Volume XVII, Issue No. 66 April-June 2015

Transcription

1
VOLUME XVII ISSUE NO. 66
APRIL-JUNE 2015
ISSN 2244-5862
From the Chancellor’s Desk
Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio speaks on The South China Sea Dispute before distinguished guests at the PHILJA
Training Center Auditorium, Tagaytay City.
It was a busy second quarter for PHILJA with the conduct of
our various regular programs: the 72nd Orientation SeminarWorkshop for Newly Appointed Judges; the 29th Orientation
Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Clerks of Court; the
Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Executive Judges (Selected
RTC and First Level Court Executive Judges, Vice Executive
Judges, 1st–3rd Vice Executive Judges, and Single Sala Court
Judges of Luzon); the Judicial Career Enhancement Program
for First Level Court Judges of the Fourth Judicial Region (Rizal,
Cavite, Laguna, and Quezon); the Career Enhancement
Program for RTC Clerks of Court (Region V, Naga City and Region
I, Baguio City); the Career Enhancement Programs for Court
Social Workers in the NCJR and the Third Judicial Region and
Regional Trial Court Sheriffs of the NCJR (Batch 1).
A number of special focus seminar-workshops were also
carried out: Seminar-Workshop on Procedural, Substantive
Laws and Jurisprudence on Intellectual Property for Clerks of
Court of Special Commercial Courts of Regions I, II, III, and V
and for Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Attorneys;
Capacity Building on Environmental Laws and Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases for Judges and Branch
Clerks of Court; and the Seminar on the Rules of Procedure on
Financial Rehabilitation for Executive Judges and V ice
Executive Judges (Regions I and II; Regions VI, VII, and VIII, as
well as the NCJR and Region III). A focus group discussion (FGD)
pertaining to the ongoing PHILJA Curriculum Review
participated in by business entrepreneurs, lawyers, and court
users from Makati City also took place at this time.
PHILJA also delivered a Seminar-Workshop on Financial
Crimes and Money Laundering for Judges (Regions I, VI, and
VIII); an Information Dissemination through a Dialogue
between Barangay Officials and Court Officials for the Cities
of Tarlac and Cabanatuan. Likewise, two Competency
Enhancement Trainings were held one for judges, prosecutors,
social workers and law enforcement investigators handling
trafficking in persons cases (CET-TIP) and another for judges
and court personnel handling cases involving children. The
Personal Security Training for Judges also continued with two
more batches.
An Intensive Seminar-Workshop on Rules 22 and 24 of
the Proposed Revised Rules of Civil Procedure for Pilot Court
Judges (2 batches) and a Seminar-Workshop on Dangerous
Drugs Law for Judges, Prosecutors, and Law Enforcers of the
Fifth Judicial Region were also mounted.
The Academy also extended its assistance in quite a
number of convention-seminars for the benefit of different
court personnel, as follows:
(Next page)
2
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Contents
(Continued from page 1)
From the Chancellor’s Desk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Training Programs and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
Judicial Moves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
New Rulings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Doctrinal Reminders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17

10th National Convention and Seminar of the Process
Servers Association of the Philippines (PROSAPHIL)
which was held in Lingayen, Pangasinan and which
had for its theme, “The Process Servers: The Center
of Public Faith and Frontline of Judicial Service;”

18th National Convention and Seminar of the Sheriff’s
Confederation of the Philippines (SCOPHIL), held in
Pasay City;

2 nd National Convention and Seminar of the
Association of Clerks of Court and Ex Officio Sheriffs
in Iloilo City with the theme “Judicial Management in
the Regional Trial Court: Its Challenges and Rewards;”

Regional Conference of the Asia-Pacific Region of the
International Association of Women Judges and 20th
National Convention and Seminar of the Philippine
Women Judges Association held in Tagaytay City which
had for this year’s theme “Protecting the Rights of
Women and Children Across the Asia Pacific Region.”
Resolutions
A.M. No. 15-04-06-SC – Financial Liquidation and
Suspension of Payments Rules of Procedure for
Insolvent Debtors (2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Orders
Memorandum Order No. 14-2015 – Creating the
Special Committee on Speedy Trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
Memorandum Order No. 14-A-2015 – Designating
an Additional Member of the Special Committee on
Speedy Trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
Memorandum Order No. 15-2015 – Reorganizing
the Subcommittee on Commercial Courts . . . . . . . . .
37
Circulars
OCA Circular No. 70-2015 – Payment of
Representation and Transportation Allowance
(RATA) for the Designated Officer in Charge (OIC)Clerk of Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
OCA Circular No. 75-2015 – Submission of
Photograph of the Accused before the Scheduled
Arraignment and Inclusion of the Correct Middle
Name in the Preparation of a Warrant of Arrest . . .
38
OCA Circular No. 77-2015 – Application of Republic
Act No. 10640 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
OCA Circular No. 81-2015 – Synchronized Justice
System Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
OCA Circular No. 100-2015 – Temporary Release of
Inmates Suffering from Communicable Diseases and
Other Health Concerns to Hospitals for Appropriate
Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45
OCA Circular No. 102-2015 – Clarification and
Amendment to A.M. No. 04-7-02-SC (Re: Guidelines
on Corporate Surety Bonds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45
Third Quarter 2015 Training Programs and
Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
48
The Academy, thru the Philippine Mediation Center Office
(PMCO), also conducted a handful of activities supporting
Alternative Dispute Resolution such as the Annual General
Assembly of the Asian Mediation Association at the PHILJA
Training Center in Tagaytay; an Orientation on JDR for Clerks
of Court and Branch Clerks of Court including Public
Prosecutors, Public Attorneys and Law Practitioners in Dagupan
City; a Basic Mediation Course as well as a Pre-Internship
Orientation and Meeting with Judges, Clerks of Court, Branch
Clerks of Court, Mediation Trainees and PMCU Staff for the
Ilocos (Norte and Sur) Mediation Programs and Oriental
Mindoro Mediation Program; a Work Orientation and Skills
Enhancement Seminar (WOSES) for PMCU Staff in Tagaytay
City; and an Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on
Court-Annexed Mediation for the Palawan Mediation Program.
Finally, we also held a roundtable discussion (RTD)
entitled, Knowledge Sharing on Court and Case Management
in partnership with Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, and a special
lecture under the PHILJA Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice
Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera Award for the Most
Outstanding Professorial Lecturer featuring “The South China
Sea Dispute” by Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio
which was broadcast simultaneously via video conference in
PTC, Tagaytay and SC En Banc Session Hall in Manila.
We were also kept abreast of new rulings, doctrinal
reminders, resolutions, circulars, and orders of the Court as
well as of the Office of the Court Administrator.
(Continued on page 46)
3
Training Programs and Activities
The PHILJA Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera Award
for the Most Outstanding Professorial Lecturer featuring
Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio on “The South China Sea Dispute”
On April 27, 2015, PHILJA conducted a special lecture
featuring the topic The South China Sea Dispute by Supreme
Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, the recipient
of the 2015 Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice Ameurfina
A. Melencio Herrera Award for the Most Outstanding
Professorial Lecturer. It was held in PHILJA Training Center,
Tagaytay City as the main site and via video conferencing at
the En Banc Session Hall of the Supreme Court, with 170 and
149 participants, respectively. The attendees were composed
of Supreme Court (SC), Court of Appeals (CA), Court of Tax
Appeals (CTA) and Sandiganbayan justices; SC and PHILJA
officials and employees; judges and other lower court
personnel; CA, CTA and Sandiganbayan employees; and
guests from other government agencies and the private
sector.
PHILJA Chancellor Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna delivered the
Opening Remarks and welcomed the attendees. Justice
Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez formally introduced the lecturer
then the lecture proper followed. Aided by a Powerpoint
presentation, Justice Carpio’s discussion revolved on
questions and issues surrounding the South China Sea among
which are: the pending South China Sea dispute; law
governing the dispute; low-tide elevations (LTEs), artificial
islands, exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf
(CS); legal effect of the reclamations undertaken by China in
the Spratlys; legal basis under international law to China’s 9dashed lines claim; overriding principle in resolving
overlapping EEZs and CS; legal basis of the Philippines’ claim
to Scarborough Shoal; and the basic objections of China to
the arbitration case filed by the Philippines under UNCLOS.
The presentation also showed photos of the historical map
of Murillo Velarde, China’s 9-dashed lines and its reclamations
in the Spratlys; and discussed the implications of these
massive reclamations to the Philippines and other Southeast
Asian countries. The lecture was followed by an open forum.
Thereafter, Justice Carpio formally presented his paper to the
children of Justice Melencio Herrera and to the Supreme
continued on page 46
4
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Roundtable Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Court and Case Management
On June 9–10, 2015, PHILJA, in partnership with KonradAdenauer-Stiftung (KAS), conducted the Roundtable
Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Court and Case
Management. The activity, held in the Philippines for the
first time, is a gathering of Asia Pacific judicial academies.
Forty-four magistrates, judges and head of judicial academies
from Germany, V ietnam, Cambodia, Bhutan, Taiwan,
Indonesia and the Philippines participated in this international
forum. The program was designed to re-apprise the
participants of the various laws, rules, jurisprudence and
developments on court and case management; familiarize
them with the emerging trends on court and case
management and the various challenges that must be
addressed to improve present system; and expose them to
the best practices being observed in other countries.
PHILJA Chancellor Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna formally
opened the program followed by Mr. Marc Alexander
Spitzkatz’s message in behalf of the KAS. The discussion
started off with retired Court Administrator Zenaida N.
Elepaño’s orientation on Philippine laws and Rules of
Procedure in different courts relative to disposition of cases.
Following is a roundtable discussion among the participants
that brought about significant views on emerging trends and
best practices on court and case management from an
international perspective as well as from a local or Philippine
perspective. The discussants were Dr. Bernd Wilhelm Pickel,
President of the High Court, Berlin, Germany; Justice ShinMin Chen of the Constitutional Court of Taiwan; Judge Agus
Subroto of the Appeal Court of Jakarta and Head of Education
and Training Center for Technical Judiciary, Supreme Court
of the Republik of Indonesia; Hon. Wei-Ya Wu, Head of
Research and Development, Judges Academy of Taiwan; Hon.
Thong Chenda, Vice President of the Royal Academy for
Judicial Professions, Cambodia; Ms.Thi Hang Nga Nguyen,
Deputy Chief of Commercial Law Team of Judge Training and
Vice Dean of the Faculty of Lawyers Training, Judicial Academy
of Vietnam; Hon. Tshering Dorji, Registrar General of the
Supreme Court of Bhutan; Court of Appeals Justice Maria
Filomena D. Singh; Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro
of RTC Br. 158, Pasig City; Court Administrator Jose Midas P.
Marquez; and Deputy Court Administrator Raul B. Villanueva.
From among the many challenges on court management,
the participants identified the following as prevailing in the
courts: bringing courts to the digital age; growing complexity
of cases that are brought to court; health effects on judges
considering their heavy caseloads; and modernization
through reforms in human resources, training, budgeting,
information technology and public services. Justice Singh
identified the following as challenges faced by Philippine
courts: difficulty to shift to eCourts because of security
reasons and technical deficits; and delivering justice on real
time by having a court manager/trained management
personnel with tailor fit court management style and working
with a central docket system and a unified trial calendar in
order that needed orders be expeditiously effected and
served.
Relative to best practices on court management, Dr. Pickel
stated that today in Germany, all court stations are equipped
with computers with developed databases. In Indonesia, they
provide certification trainings for judges on various areas;
5
Career Enhancement Programs for Court Social Workers and Sheriffs
In May 2015, PHILJA pioneered the first career enhancement programs (CEP) for court social workers and sheriffs. The Academy
addressed the need of court social workers and sheriffs for continuing judicial education to ensure competent, efficient and
ethical performance of their official functions.
Career Enhancement Program for Court Social Workers
Held on May 5–7, 2015, the activity was attended by 67 court social workers from the National Capital Judicial Region (NCJR)
and the Third Judicial Region.
The program aims to update court social workers on relevant laws, recent jurisprudence and administrative policies; and
enhance their skills and strengthen their values in the discharge of their duties. Topics discussed were family court and the
role of court social worker; children in conflict with the law; Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act; Rule on
Examination of Child Witness; case management, preparation and presentation of case study reports; interviewing and
counselling skills and techniques; recent Supreme Court circulars, administrative orders and jurisprudence concerning court
social workers; and updates on adoption laws. Workshops on interviewing and counselling skills and techniques; and on
ethical considerations in the discharge of official functions were also incorporated in the program. The participants were
given the opportunity to dialogue with the officials from the Office of the Court Administrator in order for them to raise their
specific administrative concerns.
Career Enhancement Program for Sheriffs
The activity was conducted on May 19–21, 2015 and participated in by 68 sheriffs from NCJR. In order to update the participants
on relevant laws, recent jurisprudence and administrative policies, the program contained lectures such as service of summons,
writs and other court processes, sheriff’s forms, execution of judgment, relevant provisional remedies and special civil actions,
Next page
6
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Asian Mediation Association Annual General Meeting
The Philippine Mediation Center Office (PMCO) of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) hosted the Asian Mediation
Association (AMA) Annual General Meeting (AGM) on April 17, 2015, at the PHILJA Training Center in Tagaytay City. It was
attended by 20 representatives from AMA, PHILJA, PMCO, and the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) who discussed the
report of the AMA Chairman on the 3rd AMA Conference held in Hong Kong on April 3–4, 2014, the election of a new AMA
Chairman for the 4th AMA Conference to be held in China in 2016, and the AMA website and linkage with ASEAN.
AMA came into being on August 17, 2007, when representatives from Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines,
and Singapore—the five leading mediation centers in Asia—signed a Memorandum of Understanding. Subsequently, AMA
accepted Bahrain, China, Fiji, India, Japan, and Thailand as additional members. AMA provides access to resources for the
settlement of business and commercial disputes in Asia.
Since its inception, AMA holds annual general meetings and biennial conferences. The PMCO is an active member of AMA
and its representatives have been attending all its activities. Last year, the Supreme Court sent a delegation to the 3rd AMA
Conference headed by PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna together with other members of the PMCO Executive Committee,
namely, Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez, Justice Marina L. Buzon, Dean Eduardo D. De los Angeles, Judge Selma P.
Alaras, Comm. Linda L. Malenab-Hornilla, Atty. Jose C. Saluib, Jr., and Mr. Jose T. Name, Jr.
Career Enhancement Programs for Court Social Workers and Sheriffs
Continued from page 5
procedure in claiming transportation expenses from the Sheriff’s Trust Fund, verbal and non-verbal communication skills
and techniques, revisiting the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel, Supreme Court circulars, and administrative orders
and recent jurisprudence concerning sheriffs. To further enhance skills and strengthen their values in the discharge of
duties, workshops were conducted on: how to properly serve summons, subpoenas, and writs; how to accomplish sheriff’s
forms, the Statement of Estimated Transportation and Travel Expenses and the Statement of Liquidation; improving
verbal and non-verbal communication skills; and applying the learnings gained from revisiting the Code of Conduct for
Court Personnel. A dialogue with the officials from the Office of the Court Administrator capped the activity.
7
Orientation Seminar
72nd Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Newly Appointed Judges
Date: June 16–25, 2015
Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City
Participants: 40 newly appointed and 9 promoted judges,
namely:
I. NEW APPOINTMENTS
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
REGION IX
Hon. Eduardo I. Ledesma
MTCC, Br. 4, Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur
Hon. Kenneth P. Rosal
MTCC, Br. 2, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
REGION X
Hon. Fay L. Garcia-Sasis
MTCC, Br. 4, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental
Hon. Eden Crispy B. Lasala
MTCC, Br. 1, Surigao City, Surigao del Norte
Hon. Nelison U. Pajarillo-Salcedo
MTCC, Valencia City, Bukidnon
NCJR
Hon. Elma M. Rafallo-Lingan
RTC, Br. 159, Pasig City
REGION XI
Hon. Kim E. Ortiz-Liquido
MTCC, Bislig City, Surigao del Sur
REGION I
Hon. Walter O. Junia
RTC, Br. 39, Lingayen, Pangasinan
REGION XII
Hon. Christina T. Haw Tay-Jovero
MTCC, Cotabato City, Maguindanao
REGION VI
Hon. Rodney Z. Magbanua
RTC, Br. 61, Kabankalan City, Negros Occidental
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
REGION X
Hon. Alma V. Azanza
RTC, Br. 12, Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental
REGION I
Hon. Alta Grace N. Briones
MTC, Rosales, Pangasinan
Hon. Debbie G. Dulay-Del Val
MTC, Naguilian, La Union
REGION IX
Hon. Analyn F. Ramas-Costanilla
RTC, Br. 30, Aurora, Zamboanga del Sur
REGION II
Hon. Francisco O. Pilpil
MTC, Solano, Nueva Vizcaya
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES
REGION I
Hon. Jeanylene T. Isip-Fukai
MTCC, Br. 2, San Fernando City, La Union
REGION II
Hon. Genevieve D. Ande-Ewangan
MTCC, Br. 1, Santiago City, Isabela
REGION VII
Hon. Jenelyn V. Forrosuelo
MTCC, Br. 4, Cebu City, Cebu
Hon. Manuel Isidro Rosauro V. Barrios*
MTCC, Br. 4, Roxas City, Capiz
*
Was issued Certificate of Completion for attending missed subjects
during the 71st Orientation for Newly Appointed Judges.
REGION IV
Hon. Isagani N. Ravidas
MTC, Alubijid, Misamis Oriental
REGION X
Hon. Saidamen M. Gania
MTC, Buenavista, Agusan del Norte
REGION XI
Hon. Gemma G. Betonio
MTC, Asuncion, Davao del Norte
Hon. Jimmy B. Boco
MTC, Maco, Compostela Valley
Hon. Marie Grace V. Entila-Eborde
MTC, Tupi, South Cotabato
Hon. Maria Eloisa A. Maglana
MTC, Baganga, Davao Oriental
Hon. Jeoffrey C. Manluyang
MTC, Governor Generoso, Davao Oriental
8
APRIL - JUNE 2015
REGION XII
Hon. Alvin E. Guntang
MTC, Isulan, Sultan Kudarat
Hon. Mary Sheila B. Pestolante
MTC, Sultan Naga Dimaporo, Lanao del Norte
Hon. Bai Israhayda C. Sinsuat
MTC, Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
REGION I
Hon. Trinidad T. Abad-Ferrer
6th MCTC: Pozorrubio-Sison, Pangasinan
Hon. Geraldine B. Ramos
4th MCTC: Narvacan-Nagbukel-Santa, Ilocos Sur
REGION II
Hon. Norbert Bong S. Obedoza
7th MCTC: Cordon-Dinapigue, Isabela
REGION VIII
Hon. Lorna P. Obus-Pades
10th MCTC: Merida-Isabela, Leyte
REGION XI
Hon. Cheryll Ann C. Chamen-Paronda
2nd MCTC: Hagonoy-Matanao, Davao del Sur
Hon. Josie A. Felipe
6th MCTC: Surallah-Lake Sebu, South Cotabato
Hon. Allan P. Temones
2nd MCTC: Caraga-Manay-Tarragona, Davao Oriental
Hon. Cashmere Jo-An Augustia D. Zayas-Cruiz
5th MCTC: Marihatag-San Agustin, Surigao del Sur
REGION XII
Hon. Vicente V. Imbang
2nd MCTC: M’Lang-Matalam, North Cotabato
Hon. Angelito V. Rasalan
5th MCTC: Upi-South Upi, Maguindanao
Hon. Eugene David R. Tancinco
3rd MCTC: Kabacan-Carmen, North Cotabato
II. PROMOTION
NCJR
Hon. Ana Marie T. Mas
RTC, Br. 52, Manila
Hon. Phoeve C. Meer
RTC, Br. 275, Las Piñas City
REGION I
Hon. Nida B. Alejandro (Lateral)
RTC, Br. 12, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
REGION II
Hon. Paul Ramil Attolba, Jr.
RTC, Br. 30, Bambang, Nueva Vizcaya
REGION IV
Hon. Nora B. Montejo
RTC, Br. 14, Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental
REGION IX
Hon. Ric S. Bastasa
RTC, Br. 8, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
Hon. Jose Rene G. Dondoyano
RTC, Br. 6, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte
REGION X
Hon. Kimal M. Salacop
RTC, Br. 6, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur
REGION XI
Hon. Arlene I. Lirag-Palabrica
RTC, Br. 31, Tagum City, Davao del Norte
29th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Newly Appointed Clerks of Court
Date: June 2–5, 2015
Participants: 57 newly appointed clerks of court, namely:
NCJR
Atty. Katlyn Anne Carlos Aguilar
RTC, Br. 4, Manila
Atty. Erwin Novida Barata
RTC, OCC, Mandaluyong City
Atty. Maricel Rufin Cairo
RTC, Br. 142, Makati City
Atty. Maria Nenita Diamse Catapat
RTC, Br. 40, Manila
Atty. Leannie Arciaga Dela Cruz
RTC, Br. 120, Caloocan City
Atty. Josefino Manaig Melgar III
RTC, Br. 56, Makati City
Atty. Agnes Tongco Montuno
RTC, Br. 12, Manila
Atty. Maria Laarni Nañoz Morallos
RTC, Br. 161, Pasig City
Atty. Donna May Parreno Sanchez
RTC, Br. 100, Quezon City
Atty. James Jules Botolan Tamayo
RTC, Br. 50, Manila
9
REGION I
Atty. Bernard Manrique
RTC, Br. 15, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
REGION II
Atty. Apple Redondo Jandoc
RTC, Br. 29, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
REGION III
Atty. Marichriz Ipapo Dumalay
RTC, Br. 17, Malolos City, Bulacan
Atty. Eddielyn Lopez Gatdula
RTC, Br. 22, Malolos City, Bulacan
Atty. Gerry Radona Gruspe
RTC, OCC, Olongapo City, Zambales
Atty. Sheila Minnelli Carmona Oliva
RTC, Br. 84, Malolos City,Bulacan
REGION IV
Atty. Stephen Acuzar Lamanilao
RTC, OCC, Pinamalayan, Mindoro Oriental
Atty. Joseph Legaspi Martinez
RTC, Br. 87, Rosario, Batangas
Atty. Mary Ann Panganiban Mendoza-Bolisay
RTC, Br. 75, San Mateo, Rizal
Atty. Diana Rose Buan Ramos
RTC, Br. 80, Morong, Rizal
REGION V
Atty. Odessa Grace Encarnacion Gonzaga
RTC, OCC, Naga City, Camarines Sur
REGION VII
Atty. Elsie Delantar Fabian
RTC, OCC, Tagbilaran City, Bohol
REGION VIII
Atty. Marichu P. Advincula-Samson
RTC, Br. 8, Tacloban City, Leyte
REGION IX
Atty. Dinah Bahan Cagampang-Sapong
RTC, Br. 29, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur
REGION IX
Atty. Glynmar Caharian Balangkig
RTC, Br. 11, Manolo Fortich, Bukidnon
Atty. Kathleen Español Llenares-Cezar
RTC, Br. 34, Cabadbaran City, Agusan del Norte
REGION XI
Atty. Dave Landero Cuartero
RTC, Br. 40, Tandag City, Surigao del Sur
Atty. Kristine Jane Basuga Pague
RTC, Br. 17, Davao City, Davao del Sur
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS
NCJR
Mr. Patrick De Vera Calaunan
MeTC, OCC, Parañaque City
Ms. Christine Taningco Mistica
MeTC, Br. 97, Mandaluyong City
Mr. Kevin Kingston Bondoc Ronquillo
MeTC, Br. 99, Mandaluyong City
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES
REGION I
Ms. Cherry Lim Gayagoy
MTCC, Br. 1, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
REGION II
Mr. Allen Dongui-is Apaling
MTCC, Tabuk City, Kalinga
REGION VI
Ms. Eleanor Lonado Fio
MTCC, Br. 2, Iloilo City, Iloilo
REGION VII
Ms. Johanna Jumawan Magusara
MTCC, Bayawan City, Negros Oriental
REGION VIII
Ms. Rebecca Salazar Macaso
MTCC, Br. 1, Tacloban City, Leyte
REGION IX
Ms. Prescila Relado Cornella
MTCC, Br. 3, Zamboanga City
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
REGION III
Mr. Mark Derick Bayudan Castillo
MTC, Aliaga, Nueva Ecija
Mr. Jay-ar Reyes Cuarto
MTC, Pulilan, Bulacan
Ms. Catherina Flores De Jesus
MTC, San Antonio, Nueva Ecija
REGION IV
Ms. Niñarichie R. Alvarez-Cosico
MTC, Bay, Laguna
Mr. Apolonio M. Sugay
MTC, Candelaria, Quezon
REGION V
Ms. Jasmin Diezmo Alvarez
MTC, Basud, Camarines Norte
10
APRIL - JUNE 2015
REGION VI
Ms. Camelia Rhea Polines Lozada
MTC, Mambusao, Capiz
REGION VIII
Ms. Emiliana Gonito Delis
MTC, Babatngon, Leyte
Ms. Gladys Celajes Labenia
MTC, Palapag, Northern Samar
REGION XI
Ms. Zenaida Austria Tamparong
MTC, Aurora, Zamboanga del Sur
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
REGION I
Mr. Gerald Leones Brillo
5th MCTC: Sta. Maria-Burgos, Ilocos Sur
Ms. Joanne Sevidal Goltiao
9th MCTC: Tayug-San Nicolas, Pangasinan
Judicial Career Enhancement Program (JCEP)
JCEP for First Level Court Judges of the Fourth Judicial
Region (Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, and Quezon)
Date: May 27–29, 2015
Participants: 55 MTCC, MTC, and MCTC judges
Seminar for Executive Judges
Seminar for Executive Judges (Selected RTC and First Level
Court Executive Judges, Vice Executive Judges, 1st–3rd Vice
Executive Judges, and Single Sala Court Judges of Luzon)
Date: May 6–7, 2015
Participants: 2 RTC and 36 MeTC, MTCC, and MTC judges
REGION III
Ms. Michelle Taruc Esguerra
5th MCTC: Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga
REGION IV
Ms. Cecilia Manahan Jaime
2nd MCTC: Bansud-Gloria, Mindoro Oriental
REGION VII
Ms. Ma. Golda Amila Eftimov
2nd MCTC: Tubigon-Clarin, Bohol
Mr. Allan Amista Hinautan
9th MCTC: Guindulman-Duero, Bohol
REGION VIII
Ms. Constancia Bagunas Valenzuela
9th MCTC: Giporlos-Quinapundan
Eastern Samar
REGION X
Mr. Crispen Lamor Villarosa
1st MCTC: Malimono-San Francisco
Surigao del Norte
REGION XI
Ms. Rowena Regala Layno
6th MCTC: Barobo-Lianga, Surigao del Sur
Ms. Debra Alameda Sanchez
5th MCTC: Marihatag-San Agustin
Surigao del Sur
Career Enhancement Program
Career Enhancement Program for RTC Clerks of Court
REGION I
Date: May 26–28, 2015
Venue: Hotel Veniz, Baguio City
Participants: 71 RTC clerks of court
REGION V
Date: May 5–7, 2015
Venue: Avenue Plaza Hotel, Naga City
Career Enhancement Program for Court Social Workers
NCJR AND REGION III
Date: May 5–7, 2015
Participants: 67 RTC court social workers
Career Enhancement Program for RTC Sheriffs
NCJR (BATCH 1)
Date: May 19–21, 2015
Participants: 68 RTC sheriffs
11
Special Focus Program
Seminar-Workshop on Procedural, Substantive Laws and
Jurisprudence on Intellectual Property
Information Dissemination through a Dialogue between
Barangay Officials and Court Officials
CLERKS OF COURT OF SPECIAL COMMERCIAL COURTS OF
REGIONS I, II, III, AND V
Date: April 7–8, 2015
Venue: Baguio Country Hotel, Baguio City
PROVINCE OF TARLAC
Date: April 23, 2015
Venue: Diwa ng Tarlac Community Center
Romulo Blvd., Tarlac City, Tarlac
Participants: 391 barangay officials
SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS ATTORNEYS
Date: May 19–20, 2015
Participants: 45 SC and CA attorneys
CITY OF CABANATUAN
Venue: Session Hall, City Hall Phase 2
Kapitan Pepe Subdivision, Cabanatuan City
Participants: 236 barangay officials
Capacity Building on Environmental Laws and the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases for Judges and Branch
Clerks of Court
Date: April 15–17, 2015
Participants: 41 RTC, MeTC, and MTCC judges and branch
clerks of court
Seminar on the Rules of Procedure on Financial
Rehabilitation for Executive Judges and Vice Executive
Judges
NCJR AND REGION III
Date: June 26, 2015
Venue: Hotel Jen Manila, Pasay City
Participants: 37 judges
REGIONS I AND II
Venue: Diamond Hotel, Manila
REGIONS VI, VII, AND VIII
Date: June 5, 2015
Venue: Bayfront Hotel Cebu, Cebu City
Seminar-Workshop on Financial Crimes and Money
Laundering for Judges
REGION I
Date: April 21–22, 2015
Venue: Fort Ilocandia Hotel, Laoag City
Participants: 24 RTC judges and 1 MTCC Judges
REGIONS VI AND VIII
Date: June 16–17, 2015
Venue: Radisson Blu Hotel, Cebu City
Participants: 39 RTC judges
Personal Security Training for Judges
Date: April 28–30, 2015
Participants: 49 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC, and SCC
judges
Date: June 23–25, 2015
Participants: 64 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC Judges
Competency Enhancement Training
JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, SOCIAL WORKERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
INVESTIGATORS HANDLING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS CASES
Date: April 28–30, 2015
Venue: The Lake Hotel, Tagaytay City
Participants: 54 RTC judges, prosecutors, social workers, and
law enforcers
JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL HANDLING CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN
Date: June 2–4, 2015
Venue: Hotel Elizabeth, Cebu City
Participants: 60 RTC judges, clerks of court/officers in charge,
court interpreters, court social worker, prosecutors, PAO
lawyers, and representatives from Consuelo Foundation
Intensive Seminar-Workshop on Rules 22 and 24 of the
Proposed Revised Rules of Civil Procedure for Pilot Court
Judges
Date: May 21–22, 2015
Venue: Century Park Hotel, Malate, Manila
Participants: 34 RTC, MeTC, and MTCC judges
Date: June 16, 2015
Venue: Century Park Hotel, Malate, Manila
Participants: 16 RTC, MeTC, and MTCC judges
12
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Discussion Session
PHILJA Curriculum Review: Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
BUSINESS ENTREPRENEURS
Venue: Bernas Center for Continuing Legal Education and
Research, Ateneo de Manila Law School, Rockwell Center,
Makati City
Participants: 8 business entrepreneurs and a representative
from MCLE Governing Board
LAWYERS/COURT USERS
Date: May 5, 2015
Venue: Bernas Center for Continuing Legal Education and
Research, Ateneo de Manila Law School, Rockwell Center,
Makati City
Participants: 21 lawyers and court users
Convention-Seminars
10 th National Convention and Seminar of the Process
Servers Association of the Philippines (PROSAPHIL)
Theme: The Process Servers: The Center of Public Faith and
Frontline of Judicial Service
Date: April 15–17, 2015
Venue: Sison Auditorium, Lingayen, Pangasinan
Participants: 435 process servers
18th National Convention and Seminar of the Sheriffs’
Confederation of the Philippines (SCOPHIL)
Theme: Isang Malayang Korte Suprema: Mahalagang Haligi
ng Isang Malayang Bansa
Date: April 22–24, 2015
Venue: Le Pavillion, Metro Park, Bay Area, Pasay City
Participants: 824 sheriffs and representatives from DARAB
and Social Security Commission (SSC)
2nd National Convention and Seminar of the Association of
Clerks of Court and Ex Officio Sheriffs
Theme: Judicial Management in the Regional Trial Court: Its
Challenges and Rewards
Date: April 28–30, 2015
Venue: Amigo Terrace Hotel, Iloilo City
Participants: 63 RTC clerks of court and ex officio sheriffs
Regional Conference of the Asia-Pacific Region of the
International Association of Women Judges and 20 th
National Convention and Seminar of the Philippine Women
Judges Association
Theme: Protecting the Rights of Women and Children Across
the Asia Pacific Region
Date: May 12–15, 2015
Venue: Taal Vista Hotel, Tagaytay City
Participants: 450 lady justices and judges
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Program
Annual General Assembly by the Asian Mediation
Association
Participants: 20 representatives from AMA, PHILJA, PMCO,
and the Office of the Court Administrator
Orientation of Clerks of Court and Branch Clerks of Court
on Judicial Dispute Resolution
Venue: Dagupan Village Hotel, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
Participants: 63 clerks of court and branch clerks of court
Orientation of Public Prosecutors, Public Attorneys, and
Law Practitioners on Judicial Dispute Resolution
Venue: Dagupan Village Hotel, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
Participants: 83 prosecutors, PAO and IBP lawyers
Basic Mediation Course
ILOCOS MEDIATION PROGRAM
Date: May 4–7, 2015
Venue: Java Hotel, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
Participants: 48 mediators
Pre-internship Orientation and Meeting with Judges, Clerks
of Court, Branch Clerks of Court, Mediation Trainees and
PMCU Staff
ILOCOS NORTE MEDIATION PROGRAM
Date: May 7, 2015
Venue: Java Hotel, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
Participants: 77 judges, clerks of court, mediation trainees,
and PMCU staff
ILOCOS SUR MEDIATION PROGRAM
Date: May 8, 2015
Venue: One Vittoria Hotel, Vigan City, Ilocos Sur
Participants: 56 judges, clerks of court, mediation
trainees, and PMCU staff
Work Orientation and Skills Enhancement Seminar for
Philippine Mediation Center Unit Staff
Date: May 14–15, 2015
Participants: 73 PMCU staff
Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on CourtAnnexed Mediation (Palawan Mediation Program)
Date: June 4, 2015
Venue: Citystate Asturias Hotel, Puerto Princesa City
Participants: 89 RTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC judges and
clerks of court, representatives from NPS, PAO, IBP, LGU,
NGO, media, academe, and civil society.
Roundtable Discussion
Roundtable Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Court and
Case Management
Date: June 9–10, 2015
Venue: The Peninsula Manila, corner Ayala and
Makati Avenues, Makati City
Participants: 44 OCA officials, selected RTC and MeTC judges,
foreign delegates, representatives from Konrad Adenauer
Stiftung, and PHILJA Officials, Chiefs of Offices, Professors
and Professorial Lecturers
Special Lecture
The PHILJA Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice
Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera Award for the Most
Outstanding Professorial Lecturer featuring “The South
China Sea Dispute” by Senior Associate Justice Antonio T.
Carpio
Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City with video
conferencing at the SC En Session Hall, Manila
Participants: host site – 170 CA, CTA and Sandiganbayan
justices, SC and PHILJA officials and employees, RTC, MeTC,
MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges, branch clerks of court and
legal researchers, and other guests; remote site – 149 SC
and PHILJA officials and employees, CA, CTA and
Sandiganbayan employees, and other guests
13
Roundtable Discussion:
Knowledge Sharing on Court and Case Management
(continued from page 4)
while in Taiwan, they train their legal assistants and clerks
on preparation of non-judgment issuances, and their
specialized courts are stationed in different areas. In the
Philippines, judges discover that the methods they are
employing are the key components to effective court
management, thus the need for further trainings on
these. Justice Singh likewise presented the best practices
on court management in Philippine courts: establishment
of small claims courts; the establishment of eCourts which
includes computerization of eCalendar, templates and
forms, automated hearings, and eRaffle; and the creation
of the justice zone project where there is an inter-agency
coordination from case start up to adjudication to post
judgment. CA Marquez went on to elaborate on the
project Hustisyeah where a team, composed of a
supervisor from the Office of the Court Administrator,
law students and private lawyers, draws up a
decongestion plan together with the judge. DCA
Villanueva meanwhile expounded on the concept of
eNotices or the sending of notices through SMS, email
or phone calls, and eSubpoenas, wherein they are
deemed served upon uploading to their PNP databank.
Among the relevant views shared on case
management, noteworthy are the following: flexibility
in good case management, network for exchange of ideas
in the national and international arena, automized
monitoring of cases, utilization of the services of an
amicus curiae that can help in complex cases, court
information systems for effective case management and
monitoring, information desks and legal aid, distribution
of digital recording devices for accurate recording of
hearings and their case tracking system, and one yearperiod for deciding cases through the reduction of judicial
forms.
Capping the activity was the Closing Remarks
delivered by Court Administrator Marquez.
The activity is part of the Academy’s effort to conform
to Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno’s judicial
reform agenda for the Philippine Supreme Court on
ensuring the predictability, rationality, speed and
responsiveness of judicial actions and improved systems,
processes and infrastructures. It is one of those programs
that address court and case management in relation to
reform and innovation in realizing the judiciary’s
important role in the ASEAN region.
14
APRIL - JUNE 2015
PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna (seated, center), and Dean Ed Vincent S. Albano (seated, 8th from left) with the participants of the Judicial
Career Enhancement Program (JCEP) for First Level Court Judges of the Fourth Judicial Region (Rizal, Cavite, Laguna, and Quezon) held on May
27–29, 2015, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.
The Resource Persons and trainers from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), with the participants of the Personal Security Training for
Judges held on April 28–30, 2015, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.
Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, Chair of PHILJA’s Department of Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy, gives some pointers to the participants of the
PHILJA Curriculum Review: Focus Group Discussion (FGD) for Lawyers/Court Users held on May 5, 2015, at the Bernas Center for Continuing
Legal Education and Research, Ateneo de Manila Law School, Rockwell Center, Makati City.
15
Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes P. A. Sereno, addresses the attendees of the Information Dissemination through a Dialogue between Barangay
Officials of the Province of Tarlac and Court Officials held on April 23, 2015, at the Diwa ng Tarlac Community Center, Romulo Blvd., Tarlac City.
Also present during the event are officials from the Local and Provincial Government of Tarlac.
Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez (seated, center) with the participants of the 29th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed
Clerks of Court held on June 2–5, 2015, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.
The Facilitators and Resource Persons with the participants of the Competency Enhancement Training for Judges, Prosecutors, Social Workers
and Law Enforcement Investigators Handling Trafficking in Persons Cases held on April 28–30, 2015, at The Lake Hotel, Tagaytay City.
Note: Additional pictures for these events are available for download at the Photo Gallery section of the PHILJA website (http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph)
16
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Court of Appeals
Hon. RONALDO B. MARTIN
Associate Justice
Court of Appeals
Appointed on May 5, 2015
Justice Ronaldo B. Martin is an Associate Justice of the Court
of Appeals, a position he assumed on June 13, 2015. His
professional experience ranges from legal to academic as
follows: teacher of Tulong Dunong at the Ateneo de Manila
University High School (1986–1987); scriptwriter of “Street
Pulse,” a political magazine talk show (1987–1988);
Legislative Liaison Officer at the Office of Senator Rene A.V.
Saguisag (1988–1992); Project Coordinator for the
Presidential Elections, Philippine Pastoral Council for
Responsible Voting (PPCRV) under Fr. Tito Caluag, S.J.
(1992); Legal Counsel at the Congressional Commission on
Health (Healthcom) (1992) and for labor cases at the Sentro
ng Alternatibong Lingap Pangligal (SALIGAN) (1992–1993);
Labor Lawyer at the National Union for Workers in Hotels,
Restaurants and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN) (1992–
1993); Legal Counsel and Consultant of the International
Labour Organization (ILO) (May–December 1997); Legal Staff
Member of the Ad Hoc Independent Citizen’s Committee
to investigate the Philippine Centennial Projects (1999);
Professor on Obligations and Contracts and Insurance Law
at the College of Business and Economics, De La Salle
University (2003–2005).
To better prepare him for a position in the judiciary, he
joined the Office of the Solicitor General as Associate
continued on page 46
Sandiganbayan
Hon. SARAH JANE T. FERNANDEZ
Associate Justice
Sandiganbayan
Appointed on May 5, 2015
Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez was appointed Associate
Justice of the Sandiganbayan on May 5, 2015. She took her
oath of office before Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno
on May 11, 2015.
Prior to her appointment to the Sandiganbayan, Justice
Fernandez served as an Assistant Solicitor General for more
than eight years at the Office of the Solicitor General. She
was the lead assistant solicitor general in the arbitration case
filed by the Republic of the Philippines against the People’s
Republic of China.
Justice Fernandez was also a lecturer of Taxation I, Legal
Writing and Statutory Construction at the University of Santo
Tomas from 2008 to 2011.
Justice Fernandez was born in Dagupan City. She is the
youngest daughter of Jimmy Lim Fernandez and Remedios
Tan-Fernandez. She finished her primary and secondary
education at the Divine Word Academy of Dagupan (1986).
She holds a BS Legal Management Degree (1990) from the
Ateneo de Manila University, a Juris Doctor [Second Honors]
(1994) from the Ateneo de Manila School of Law, and a
Master in Management (2001) from the Asian Institute of
Management. She is an alumna of the Rhodes Academy of
Oceans Law and Policy (2013), and of the International Law
Institute (2013 and 2014).
17
Remedial Law
Guidelines for implementing an expropriation
proceeding.
Section 4 of Republic Act No. 8974 (RA No. 8974), which took
effect on November 26, 2000, provides sufficient guidelines
for implementing an expropriation proceeding, to wit:
SEC. 4. Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings. –
Whenever it is necessary to acquire real property for
the right-of-way or location for any national
government infrastructure project through
expropriation, the appropriate implementing agency
shall initiate the expropriation proceedings before the
proper court under the following guidelines:
(a) Upon the filing of the complaint, and after due
notice to the defendant, the implementing agency
shall immediately pay the owner of the property
the amount equivalent to the sum of (1) 100
percent of the value of the property based on the
current relevant zonal valuation of the Bureau of
Internal Revenue (BIR); and (2) the value of the
improvements and/or structures as determined
under Section 7 hereof;
(b) In provinces, cities, municipalities and other areas
where there is no zonal valuation, the BIR is hereby
mandated within the period of 60 days from the
date of the expropriation case, to come up with a
zonal valuation for said area; and
(c) In case the completion of a government
infrastructure project is of utmost urgency and
importance, and there is no existing valuation of
the area concerned, the implementing agency
its proffered value taking into consideration the
standards prescribed in Section 5 hereof.
Upon compliance with the guidelines
abovementioned, the court shall immediately issue to
the implementing agency an order to take possession
of the property and start the implementation of the
project.
Before the court can issue a Writ of Possession,
the implementing agency shall present to the court a
certificate of availability of funds from the proper
official concerned.
In the event that the owner of the property
contests the implementing agency’s proffered value,
the court shall determine the just compensation to be
paid the owner within 60 days from the date of filing
of the expropriation case. When the decision of the
court becomes final and executory, the implementing
agency shall pay the owner the difference between the
amount already paid and the just compensation as
determined by the court.
Failure to comply with the foregoing directives shall
subject the government official or employee concerned to
administrative, civil and/or criminal sanctions, thus:
SEC. 11. Sanctions. – Violation of any provisions of this
Act shall subject the government official or employee
concerned to appropriate administrative, civil and/or
criminal sanctions, including suspension and/or
dismissal from the government service and forfeiture
of benefits.
Peralta, J., Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways and
District Engineer Celestino R. Contreras v. Spouses Heracleo and Ramona
Tecson, G.R. No. 179334, April 21, 2015.
Constitutional Law
Right to counsel not applicable in administrative
proceeding.
The Court said in Remolona v. Civil Service Commission:
While investigations conducted by an administrative
body may at times be akin to a criminal proceeding,
the fact remains that under existing laws, a party in an
administrative inquiry may or may not be assisted by
counsel, irrespective of the nature of the charges and
of the respondent’s capacity to represent himself, and
no duty rests on such body to furnish the person being
investigated with counsel. In an administrative
proceeding, a respondent has the option of engaging
the services of counsel or not. This is clear from the
provisions of Section 32, Article VII of Republic Act No.
2260 (otherwise known as the Civil Service Act) and
Section 39, paragraph 2, Rule XIV (on discipline) of the
Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of Executive
Order No. 292 (otherwise known as the Administrative
18
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Doctrinal Reminders
Constitutional Law (continued)
Code of 1987). Thus, the right to counsel is not always
imperative in administrative investigations because
such inquiries are conducted merely to determine
whether there are facts that merit disciplinary measure
against erring public officers and employees, with the
purpose of maintaining the dignity of government
service. As such, the hearing conducted by the
investigating authority is not part of a criminal
prosecution.
Leonen, J., Maria Theresa G. Gutierrez v. Commission on Audit and Auditor
Narcisa DJ Joaquin, G.R. No. 200628, January 13, 2015.
Criminal Law
Special Law—elements of illegal recruitment in large scale.
The offense of illegal recruitment in large scale has the
following elements: (1) the person charged undertook any
recruitment activity as defined under Section 6 of RA No.
8042; (2) accused did not have the license or the authority to
lawfully engage in the recruitment of workers; and, (3)
accused committed the same against three or more persons
individually or as a group. These elements are obtaining in
this case. First, the RTC found appellants to have undertaken
a recruitment activity when they promised private
complainants employment in Japan for a fee. This factual
finding was affirmed by the CA. “The time-tested doctrine is
that the matter of assigning values to declarations on the
witness stand is best and most competently performed by
the trial judge.” And when his findings have been affirmed
by the Court of Appeals, these are generally binding and
conclusive upon the Supreme Court. Second, the Certification
issued by the POEA unmistakably reveals that appellants
neither have a license nor authority to recruit workers for
overseas employment. Notably, appellants never assailed this
Certification. Third, it was established that there were five
complainants. Clearly, the existence of the offense of illegal
recruitment in large scale was duly proved by the prosecution.
Appellants’ argument that there was no proof that they
received money from the private complainants deserves no
credence. Suffice it to say that money is not material to a
prosecution for illegal recruitment considering that the
definition of “illegal recruitment” under the law includes the
phrase “whether for profit or not.” Besides, even if there is
no receipt for the money given by the private complainants
to appellants, the former’s respective testimonies and
affidavits clearly narrate the latter’s involvement in the
prohibited recruitment.
Del Castillo, J., People of the Philippines v. Angel Mateo y Jacinto and Vicenta
Lapiz y Medina, G.R. No. 198012, April 22, 2015.
Elements of other forms of swindling under Article 316,
paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code.
The elements of other forms of swindling under Article 316,
paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code are as follows: (1) that
the thing disposed of be real property; (2) that the offender
knew that the real property was encumbered, whether the
encumbrance is recorded or not; (3) that there must be express
representation by the offender that the real property is free
from encumbrance; and (4) that the act of disposing of the real
property be made to the damage of another.
The Information in the present case, aside from expressly
indicating in its caption that it is charging the petitioner under
Article 316, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, alleged that
the petitioner “with deceit and intent to defraud,” pretended
to be the lawful owner of a 200-square meter portion of a lot
covered by TCT No. T-19932 despite her knowledge that the
entire property had already been sold and was owned by JS
Francisco. Notably, it had not been alleged that the petitioner
expressly represented to Naval that the subject property was
free from any encumbrance.
In Naya v. Abing, the Court set aside the petitioner’s
conviction for estafa under Article 316(2) of the Revised Penal
Code since there had been no allegation in the Information that
he (petitioner) expressly represented in the sale of the subject
property to William Po that the said property was free from any
encumbrance. We explained that the gravamen of the crime is
the disposition of legally encumbered real property by the
offender under the express representation that there is no
encumbrance thereon; and that the accused must make an
express representation in the deed of conveyance that the
property sold or disposed of is free from any encumbrance for
one to be criminally liable.
Brion, J., Clarita Estrellado-Mainar v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 184320,
July 29, 2015.
Remedial Law
Writ of Possession in Expropriation Cases; when issued.
A Writ of Possession may be issued only upon full compliance
with Section 4 of Republic Act No. 8974.
19
Before the state may expropriate private property for a
national infrastructure project, it must first comply with the
requisites in Republic Act No. 8974, otherwise known as An
Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-of-Way, Site or
Location for National Government Infrastructure Projects and
for Other Purposes. Section 4 of Republic Act No. 8974 states:
SEC. 4. Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings. –
Whenever it is necessary to acquire real property for
the right-of-way or location for any national
government infrastructure project through
expropriation, the appropriate implementing agency
shall initiate the expropriation proceedings before the
proper court under the following guidelines:
(a) Upon the filing of the complaint, and after due
notice to the defendant, the implementing agency
the amount equivalent to the sum, of (1) 100
percent of the value of the property based on the
current relevant zonal valuation of the Bureau of
Internal Revenue (BIR); and (2) the value of the
improvements and/or structures as determined
under Section 7 hereof;
(b) In provinces, cities, municipalities and other areas
where there is no zonal valuation, the BIR is hereby
mandated within the period of 60 days from the
date of the expropriation case, to come up with a
zonal valuation for said area; and
(c) In case the completion of a government
infrastructure project is of utmost urgency and
importance, and there is no existing valuation of
the area concerned, the implementing agency shall
immediately pay the owner of the property its
proffered value taking into consideration the
standards prescribed in Section 5 hereof.
Upon compliance with the guidelines
abovementioned, the court shall immediately issue to
the implementing agency an order to take possession
of the property and start the implementation of the
project.
Before the court can issue a Writ of Possession,
the implementing agency shall present to the court a
certificate of availability of funds from the proper
official concerned.
In the event that the owner of the property
contests the implementing agency’s proffered value,
the court shall determine the just compensation to be
paid the owner within 60 days from the date of filing
of the expropriation case. When the decision of the
court becomes final and executory, the implementing
agency shall pay the owner the difference between the
amount already paid and the just compensation as
determined by the court.
Leonen, J., Republic of the Philippines v. Heirs of Gabriel Fernandez, G.R. No.
175493, March 25, 2015.
Burden of proof in reconveyance cases.
Generally, “in civil cases, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff
to establish his case by a preponderance of evidence. If the
plaintiff claims a right granted or created by law, the same
must be proven by competent evidence. The plaintiff must
rely on the strength of his own evidence,” “or evidence which
is of greater weight or more convincing than that which is
offered in opposition to it. Hence, parties who have the
burden of proof must produce such quantum of evidence,
with plaintiffs having to rely on the strength of their own
evidence, not on the weakness of the defendant’s.” In an
action for reconveyance, however, a party seeking it should
establish not merely by a preponderance of evidence but by
clear and convincing evidence that the land sought to be
reconveyed is his.
In the case at bar, the respondents failed to dispense their
burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that they
are entitled to the reconveyance of Lot No. 299.
Reyes, J., Baltazar Ibot v. Heirs of Francisco Tayco, represented by Flora Tayco,
Willy Tayco and Merlyn T. Bulante, G.R. No. 202950, April 6, 2015.
Fresh period rule covers judicial proceedings only.
The “fresh period rule” only covers judicial proceedings under
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure:
The “fresh period rule” in Neypes declares:
To standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules
and to afford litigants fair opportunity to appeal their
cases, the Court deems it practical to allow a fresh
period of 15 days within which to file the notice of
appeal in the Regional Trial Court, counted from receipt
of the order dismissing a motion for a new trial or
motion for reconsideration.
Henceforth, this “fresh period rule” shall also apply
to Rule 40 governing appeals from the Municipal Trial
Courts to the Regional Trial Courts; Rule 42 on petitions
for review from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court
of Appeals; Rule 43 on appeals from quasi-judicial
agencies to the Court of Appeals; and Rule 45 governing
appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court. The new
rule aims to regiment or make the appeal period
uniform, to be counted from receipt of the order
denying the motion for new trial, motion for
20
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Doctrinal Reminders
Remedial Law (continued)
reconsideration (whether full or partial) or any final
order or resolution.
xxxx
As reflected in the above-quoted portion of the
decision in Neypes, the “fresh period rule” shall apply
to Rule 40 (appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to
the Regional Trial Courts); Rule 41 (appeals from the
Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals or
Supreme Court); Rule 42 (appeals from the Regional
Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals); Rule 43 (appeals
from quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of Appeals);
and Rule 45 (appeals by certiorari to the Supreme
Court). Obviously, these Rules cover judicial
proceedings under the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
xxxx
In this case, the subject appeal, i.e., appeal from a
decision of the HLURB Board of Commissioners to the OP, is
not judicial but administrative in nature; thus, the “fresh
period rule” in Neypes does not apply.
was holding a lagaraw a type of bolo used in the rural areas,
which was stained with blood, and he was restless and uneasy;
Third, in the morning of the following day, February 29, 2000,
AAA’s lifeless body was found with several hack wounds
inflicted on her face, neck and extremities, one hand and one
finger were totally severed; Fourth, the post-mortem
examination conducted by Dr. Edu confirmed that AAA died
from loss of blood due to multiple hack wounds, her
underwear was blood-stained, she had hymenal lacerations
and a whitish discharge was found in her vagina; Fifth,
appellant had the motive to commit the crime against AAA
considering that it was BBB’s son-in-law, Lito Miguel, who
killed appellant’s father; and Sixth, appellant was evasive
when being questioned on his knowledge of the identity of
his father’s killer and the latter’s relationship to the family of
AAA, and the amicable settlement executed by his mother in
behalf of appellant’s family.
Villarama, Jr., J., People of the Philippines v. Jose Broniola @ “Asot”, G.R. No.
211027, June 29, 2015.
Brion, J., San Lorenzo Ruiz Builders and Developers Group, Inc. and Oscar
Violago v. Ma. Cristina F. Bayang, G.R. No. 194702, April 20, 2015.
Evidence-Circumstantial evidence; when sufficient for
conviction.
Circumstantial evidence consists of proof of collateral facts
and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact
may be inferred according to reason and common experience.
Section 4, Rule 133, of the Revised Rules of Evidence, as
amended, sets forth the requirements of circumstantial
evidence that is sufficient for conviction, viz:
SEC. 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. –
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
(a) There is more than one circumstance;
(b) The facts from which the inferences are derived
are proven; and
(c) The combination of all the circumstances is such as
to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
The RTC and CA found the following circumstantial
evidence presented by the prosecution as sufficient for the
conviction of appellant: First, witness Abag met the appellant
on a shortcut road near the place where AAA’s dead body
was found, at about the same time (5:30 p.m.) AAA went
missing as she failed to return home that day, February 28,
2000; Second, appellant had scratches on his face and he
A.M. No. 15-04-06-SC
FINANCIAL LIQUIDATION AND SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR INSOLVENT DEBTORS (2015)
WHEREAS, under Republic Act No. 10142, otherwise known
as the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act of 2010
(FRIA), the Supreme Court shall “promulgate the rules of
pleading, practice and procedure to govern the proceedings
brought under [the] Act;1
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, through Memorandum No.
46-2010 dated September 30, 2010 (as amended by
Memorandum Order No. 17-2013 dated May 9, 2013), tasked
the Subcommittee on Commercial Courts to revise and/or
amend A.M. No. 00-8-10-SC or the Rules of Procedure on
Corporate Rehabilitation (2008) to incorporate the significant
1
SEC. 6. Designation of Courts and Promulgation of Procedural
Rules. – The Supreme Court shall designate the court or courts
that will hear and resolve cases brought under this Act and shall
promulgate the rules of pleading, practice and procedure to
govern the proceedings brought under this Act.
21
changes brought about by the enactment of Republic Act No.
10142 on the aspects of financial rehabilitation, insolvency
and liquidation;
These Rules shall have suppletory application to the
liquidation of entities expressly excluded from the coverage
of the FRIA under Section 5, Chapter I thereof.
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, through A.M. No. 12-12-11SC dated August 27, 2013, approved the Financial
Rehabilitation Rules of Procedure (2013), otherwise known
as the FR Rules, which incorporated changes pertaining to
financial rehabilitation;
SEC. 3. Nature of Proceedings. – The proceedings under these
Rules shall be in rem.
NOW, THEREFORE, acting on the recommendation of the
Subcommittee on Special Commercial Courts, the Court
resolved to APPROVE the Financial Liquidation and
Suspension of Payments Rules of Procedure for Insolvent
Debtors (2015), otherwise known as the “FLSP Rules.”
The FLSP Rules shall take effect 15 days following its
publication in the Official Gazette or in two newspapers of
national circulation.
April 21, 2015.
(Sgd.) SERENO, CJ, CARPIO, VELASCO, Jr., LEONARDO-DE
CASTRO, BRION, PERALTA, BERSAMIN, DEL CASTILLO,
VILLARAMA, Jr., PEREZ, MENDOZA, REYES, PERLAS-BERNABE,
LEONEN, JARDELEZA, JJ.
FINANCIAL LIQUIDATION AND SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR INSOLVENT DEBTORS (2015)
Pursuant to Section 6, Chapter I of Republic Act No. 10142,
otherwise known as the “Financial Rehabilitation and
Insolvency Act (FRIA) of 2010,” the Court hereby adopts and
promulgates the following Rules of Procedure for the
Liquidation of Insolvent Juridical and Individual Debtors, and
Suspension of Payments of Insolvent Individual Debtors:
RULE 1
COVERAGE AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION 1. Title. – These Rules shall be known and cited as the
“Financial Liquidation and Suspension of Payments Rules of
Procedure for Insolvent Debtors” or the “FLSP Rules.”
SEC. 2. Scope. – These Rules shall govern the practice,
pleading, and procedure for the liquidation of insolvent
juridical and individual debtors, and suspension of payments
of insolvent individual debtors pursuant to the FRIA.
They shall similarly govern all further proceedings in
insolvency cases already pending, except to the extent that,
in the opinion of the court, its application would not be
feasible or would work injustice, in which event the
procedures originally applicable shall continue to govern.
In voluntary liquidation proceedings of both juridical and
individual debtors, jurisdiction over all persons affected by
the proceedings is acquired upon publication of the
Liquidation Order as provided in these Rules.
In involuntary liquidation proceedings of juridical debtors,
jurisdiction over all persons affected by the proceedings is
acquired upon publication of the petition or motion under
Section 7, Rule 2(B) of these Rules.
In involuntary liquidation proceedings of individual
debtors, jurisdiction over the person of the debtor is acquired
upon service of summons in accordance with Section 15, Rule
3(C) of these Rules; whereas jurisdiction over all other persons
affected by the proceedings is acquired upon publication of
the Liquidation Order under Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these
Rules.
In suspension of payments proceedings, jurisdiction over
all persons affected by the proceedings is acquired upon
publication of the Suspension of Payments Order as provided
in these Rules.
The proceedings shall be summary and non-adversarial
in nature. The following pleadings are prohibited:
(a) motion to dismiss;
(b) motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) petition for relief;
(d) motion for extension;
(e) motion for postponement and other motions of
similar intent;
(f) reply;
(g) rejoinder;
(h) intervention; and
(i) any pleading or motion similar to, or of like effect as,
any of the foregoing.
For stated and fully supported compelling reasons, the
court may allow the filing of motions for extension or
postponement, provided, the same shall be verified and
under oath.
Any pleading, motion, or other submission by any
interested party shall be supported by verified statements
22
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Resolutions
A.M. No. 15-04-06-SC (continued)
that the affiant has read the submission and its factual
allegations are true and correct of his personal knowledge or
based on authentic records, and shall contain supporting
annexes, which the submitting party shall attest as faithful
reproductions of the originals. An unverified submission shall
be considered as not filed. An improperly verified submission
may be considered as not filed, at the discretion of the judge.
Upon motion, the court may order that the originals of the
annexes to a submission be produced in court for examination
or comparison by a party to the proceedings.
All pleadings or motions shall be filed simultaneously in
three printed and two digitized copies in compact discs, flash
drives, or other compatible Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) media, in PDF format.
The court may decide matters on the basis of the
pleadings and other documentary evidence, and conduct
clarificatory hearings when necessary.
Any order issued by the court under these Rules is
immediately executory. Review of any order of the court shall
be in accordance with Rule 5 of these Rules. Provided,
however, that the reliefs ordered by the trial or appellate
courts shall take into account the need for resolution of the
proceedings in a just, equitable, and speedy manner.
SEC. 4. Construction of Rules. – These Rules shall be liberally
construed to promote a timely, fair, transparent, effective,
and efficient liquidation and suspension of payments of
debtors, in accordance with the declared policy of the FRIA.
SEC. 5. Definition of Terms. – Terms used but not defined
herein shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the
FRIA:
(a) Administrative expenses shall refer to those
reasonable and necessary expenses
1) incurred in connection with the filing of a petition
under these Rules, including filing and
professional fees in preparing the petition;
2) arising from, or in connection with the
proceedings under these Rules;
3) incurred in the ordinary course of business of
the debtor after the commencement date;
4) incurred for the fees of the liquidator/
commissioner and/or of the professionals he
may engage; and
5) those otherwise authorized or mandated under
the FRIA or such other expenses authorized
under these Rules.
(b) Asset is anything of value, which may be either
tangible or intangible. Tangible assets can be current
assets or fixed assets. Current assets may include cash
on hand, money in banks or inventory, while fixed
assets may include plant, building, property and
equipment. Intangible assets may include intellectual
property (such as copyrights, patents, and
trademarks) and financial assets (such as accounts
receivables, subscriptions receivables, and bonds and
stocks).
The value of these assets must appear in the
latest audited financial statements immediately
preceding the filing of the petition. In case the debtor
is less than three years in operation, it is sufficient
that the book value is based on the audited financial
statement/s for the two years or year immediately
preceding the filing of the petition, as the case may
be.
(c) Commencement date shall refer to the date on which
the court issues a commencement order in a
rehabilitation case.
(d) Court/s shall refer to the Regional Trial Court/s
designated by the Supreme Court as special
commercial court/s.
(e) Insolvency shall refer to the financial incapacity of
the debtors to pay their liabilities as they fall due in
the ordinary course of business or whenever their
liabilities are greater than their assets.
(f) Liquidation shall refer to the proceedings under
Chapters V, VI(B) and (C), and VII of the FRIA.
(g) Liquidation Order shall refer to the order issued by
the court pursuant to Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these
Rules.
(h) Liquidator shall refer to the natural person or juridical
entity appointed as such by the court pursuant to
these Rules and entrusted with such powers and
duties as set forth herein; Provided, that if the
liquidator is a juridical entity, it must designate a
natural person who possesses all the qualifications
and none of the disqualifications as its
representative, it being understood that the juridical
entity and the representative are solidarily liable for
all obligations and responsibilities of the liquidator.
(i) Proceedings, unless the term is used in a different
context, shall refer to liquidation proceedings or
suspension of payments proceedings, as the case may
be, under these Rules.
(j) Suspension of Payments Order shall refer to the order
issued by the court pursuant to Section 2, Rule 3(A)
of these Rules.
(k) Working day shall have the same meaning as business
day.
SEC. 6. Debtor Spouses as Parties. – A married individual
debtor shall sue or be sued jointly with his or her spouse,
except as provided by law.
SEC. 7. Applicability of Rule 5 of the FR Rules. – Rule 5 of the
FR Rules on Cross-Border Insolvency Proceedings is hereby
made applicable to liquidation proceedings and, for this
purpose, is adopted as part of these Rules.
SEC. 8. Liability of Individual Debtor, Owner of a Sole
Proprietorship, Partners in a Partnership, or Directors and
Officers. – The individual debtor, owner of a sole
proprietorship, the partners in a partnership, or the directors
and officers of a corporate debtor shall be liable for double
the value of the property sold, embezzled or disposed of, or
double the amount of the transaction involved, whichever is
higher, to be recovered for the benefit of the debtor and the
creditors, if they, having notice of the commencement of the
proceedings, or having reason to believe that the proceedings
are about to be commenced, or in contemplation thereof,
willfully commit the following acts:
(a) dispose or cause to be disposed any property of the
debtor other than in the ordinary course of business
or authorize or approve any transaction in fraud of
creditors or in a manner grossly disadvantageous to
the debtor and/or creditors; or
(b) conceal, authorize or approve the concealment from
the creditors, or embezzle or misappropriate, any
property of the debtor.
The court shall determine the extent of the liability of an
owner, partner, director or officer under this section. In this
connection, in case of partnerships and corporations, the
court shall consider the amount of the shareholding or
partnership or equity interest of such partner, director or
officer, the degree of control of such partner, director or
officer over the debtor, and the extent of the involvement of
such partner, director or debtor in the actual management
of the operations of the debtor.
RULE 2
LIQUIDATION OF INSOLVENT JURIDICAL DEBTORS
A. Voluntary Liquidation
23
SECTION 1. Who May File Petition; Venue; Contents. – An
insolvent juridical debtor may file a verified petition for
liquidation in the Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction
over its principal office as specified in its articles of
incorporation or partnership. Where the principal office of
the corporation or partnership as registered with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is in Metro Manila,
the petition must be filed in the Regional Trial Court of the
city or municipality where the head office is located. The
petition shall indicate the names of at least three nominees
to the position of liquidator and shall include, as minimum
attachments, the following:
(a) a certificate attesting to the holding of a meeting of
the Board of Directors of a stock corporation or the
Board of Trustees of a non-stock corporation, as the
case may be, called for the purpose and the approval
during the meeting of a resolution to file the petition,
signed by the secretary of the meeting and at least a
majority of the members of the Board present during
the meeting;
(b) a certificate attesting to the holding of a meeting of
the stockholders, members or partners comprising
the debtor, as the case may be, called for the purpose
and the approval during the meeting of a resolution
to file the petition by the stockholders holding at least
two-thirds of the outstanding capital stock of the
stock corporation, or two-thirds of the members or
partners in case of a non-stock corporation,
association or partnership, as the case may be, signed
by the chairman and the secretary of the meeting;
(c) a schedule of debts and liabilities, which lists all the
creditors of the debtor, indicating the name and last
address of record of each creditor; the amount of
each claim as to principal, interest, or penalties due
30 days prior to the date of filing; the nature of the
claim; and any pledge, lien, mortgage, judgment or
other security given for the payment thereof;
(d) an inventory of assets, which must list with
reasonable particularity all the assets of the debtor,
whether in the possession of the debtor or third
parties, stating the nature of each asset; the location
and condition thereof; the book value and market
value of the asset, attaching the corresponding
certified copy of the certificate of title thereof in
case of real property, or the evidence of title or
ownership in case of movable property; the
encumbrances, liens or claims thereon, if any, and
24
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Resolutions
the identities and addresses of the lien holders and
claimants;
(e) a schedule of current income and expenditures
within three months prior to the filing of the petition;
(f) a list of all properties acquired by the debtor in the
immediately preceding two years;
(g) a list of all properties sold, disposed of, or donated
by the debtor in the immediately preceding two
years;
(h) a schedule of the debtor’s executory contracts and
unexpired leases;
(i) the audited financial statements of the debtor for
the immediately preceding three years; and
(j) the income tax return of the debtor for the
immediately preceding year.
All attachments to the petition shall be deemed part and
parcel of the verified petition.
S EC . 2. Filing of a Motion to Convert Rehabilitation
Proceedings into Liquidation Proceedings. – When there is
a pending court-supervised or pre-negotiated rehabilitation
proceeding, the debtor may file a motion in the same court
where the rehabilitation proceedings are pending to convert
the rehabilitation proceedings into liquidation proceedings.
The motion shall be verified and shall contain or set forth the
same matters mentioned in the preceding section and the
grounds relied upon as provided under the FRIA.
SEC. 3. Action on the Petition or Motion. – If the court finds
the petition or motion, as the case may be, to be sufficient in
form and substance, it shall issue the Liquidation Order
mentioned in Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these Rules. Otherwise,
the court shall dismiss the petition or deny the motion. The
court may take any action necessary for the foregoing
purposes but it shall have a maximum period of 10 working
days from the date of the filing of the petition or motion to
issue the Liquidation Order, dismiss the petition, or deny the
motion.
B.
Involuntary Liquidation
SEC. 4. Who May File Petition; Venue; Contents. – Three or
more creditors the aggregate of whose claims is at least either
One Million Pesos (P1 million) or at least 25 percent of the
subscribed capital stock or partners’ contributions of the
insolvent juridical debtor, whichever is higher, may file a
petition for the liquidation of an insolvent juridical debtor in
the Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction over the
principal office of the debtor as specified in its articles of
incorporation or partnership. Where the principal office of
the corporation or partnership as registered with the SEC is
in Metro Manila, the petition must be filed in the Regional
Trial Court of the city or municipality where the head office
is located. The petition must be verified by each of the
petitioners or, if the petitioners or any of them is a
corporation, partnership, or association, then by any of their
duly authorized officer/s or representative/s. The petition
shall indicate the names of at least three nominees to the
position of liquidator, and must show that:
(a) there is no genuine issue of fact or law on the claim/s
of the petitioner/s, and that the due and demandable
payments thereon have not been made for at least
180 days or that the debtor has failed generally to
meet its liabilities as they fall due; and
(b) there is no substantial likelihood that the debtor may
be rehabilitated.
The petition shall also include information to the best
knowledge of the petitioners on:
(a) the schedule of debts and liabilities, including a list
of its known creditors with their addresses, amounts
of claims and collaterals, or securities, if any;
(b) the debtor’s assets, including receivables and claims
against third parties; and
(c) the audited financial statements of the debtor for
the immediately preceding three years.
SEC. 5. Bond. – The petitioners shall post a bond in an amount
at least equal in value to the aggregate of their claims,
conditioned upon payment to the debtor of all expenses and
damages it may incur by reason of the filing of the petition if
the same is later denied or dismissed by the court, or
withdrawn by the petitioners without the consent of the
debtor.
S EC . 6. Filing of a Motion to Convert Rehabilitation
Proceedings into Liquidation Proceedings. – When there is
a pending court-supervised or pre-negotiated rehabilitation
proceedings, three or more creditors the aggregate of whose
claims is at least either One Million Pesos (P1 million) or at
least 25 percent of the subscribed capital, or partners’
contributions, of the debtor, whichever is higher, may file a
motion in the same court where the rehabilitation
proceedings are pending to convert the rehabilitation
proceedings into liquidation proceedings. The motion shall
be verified and shall contain or set forth the same matters
mentioned in Section 4 of this Rule.
25
SEC. 7. Action on the Petition or Motion. – If the court finds
the petition or motion sufficient in form and substance, it
shall issue an order:
of payments in the court having jurisdiction over the province
or city where he has resided for six months prior to the filing
of the petition.
(a) directing the publication of the petition or motion in
a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines
once a week for two consecutive weeks;
The petition shall indicate the names of at least three
nominees to the position of commissioner and shall include,
as minimum attachments, the following:
(b) directing the debtor, all known creditors, and any
other interested party, to file their comment on the
petition or motion within 15 days from notice of the
order; and
(a) a schedule of debts and liabilities, including a list of
creditors with their addresses, amount of claims and
collaterals, if any;
(c) directing that a copy of the petition or motion be
served on the debtor and on all known creditors,
unless they exceed 20 in number, in which case,
service shall be made on at least the first 20 largest
known creditors of the debtor in terms of credits
held. However, if there are more than 20 known
creditors (who are not petitioners) and one or more
of them acquired their credit/s within the six month
period immediately preceding the filing of the
petition, the number of creditors to be served copies
of the petition shall be increased by the same
number.
(b) an inventory of all the debtor’s assets, including
receivables and claims against third parties;
(c) a schedule of current income and expenditures
(d) the income tax return of the debtor for the
immediately preceding year;
(e) a list of all properties acquired by the debtor in the
(f) a list of all properties sold, disposed of, or donated
years;
SEC. 8. Hearing on the Petition or Motion. – The court shall
conduct a hearing if the petition or motion, as well as the
comments thereto raise issues of facts.
(g) a schedule of the debtor’s executory contracts and
unexpired leases; and
On the basis of the pleadings and the hearing conducted,
if any, the court shall determine whether the evidence is
sufficient to warrant the issuance of a Liquidation Order
mentioned in Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these Rules. Otherwise,
the court shall dismiss the petition or deny the motion.
SEC. 9. Conversion by the Court of Rehabilitation Proceedings
into Liquidation Proceedings. – After notice and hearing, the
court where rehabilitation proceedings are pending may also
order the conversion of rehabilitation proceedings into
liquidation proceedings in those cases authorized by law, or
at any other time upon the recommendation of the
rehabilitation receiver or management committee that the
rehabilitation of the debtor is no longer feasible. In such case,
the FLSP Rules shall apply.
RULE 3
INSOLVENCY OF INDIVIDUAL DEBTORS
A. Suspension of Payments
SECTION 1. Who May File Petition; Venue; Contents. – An
individual debtor who has assets that exceed his liabilities
but foresees the impossibility of paying his debts when they
respectively fall due may file a verified petition for suspension
(h) a proposed agreement with the creditors.
SEC. 2. Action on the Petition. – If the Court finds the petition
sufficient in form and substance, it shall, within five working
days from the filing of the petition, issue a Suspension of
Payments Order:
(a) prohibiting creditors from suing or instituting
proceedings for collection against the debtor, except:
(i) creditors having claims for personal labor,
maintenance, expense of last illness and funeral of
the wife or children of the debtor incurred within 60
days immediately prior to the filing of the petition;
and (ii) secured creditors;
(b) calling a meeting of all the creditors named in the
schedule of debts and liabilities at a time not less
than 15 days nor more than 40 days from the date of
such order and designating the date, time, and place
of the meeting;
(c) directing such creditors to present written evidence
of their claims before the scheduled creditors’
meeting;
26
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Resolutions
(d) directing the publication of the said order in a
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines
once a week for two consecutive weeks, with the
first publication to be made within seven days from
the time of the issuance of the order;
(e) directing the clerk of court to send or cause the
sending of a copy of the order by registered mail,
postage prepaid, to all creditors named in the
schedule of debts and liabilities;
(f) prohibiting the petitioner from selling, transferring,
encumbering or disposing his property, except those
used in the ordinary operations of commerce or of
industry in which the petitioner is engaged as long
as the proceedings are pending;
(g) prohibiting the petitioner from making any payment
outside of the necessary or legitimate expenses of
his business or industry, as long as the proceedings
are pending; and
(h) appointing a commissioner to preside over the
creditors’ meeting, who may or may not be from
among the nominees of the debtor.
SEC. 3. Motion to Suspend Pending Execution. – Upon motion
of the petitioner, the court may also issue an order suspending
any pending execution against the debtor. Property held as
security by secured creditors shall not be subject to such
suspension order.
The order suspending execution shall lapse when three
months shall have passed without the proposed agreement
being accepted by the creditors or as soon as such proposed
agreement is rejected.
SEC. 4. Persons Who May Refrain from Attending and Voting
during the Creditor’s Meeting. – Secured creditors and
creditors having claims for personal labor, maintenance,
expense of last illness and funeral of the wife or children of
the debtor incurred within 60 days immediately prior to the
filing of the petition may refrain from attending the creditors’
meeting and from voting therein. Such persons shall not be
bound by any agreement arrived at in such meeting, unless,
being aware of this right, they attend the meeting, participate
in the discussions and vote therein.
S EC . 5. Who May be Appointed Commissioner. – The
commissioner, who shall preside over the creditors’ meeting
in connection with the proceedings, shall be a natural person
who shall have the following minimum qualifications:
(a) a citizen of the Philippines or a resident thereof for
six months immediately preceding his appointment;
(b) of good moral character and with acknowledged
integrity, impartiality and independence;
(c) has the requisite knowledge of insolvency laws, rules
and procedures; and
(d) has no conflict of interest; Provided, that such conflict
of interest may be waived, expressly or impliedly, by
a party who may be prejudiced thereby. An individual
shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest if he is
so situated as to be materially influenced in the
exercise of his judgment for or against any party to
the proceedings.
The debtor or any creditor may file a written objection
to the commissioner appointed by the court on the ground
that he does not meet the foregoing minimum requirements.
If the court finds merit in the objection, it shall appoint a
new commissioner.
SEC. 6. Creditors’ Meeting. – The presence of creditors, either
in person or through a representative duly authorized in
writing, holding claims amounting to at least three-fifths of
the liabilities of the petitioner, excluding liabilities unaffected
by the Suspension of Payments Order listed as exceptions
under Section 2(a) of this Rule, shall be necessary to hold a
creditors’ meeting under this Rule. The court-appointed
commissioner shall preside over the meeting and the clerk
of court shall act as meeting secretary, subject to the following
rules:
(a) The clerk of court shall record the creditor s present
and the amount of their respective claims;
(b) The commissioner shall examine the written
evidence of the claims. If the creditors present hold
at least three-fifths of the liabilities of the debtor as
above-qualified, he shall declare a quorum;
(c) The creditors and the debtor shall discuss the
proposed agreement and any amendment thereto,
and put it to a vote. No creditor who incurred his
credit within 90 days prior to the filing of the petition
shall be allowed to vote;
(d) To form a majority, it is necessary:
1) that two-thirds of the creditors voting unite upon
the matter on the table; and
2) that the claims represented by said majority vote
amount to at least three-fifths of the total
liabilities of the debtor as above-qualified; and
27
(e) After the announcement of the results, all the
protests against the majority vote shall be drawn
up, and the commissioner, the debtor and all
creditors who took part in the voting shall sign
the affirmed propositions.
The commissioner shall prepare a report of the
proceedings that shall include the voting results, the affirmed
propositions mentioned in paragraph (e) above, if any, and
submit the report to the court not later than three days after
the last creditors’ meeting.
SEC. 7. Rejection of the Debtor’s Proposal and Dismissal of
the Petition. – If no creditors’ meeting with the required
quorum is held within 90 days from the date of the last
publication mentioned in Section 2(d) of this Rule, or, there
being such meeting or meetings, the debtor’s proposal is not
approved within the said period, the same shall be deemed
rejected. In such a case, the court, within five days from the
lapse of the 90-day period, or from receiving the report of
the commissioner mentioned in the preceding section that
the debtor’s proposal has been rejected, shall issue an order
dismissing the petition.
SEC. 8. Objections to the Approval of the Debtor’s Proposal
or Any Amendment Thereto. – If the proposal of the debtor,
or any amendment thereto, made during the creditors’
meeting, is approved by the majority of creditors in
accordance with Section 6 of this Rule, any creditor who
attended the meeting and who dissented from and protested
against the vote of the majority may file an objection with
the court within 10 days from the date of the meeting on any
of the following grounds:
(a) defects in the call for the meeting, in the holding
thereof, and in the deliberations had thereat which
prejudice the rights of the creditors;
(b) fraudulent connivance between one or more
creditors and the individual debtor to vote in favor
of the proposed agreement, or any amendment
thereto; or
the creditors to approve the proposed agreement, or any
amendment thereto, made during the creditors’ meeting is
upheld by the court, or when no opposition or objection to
said decision has been presented, the court shall issue an
order confirming the approval of the proposed agreement,
or any amendment thereto, and directing all parties bound
thereby to comply with its terms.
SEC. 10. Residual Power of the Court. – The court, upon
motion of any affected party, may issue any order which may
be necessary or proper to enforce the agreement. If the
debtor fails, wholly or in part, to perform his obligations under
the agreement, or to comply with any order of the court, the
court, upon motion of any creditor, shall declare the
agreement terminated, and all the rights which the creditors
had against the debtor before the agreement shall revest in
them.
B. Voluntary Liquidation
SEC. 11. Who May File Petition; Venue; Contents. – An
individual debtor whose liabilities exceed his assets and
whose debts exceed Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P500,000) may file a verified petition for liquidation in the
court having jurisdiction over the province or city where he
has resided for six months prior to the filing of the petition.
The petition shall indicate the names of at least three
nominees to the position of liquidator and shall include, as
minimum attachments, the following:
(a) a schedule of debts and liabilities, including a list of
creditors with their addresses, amount of claims and
collaterals, if any;
(b) an inventory of all the debtor’s assets, including
receivables and claims against third parties;
(c) a schedule of current income and expenditures
(d) the income tax return of the debtor for the
immediately preceding year;
(c) fraudulent conveyance of claims for the purpose of
obtaining a majority.
(e) a list of all properties acquired by the debtor in the
The court shall hear and pass upon such objection in a
summary manner, within 30 days from the filing of the
objection. If the decision of the majority of creditors to
approve the debtor’s proposal, or any amendment thereto,
is annulled by the court, the petition shall be dismissed.
(f) a list of all properties sold, disposed of, or donated
years; and
SEC. 9. Effects of the Approval of the Debtor’s Proposal or
Any Amendment Thereto. – If the decision of the majority of
(g) a schedule of the debtor’s executor contracts and
unexpired leases.
28
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Resolutions
SEC. 3. Action on the Petition. – If the court finds the petition
sufficient in form and substance, it shall issue the Liquidation
Order mentioned in Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these Rules.
Otherwise, the court shall dismiss the petition. The court may
take any action necessary for the foregoing purposes but it
shall have a maximum period of 10 working days from the
date of the filing of the petition to issue the Liquidation Order
or dismiss the petition.
C. Involuntary Liquidation
SEC. 13. Who May File Petition; Venue; Contents. – Any
creditor or creditors with a claim of, or the aggregate of whose
claims is, at least Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000)
may file a verified petition for liquidation of an individual
debtor with the court of the province or city where the debtor
resides.
The petition shall state the particulars of at least one of
the following acts of insolvency of the debtor:
(a) that the debtor is about to depart or has departed
from the Philippines, with intent to defraud his
creditors;
(b) that being absent from the Philippines, with intent
to defraud his creditors, he remains absent;
(c) that the debtor conceals himself to avoid the service
of legal process for the purpose of hindering or
delaying the liquidation or of defrauding his creditors;
(d) that the debtor conceals, or is removing, any of his
property to avoid its being attached or taken on legal
process;
(e) that the debtor has allowed his property to remain
under attachment or legal process for three days for
the purpose of hindering or delaying the liquidation
or of defrauding his creditors;
(f) that the debtor has confessed or offered to allow
judgment in favor of any creditor for the purpose of
hindering or delaying the liquidation or of defrauding
any creditor;
(g) that the debtor has wilfully allowed judgment to be
taken against him by default for the purpose of
hindering or delaying the liquidation or of defrauding
his creditors;
(h) that the debtor has suffered or procured his property
to be taken on legal process with intent to give a
preference to one or more of his creditors and
thereby hinder or delay the liquidation or defraud
any one of his creditors;
(i) that the debtor has made any assignment, gift, sale,
conveyance or transfer of his estate, property, rights
or credits with intent to hinder or delay the
liquidation or defraud his creditors;
(j) that the debtor has, in contemplation of insolvency,
made any payment, gift, grant, sale, conveyance or
transfer of his estate, property, rights or credits;
(k) that being a merchant or tradesman, the debtor has
generally defaulted in the payment of his current
obligations for a period of 30 days;
(l) that for a period of 30 days, the debtor has failed,
after demand, to pay any moneys deposited with him
or received by him in a fiduciary capacity; or
(m) that an execution having been issued against him on
final judgment for money, the debtor shall have been
found to be without sufficient property subject to
execution to satisfy the judgment.
SEC. 14. Bond for Filing of Petition. – The petitioner/s shall
post a bond in an amount at least equal in value to the
aggregate of his/their claims, conditioned upon payment to
the debtor of all expenses and damages the debtor may incur
by reason of the filing of the petition if the petition is later
dismissed or withdrawn by the petitioner/s without the
consent of the debtor, or if it is finally determined that the
debtor is not insolvent.
SEC. 15. Order for Debtor to Show Cause. – If the petition is
sufficient in form and substance, the court, within five
working days from the filing of the petition, shall issue
summons to the debtor requiring him, by way of comment
on or opposition to the petition within an inextendible period
of 15 days from service of the summons, to show cause why
he should not be declared insolvent.
SEC. 16. Order for Debtor to Refrain from Paying Debts or
Transferring Property. – Upon motion of any creditor and
after hearing, the court may, upon good cause shown, issue
an order prohibiting the debtor from paying any of his debts,
or from transferring any property belonging to him, until the
court issues a Liquidation Order or dismisses the petition,
whichever is earlier. However, nothing contained herein shall
affect or impair the rights of a secured creditor to enforce his
lien in accordance with its terms.
SEC. 17. Hearing on the Petition. – After the issues are joined,
the court shall set the petition for hearing in order to
determine whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant the
issuance of a Liquidation Order.
SEC. 18. Issuance of the Liquidation Order. – If the debtor on
whom summons is properly served fails to file a comment
on or opposition to the petition within the period given by
the court, or if the evidence given during the hearing
mentioned in the preceding section warrant it, the court shall
issue the Liquidation Order mentioned in Section 2, Rule 4(A)
of these Rules.
SEC. 19. Absent Debtor. – When the debtor resides out of
the Philippines, or when his residence is unknown, or he has
departed from the Philippines with intent to defraud his
creditors, or cannot, after due diligence, be found therein,
or conceals himself to avoid service of summons, or any other
related preliminary process or orders, then the court, upon
motion of the petitioning creditors duly supported by an
affidavit or affidavit/s narrating and substantiating any of the
foregoing allegations and a bond approved by the court in
double the amount of the aggregate sum of their claims
against the debtor, shall issue an order directing:
(a) the sheriff of the province or city in which the matter
is pending to take into custody, within 30 days from
the date of the order, a sufficient amount of property
of the debtor, not exempt from execution and not
subject of a secured creditor’s lien, to satisfy the
claims of the petitioning creditors and the costs of
the proceedings;
(b) the publication of the summons and the said order
in a newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines once a week for two consecutive weeks;
(c) the mailing of the petition, the summons and the
order to the debtor’s last known address;
(d) the sending of an electronic mail to the debtor’s last
known electronic mail address, if any, attaching
thereto copies of the petition, the summons and the
order; and
(e) the posting of copies of the petition and the
summons on at least three conspicuous places on
any real property owned by the debtor.
If the debtor fails to file a comment, opposition or other
responsive pleading to the petition or order within 15 days
after the last publication of the summons and order, or within
any other period given by the court, then the court shall issue
a Liquidation Order mentioned in Section 2, Rule 4(A) of these
Rules.
SEC. 20. Duty of Sheriff. – Upon receiving the order for him to
take into custody property of the debtor, the sheriff shall take
custody of such property of the debtor not exempt from
execution and not subject of any secured creditor’s lien
sufficient to cover the amount provided for. He shall make a
29
return to the court within two days every time he takes
property of the debtor pursuant to the order, and as soon as
he has taken sufficient amount of the debtor’s property to
cover the amount provided for in the order, he shall make a
return to the court of an inventory of all the property taken
within three days from the time of the last taking. Upon
motion and for good cause shown, the time for making an
inventory, or any return may be extended. The sheriff shall
also prepare a schedule of the names and residences of the
creditors, and the amount due each, from the books of the
debtor, or from such other papers or data of the individual
debtor available as may come to his possession, and shall file
such schedule or list of creditors and inventory with the clerk
of court.
SEC. 21. All Property Taken to be held for All Creditors; Appeal
Bonds; Exemptions to Sureties. – If after the taking mentioned
in the preceding section, there still remains property of the
debtor not exempt from execution and not subject of a
secured creditor’s lien, any other creditor or creditors, upon
giving bond approved by the court in double the amount of
his/their claim/s, singly or jointly, shall be entitled to similar
orders and to like action, by the sheriff, until all claims are
provided for, and as long as the debtor has sufficient property.
All such property taken into custody by the sheriff shall be
held by him for the benefit of all creditors whose claims shall
be duly established in the proceedings.
SEC. 22. Bonds for Custody of Property and Appeal. – The
bonds provided for in Sections 19 and 21 of this Rule to
procure the order for custody of the property and effects of
the debtor shall be conditioned upon payment to the debtor,
his heirs, administrators, executors or assigns of all damages
he may sustain by reason of the order for which the bonds
were procured if, after hearing of the petition, the court shall
find in favor of the debtor and the petition is dismissed. Such
damages, which shall not exceed the amount of the bond,
shall be determined and fixed by the court. If either the
petitioners or the debtor shall appeal from the decision of
the court, upon final hearing of the petition, the appellant
shall be required to give bond to the successful party in a
sum double the amount of the value of the property in
controversy, and for the costs of the proceedings.
Any person interested in the estate may object to the
sufficiency of the surety or sureties on such bond or bonds.
The court shall direct the surety or sureties to justify their
sufficiency. If the court finds that the sureties or any of them
are insufficient, the court shall issue an order dismissing the
petition or vacating the order to take into the custody of the
sheriff the property of the individual debtor, or denying the
appeal, as the case may be.
30
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Resolutions
SEC. 23. Sale of Debtor’s Property under Sheriff’s Custody. –
If the property of the debtor taken into custody by the sheriff
under Sections 19, 20 and 21 of this Rule is perishable, costly
to maintain, subject to or in anger of rapid obsolescence,
depreciation, or diminution in value, or when the interests
of the debtor and the creditors will be better served by the
sale thereof, the court, upon motion of any creditor, duly
supported by affidavit/s narrating facts supporting the
application and a bond equivalent to the estimated value of
the property approved by the court, shall issue an order
directing: (a) the sale of the property in the same manner as
property is sold under execution, the proceeds to be
deposited in the court to abide by the result of the
proceedings; and (b) the publication of the order once a week
for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city or province where the court exercises
jurisdiction.
RULE 4
PROVISIONS COMMON TO LIQUIDATION IN INSOLVENCY
OF INDIVIDUAL AND JURIDICAL DEBTORS
SECTION 1. Use of Term Debtor. – The term debtor used in this
Rule shall refer to an individual debtor and/or a juridical
debtor whenever appropriate.
A. The Liquidation Order
SEC. 2. Liquidation Order. – The Liquidation Order shall:
(a) declare the debtor insolvent;
(b) order the liquidation of the debtor and, in the case
of a juridical debtor, declare it as dissolved;
(c) order the sheriff to take possession and control of
all the property of the debtor, except those that may
be exempt from execution;
(d) order the publication of the Liquidation Order,
together with the petition, or motion to convert the
rehabilitation proceedings into liquidation
proceedings, if any, in a newspaper of general
circulation in the Philippines once a week for two
consecutive weeks;
(e) direct payments of any claims and conveyance of any
property due the debtor to the liquidator;
(f) prohibit payments and the transfer of any property
by the debtor;
(g) direct all creditors to file their claims with the
liquidator not later than five days from the time the
liquidator takes his oath of office, furnishing a copy
thereof to the court;
(h) authorize the payment of administrative expenses
as they become due;
(i) state that the debtor and creditors who are not
petitioner/s may submit the names of other
nominees to the position of liquidator; and
(j) set the case for hearing for the election and
appointment of the liquidator, which date shall not
be less than 30 days nor more than 45 days from the
date of the last publication.
SEC. 3. Effects of the Liquidation Order. – Upon the issuance
of the Liquidation Order:
(a) the juridical debtor shall be deemed dissolved and
its corporate or juridical existence terminated;
(b) legal title to and control of all the assets of the debtor,
except those that may be exempt from execution,
shall be deemed vested in the liquidator or, pending
his election or appointment, with the court;
(c) all contracts of the debtor shall be deemed
terminated and/or breached, unless the liquidator,
within 90 days from the time he takes his oath of
office, declares otherwise and the contract counterparty agrees;
(d) no separate action for the collection of an unsecured
claim shall be allowed. Actions already pending will
be transferred to the liquidator for him to accept and
settle or contest. If the liquidator contests or disputes
the claim, the court shall allow, hear, and resolve such
contest, except when the case is already on appeal.
In such a case, the suit may proceed to judgment,
and any final and executory judgment therein for a
claim against the debtor shall be filed and allowed in
court; and
(e) no foreclosure proceeding shall be allowed for a
period of 180 days from the date of the order.
B. Secured Creditors
SEC. 4. Rights of Secured Creditors. – The Liquidation Order
shall not affect the right of a secured creditor to enforce his
lien in accordance with the applicable contract or law, unless
he waives his right.
SEC. 5. Duty of Secured Creditors. – At any time prior to the
election of the liquidator, a secured creditor shall manifest in
writing to the court whether he is:
(a) waiving his right under the security or lien in
accordance with Section 6 of this Rule; or
(b) maintaining his right under the security or lien.
31
If a secured creditor fails to file such a manifestation, he
shall be deemed to have opted to maintain his right under
the security or lien.
SEC. 6. Waiver of Security or Lien. – A secured creditor shall
not be deemed to have waived his right under the security
or lien unless the waiver is made in a public document, in
unequivocal language, and with full knowledge of the
consequences of his action. If a secured creditor waives his
right, he shall be entitled to participate in the liquidation
proceedings as an unsecured creditor.
SEC. 7. When a Secured Creditor Maintains His Security or
Lien. – If a secured creditor elects to enforce or maintain his
right under the security or lien, at his option:
(a) the value of the property may be fixed in a manner
agreed upon by the creditor and the liquidator, and
approved by the court.
When the value of the property is less than the claim
it secures, the liquidator may convey the property
to the secured creditor and the latter will be admitted
in the liquidation proceedings as an unsecured
creditor for the balance. If the value of the property
exceeds the claim secured, the liquidator may convey
the property to the secured creditor and waive the
debtor’s right of redemption upon receiving the
excess from the creditor. In any case, any other
creditor or interested party may, upon a prima facie
showing that the valuation is too low, contest the
valuation and propose another mode by which to
dispose of the property, or to otherwise convert it
to cash or its equivalent, to ensure that the true
maximum value of the property under the
circumstances is obtained. A dissenting creditor or
any other creditor or interested party may also offer
to purchase the property at the price it is valued by
the secured creditor and the liquidator, as approved
by the court. At all times, it shall be the duty of the
court to ensure that the property is valued at its
maximum under the circumstances. In case there is
conflict on the valuation of the property, the court
may appoint an independent third party appraiser
to assist in determining the proper valuation of the
property;
(b) the liquidator may sell the property and satisfy the
secured creditor’s entire claim from the proceeds of
the sale. The sale shall be made under such terms
and conditions as the liquidator and the secured
creditor may agree upon, as approved by the court,
provided, that the costs of the sale, if any, shall be
for the account of the secured creditor; or
(c) the secured creditor may enforce the lien or foreclose
on the property pursuant to applicable laws.
C. The Liquidator
SEC. 8. Qualifications of the Liquidator. – The liquidator shall:
(a) be a citizen of the Philippines or a resident thereof
for six months immediately preceding his
nomination;
(b) be of good moral character and with acknowledged
integrity, impartiality and independence;
(c) have the requisite knowledge of insolvency and other
relevant commercial laws, rules and procedures, as
well as the relevant training and/or experience that
may be necessary to enable him to properly discharge
the duties and obligations of a liquidator; and
(d) have no conflict of interest: Provided, that such
conflict of interest may be waived, expressly or
impliedly, by a party who may be prejudiced thereby.
An individual shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest
if he is so situated as to be materially influenced in the exercise
of his judgment for or against any party to the proceedings.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, an individual
shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest if:
(a) he is a creditor, owner, partner or stockholder of the
debtor;
(b) he is a creditor, owner, partner or stockholder of a
creditor of the debtor;
(c) he is engaged in a line of business which competes
with that of the debtor;
(d) he is, or was, within five years from the filing of the
petition or motion for conversion, a director, officer,
owner, partner or employee of the debtor or any of
the creditors, or acted as legal counsel or auditor or
accountant of the debtor or any of the creditors;
(e) he is, or was, within two years from the filing of the
petition or motion for conversion, an underwriter of
the outstanding securities of the debtor;
(f) he is related by consanguinity or affinity within the
fourth civil degree to any individual creditor, owner
of a sole proprietorship-debtor, partner in a
partnership-debtor or stockholder, director, officer,
employee or underwriter of a corporate-debtor;
(g) he has any other direct or indirect material interest
in the debtor or any of the creditors; or
32
Resolutions
(h) he was the receiver or member of the management
committee, the counsel or an employee of either,
when there is a showing that the financial distress of
the debtor was not arrested or its fiscal condition
deteriorated and resulted in its liquidation by reason
of his lack of diligence or foresight.
A nominee or an elected or appointed liquidator and their
personnel shall immediately disclose to the court any ground
that may give rise to an actual or potential conflict of interest,
regardless of his personal assessment of its sufficiency, as soon
as he becomes aware of it.
If the liquidator is a juridical entity, it must designate a
natural person who possesses all the qualifications and none
of the disqualifications as its representative, it being
understood that the juridical entity and the representative
are solidarily liable for all obligations and responsibilities of
the liquidator.
SEC. 9. Election of Liquidator. – The creditors entitled to vote
will elect the liquidator in open court. To constitute a quorum
for the election of the liquidator, creditors representing or
holding at least a majority of the total claims entitled to vote
must be present either in person or by proxy. Only creditors
who were included in the schedule of debts and liabilities or
registry of claims, or have filed their claims within the period
set by the court, and whose claims are not barred by the
statute of limitations, are entitled to vote. A secured creditor
shall not be entitled to vote, unless: (a) he waives his right
under the security or lien; and (b) has the value of the
property subject of his security or lien fixed and approved by
the court, and is admitted for the balance of his claim. The
nominee receiving the highest number of votes cast in terms
of the amount of claim held or represented, and who is
qualified pursuant to Section 8 of this Rule, shall be appointed
as the liquidator.
SEC. 10. Court-Appointed Liquidator. – The court may appoint
the liquidator if:
(a) on the date set for the election of the liquidator, there
is no quorum;
(b) the creditors who attend either fail or refuse to elect
a liquidator;
(c) after being elected, the liquidator fails to qualify; or
(d) a vacancy occurs for any reason whatsoever.
In any of these cases, the court, upon motion or motu
proprio, and for good cause shown, may set another date or
APRIL - JUNE 2015
hearing for the election of the liquidator. Any person
appointed by the court to administer the debtor as a
rehabilitation receiver prior to the commencement of the
liquidation may subsequently be appointed as its liquidator.
SEC. 11. Oath and Bond of the Liquidator. – Prior to assuming
his office, the liquidator shall take an oath and file a bond, in
such amount to be fixed by the court, conditioned upon the
proper and faithful discharge of his powers, duties and
responsibilities.
SEC. 12. Powers, Duties and Responsibilities of the Liquidator.
The liquidator shall be deemed an officer of the court with
the principal duty of preserving and maximizing the value
and recovering the assets of the debtor, with the end in view
of liquidating them and discharging to the extent possible all
the claims against the debtor. The powers, duties and
responsibilities of the liquidator shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:
(a) to sue and recover all the assets, debts and claims,
belonging or due to the debtor;
(b) to take possession of all the property of the debtor,
except property exempt by law from execution;
(c) to sell, with the approval of the court, any property
of the debtor under his possession or control;
(d) to redeem all mortgages and pledges, and satisfy any
judgment which may constitute an encumbrance on
any property sold by him;
(e) to settle all accounts between the debtor and his
creditors, subject to the approval of the court;
(f) to recover any property, or its value, fraudulently
conveyed by the debtor;
(g) to recommend to the court the creation of a
creditors’ committee which will assist him in the
discharge of his functions and which shall be vested
with powers as the court deems just, reasonable and
necessary; and
(h) upon approval of the court, to engage the services
of persons with specialized skills or training as may
be necessary and reasonable to assist him in the
discharge of his duties. Such persons or professionals
shall be deemed employees or independent
contractors of the liquidator and shall possess the
same qualifications as the liquidator.
In addition to the rights and duties of a rehabilitation
receiver under Section 31, Chapter II (C) of the FRIA, insofar
as they are applicable to liquidation proceedings, the
33
liquidator, shall have the right and duty to take all reasonable
steps to manage and dispose of the debtor’s assets with a
view towards maximizing the proceeds therefrom, to pay
creditors and stockholders, and to terminate the debtor’s
legal existence.
SEC. 13. Removal of the Liquidator. – The liquidator may be
removed at any time by the court either motu proprio or upon
motion by the debtor or any creditor or creditors on any of
the following grounds:
(a) he did not actually receive the highest number of
votes during the election for liquidator;
(b) incompetence, gross negligence, failure to perform
or exercise the proper degree of care in the
performance of his duties and powers;
(c) lack of a particular or specialized competency
required by the specific case;
(d) illegal acts or conduct in the performance of his
duties and powers;
(e) lack of any of the qualifications stated under Section
8 of this Rule or presence of any disqualification;
(f) conflict of interest, unless, waived, expressly or
impliedly, by a party who may be prejudiced thereby;
(g) partiality or lack of independence; or
(h) any other ground analogous to the foregoing.
SEC. 14. Compensation of the Liquidator. – The liquidator and
the persons engaged or employed by him to assist in the
discharge of his powers and duties shall be entitled to such
reasonable compensation as may be determined by the court,
after consultation with the creditors.
SEC. 15. Reporting Requirements. – The liquidator shall make
and keep a record of all property received and all
disbursements made by him or under his authority as
liquidator. He shall render a quarterly report thereof to the
court, which report shall be made available to all interested
parties. The liquidator shall also submit such reports as may
be required by the court from time to time as well as a final
report at the end of the liquidation proceedings.
SEC. 16. Discharge of Liquidator. – Upon the filing of his final
report, and in preparation for the final settlement of all the
claims against the debtor, the liquidator will notify all the
creditors, either by publication in a newspaper of general
circulation or such other mode as the court may direct or
allow, that he will apply with the court for the settlement of
his account and his discharge from liability as liquidator. The
liquidator will file a final accounting with the court, with proof
of notice to all creditors. The accounting will be set for
hearing. If the court finds the same in order, the court will
discharge the liquidator.
SEC. 17. Registry of Claims. – Within 20 days from his
assumption into office, the liquidator shall submit to the court
a preliminary registry of claims of secured and unsecured
creditors indicating, among others, the amount and nature
of each claim, the documentary or other basis for each claim,
and a description of the nature and location of every security
or lien, if any. Secured creditors who have waived their rights
under their security or lien, or have fixed the value of the
property subject of their security or lien by agreement with
the liquidator and are admitted as creditors for the balance,
shall be considered as unsecured creditors. The liquidator
shall make the registry available for public inspection, give
notice to all the creditors and other interested parties that
the registry is available for inspection and copying, and
publish said notice in a newspaper of general circulation in
the province or city where the debtor’s principal office is
located.
D. Determination of Claims
SEC. 18. Right of Set-Off. – If the debtor and creditor are
mutually debtor and creditor of each other, one debt shall
be set off against the other and only the balance, if any, shall
be allowed in the liquidation proceedings.
SEC. 19. Opposition or Challenge to Claims. – Within 30 days
from the expiration of the period for the filing of claims, a
creditor, debtor, or other interested party may submit to the
court an opposition or challenge to any claim or claims,
serving a certified copy on the liquidator and the creditor
holding the challenged claim. Upon the expiration of the
period, the liquidator shall submit to the court the registry
of claims containing the undisputed claims that have not been
subject to challenge. Such claims shall become final upon the
filing of the register and may be subsequently set aside only
on grounds of fraud, accident, mistake or excusable neglect.
SEC. 20. Submission of Disputed Claims to the Court. – The
liquidator shall resolve disputed claims and submit his findings
thereon to the court for final approval. The liquidator may
disallow claims, subject to final approval of the court.
E. Avoidance Proceedings
SEC. 21. Rescission or Nullity of Certain Transactions. – Any
transaction occurring prior to the issuance of the Liquidation
Order or, in the case of conversion of rehabilitation
proceedings to liquidation proceedings, prior to the
commencement date, entered into by the debtor or involving
34
Resolutions
its assets, may be rescinded or declared null and void on the
ground that the same was executed with intent to defraud a
creditor or creditors or constitutes an undue preference of
creditors. The presumptions set forth in Section 58, Chapter
II of the FRIA shall apply.
SEC. 22. Actions for Rescission or Nullity.
(a) The liquidator or, with his conformity, a creditor, may
initiate and prosecute any action to rescind, or
declare null and void, any transaction described in
the immediately preceding paragraph. If the
liquidator does not consent to the filing or
prosecution of such action, any creditor may seek
leave of the court to commence and prosecute said
action.
The court shall have five working days to act on the
motion for leave to commence or prosecute an
action.
(b) If leave of court is granted under subsection (a)
hereof, the liquidator shall assign and transfer to the
creditor all rights, title and interest in the chose in
action or subject matter of the proceeding, including
any document in support thereof.
(c) Any benefit derived from a proceeding taken
pursuant to subsection (a) hereof shall belong
exclusively to the creditor instituting the proceeding
to the extent of his claim and the costs, and the
surplus, if any, shall belong to the estate.
(d) Where, before an order is made under subsection
(a) hereof, the liquidator signifies to the court his
readiness to institute the proceeding for the benefit
of the creditors, the order shall fix the time within
which he shall do so and, in that case the benefit
derived from the proceedings, if instituted within the
time limits so fixed, shall belong to the estate.
In any case, the liquidator shall make provisions for any
action for rescission or nullity in the Liquidation Plan.
F.
The Liquidation Plan
SEC. 23. The Liquidation Plan. – Within three months from
his assumption into office, the liquidator shall submit a
Liquidation Plan to the court. The Liquidation Plan shall, as a
minimum, enumerate all the assets of the debtor not exempt
from execution, a list of all creditors and their claims which
have been duly proved as shown in the final registry of claims,
and a proposed mode and schedule of liquidation of the
APRIL - JUNE 2015
assets and payment of the claims. The Liquidation Plan shall
make provisions for, among others, disputed claims and any
action for rescission or nullity of certain transactions.
SEC. 24. Exempt Property to be Set Apart. – Upon motion,
and after notice and hearing, the court shall set apart
property of the individual debtor exempt from execution. The
motion shall be heard and granted only after it is shown that
the clerk of court has posted or caused notice of the motion
and hearing in at least three public places in the province or
city where the court exercises jurisdiction at least 10 days
prior to the time of such hearing, which notice shall set forth
the name of the debtor, and the time and place appointed
for the hearing of such motion, and shall briefly indicate the
homestead sought to be exempted or the property sought
to be set aside.
SEC. 25. Concurrence and Preference of Credits. – The
Liquidation Plan and its implementation shall ensure that the
concurrence and preference of credits as enumerated in the
Civil Code of the Philippines, and other relevant laws, shall
be observed, unless a preferred creditor voluntarily waives
his preferred right. For purposes of this Rule, credits for
services rendered by employees or laborers to the debtor
shall enjoy first preference under Article 2244 of the Civil
Code, unless the claims constitute legal liens under Articles
2241 and 2242 thereof.
SEC. 26. Sale of Assets in Liquidation. – With the approval of
the court, the liquidator may sell, transfer or otherwise
dispose of the unencumbered assets of the debtor and
convert the same into money. The sale, transfer or disposition
shall be made at public auction. However, a private sale,
transfer or disposition may be allowed with the approval of
the court if (a) the goods to be sold are of a perishable nature,
or are liable to quickly deteriorate in value, or are
disproportionately expensive to keep or maintain; or (b) the
private sale, transfer or disposition is for the best interest of
the debtor and his creditors. With the approval of the court,
unencumbered property of the debtor may also be conveyed
to a creditor in satisfaction of his claim or part thereof. In all
cases, the liquidator and the court shall ensure that the
manner of sale, transfer or disposition is in the best interest
of the debtor and his creditors.
SEC. 27. Manner of Implementing the Liquidation Plan. – The
liquidator shall implement the Liquidation Plan as approved
by the court in an order duly issued therefor. Payments shall
be made to creditors only in accordance with the provisions
of the Plan.
SEC. 28. Final Report of the Liquidator. – When all the property
of the debtor not exempt from execution have been realized
35
and their proceeds distributed to the creditors in accordance
with the Liquidation Plan, the liquidator shall submit his final
report to the court, together with the final accounting of his
administration and a recommendation for the termination
of the proceedings, furnishing all the creditors and other
interested parties with copies thereof.
SEC. 29. Termination of Proceedings. – If, after notice and
hearing, the court is satisfied with the final report, it shall
issue an order approving the same and directing the removal
of the name of the juridical debtor from the register of legal
entities of the SEC and other government agencies, or
discharging the individual debtor from his liabilities included
in the Liquidation Plan, as the case may be.
In the same order discharging the individual debtor from
his liabilities, the court shall state that the proceedings are
terminated. However, in the case of a juridical debtor
registered with the SEC, the court shall issue an order
terminating the proceedings only upon receipt of evidence
showing that the debtor has been removed from the registry
of legal entities at the SEC.
SEC. 30. Liquidation of a Securities Market Participant. – The
foregoing provisions shall be without prejudice to the power
of a regulatory agency or self-regulatory organization to
liquidate trade-related claims of clients or customers of a
securities market participant which, for purposes of investor
protection, are hereby deemed to have absolute priority over
other claims of whatever nature or kind insofar as traderelated assets are concerned.
the proposed agreement mentioned in Section 9, Rule 3(A)
of these Rules can only be reviewed through a petition for
certiorari to the Court of Appeals under Rule 65 of the Rules
of Court within 15 days from notice of the decision or order.
S EC . 3. Motion for Reconsideration in Liquidation
Proceedings. – A party may file a motion for reconsideration
of any order issued by the court prior to the issuance of the
Liquidation Order. No relief can be extended to the party
aggrieved by the court’s order on the motion through a
special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
Court.
S EC . 4. Review of Decision or Order in Liquidation
Proceedings. – The Liquidation Order, and the order
approving or disapproving the Liquidation Plan under Section
27, Rule 4(F) of these Rules can only be reviewed through a
petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals under Rule 65
of the Rules of Court within 15 days from notice of the
decision or order.
RULE 6
EFFECTIVITY
SECTION 1. Effectivity. – These Rules shall take effect 15 days
after their complete publication in the Official Gazette or in
at least two newspapers of national circulation in the
Philippines.
For purposes of this section, trade-related assets include
cash, securities, trading right, and other assets owned and
used by the securities market participant in the ordinary
course of its business.
RULE 5
PROCEDURAL REMEDIES
SECTION 1. Motion for Reconsideration in Suspension of
Payments Proceedings. – A party may file a motion for
reconsideration of a Suspension of Payments Order, or any
order issued by the court prior to its order confirming or
disapproving the proposed agreement mentioned in Section
9, Rule 3(A) of these Rules. No relief can be extended to the
party aggrieved by the court’s order on the motion through
a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules
of Court.
SEC. 2. Review of Decision or Order in Suspension of Payments
Proceedings. – The court’s dismissal of the petition for
suspension of payments on the ground of insufficiency in form
and substance resulting in the non-issuance of a Suspension
of Payments Order, and its order confirming or disapproving
MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 14-2015
CREATING THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON SPEEDY TRIAL
WHEREAS, criminal cases comprise more than 50 percent of
the total caseload of the trial courts;
WHEREAS, there is a need to address delays and congestion
in many of the trial courts nationwide;
WHEREAS, there is a need to review the current application
of existing rules on speedy trial in criminal cases, and issue
new guidelines to truly fulfill the objective of expediting the
trial and resolution of criminal cases;
36
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Orders
Memorandum Order No. 14-2015 (continued)
NOW THEREFORE, the Special Committee on Speedy Trial is
hereby created and constituted as follows:
Chairperson
Hon. Diosdado M. Peralta
Associate Justice, Supreme Court
Vice Chairperson
Hon. Lucas P. Bersamin
Members
Hon. Martin S. Villarama, Jr.
Hon. Jose C. Mendoza
Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez
Court Administrator
Hon. Magdangal M. De Leon
Associate Justice, Court of Appeals
Hon. Mario V. Lopez
Hon. Alexander G. Gesmundo
Associate Justice, Sandiganbayan
Hon. Maria Filomena D. Singh
Secretary
(To be designated by the Chairperson)
Asst. Secretaries
Atty. Crisostomo A. Uribe, OCJ
Atty. Jilliane Joyce R. De Dumo, OCJ
Secretariat
(To be designated by the Chairperson)
c.
Budget requirements for each initiative; and
d. Responsible/focal persons.
2.
Survey and compile the best practices employed by
trial court judges;
3. Formulate the guidelines for the pilot and full
implementation of the continuous trial system for
criminal cases, including but not limited to pre-trial,
prohibited pleadings, bail, jail decongestion, and
drugs cases;
4. Identify other initiatives that will expedite trials, and
decongest all the trial courts in the country;
5. Propose amendments to existing rules to further
expedite the trial and resolution of criminal cases;
To enable it to perform its functions and duties, the
Committee shall be authorized to:
6. Create technical working groups as the need arises
to look into the different aspects of criminal trial and
carry out its duties;
7. Collaborate with the Philippine Judicial Academy for
the development of skills advancement training
modules for trial court judges; and
8. Do such other acts as may be necessary in the
performance of its mandate.
The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members, and
Members of the Secretariat of the Committee shall receive
the usual expense allowances.
This Memorandum Order shall take effect upon its
Issuance this 6th day of April 2015.
The Committee shall have the following functions and
duties:
(Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
Chief Justice
Chairperson, First Division
1. Draft a multi-year work plan to be submitted to the
Chief Justice within one month from the creation of
the Committee that will include:
(Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Senior Associate Justice
Chairperson, Second Division
a. Identified initiatives/activities with timelines;
b. Brief description and expected outcome/output
of the initiatives/activities;
(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO Jr.
Associate Justice
Chairperson, Third Division
37
MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 14-A-2015
DESIGNATING AN ADDITIONAL MEMBER OF THE SPECIAL
COMMITTEE ON SPEEDY TRIAL
In the interest of the service, Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta
of the Court of Appeals is hereby designated Member of the
Special Committee on Speedy Trial (created by virtue of
Memorandum Order No. 14-2015, issued on April 6, 2015).
As Member of the Special Committee, Justice Peralta shall
receive the usual expense allowances.
issuance this 5th day of June 2015.
Chief Justice
(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, Jr.
Associate Justice
Date: June 5, 2015
(Sgd.) TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
Associate Justice
Date: June 5, 2015
(Per S. O. No. 2046 date June 1, 2015)
Secretary
To be designated by the Chairperson
Asst. Secretary
Atty. Edwin D. Malabanan, OCJ
Secretariat
To be designated by the Chairperson
The Chairperson, 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.
issuance this 6th day of April 2015.
Chief Justice
(Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Senior Associate Justice
Chairperson, Second Division
(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO Jr.
Associate Justice
MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 15-2015
REORGANIZING THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCIAL
COURTS
In view of the existing vacancies in the SubCommittee on
Commercial Courts, it is hereby reorganized as follows:
Chairperson
Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe
Vice Chairperson
CA Justice Japar B. Dimaampao
Members
CA Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr.
RTC Judge Reynaldo B. Daway
IPO Director General Ricardo R. Blancaflor
Atty. Francis Ed. Lim, and
Atty. Rena M. Rico-Panfilo
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 70-2015
TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS,
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS AND MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURTS IN CITIES
SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF REPRESENTATION AND
TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE (RATA) FOR THE
DESIGNATED OFFICER IN CHARGE (OIC)-CLERK OF COURT
The attention of the Financial Management Office, Office of
the Court Administrator, has been called in connection with
the numerous belated requests for confirmation of the
38
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Circulars
OCA Circular No. 70-2015 (continued)
designations of OIC-Clerks of Court entitled to the payment
of the representation and transportation allowance (RATA).
More often than not, the designation of the OIC-Clerk of Court
is effected by the Presiding Judge on an earlier date but the
request for confirmation of the Office of the Court
Administrator (OCA) of such designation is made on a much
later date and not immediately after. Such circumstance
invariably results in a substantial disruption of the cash flow
and availability of funds for the lower courts because it could
happen that the payment of RATA retroacts to more than
one or two years, reckoned from the date when the
designation was made.
Thus, all Judges are hereby directed to forthwith submit
for confirmation their designations of OIC-Clerks of Court who
shall be entitled to the payment of RATA. Effective
immediately, for the purpose of payment of RATA to the
concerned OIC-Clerks of Court, the computation of the
amount thereof shall be reckoned from the date of
confirmation of designation and not on the date the
designation was made.
For strict compliance.
photographs to be submitted must show the front, right and
left profile of the accused.
To maintain uniformity and to prevent further omission
of the abovementioned material data, all concerned are
hereby DIRECTED to judiciously REQUIRE each accused to
submit to your respective courts his/her photographs before
the scheduled arraignment, and MONITOR your respective
clerks of court in the accomplishment of the warrant of arrest
of the accused by including therein not only the full middle
name or middle initial, but also his second name, if any.
Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.
April 23, 2015.
(Sgd.) RAUL BAUTISTA VILLANUEVA
Deputy Court Administrator and
Officer in Charge
Office of the Court Administrator
April 17, 2015.
.
(Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ
Court Administrator
TO: ALL REGIONAL TRIAL COURT JUDGES
SUBJECT: APPLICATION OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10640
TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
SUBJECT: SUBMISSION OF PHOTOGRAPH OF THE ACCUSED
BEFORE THE SCHEDULED ARRAIGNMENT AND INCLUSION
OF THE CORRECT MIDDLE NAME IN THE PREPARATION OF
A WARRANT OF ARREST
It has been brought to the attention of this Court that there
are instances that (a) the warrants of arrest issued by the
trial courts fail to indicate the complete name, including the
middle name, of the person who is the subject of the warrant
of arrest pursuant to OCA Circular No. 64-2014 dated April
23, 2014; (b) the practice of some judges issuing the orders
that require the accused to submit a photograph before the
arraignment proper is highly commendable, as it would result
to a more efficient execution of the warrants of arrest; and
(c) the consequential effect of such practice entails that the
The attention of this Court has been called to the significance
of the so-called “Sotto Amendment to the Anti-Drug Law”,
or otherwise known as Republic Act No. 10640 (An Act to
Further Strengthen the Anti-Drug Campaign of the
Government, Amending for the Purpose Section 21 of Republic
Act No. 9165, Otherwise Known as the “Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002”) which took effect on July 23,
2014.
In view of the foregoing, all concerned are hereby
REMINDED to COMPLY with the above-quoted law, appended
herein as “Annex A,” for the purpose of ensuring that all those
involved in the proper apprehension of the drug violators will
avail of the full benefits of the law.
Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.
April 23, 2015.
(Sgd.) RAUL BAUTISTA VILLANUEVA
Deputy Court Administrator and
Officer in Charge
Office of the Court Administrator
39
Annex “A”
H. No. 2285
S. No. 2273
Republic of the Philippines
Congress of the Philippines
Metro Manila
Sixteenth Congress
First Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twentysecond day of July, two thousand thirteen.
[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10640]
AN ACT TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN THE ANTI-DRUG
CAMPAIGN OF THE GOVERNMENT, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE SECTION 21 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “COMPREHENSIVE
DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002”
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise
known as the “Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated,
Seized, and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs,
Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals, Instruments/
Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. – The
PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs,
controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as
well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or
laboratory equipment so confiscated, seized and/
or surrendered, for proper disposition in the
following manner:
(1) The apprehending team having initial custody
and control of the dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors and essential chemicals, instruments/
paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment shall,
immediately after seizure and confiscation, conduct
a physical inventory of the seized items and
photograph the same in the presence of the accused
or the person/s from whom such items were
confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative
or counsel, with an elected public official and a
representative of the National Prosecution Service
or the media who shall be required to sign the copies
of the inventory and be given a copy
thereof: Provided, That the physical inventory and
photograph shall be conducted at the place where
the search warrant is served; or at the nearest police
station or at the nearest office of the apprehending
officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case
of warrantless seizures: Provided, finally, That
noncompliance of these requirements under
justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and
the evidentiary value of the seized items are
properly preserved by the apprehending
officer/team, shall not render void and invalid
such seizures and custody over said items.
xxxx
(3) A certification of the forensic laboratory
examination results, which shall be done by the
forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued
immediately upon the receipt of the subject
item/s: Provided, That when the volume of
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
drugs, and controlled precursors and essential
chemicals does not allow the completion of
testing within the time frame, a partial
laboratory examination report shall be
provisionally issued stating therein the
quantities of dangerous drugs still to be
examined by the forensic laboratory: Provided,
however, That a final certification shall be
issued immediately upon completion of the
said examination and certification;
xxxx
SEC. 2. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). –
To implement effectively the provisions of Section 21,
the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) shall
issue the necessary guidelines on the IRR for the
purpose in consultation with the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and relevant sectors to curb increasing drug
cases.
SEC. 3. Separability Clause. – If any provision or part
hereof is held invalid or unconstitutional, the
remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise
affected shall remain valid and subsisting.
S EC . 4. Repealing Clause. – All laws, presidential
decrees or issuances, executive orders, letters of
instruction, administrative orders, rules and regulations
contrary to or inconsistent with the provisions of this
Act are hereby repealed, modified or amended
accordingly.
SEC. 5. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect 15 days
after its complete publication in at least two
newspapers of general circulation.
Approved,
July 15, 2014
40
TO: ALL JUDICIARY OFFICIALS AND COURT PERSONNEL OF
THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
SUBJECT: SYNCHRONIZED JUSTICE SYSTEM CALENDAR
The Justice Sector Coordinating Council, through its Justice
Zone project, has recently developed a Synchronized Justice
System Calendar (SJSC) that serves as a mechanism in which
the representatives of the Judiciary, Department of Justice
and Department of Interior and Local Government, plot their
individual activities to a single calendar, with the end-goal of
Annex A
APRIL - JUNE 2015
avoiding suspension of trial due to lack of information on
activities affecting trial dates.
In view of the foregoing, you are hereby DIRECTED to
faithfully OBSERVE and judiciously ADHERE to the
abovementioned SJSC, for the purpose of greatly helping
reduce unnecessary delays in the trial of cases by giving judges
and litigants prior information on the SJSC, appended
herewith as Annex “A”.
For your information, guidance and strict compliance.
May 8, 2015.
Court Administrator
41
42
Circulars
APRIL - JUNE 2015
43
44
Circulars
APRIL - JUNE 2015
45
TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
TO: ALL COURT OFFICIALS AND PERSONNEL
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY RELEASE OF INMATES SUFFERING
FROM COMMUNICABLE DISEASES AND OTHER HEALTH
CONCERNS TO HOSPITALS FOR APPROPRIATE TREATMENT
SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION AND AMENDMENT TO A.M. NO.
04-7-02-SC (Re: Guidelines on Corporate Surety Bonds)
Acting on reports that motions filed by counselor officials of
the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology to bring inmates
suffering from serious ailments and other health concerns,
which cannot be properly treated by the jails clinics, to
hospitals or clinics outside the detention facilities are not
being expeditiously acted upon, all judges of the first and
second level courts are REMINDED and ADVISED to be more
circumspect and considerate in acting on these motions which
should be prioritized and immediately acted upon in a speedy
and efficient manner in accordance with the applicable rules.
For strict compliance.
May 26, 2015.
Court Administrator
Form No. 1
Inventory of Construction Disputes
No.
Case No.
Case Title
Date Filed
Latest Status
(If not yet Referred to
CIAC)
In its April 21, 2015 Resolution in A.M. No. 04-7-02-SC (Re:
Guidelines on Corporate Surety Bonds), the Supreme Court
En Banc resolved, among others, to:
(b) CLARIFY that the obligation on the part of the
accused/defendant to pay the annual premium
necessary for the renewal of the surety bond
previously approved by the court remains;
(c) AMEND the phrase ‘Unless and until the Supreme
Court directs otherwise’ appearing in the first
paragraph of Section VII of A.M. No. 04-7-02-SC to
read as ‘Unless and until the court concerned directs
otherwise;’
(d) AMEND the second paragraph of Section VII of A.M.
No. 04-7-02-SC to include the following statement:
‘If the surety company seeks to be discharged from
its obligation because of the failure/refusal of the
accused/defendant to pay premiums, it shall make
the same notice within 10 days from the occurrence
of such fact and the court shall decide accordingly.’
Pursuant to the above, it is hereby clarified that “the
obligation on the part of the accused/defendant to pay the
annual premium necessary for the renewal of the surety bond
previously approved by the court remains.”
Likewise, Section VII, A.M. No. 04-7-02-SC, shall now read
as follows:
VII. LIFETIME OF BONDS IN CRIMINAL AND
CIVILACTIONS/SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
Prepared by: _____________ Verified by: _______________
Clerk in Charge
Clerk of Court/OIC
Noted: ___________________
Presiding Judge
Unless and until the court concerned directs otherwise,
the lifetime or duration of the effectivity of any bond
issued in criminal and civil actions/special proceedings,
or in any proceeding or incident therein shall be from
its approval by the court, until the action or proceeding
is finally decided, resolved or terminated. This condition
must be incorporated in the terms and condition of
the bonding contract and shall bind the parties
notwithstanding their failure to expressly state the
same in the said contract or agreement.
The surety company shall notify the court
concerned and the parties to the action or proceeding
46
APRIL - JUNE 2015
Circulars
of any act, event, or circumstances that may affect its
business or operations, such as corporate
rehabilitation; amendment of its articles of
incorporation that shortens corporate lifetime,
bankruptcy; insolvency; or issuance of writs of
execution, attachment, or garnishment against it. The
notice, which shall be given within 10 days from the
occurrence of the act, event, or circumstance, shall
have as attachments thereto, certified true copies or
authenticated documents evidencing the same act,
event or circumstance. If the surety company seeks
to be discharged from its obligation because of the
failure/refusal of the accused/defendant to pay
premiums, it shall make the same notice within 10
days from the occurrence of such fact and the court
shall decide accordingly.
The concerned Clerk of Court shall furnish the
Docket and Clearance Division, Legal Office, OCA, with
a copy of the final order of the court on the Motion to
Withdraw as Bondsman filed by the surety company,
within 10 days upon its issuance. (Amendment
emphasized.)
For your information and guidance.
May 27, 2015.
Court Administrator
The PHILJA Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice Ameurfina A.
Melencio Herrera Award for the Most Outstanding Professorial
Lecturer featuring Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio
on “The South China Sea Dispute”
continued from page 3
Court through Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno.
The program ended with the Closing Remarks of Chief
Justice Sereno who congratulated Justice Carpio for his
presentation of a well-researched paper.
The Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice Ameurfina
A. Melencio Herrera Award for the Most Outstanding
Professorial Lecturer was established in 2012 by the
children of Justice Melencio Herrera in honor of her 90th
birthday. It aims to assist PHILJA in its continuing
promotion of judicial excellence through the delivery of
distinguished lectures in judicial education. Justice Azcuna
was the first recipient of the award in 2012, followed by
Retired Court of Appeals Justice Hilarion L. Aquino in
2013.
To our officials and staff, keep up the good work and
congratulations on our milestones thus far.
To our development partners, thank you for your
valuable support as we pursue our common goal.
To the Supreme Court, we are very grateful for the
unwavering support to PHILJA and all our training
programs and activities.
And to God Almighty, our humble and continuing
thanks.
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA
Chancellor
Judicial Moves
(Justice Ronaldo B. Martin)
Solicitor I, Associate Solicitor II, and Associate Solicitor III
from 1993 to 2005. He was appointed Presiding Judge of
RTC Branch 73, Antipolo City in 2005, where he became
Vice Executive Judge from 2007 to 2011 and Executive
Judge from 2011 to 2015 until his appointment to the
Court of Appeals.
He has attended various seminars and skills
development trainings from 1993 to 2015 such as the
ASEAN-Japan International Seminar on Copyright and the
Special Course on Intellectual Property Rights and
Neighboring Rights held in Yokohama and Tokyo, Japan,
respectively. Justice Martin also joined the World Congress
on Labor and Social Security conducted at the University
of Buenos Aires, Argentina in September 1997.
He had authored publications, one of which was
shortlisted for the National Book Awards in 2008; and
written an essay which won the grand prize in an essay
writing contest for government workers published in the
GSIS Journal, Office of the Solicitor General in 2001.
Justice Martin obtained his primary and secondary
education from the Ateneo de Manila University, where
he also finished his Bachelor of Arts in Economics (1986)
and Juris Doctor (1991) degrees.
47
Third Quarter Training Programs and Activities (continued)

Competency Seminar on Legal Writing
July 27, Court of Appeals, Manila





Career Development Program for Court Legal
Researchers of Luzon
July 28–29, PTC, Tagaytay City
Competency Enhancement Training for Judges,
Prosecutors, Social Workers and Law Enforcement
Investigators Handling Trafficking in Persons Cases
September 2–4, Dumaguete City

Roundtable Discussion for Judge on
Intellectual Property Rights and Public Health
July 29–30, Manila
Recruitment and Screening of Prospective Mediators
and PMC Unit Staff in North Cotabato
September 8, Kidapawan City

73rd Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Newly Appointed Judges
September 8–17, PTC, Tagaytay City

Competency Enhancement Training for Judges
and Court Personnel Handling Cases Involving Children
September 8–10, Manila

Recruitment and Screening of Applicants for Mediators
and PMC Unit Staff in Sultan Kudarat
September 10, Sultan Kudarat

Focus Group Discussion (Curriculum Review)
Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on
Court-Annexed Mediation (North Cotabato and
Sultan Kudarat Mediation Programs)
July 30, Kidapawan City
Information Dissemination through a Dialogue
between Barangay Officials and Court Officials,
and Court-Annexed Mediation
July 30, Balanga City
July 31, Angeles City
September 3, Ormoc City
September 4, Catbalogan City
September 17, Dipolog City
September 18, Pagadian City


Internship Program (Ilocos Region Mediation Program)
July 20–21 , Laoag City/Vigan
Pre-Internship Orientation and Meeting with Judges,
Clerks of Court, Mediation Trainees and PMC Unit Staff
(Palawan Mediation Program)
August 14, Puerto Princesa City

Work Orientation and Skills Enhancement Seminar
for PMC Unit Staff (Batch 2)
August 27–28, PTC, Tagaytay City

Internship Program
(Oriental Mindoro Mediation Program)
September 1–October 31, Calapan City

Personal Security Training for Judges

Seminar-Workshop on Dangerous Drugs Law
September 1–3, Bacolod City

Refresher Course/Advanced Course for
Court-Annexed Mediators in Isabela/Tuguegarao
September 2–3, Cauayan City
FOR COURT PERSONNEL
September 10, Manila
FOR JUSTICES OF APPELLATE COURTS
September 10, Manila

National Summit of Family Court Judges
September 16–17, Alabang, Muntinlupa City

Seminar Workshop for Judges on Financial Crimes
and Money Laundering
September 16–17, Manila

17th National Convention and Seminar of the
Metropolitan and City Court Judges Association
of the Philippines
September 23–25, Batangas City

Basic Mediation Course
PALAWAN MEDIATION PROGRAM
August 11–14, Puerto Princesa City
NORTH COTABATO AND SULTAN KUDARAT MEDIATION PROGRAMS
September 29–October 2, Kidapawan City
48
3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial Building
Padre Faura Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila 1000
Philippines
APRIL
- JUNE 2015
PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE TO
AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE
OR IMPRISONMENT OR BOTH
Third Quarter 2015 Training Programs and Activities

Judicial Career Enhancement

Program for First Level Court Judges
FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION (MINDORO,
MARINDUQUE, ROMBLON, PALAWAN, AND
BATANGAS)

SIXTH JUDICIAL REGION


Pre-Internship Orientation and
Meeting with Judges, Clerks of

Court, Branch Clerks of Court,
Mediation Trainees, and PMCU Staff
(Oriental Mindoro Mediation

Program)
July 3, Calapan City
for RTC Clerks of Court

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION
July 7–9 PTC, Tagaytay City
THIRD JUDICIAL REGION
September 30–October 2
PTC, Tagaytay City



for Court Social Workers of the
Sixth to Eight Judicial Regions
July 7–9, Cebu City
Judicial Settlement Conference
for Judges on Judicial Dispute
Resolution (Skills-based Course)
Orientation and Screening of
Prospective Mediators and PMC
Unit Staff
(Palawan Mediation Program)
July 9, Puerto Princesa City
Career Enhancement Program for
Regional Trial Court Sheriffs of the
National Capital Judicial Region
(Batch 2)
Seminar-Workshop on
Strengthening Judicial Integrity and
Rule of Law for Selected Judges of
Regions VI and VII
July 15–16, Dumaguete City
35th Pre-Judicature Program
July 20–31, Manila
Third Forum of Women Leaders
on Biodiversity Conservation
July 21, Manila
Sixth Seminar-Workshop on
Deposit Insurance, Banking
Practices and Bank Conservatorship,
Receivership and Liquidation

Orientation of Clerks of Court
and Branch Clerks of Court on
Judicial Dispute Resolution
July 23, Malolos City, Bulacan

Orientation of Public Prosecutors,
Public Attorneys, and Law
Practitioners on Judicial Dispute
Resolution
July 23, Malolos City, Bulacan

Training Seminar on the Guidelines
for Continuous Trial of Criminal
Cases and Skills Development for
Judges of Pilot Courts
Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna
Chancellor
Professor Sedfrey M. Candelaria
Editor in Chief
Editorial and Research Staff
Atty. Orlando B. Cariño
Atty. Ma. Melissa Dimson-Bautista
Armida M. Salazar
Jocelyn D. Bondoc
Ronald Paz Caraig
Joseph Arvin S. Cruz
Christine A. Ferrer
Joanne Narciso-Medina
Charmaine S. Nicolas
Sarah Jane S. Salazar
Atty. Jeniffer P. Sison
Circulation and Support Staff
Romeo A. Arcullo
Judith B. Del Rosario
Michael Angelo P. Laude
Lope R. Palermo
Daniel 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:
research_philja@yahoo.com;
philja@sc.judiciary.gov.ph; Website:
http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph

Volume XVII, Issue No. 66 April-June 2015

Transcription

Similar documents

los güeros contact information form document information family

PDF - Pinsent Masons

Debtmaster PDF - Comtronic Systems

Information Booklet: Court Appointed Liquidation

D-547 Initiating Docs and Map

Forest Ridge Forest Ridge Times - Forest Ridge | Ravenna, Ohio

13Network v 3.0 - David Wm. Ruskin, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee

ccennect

Voluntary Petition for Non-Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy