Un-notarized Document

Absence of notarization of a deed of sale would not invalidate the transaction, however, an irregular notarization reduces the evidentiary value of the document to that of a private document, which requires proof of its due execution and authenticity to be admissible as evidence.

Trier of Facts

The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts and is not to review or calibrate the evidence on record. When supported by substantial evidence, the findings of fact by the trial court are binding and conclusive on the parties and are not reviewable by the Supreme Court, unless the case falls under the recognized exceptions. An acceptable exception is where there is a conflict between the factual determination of the trial court and that of the appellate court. In such case, it becomes imperative to digress from this general rule and revisit the factual circumstances surrounding the controversy (G.R. No. 203786. October 23, 2013).

Disbarred for gross misconduct

Case law instructs that if a person, in respect to business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults a lawyer with a view to obtaining professional advice or assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or acquiesces with the consultation, then the professional employment is established. The fact that a client transacted with counsel, the latter belated and unilateral classification of her acts as being limited to those of a real estate broker cannot be upheld. Respondent publicly held herself as a lawyer and the mere fact that she also donned the hat of a real estate broker did not divest her of the responsibilities attendant to the legal profession. The legal profession demands of attorneys an absolute abdication of every personal advantage conflicting in any way, directly or indirectly, with the interests of their clients. In the instant case, instead of delivering the deed of sale covering the subject property of her clients, she willfully notarized a deed of sale over the same property in favor of another person. This act of counsel constitute gross misconduct which warrant disbarment (A.C. No.4945, October 8, 2013).

a compassionate court

The Court is not only a court of law and justice, but also a court of compassion. The Court would be a mindless tyrant otherwise. The Court does not also sit on a throne of vindictiveness, for its seat is always placed under the inspiring aegis of that grand lady in a flowing robe who wears the mythical blindfold that has symbolized through the ages of man that enduring quality of objectivity and fairness, and who wields the balance that has evinced the highest sense of justice for all regardless of their station in life. This reiteration assures all judicial officials and personnel that the Court is not an uncaring overlord that would be unmindful of their fealty to their oaths and of their dedication to their work. For as long as they act efficiently to the best of their human abilities, and for as long as they conduct themselves well in the service of our Country and People, the Court shall always be considerate and compassionate towards them (A.M. No. RTJ-12-2320).

Suspension from the practice of law

The relationship between an attorney and his client is one imbued with utmost trust and confidence. In this light, clients are led to expect that lawyers would be ever-mindful of their cause and accordingly exercise the required degree of diligence in handling their affairs. Verily, a lawyer is expected to maintain at all times a high standard of legal proficiency, and devote his full attention, skill and competence to the case, regardless of its importance and whether he accepts it for a fee or for free. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. While such negligence or carelessness is incapable of exact formulation, the Court has consistently held that the lawyer's mere failure to perform the obligations due his client is per se a violation (A.C. No. 7749, July 8, 2013).

Transactions involving Agri Land

Not every sale or transfer of Agricultural Land would warrant DAR Adjudication Board's jurisdiction. When a suit does not involve an agrarian dispute it does not fall under the jurisdiction of DARAB. There must be a tenancy relationship between the party litigants or, the controversy must relate to "tenurial arrangements" for the  DARAB to validly take cognizance of the controversy. An allegation to declare null and void a certain sale involving an agricultural land does not ipso facto make the case an agrarian dispute. While the Court recognizes the legal requirement for clearances in the sale and transfer of agricultural lands, the DARAB's jurisdiction over such dispute is limited by the qualification that the land involved is under the administration and disposition of the Department of Agrarian Reform and Land Bank or, under the coverage of the CARP or other agrarian laws (DARPO, Laguna v. Paramount Holdings-Equities, Inc., et al, G.R. No. 176838. June 13, 2013).

Judicial Affidavit in place of Direct Testimonies

The bottleneck in our Judicial System in hearing and deciding cases is at the witness stand. This is so because courts can hear no more than one witness at a given time. To partly solve this problem, the 2012 Judicial Affidavit Rule directs the parties to use judicial affidavits of witnesses in place of their direct testimonies. This change has cut down the time needed for hearing cases by two-thirds, since the examination of witnesses normally consists of two-thirds direct and one-third cross. Some think that the use of judicial affidavit impairs the court's opportunity to observe the demeanor of witness while he testifies on direct examination. But true demeanor usually will not show when the witness responds to closely controlled questions from a friendly lawyer who interviewed him before trial. It is during cross examination, when the witness has to answer questions that he has not prepared for, that his true demeanor will show.

Misconduct of lawyers in government service

Generally speaking, a lawyer who holds a government office may not be disciplined as a member of the Bar for his misconduct in the discharge of his duties as government official. However, if said misconduct as a government official also constitutes a violation of his oath as a lawyer, then he may be disciplined by the Court as a member of the Bar. A member of the Bar who assumes public office does not shed his professional obligations. The Code of Professional Responsibility was not meant to govern the conduct of private practitioners alone, but all lawyers including those in government service. Lawyers in government are public servants who owe utmost fidelity to the public service. Otherwise said, a lawyer in government service is a keeper of the public faith and is burdened with high degree of social responsibility, perhaps higher than her brethren in private practice (A.C. No. 5119. April 17, 2013).

Proposed Rules on Civil Procedure

The proposed rules provide that, after the issues have been joined by the parties' pleadings, the court shall refer the case to court-annexed mediation in places where the service is available. The plaintiff is required to pay only 50% of the filing fees based on the possibility that the case would be settled and not have to go to trial. Experience shows that court-trained mediators have high success rates. Only when mediation fails and the case is returned to the court for further proceedings will the plaintiff pay the balance of the filing fees.

Revision Rules of Civil Procedure

Under the existing rules, parties to a case need only to allege the ultimate facts that constitute their basic positions in the case. The old practice is that the parties make full disclosure of the facts in their possesion only at the trial. This has changed when the Judicial Afidavit Rule began to require the parties to submit the testimonies of their witnesses in the form of affidavits long before trial. Consistent with this change, the proposed new rules would direct the parties to allege in their basic pleadings both the ultimate and the evidentiary facts on which their cases stand. This would facilitate a clear understanding of the case and the issues between the parties from the very beginning and help direct its course.

Revision of the Rules of Civil Procedure

To augment the efforts to decongest our court, the proposed rules of civil procedure provide that every case with few exceptions must undergo alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) before it is filed in court. The plaintiff cannot file a case without a written demand upon the defendant, seeking a meeting to negotiate settlement. The defendant cannot make a counterclaim without a counter demand and agreeing to meet with the plaintiff or his representative. Only when this fails can the plaintiff file his complaint in court and the defendant his counterclaim.

Contract; Social Justice

When a party enters into a covenant with another, he must perform his obligations with fealty and good faith. This becomes imperative where such party has been given a grant, such as land, under the land reform laws. While the tenant is emancipated from the bondage of the soil, the landowner is entitled to just compensation for the deprivation of his land. Authoritative pronouncements that farmer-beneficiaries cannot be faulted in non-payment of the fixed price agreed upon between them and the landowner under the honest belief that they (farmers) are now vested with absolute ownership of the land and that they cannot be expected to understand the legal implications of the existing lien/encumbrances annotated on their respective titles, appears to be anchored not on legal ground. "Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith." 

Notarial Act

A Notary Public is disqualified from performing a notarial act if he is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity of the principal within the fourth (4th) civil degree. Violation of this proscription, however, cannot be a sufficient ground for disbarment. In one case the Supreme Court imposed a reprimand on the erring lawyer and disqualification to perform notarial act for a period of three (3) months.

Notary Public

Engaging in the practice as notary public without having been properly commissioned by the Court violates the rules on Notarial Practice. The practice of law is embued with public interest and that a lawyer owes substantial duties not only to his client, but also to his brethren in the profession, to the courts, and to the nation. The duties of notaries public are dictated by public policy and impressed with public interest. Notarization is not a routinary, meaningless act, for it converts private document to a public instrument, making the document admissible in evidence without the necessity of preliminary proof of its authenticity and due execution.

Clear provisions of law need no clarification..

The Constitution evinces the direct action of the Filipino people by 

which the fundamental powers of government are established, limited and 

defined and by which those powers are distributed among the several 

departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body 

politic. The Framers reposed their wisdom and vision on one suprema lex 

to be the ultimate expression of the principles and the framework upon 

which government and society were to operate. Thus, in the interpretation 

of the constitutional provisions, the Court firmly relies on the basic 

postulate that the Framers mean what they say. The language used in the 

Constitution must be taken to have been deliberately chosen for a definite 

purpose. Every word employed in the Constitution must be interpreted to 

exude its deliberate intent which must be maintained inviolate against 

disobedience and defiance. What the Constitution clearly says, according to 

its text, compels acceptance and bars modification even by the branch 

tasked to interpret it. 

SC adopts new parameters in the qualification of sectoral parties under the party-list system.

The framers of the 1987 Constitution intended the party-list system to include not only sectoral parties but also non-sectoral parties. The framers intended the sectoral parties to constitute a part, but not the entirety, of the the party system. The framers of the 1987 Constitution expressly rejected the proposal to make the party-list system exclusively for sectoral parties only. It is the firm notion of the framers that party-list system will be the entry point to membership in the House of Representatives for these non-traditional parties that could not compete in the legislative district elections. Undeniably, both sectoral and non-sectoral parties are included in the party-list system, as clearly stated in Section 5(1), Article VI of the Constitution. The party-list system is composed of three (3) different groups: (1) National parties or organizations; (2) Regional parties or organizations; and (3) Sectoral parties and organizations. National and Regional parties or organizations need not be recognized along sectoral lines and need not represent any particular sector. A sectoral party refers to an organized group of citizens belonging to "labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural minorities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans, overseas workers and professionals," (Section 5, RA7941). The sectors aforementioned are not necessarily marginalized and under-represented. However, these sectors may "lack well-defined political constituencies" and can therefore organize themselves into sectoral parties in advocacy of the special interests and concerns of their respective sectors. It is enough that their principal advocacy pertains to the special interest of the sector they represent.

Environment Friendly, SC Admin Matter

A.M.  No. 11-9-4-SC
EFFICIENT USE OF PAPER RULE
Whereas,  to produce 500 reams o~ paper, twenty trees are cut and
100,000  liters  of  water  are  used,  water  that  is  no  longer  reusable
because  it  is  laden  with  chemicals  and  is  just  released  to  the
environment to poison our rivers and seas;
Whereas,  there  is  a  need  to  cut  the  judicial  system's  use  of
excessive  quantities  of costly  paper,  save  our forests,  avoid  landslides,
and  mitigate  the  worsening  effects  of climate  change  that  the  world  is
expenenc1ng;
Whereas,  the  judiciary  can  play  a  big  part  in  sav1ng  our  trees,
conserving precious water,  and helping mother earth;
NOW,  THEREFORE,  the Supreme  Court  En  Bane  hereby  issues
and promulgates the following:
Sec.  1.  Title  of the  Rule.  - This rule  shall  be  known  and  cited  as
the Efficient Use of Paper Rule.
Sec.  2.  Applicability. -This rule shall apply to all  courts and quasijudicial  bodies  under  the  administrative  supervision  of  the  Supreme
Court.
Sec.  3.  Format and Style.  - a) All  pleadings, motions,  and  similar
papers intended for the court and quasi-judicial body's consideration and
action  (court-bound  papers) shall  be written  in  single space with  a oneand-a-half  space  between  paragraphs,  using  an  easily  readable  font
style of the  party's choice,  of 14-size font,  and  on  a  13-inch by  8.5-inch
white bond paper; and
b)  All  decisions,  resolutions,  and  orders  issued  by  courts  and
by  quasi-judicial  bodies  under  the  administrative  supervision  of  the
Supreme Court shall  comply with  these requirements.  Similarly covered
are  the  reports  submitted  to  the  courts  and  transcripts  of stenographic
notes. Efficient Use (~f Paper Rule  2
Sec.  4.  Margins  and  Prints.  - The  parties  shall  maintain  the
following  margins  on  all  court-bound  papers:  a  left  hand  margin  of 1.5
inches  from  the  edge;  an  upper margin  of 1.2  inches from  the  edge;  a
right  hand  margin  of 1.0 inch  from  the  edge;  and  a  lower margin  of 1.0
inch from the edge.  Every page must be consecutively numbered.
Sec.  5.  Copies  to  be  Filed.  - Unless  otherwise  directed  by  the
court,  the  number  of  court~bound  papers  that  a  party  is  required  or
desires to file shall be as follows:
a.  In  the  Supreme  Court,  one  original  (properly  marked)  and
four  copies,  unless the  case  is  referred  to  the  Court En  Bane,  in  which
event,  the  parties  shall  file  ten  additional  copies.  For the  En  Bane,  the
parties  need  to  submit  only  two  sets  of  annexes,  one  attached  to  the
original  and  an  extra  copy.  For the  Division,  the  parties  need  to  submit
also two sets of annexes,  one attached to the original and an  extra copy.
All  members of the Court shall  share the extra  copies of annexes in  the
interest of economy of paper.
Parties to cases before the Supreme Court are further required,  on
voluntary  basis  for  the  first  six  months  following  the  effectivity  of  this
Rule  and  compulsorily  afterwards  unless  the  period  is  extended,  to
submit,  simultaneously with  their court-bound  papers,  soft copies  of the
same and their annexes (the latter in  PDF format) either by email to the
Court's e-mail  address or by compact disc (CD).  This requirement is  in
preparation  for  the  eventual  establishment  of  an  e-filing  paperless
system in the judiciary.
b.  In  the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan, one original
(properly marked) and two copies with their annexes;
c.  In  the  Court  of Tax Appeals,  one  original  (properly marked)
and  two  copies  with  annexes.  On  appeal  to  the  En  Bane,  one  original
(properly marked) and eight copies with annexes; and
d.  In  other  courts,  one  original  (properly  marked)  with  the
stated annexes attached to it.
Sec.  6.  Annexes Served on Adverse Party.  - A  party required  by
the rules to  serve a copy of his court-bound  paper on  the adverse party
need  not  enclose  copies  of those  annexes that  based  on  the  record  of
the  court  such  party already has in  his  possession ..  In  the event a party
I
requests a set of the annexes actually filed with the court,  the party who
filed  the  paper  shall  comply  with  the  request  within  five  days  from
receipt. Efficient Use  of Paper Rule  3
Sec.  7.  Date of Effectivity.  -This rule shall take effect on  January
1,  2013  after publication  in  two  newspa.pers  of general  circulation  in  the
Philippines.
Manila,  November 13, 2012.

SC Reinstates Remorseful Lawyer Dismissed for Immorality

The Supreme Court recently granted the petition (for extraordinary mercy) of a lawyer dismissed for immorality in 2004 to be reinstated in the Roll of Attorneys after the same “has sufficiently atoned for his transgressions.”

In a six-page resolution penned by Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe, the Court En Banc ordered the reinstatement in the Roll of Edmundo L. Macarubbo who, at 58 years of age, “still has productive years ahead of him that could significantly contribute to the upliftment of the law profession and the betterment of society.” It added that while the Court was mindful of its duty to discipline and even remove its errant officers, it also has a duty to show compassion to those who have reformed their ways as in Macarubbo’s case.

In 2004, Macarubbo was disbarred for having contracted a bigamous marriage with complainant Florence Teves and a third marriage with one Josephine Constantino while his first marriage to Helen Esparza was still subsisting, which acts constituted gross immoral conduct in violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

The Court held that Macarubbo “has sufficiently shown his remorse and acknowledged his indiscretion in the legal profession and in his personal life” and has since asked forgiveness from his children by complainant Teves and maintained a cordial relationship with them as proved by his photo evidence. It noted that following his disbarment, Macarubbo has returned to his hometown in Enrile, Cagayan and devoted his time tending an orchard and taking care of his ailing mother until her death in 2008. He also worked for the local government of Enrile, Cagayan, as well as taught part-time instructor at the University of Cagayan Valley and F.L. Vargas College and took an active part in socio-civic activities.

Macarubbo’s plea for reinstatement, the Court noted, was also duly supported by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Cagayan Chapter and his parish priest Rev. Fr. Camilo Castillejos, Jr., among others. Furthermore, records reveal that he has already settled his previous marital squabbles and sends regular support to his children. (Macarubbo v. Macarubbo, AC No. 6148, January 22, 2013)

SC Clarifies "Three-Term Limit" Rule, Proclaims Abundo Winner of 2010 Mayoral Elections in Viga, Catanduanes

In the Court’s 35-page decision, written by Justice Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., it unanimously held that Abundo did not serve three consecutive terms as Mayor of Viga, Catanduanes due to an actual involuntary interruption during the 2004-2007 term. This was because he assumed the mayoralty post only on May 9, 2006 and served a little over one year and one month only. Thus, “the two-year period which his opponent, Torres, was serving as mayor should be considered as an interruption, which effectively removed Abundo’s case from the ambit of the three-term limit rule,” ruled the Court.
Justice Brion agreed that the Aldovino ruling relied upon by COMELEC “cannot be used as a basis for the conclusion that there had been no interruption in the case of Abundo - the eventual winner who is so recognized only after winning his protest case. Notably in Aldovino, while preventive suspension is an involuntary imposition, what it affects is merely the authority to discharge the functions of an office that the suspended local official continues to hold… the local elective official continues to possess title to his office while under preventive suspension, so that no interruption of his term ensues.” (GR No. 201716, Abundo v. Commission on Elections, January 8, 2013)

Judicial Conduct

Misconduct means intentional wrongdoing or deliberate violation of a rule of law or a standard of behavior. To constitute an administrative offense, misconduct should relate to or be connected with the performance of the official functions of a public officer. In grave misconduct, as distinguished from simple misconduct,  the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate the law or flagrant disregard of an established rule must be established.

re-issuance of 2nd owners copy of title

It is judicially settled that a trial court does not acquire jurisdiction over a petition for the issuance of a new owner’s duplicate certificate of title if the original is in fact not lost but in the possession of the alleged buyer.  Such reconstituted certificate is itself void once the existence of the original is unquestionably demonstrated. Nonetheless the nullity of the reconstituted certificate does not by itself settle the issue of ownership over the property; much less does it vest such title upon the holder of the original certificate. The issue of ownership must be litigated in appropriate proceedings. It cannot be determined in an action for the issuance of a new owner’s duplicate certificate of title or in proceedings to annul such newly issued certificate.

Judicial Affidavit Rule

SC to Take Up Prosecutors' Request for Deferment of the Judicial Affidavit Rule in Criminal Cases

The Rule, which is meant to address the twin problems of case congestion and delay in the resolution of cases, requires the compulsory use of judicial affidavits of witnesses in lieu of their direct testimonies in all first-level (except as to small claims cases) to third-level courts; investigating officers and bodies authorized by the SC to receive evidence; and special courts and quasi-judicial bodies whose rules of procedure are subject to the SC’sdisapproval. It further requires the parties’ documentary or object evidence to be attached to the judicial affidavits.

Initial valuation of land by LBP not binding upon the court.

The determination of just compensation for agricultural lands brought under agrarian reform is the exclusive domain of the courts and that the executive and legislative acts of fixing just compensation are not conclusive or binding upon the court, but should only be regarded as an initial valuation. In case the landowner rejects the offer or fails to reply, the DAR Adjudicator conducts summary administrative proceedings to determine the compensation for the land by requiring the landowner, the landbank and other interested parties to submit evidence as to the just compensation for the land. Any valuation of Land Bank in accordance with any formula should only be regarded as an initial valuation, never conclusive nor controlling. Otherwise, Land Bank or the DAR might impermissibly usurp the essentially judicial function of determination of just compensation (LBP v. Sps. Costo, G.R. No. 174647. December 5, 2012).

Political Scenario in Cebu

The swiftness of the administration to employ its punitive powers to damage the electoral chances of candidates it does not favor is underlined by the fact that the case against Garcia is administrative, not criminal, and does not involve graft and corruption. The siege of Cebu has created political repercussions beyond the province. It has widened the rift between two power blocs, one identified with Vice President Jejomar Binay and the other with Interior Secretary Mar Roxas. The Aquino administration is in no mood to go easy on those it perceives as its enemies, even in the spirit of Christmas and New Year. President Aquino needs to show that he is more concerned about introducing economic and social reforms than prosecuting or persecuting his political enemies or proclaiming his incorruptibility.