-

la Properties, Inc., Alfredo C. Ramos, Rufo B. Colayco, Maximo G. Licauco III,

and Benjamin C. Ramos, G.R. No. 174938, October 1, 2014.

Alternative Dispute Resolution


TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF THE FIRST AND

SECOND LEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: REITERATION OF OCA CIRCULAR NO. 33-2003 DATED

APRIL 8, 2003 (RE: COMPLIANCE WITH MEMORANDUM

CIRCULAR NO. 2 DATED MAY 26, 1980 [RE: SUBMISSION TO

THE NBI OF REPORT ON DECISIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES,

PURSUANT TO RA NO. 157, IN RELATION TO CIRCULAR NOS.

37 AND 42, DATED OCTOBER 7, 1953 AND MAY 15, 1969,

RESPECTIVELY, OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND

MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 1 DATED FEBRUARY 13, 1978

OF THIS COURT])

Acting on the August 19, 2014 letter of Atty. Virgilio L. Mendez,

Director, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), requesting the

reiteration of issuances relative to the requirement of furnishing

the NBI with copies of decisions in all criminal cases, it appearing

that there are some trial court judges who do not comply with

the directives of the said issuances, all judges and clerks of court

of the first and second level courts, in furnishing copies of

decisions in all criminal cases rendered by their respective

courts, are hereby REMINDED to strictly comply with the

directives set forth in OCA Circular No. 33-2003, quoted

hereunder, as follows:

OCA Circular No. 33-2003

TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF THE FIRST

AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: COMPLIANCE WITH MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR

NO. 2 DATED MAY 26, 1980

This Office has received a report from the National

Bureau of Investigation that most courts are not

complying with Memorandum Circular No. 2 dated May

6, 1980 [sic], directing all courts in the first and second

levels that in their reports on decisions rendered in

criminal cases to the National Bureau of Investigation

the following shall be stated:

(1) full name of the accused and/or convicted or

acquitted persons including maternal

surname;

(2) date of birth;

(3) place of birth;

(4) address; and

(5) all other pertinent descriptions and

information which will identify said

persons.

The above directive is hereby reiterated and

the said report shall be submitted to the National

Bureau of Investigation within 10 days from

promulgation of the decision (emphasis supplied).

Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.

April 8, 2003.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.

Court Administrator

September 30, 2014.

(Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ

Court Administrator

TO: ALL JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT, BRANCH CLERKS OF

COURT, AND OFFICERS IN CHARGE OF THE FIRST AND SECOND

LEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: SUBMISSION OF PROJECT PROCUREMENT

MANAGEMENT PLAN (PPMP) FOR YEAR 2016

All Clerks of Court, Branch Clerks of Court, and Officers in Charge

of the first and second level courts are hereby DIRECTED to

complete and submit the attached Project Procurement

Management Plan (PPMP) Form for the allocation of your

supplies for 2016 which is also available for download at

oca.judiciary.gov.ph. This process is being undertaken to ensure

that a sufficient quantity of supplies/equipment is allocated for

each court. Indicate therein the quantity requirement and

current stock position of the office supplies listed in the form

as this shall be part of the basis in the distribution of your supplies.

For item/s not needed by your office/court, please leave them

blank. On the other hand, for item/s needed but are not found

in the list, please attach a separate list thereof. In case your

court needs necessary repairs, renovations, repainting and the

like, please also indicate these in your PPMP Form, or in a separate

sheet.

The PPMP Form shall be accomplished immediately and

thereafter forwarded for review to the Presiding Judge (or the

Executive Judge for the Office of the Clerk of Court).




The completed PPMP Form shall then be submitted to the

Property Division, Office of the Administrative Services, Office

of the Court Administrator, on or before November 15, 2014.

It may be transmitted via regular mail, door to door courier

services or through the following electronic mail address: i)

[email protected] or ii) [email protected]. This

is to facilitate the immediate submission of the consolidated

lower court office supplies requirement and/or necessary repairs

and renovations needed to the Procurement Planning

Committee (PPC) and ultimately to the Bids and Awards

Committee for Goods and Services and Office of the Halls of

Justice, respectively, and thus avoid delay in the delivery thereof

to your respective courts.

Failure to submit the duly accomplished forms within the

deadline would mean that no delivery shall be made to your

court as it is presumed that you have adequate stocks/supplies

for the fiscal year 2016. Likewise, if no request for repairs and

renovations is listed, it is presumed that your court is in good

condition.

For strict compliance.

October 28, 2014.


Court Administrator

TO : ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF THE FIRST AND

THE SECOND LEVEL COURTS UNDER THE HUSTISYEAH! CASE

DECONGESTION PROJECT

SUBJECT: CASE DECONGESTION STATUS AND MONTHLY

REPORTS

WHEREAS, in a Resolution dated April 16, 2013 in A.M. No.

13-04-11-SC, the Court en banc approved the full roll out of the

Hustisyeah!, a case decongestion project in selected courts to

be implemented by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)

and The Asia Foundation (TAF);

WHEREAS, to fully implement Hustisyeah!, the OCA and

TAF formed inventory teams led by judicial supervisors and

deployed them to the participating courts;

WHEREAS, after an inventory in a particular court, the

judicial supervisor is tasked to prepare the Initial Inventory

Report and, together with the presiding judge, submit the Case

Decongestion Plan (CDP), which shall thereafter be implemented;

WHEREAS, TAF has been tasked to consolidate the results

of Hustisyeah!;

NOW, THEREFORE, to assist TAF in monitoring the

implementation of Hustisyeah!, all judges and clerks of court of

the first and the second level courts under the Hustisyeah! case

decongestion project are hereby required to:

1. Continuously monitor the status of cases listed in the

CDPs;

2. Accomplish the attached status report form* and submit

to TAF at the end of the third and sixth month after the

signing of the CDP and thereafter every end of January

and end of July; and

3. Provide TAP electronic or hard copy of the court’s

Monthly Reports from the starting month of the

inventory to the last month of implementation of the

CDP.


November 5, 2014.


Court Administrator

TO: ALL CLERKS OF COURT, OFFICERS IN CHARGE, LIBRARIANS

AND ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL

COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL

COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL

CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS, SHARI’A

CIRCUIT COURTS AND MAINTENANCE OFFICES OF THE HALLS

OF JUSTICE

SUBJECT: DELIVERY OF SUPPLIES, FURNITURE, EQUIPMENT,

LIBRARY MATERIALS, ACCOUNTABLE FORMS AND OTHER

MATERIALS NEEDED BY THE TRIAL COURTS

It has been observed that documents for the delivery of the

above-enumerated items such as: (i) Bills of Lading; (ii) Requisition

and Issue Slips (RIS) for supplies; and (iii) Acknowledgement

Receipts for Equipment (AREs), are being disregarded and

ignored by some Clerks of Court/Officers in Charge, as some

documents submitted to this Office by the freight forwarder



* Available for download at http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph


after the completion of delivery have not been signed by a

representative of the court, while some were signed by person/s

who are not even court employees.

All Clerks of Court, Officers in Charge, Librarians and

Accountable Officers are hereby directed to ensure the following:

i) All documents pertaining to the delivery of the above

mentioned items to your respective court/offices must

be duly signed. The complete name and position of the

person who signed the documents must be legibly

written and the date of receipt must also be indicated;

and

ii) In the absence of the Clerk of Court or Officer in Charge,

the signing of documents is the responsibility of the

next in rank employee of the recipient court.


November 13, 2014.


Court Administrator

for Adoption Proceedings, x x x”), 8552 (Domestic Adoption Act

of 1998), and 8043 (Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995), and

other related laws and issuances when handling adoption cases

before your respective courts, with a REMINDER that particular

attention be given to the following provisions:

Republic Act No. 9523

SEC. 8. Certification. — The certification that a child is

legally available for adoption shall be issued by the

DSWD in lieu of a judicial order, thus making the entire

process administrative in nature.

The certification shall be, for all intents and

purposes, the primary evidence that the child is legally

available in a domestic proceeding, as provided in

Republic Act No. 8552, and in an inter-country adoption

proceeding, as provided in Republic Act. No. 8043.

Republic Act No. 8552

SEC. 9. Whose Consent is Necessary to the Adoption. —

After being properly counseled and informed of his/her

right to give or withhold his/her approval of the

adoption, the written consent of the following to the

adoption is hereby required:

x x x x

(b) The biological parent(s) of the child if known, or

the legal guardian, or the proper government

instrumentality which has legal custody of the

child; (Emphasis supplied)

For your information and guidance.

November 17, 2014.


Court Administrator

TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE FAMILY COURTS

SUBJECT: CLARIFICATORY ISSUANCE RELATIVE TO OCA

CIRCULAR NO. 10-2014 DATED JANUARY 20, 2014 (RE:

REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW ON ADOPTION CASES)

In her October 7, 2014 letter, Secretary Corazon Juliano-Soliman

of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

recommended the issuance of a clarificatory circular

emphasizing the requirement of the law on adoption cases,

particularly on cases which involve children who are considered

wards of the State, it appearing that some trial court judges fail

to require both a certification that the child is legally available

for adoption pursuant to Republic Act No. 9523; and a Consent

to Adopt issued by the DSWD for children who are considered

wards of the State. Acting on the said letter, all family court

judges are hereby enjoined to STRICTLY OBSERVE the mandate

of Republic Act Nos. 9523 (“An Act Requiring the Certification of

the Department of Social Welfare and Development [DSWD] to

Declare a ‘Child Legally Available for Adoption’ as a Prerequisite

TO: ALL EXECUTIVE JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF THE


SUBJECT: REITERATION OF THE 2004 RULES ON NOTARIAL

PRACTICE (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

It has been observed that despite the clear directive in A.M. No.

02-8-13-SC (2004 Rules on Notarial Practice), many Executive

Judges have not been furnishing the Office of the Court

Administrator copies of the data recorded in the registers of

notaries public.



CircularsOCA Circular No. 143-2014 (continued)


Section 12, Rule III, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice,

provides:

SEC. 12. Register of Notaries Public. — The Executive Judge

shall keep and maintain a Register of Notaries Public

in his jurisdiction which shall contain, among others,

the dates of issuance or revocation or suspension of

notarial commissions, and the resignation or death of

notaries public. The Executive Judge shall furnish the

Office of the Court Administrator information and data

recorded in the register of notaries public. The Office of

the Court Administrator shall keep a permanent,

complete and updated database of such record

(Emphasis supplied).

Accordingly, all Executive Judges are hereby REMINDED to

strictly comply with the above quoted provision, submit the

data to the Office of the Court Administrator immediately, and

henceforth twice a year, on or before the 15th day of the months

of February and August.

Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.

November 25, 2014.


Court Administrator

more predictable cash outflow in the Bureau of Treasury. The

aforementioned DBM circular letter now restricts the issuance

of MDS checks as payment of claims.

Accordingly, in compliance with the directive of the

abovementioned DBM circular letter, the issuance of MDS

checks as payment of the monthly pensions/annuities shall no

longer be used for ALL pensioners/judges and survivorship

pensioners beginning the Fiscal Year 2015. ALL PENSIONERS/

JUDGES AND SURVIVORSHIP PENSIONERS who are receiving

their monthly pensions/annuities through MDS checks are hereby

required to open an ATM account with any branch of the Land

Bank of the Philippines of their choice and to submit a clear copy

of the same with the Financial Management Office, Office of

the Court Administrator, for inclusion in the ATM payroll of

pensions/annuities, on or before the last day of January 2015.

The monthly pensions/annuities of pensioners/judges and

survivorship pensioners who fail to comply with the

abovementioned directive shall not be released.

Similar to the guidelines in the implementation of the

Automated Payroll System for the lower courts, any inquiry on

individual bank balances shall be effected through enrolment in

the I-Access facility of the Land Bank of the Philippines, or through

the LBP Phone Banking Facility.


December 9, 2014.


Court Administrator

TO: All PENSIONERS/JUDGES AND SURVIVORSHIP

PENSIONERS

SUBJECT: AUTOMATION OF THE PAYROLL SYSTEM FOR ALL

PENSIONERS/JUDGES AND SURVIVORSHIP PENSIONERS

Pursuant to OCA Circular No. 56-2004 dated April 20, 2004,

pensioners/judges were advised to open an ATM account with

the Land Bank of the Philippines for the implementation of the

Automated Payroll System (APS) for their monthly pensions/

annuities. However, due to the request of some pensioners/

judges, the receipt of their monthly pensions/annuities by

Modified Disbursement Scheme (MDS) checks was retained.

On February 25, 2014, the Department of Budget and

Management issued Circular Letter No. 2013-16 B to promote

the use of the Authority to Debit Account (ADA) as a mode of

disbursement for all National Government Agencies in order to

reduce the volume of outstanding checks, thus, resulting in a


REORGANIZING THE COMMITTEE ON GENDER

RESPONSIVENESS IN THE JUDICIARY

In view of the retirement, resignation, promotion, and

appointment of some justices, judges, officials, and employees

Memorandum Order No. 26-2014


of the judiciary, the Committee on Gender Responsiveness in

the Judiciary, is hereby reorganized as follows:

Chairperson

Hon. Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro

Vice Chairperson

Hon. Remedios Salazar-Fernando, Court of Appeals

Members

Hon. Leoncia R. Dimagiba, Court of Appeals

Hon. Teresita V. Diaz-Baldos, Sandiganbayan

Justice Ma. Belen Ringpis-Liban, Court of Tax Appeals

Court Administrator or his representative

President or his representative,

Philippine Judges Association

Chief, Office of Administrative Services

Chief, Fiscal Management and Budget Office

Chief, Office of the Chief Attorney

Prof. Myrna S. Feliciano, Philippine Judicial Academy

Judicial Reform Program Administrator,

Program Management Office

Chief, Public Information Office

Representative, Office of the Chief Justice

Secretary

Atty. Catherina N. Manzano,

Office of the Chairperson

Assistant Secretary

Ms. Ma. Theresa S. Victoriano-Baylon,

Office of the Chairperson

The Chairperson, Co-Chairperson, Members, and

Secretariat of the above Committee, including those who have

rendered service as part of the said Committee prior to the

issuance of this Memorandum Order, shall receive the expense

allowance presently authorized.

This Memorandum Order shall take effect upon its issuance

this 7th day of October 2014.

(Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO

Chief Justice

Chairperson, First Division

(Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Senior Associate Justice

Chairperson, Second Division

(Sgd.) TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO

Associate Justice

(Per S.O. No. 1819 dated October 3, 2014)

REORGANIZING THE COMMITTEE FOR THE DECONGESTION

OF PROVINCIAL, CITY AND MUNICIPAL JAILS

In the interest of service, the Committee for the Decongestion

of Provincial, City and Municipal Jails is hereby reorganized as

follows:

Chairperson

CA Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez

Vice Chairpersons

CA Associate Justice Elihu A. Ybañez

SC Deputy Court Administrator Raul Bautista Villanueva

Members

Judge Jansen R. Rodriguez (RTC Branch 6, Manila)

Judge Bernelito R. Fernandez (RTC Branch 97, Quezon City)

Judge Patria Manaslastas de Leon

(RTC Branch 206, Muntinlupa City)

Judge Maximo M. De Leon (RTC Branch 143, Makati City)

Judge Emily L. San Gaspar-Gito (RTC Branch 5, Manila)

Judge Rowena Tan (RTC Branch 118, Pasay City)

Judge Phoeve C. Meer (MTC Branch 17, Manila)

OCJ Representative

Atty. Renelie B. Mayuga/Atty. Jilliane Joyce De Dumo

Secretary

Atty. Djonivie Jomare Junasa

Josephine B. Asuzano, Stenographer

Jane M. Hernandez, Stenographer

The Chairperson, V ice Chairpersons, Members, and

Members of the Secretariat of the Committee, including those

who have rendered service as part of the said Committee prior

to the issuance of this Memorandum Order, shall receive the

usual expense allowances.

This Memorandum Order shall take effect upon its issuance

this 16th day of October 2014.


Chief Justice





(Sgd.) ARTURO D. BRION

Associate Justice

(Per S.O. No. 1819 dated October 3, 2014)

Memorandum Order No. 28-2014

OrdersMemorandum Order No. 26-2014 (continued)


Memorandum Order No. 31-2014 First Quarter 2015 Trainings, Programs, and Activities(continued from page 24)

� Pre-Pilot Seminar on Rules 22 and 24 of the Proposed

Revised Rules of Civil Procedure

February 17–18, Iloilo City

� Refresher/Advanced Course for Mediators in Sorsogon

and Camarines Sur

February 17–18, Legazpi City

� Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed

Sheriffs and Process Servers (Luzon)

February 24–26, PTC, Tagaytay City

� Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on

Court-Annexed Mediation

February 26, Calapan City

� Multi-Sectoral Capacity Building on Environmental Laws

and the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

March 3–5, PTC, Tagaytay City

� Information Dissemination through a Dialogue among

Barangay Officials and Court Officials, with Mobile Court-

Annexed Mediation

March 12, Puerto Princesa City

� Seminar on the Rules of Procedure on Financial

Rehabilitation

March 13, Manila

� Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed

Judges

March 17–26, PTC, Tagaytay

� Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and Rules Relating

to Money Laundering and Other Financial Crimes

March 17–18, Davao City

� Seminar-Workshop on Strengthening Judicial Integrity

and Rule of Law

March 26–27, Legazpi City

� Competency Enhancement Training for Judges,

Prosecutors, Social Workers and Law Enforcement

Investigators Handling Trafficking in Persons Cases

March 25–27, TBA

APPOINTING THE TWO OCA ASSISTANT CHIEFS OF OFFICE

(OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, OFFICE OF THE COURT

ADMINISTRATOR)

WHEREAS, the two positions of OCA Assistant Chiefs of Office

(Office of Administrative Services, Office of the Court

Administrator) are vacant; the notice of vacancy and the deadline

for the filing of the applications for appointment thereto were

duly published; and the matrix (showing the applicants’ present

positions with salary grades, highest educational attainment,

performance rating, relevant experiences, trainings and

seminars, dates of entrance to the Supreme Court, and dates of

last promotion) prepared by the Secretariat of the Selection

and Promotion Board for the Supreme Court (SPB-SC) were

submitted to the Chief Justice;

WHEREAS, evaluations have been made based on the

criteria for the selection of the most qualified applicants.

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, for and in behalf of

the Supreme Court, by virtue of and pursuant to the power and

authority vested in the revised Resolution in A.M. No. 99-12-08-

SC, do hereby appoint:

1) Atty. Maria Teresa O. Demesa-Razal

2) Atty. Raquel M. Ladrillano

as OCA Assistant Chiefs of Office (Office of Administrative

Services, Office of the Court Administrator).

This appointment shall take effect on the 7th day of

November 2014.

Issued this 7th day of November 2014.


Chief Justice





(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.

Associate Justice

Chairperson, Third Division


Justice Adolfo S. AzcunaChancellor

Professor Sedfrey M. CandelariaEditor in Chief

Editorial and Research Staff

Atty. Orlando B. CariñoArsenia M. Mendoza

Armida M. SalazarJocelyn D. BondocRonald Paz Caraig

Joseph Arvin S. CruzChristine A. Ferrer

Joanne Narciso-MedinaCharmaine S. NicolasSarah Jane S. Salazar

Jeniffer P. Sison

Circulation and Support Staff

Romeo A. ArculloJudith B. Del Rosario

Michael Angelo P. LaudeLope R. PalermoDaniel S. Talusig

Printing Services

Leticia G. Javier and Staff

The PHILJA Bulletin is published

quarterly by the Research,

Publications and Linkages Office

of the Philippine Judicial

Academy, with office at the 3rd

Floor of the Supreme Court

Centennial Building, Padre Faura

Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila.

Tel: 552-9524; Fax: 552-9621; E-mail:

[email protected];

[email protected]; Website:

http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph

(Continued on page 23)

First Quarter 2015 Trainings, Programs, and Activities

� Pre-Pilot Seminar on Rules 22 and 24 of

the Proposed Revised Rules of Civil

Procedure

January 8– 9, Cebu City

� Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and

Rules Relating to Money Laundering and

Other Financial Crimes

January 13–14, Bacolod City

� Seminar-Workshop on Procedural,

Substantive Law and Jurisprudence on

Intellectual Property

January 21–22, Cagayan de Oro City

� Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and

Rules Relating to Money Laundering and

Other Financial Crimes

January 28–29, Cebu City



Procedure

January 29–30, Makati City



Procedure

February 2–3, Quezon City

� Pre-Judicature Program

February 2–13, Manila

� Career Development Program for Court

Legal Researchers (Luzon)


PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE TO AVOID

PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE

OR IMPRISONMENT OR BOTH

3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial Building

Padre Faura Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila 1000

Philippines

� Orientation Conference with

Stakeholders on Court-Annexed

Mediation

ILOCOS NORTE

February 4, Laoag City

ILOCOS SUR

February 5, Vigan City

� Judicial Career Enhancement Program

(First level court judges of NCJR)

BATCH 1


BATCH 2


� Career Enhancement Program for RTC

Clerks of Court (Region VIII)

February 10–12, Cebu City

� Seminar for EJs, VEJs, Single Sala Court

Judges (Mindanao)

February 10–11, Davao City



Procedure

February 12–13, Davao City

� Seminar-Workshop on Procedural,

Substantive Law and Jurisprudence on

Intellectual Property

(NCJR and Region VI)


Documents

Volume XVI, Issue No. 64 October-December 2014