january-march 2006 philja newsphilja newsphilja.judiciary.gov.ph/files/bulletin/bul29.pdfsa...

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006January-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

January to March 2006 Volume VIII, Issue No. 29

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

SUPREME COURT

RE

PU

BLIC

OF THE PHILIP

PI N

ES

BATAS AT BAYAN

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

PHILJAACADEMIC PROGRAMS

39TH ORIENTATION SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

FOR NEWLY-APPOINTED JUDGES

The 39th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for NewlyAppointed Judges was held on February 13 to 24, 2006,at the PHILJA Development Center, Tagaytay City.In attendance were forty-seven (47) judges,comprising twenty-eight (28) newly appointedjudges and nineteen (19) promoted judges.

A. New Appointments

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Hon. Salvador T. Timbang, Jr.RTC Br. 253, Las Piñas CityHon. Felix P. ReyesRTC Br. 272, Marikina City

REGION IIIHon. Esperanza P. RozarioRTC Br. 44, San Fernando, PampangaHon. Virgilio G. CaballeroRTC Br. 30, Cabanatuan, Nueva Ecija

REGION IVHon. Edgar D. SantosRTC Br. 78, Morong, Rizal

REGION VIHon. Franklin J. DemonteverdeRTC Br. 55, Himamaylan, Negros Occidental

REGION IXHon. Yolinda C. BautistaRTC Br. 9, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del NorteHon. Chandler O. RuizRTC Br. 10, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte

REGION XIIHon. George C. JabidoRTC Br. 18, Midsayap, North Cotabato

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES

REGION IIHon. Mary Jane S. SorianoMTCC Cauayan City, Isabela

REGION IIIHon. Katrina Nora Buan FactoraMTCC Br. 2, Angeles City, Pampanga

Hon. Jacinto C. GonzalesMTCC Br. 2, Olongapo City, ZambalesHon. Irineo P. Pangilinan, Jr.MTCC Br. 1, Angeles City, Pampanga

REGION IXHon. Alexander M. BetoyaMTCC Br. 1, Pagadian City, Zamboanga del Sur

REGION XHon. Cesar A. MerlasMTCC Br. 1, Cagayan de Oro City

REGION XIIHon. Alejandro Ramon C. AlanoMTCC Br. 3, General Santos City, South Cotabato

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IIIHon. Ana Marie Joson-ViterboMTC Zaragoza, Nueva Ecija

REGION IVHon. Michael M. AmdenganMTC Angono, RizalHon. Lourdes M. CascoMTC Tayabas, QuezonHon. Jose Lorenzo R. dela RosaMTC Victoria, LagunaHon. Vicente B. MontesMTC Calaca, Batangas

REGION VHon. Victoria Dino ReyesMTC Basud, Camarines Norte

REGION VIIIHon. Maria Cielo S. Velasquez-MartinezMTC Jaro, Leyte

REGION IXHon. Veronica C. de Guzman-LaputMTC Manukan, Zamboanga del NorteHon. Deborah G. NazarioMTC Polanco, Zamboanga del NorteHon. Vicente B. TecsonMTC Aurora, Zamboanga del Sur

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION IIHon. Fe Viray Alvaro10th MCTC Roxas-Quirino, Isabela

REGION VHon. Carlos L. BonaMCTC Sto. Domingo-Manito, Albay

2

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006January-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 3

B. Promotions

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Hon. Carolina R. ColasitoRTC Br. 23, ManilaHon. Roy G. GironellaRTC Br. 43, ManilaHon. Aida E. LayugRTC Br. 46, ManilaHon. Jose A. MendozaRTC Br. 55, ManilaHon. Jose P. MorallosRTC Br. 44, ManilaHon. Ruben Reynaldo G. RoxasRTC Br. 12, ManilaHon. Ma. Victoria A. EstoestaRTC Br. 99, Quezon CityHon. Elvira de Castro PanganibanRTC Br. 227, Quezon CityHon. Maria Rosario B. RagasaRTC Br. 108, Pasay CityHon. Wilhelmina Jorge-WaganRTC Br. 111, Pasay CityHon. Gloria Butay AglugubRTC Br. 254, Las Piñas City

REGION IHon. Genoveva Conching MarambaRTC Br. 44, Dagupan City, PangasinanHon. Mona Lisa V. Tiongson-TaboraRTC Br. 26, San Fernando, La Union

REGION IIIHon. Joselito S. SalvadorRTC Br. 46, San Fernando, Pampanga

REGION VIIIHon. Celso L. MantuaRTC Br. 17, Palompon, Leyte

REGION IXHon. Aniceto B. GalonRTC Br. 20, Pagadian City, Zamboanga del Sur

REGION XHon. Jose C. Yamut, Sr.RTC Br. 11, Manolo Fortich, Bukidnon

REGION XIHon. Romeo C. AlbarracinRTC Br. 9, Davao City

REGION XIIHon. Macaundas M. HadjirasulRTC Br. 10, Marawi City, Lanao del Sur

RJCEPs (LEVEL 4)

This quarter, PHILJA conducted two (2) RegionalJudicial Career Enhancement Programs (RJCEPs, Level4) for Judges, Clerks of Court and Branch Clerks of Courtof the Regional Trial Courts and First Level Trial Courts.

The RJCEP for the 8th Judicial Region was heldon February 15 to 17, 2006, at the Leyte Park Hotel,Tacloban City. A total of two hundred nineteen(219) participants attended the program,comprising thirty-two (32) Regional Trial Courtjudges, fifty-one (51) First Level Trial Court judges,thirty (30) clerks of court and branch clerks of courtwho are lawyers, and one hundred six (106) clerksof court and branch clerks of court who are non-lawyers.

On the other hand, the RJCEP for the 11th

Judicial Region was conducted on March 15 to 17,2006, at the Grand Regal Hotel, Davao City. Onehundred sixty-eight (168) attended the program,comprising thirty-two (32) Regional Trial Courtjudges, thirty-one (31) First Level Trial Courtjudges, thirty-six (36) clerks of court and branchclerks of court who are lawyers, and sixty-nine(69) clerks of court and branch clerks of court whoare non-lawyers.

SEMINAR AND ANNUAL MEETING OF THE

PHILIPPINE WOMEN JUDGES ASSOCIATION

The Seminar and Annual Meeting of the Philippineand Women Judges Association (PWJA)was held onMarch 15 to 16, 2006, at the Manila Hotel, RoxasBlvd., Manila and attended by three hundred ten(310) participants comprising Justices of theSupreme Court, Court of Appeals andSandiganbayan, and judges of the First Level andSecond Level Courts nationwide.

The first day of the said event was devoted toactivities of the PWJA, included therein werespeeches delivered by Judge Jiin-Fang Lin of TaiwanTaipeh District Court, Ms. Joan Winship ofInternational Association of Women Judges (IAWJ)and Atty. Teresa Lynn Cannady of ABA-ASIA. Thesecond day was allotted to the educationalcomponent. Highlighted lectures were ForensicEvidence in Child Abuse Cases and The Grant of NotarialCommissions under the New Rules.

CONVENTIONS

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS4

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

5TH REGIONAL MULTI-SECTORAL SEMINAR-WORKSHOP ON JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC

RELATIONS JUSTICE (ADVANCED LEVEL)

PHILJA, in partnership with the UnitedNations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Adhikain ParaSa Karapatang Pambata – Ateneo Human RightsCenter (AKAP-AHRC), United States Agency forInternational Development (USAID), and The AsiaFoundation (TAF) conducted the 5th Regional Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop on Juvenile and DomesticRelations Justice (Advanced Level) on January 25 to27, 2006, at the CSB Hotel, Malate, Manila. Sixty-four (64) participants attended the seminarcomposed of judges, branch clerks of court, courtsocial workers, prosecutors, lawyers from thePublic Attorney’s Office (PAO), and officers of thePhilippine National Police (PNP) and Bureau ofJail Management and Penology (BJMP) handlingwomen and children cases. This cluster ofparticipants came from the National Capital JudicialRegion and Region IV, particularly in thedesignated Family Courts in Quezon City,Malabon, Marikina City, Batangas City, Cavite City,Sta. Cruz in Laguna, Lucena City, and AntipoloCity in Rizal.

The lectures highlighted updates on new lawson family, women, and children. The workshopswere on case studies, dispute resolution skills; anddrafting and validation of rules and guidelines forfamily courts, specifically on adoption, diversion,and mediation on family law cases.

RTD ON R.A. 9208 AND R.A. 9262

The Roundtable Discussion on Republic Act No. 9208(Anti-Trafficking in Person) and Republic Act No. 9262(Violence Against Women and their Children) for NationalCapital Judicial Region (NCJR) Family Court Judges wasconducted by the Academy on February 7, 2006, atthe Justices’ Lounge, Centennial Building, Courtof Appeals. Thirteen (13) NCJR Family Court judgesattended the half-day session.

The RTD aimed at enabling Family Court judgesto distinguish between cases of trafficking fromnon-trafficking by being familiar with the elementsof trafficking, recognizing women and child-abuse

cases; and determining the appropriateness ofissuing Protection Orders.

Another RTD, entitled Roundtable Discussion onR.A. 9208 and R.A. 9262 for the Associate Justices ofthe Court of Appeals-Manila was conducted by theAcademy last March 21, 2006, at the JusticesLounge, Centennial Building, Court of Appeals.The discussion focused on the salient features ofR.A. No. 9208 and R.A. No. 9262. The event wasattended by fifteen (15) Court of Appeals justices.

SEMINAR ON THE RULE OF PROCEDURE

IN CASES OF CIVIL FORFEITURE, ETC.

The Seminar on the Rule of Procedure in Cases ofCivil Forfeiture, Asset Preservation and Freezing ofMonetary Instrument, Property or Proceeds Representing,Involving, or Relating to an Unlawful Activity or MoneyLaundering Offense under R.A. No. 9160 as Amended,was conducted on February 8, 2006, by PHILJA,in collaboration with the Rule of Law Effectiveness(ROLE) and the American Bar Association – AsiaLaw Initiative (ABA-Asia), under the supervisionof Dean Cesar L. Villanueva, Chair of the PHILJACommercial Law Department. The seminar wasconducted simultaneously via webcasting in three(3) remote sites, particularly, at the Discover Suites,Ortigas Avenue, Pasig City; at the Cebu GrandHotel, Cebu City; and at the Dynasty Court Hotel,Cagayan de Oro City.

Participants of the seminar were justices of thefirst three Divisions of the Court of Appeals in Cebuand Cagayan de Oro; justices of theSandiganbayan; and the executive judges, vice-executive judges and Commercial Court judges ofthe National Capital Judicial Region (NCJR), Cebu,and Misamis Oriental and Occidental.

Topics discussed were the Basic Principles of CivilForfeiture and the Philippine and Foreign Experience onthe Subject and the New Rule of Civil Forfeiture,Applicable Jurisprudence and Related Laws. The firsttopic aimed at stimulating the interest of theparticipants on the new Rule by giving them a clearidea of what Civil Forfeiture is, how it differs fromcriminal forfeiture, and how it is applied in otherjurisdiction. The second topic, on the other hand,featured the provisions of the Rule particularly onApplicability, Party, Jurisdiction, Procedure in theRegional Trial Court, Trial Judgment and Review,Claims against Forfeited Assets and Appeal.


ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

SEMINAR-WORKSHOP FOR SELECTED

JUDGES OF PANAY AND NEGROS ORIENTAL

The Environmental Law Seminar-Workshop forSelected Judges of Panay and Negros Oriental wasconducted by the Academy, in cooperation with theUnited Nations Development Programme – GlobalEnvironment Facility – Small Grants Programme(UNDP-GEF-SGP) International Visitor Program– Philippine Alumni Foundation, Inc., and theHaribon Foundation through the ANEST forBiodiversity Conservation in the PhilippinesProject (PN-11780) and the Threatened SpeciesProgram on February 15 to 17, 2006, at the IloiloBusiness Hotel, Iloilo City. A total of forty (40)participants attended the seminar-workshopcomposed of judges and representatives from theHaribon Foundation, local government unit,Negros Forest and Ecological Foundation, Inc., theAntique Outdoors, PAMANAKASA Pilipinas,Biocon, LIPASECU, and the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources (DENR).

Topics discussed were the State of the PhilippineEnvironment, People Mining Act of 1995 (R.A. No. 7942);People’s Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991 (R.A. No.7076); Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act(R.A. No. 9147); National Caves and Cave ResourceManagement and Protection Act (R.A. No. 9072);National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992(R.A. No. 7586); Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines(P.D. No. 705); The Chainsaw Act (R.A. No. 9175);The Philippine Fisheries Code (R.A. No. 8550); and theIndigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA).

PANEL DISCUSSION ON GRAVE ABUSE OF

DISCRETION IN THE CONTEXT OF

SEPARATION OF POWERS

The Panel Discussion on Grave Abuse of Discretionin the Context of Separation of Powers was conductedby the Academy on February 23, 2006, at the HyattHotel, Manila. Thirty-four (34) participants fromthe Supreme Court, Court of Appeals,Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals and RegionalTrial Courts, attended the activity.

Dr. Sheehan Baker, the main discussant of theactivity, was a Fullbright lecturer and a professorof Constitutional Law at Louisiana StateUniversity’s Paul Herbert Law Center. Hediscussed the concept of separation of powers andjudicial review from the point of view of the UnitedStates of America. A notable remark he madeduring the discussion was “as long as the judiciaryprotects the people from the political by sticking to thelegal, then it would be held in high esteem.”

Participants of the Environmental LawSeminar-Workshop for Selected Judges ofPanay and Negros Oriental, with Court ofAppeals Justice Portia A. Hormachuelos andPHILJA’s Professor Sedfrey M. Candelaria.


IMPROVING JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

INVOLVING CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE/EXPLOITATION CASES

The Philippine Judicial Academy and the ChildProtection Unit Network (CPU-Net), a society ofChild Protection Specialist and Child ProtectionUnits of the Philippines, in cooperation with theBritish Embassy, have embarked on a pioneeringproject, Improving Judicial Proceedings lnvolving ChildSexual Abuse / Exploitation Cases, that aims toenhance the competence of judges in dealing withcases of children in court. The project,conceptualized through the Research Group of theAcademy, started off with the production of six (6)trigger videos on actual court cases. The videomodules were skills-based and tailored to adultlearning styles. They were entitled Child and Gender-insensitive Court Atmosphere; Language of a Child;Badgering of a Child Witness; Use of Guardian Ad Litem(GAL), Use of Testimonial Aids; and Unavailable Child.Said video modules were to be used for workshopsand small group discusseions aimed to drawsolutions to common problems faced by the childas he/she undergoes the judicial process.

Part of the project was the conduct of theTraining of Trainers on the Capacity Enhancement Trainingfor Family Court Judges and Personnel in Handling ChildAbuse Cases on March 13, 2006, at the Traders Hotel,Manila. Participants to the training were thetrainers/resource persons of the video modules. Theactivity’s objective was to train a pool of resource

persons to be trainers on the video modules. Thepool of trainers would spherehead the series oftrainings on the video modules to be conductedby PHILJA .

Following this, was the Launching andDemonstration of the Video Training Modules on“Improving Judicial Proceedings Involving Child SexualAbuse/Exploitation Cases” held on March 16, 2006,at the Justices’ Lounge, 7th Floor, Supreme Court,Manila. Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban, HerMajesty’s Ambassador, His Excellency Mr. PeterBeckingham from the British Embassy, AssociateJustice Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., the pool of trainersand other special guests, graced the affair.

On March 21 to 23, 2006, the CapacityEnhancement Training for Family Court Judges andPersonnel in Handling Child Abuse Cases, wasconducted by the Academy at Hotel Dominique,Tagaytay City. A total of twenty-nine (29)participants attended the training. The goal of thetraining was, that by the end of the sessions, theparticipants would be able to demonstrateawareness and sensitivity in handling child abusecases; communicate effectively and sensitively inhandling child abuse cases; maintain properdecorum inside the family courts as reflected in theirprevention of oppressive behavior, badgering andinsensitive questions from any person during thecourt proceedings; appoint, as appropriate, aguardian ad litem (GAL) for the child; andcompetently identify various forms of evidence ofchild abuse that are admissible and have probativevalue during judicial proceedings. To achieve theabove-mentioned objectives, lectures, paneldiscussions and workshops on the video modules,were enforced as learning strategies.

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

Participants of the Capacity Enhancement Training for Family Court Judges and Personnel in Handling Child Abuse Cases.


CONFERENCE ON ARBITRATION

FOR THE JUDICIARY

Republic Act No. 9285, the Alternative DisputeResolution Act of 2004, mandates to promote modesof alternative dispute resolution, particularly,mediation and arbitration in the country. To thisend, a Conference on Arbitration for the Judiciary wasconducted by the Academy, in partnership withKuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration(KLRCA), Chartered Institute of Arbitrators(CIArb), Philippine Dispute Resolution Center, Inc.(PDRCI), United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID), and The Asia Foundation(TAF) on March 23 to 24, 2006 at the Bahia Room,Intercontinental Manila, Makati City, Philippines.The said conference aimed to familiarize judges withsome aspects of both domestic and internationalarbitration, with emphasis on how domestic courtscan assist arbitral tribunals, and how they canenforce or vacate arbitral awards.

The two-day conference was attended by thirty(30) participants with eleven (11) lecturers andreactors. On the first day of the conference, topicsdealt with were The Fundamental Concept of Arbitration;Party Autonomy and Arbitration; The UNCITRAL Modellaw: An International Standard; Interaction between theCourt and Arbitral Tribunals: The Supervisory andSupportive Roles of Domestic Courts; and RecourseAgainst and Enforcement of Awards: The Hong KongExperience. On the second day, topics discussed wereA Panacea for Dispute Resolution; Court AnnexedArbitration; Arbitrability: Changing Limitation;Recourse and the Enforcement of an Arbitral Award: TheMalaysian Experience; Public Policy as Ground to VacateArbitral Award; and Chronicle of Current Issues AffectingInternational Commercial Arbitration in Asia.

SANDIGANBAYANEMPLOYEES’ COMPUTER SKILLS TRAINING

The Academy, in coordination with the UnitedStates Agency for International Development(USAID), The Asia Foundation (TAF), the Rule ofLaw Effectiveness (ROLE), and the American BarAssociation – Asia Law Initiative (ABA-Asia)conducted a series of Sandiganbayan Employees’Computer Skills Training covering three (3) modules,as follows: Computer Fundamentals, PersonalProductivity Tools, and Case ManagementInformation System (CMIS). The trainings wereall held at the Sandiganbayan Library,Sandiganbayan Centennial Bldg., Commonwealth,Quezon City.

The Module on Computer Fundamentals was heldon February 20 to 21, 2006 with seventeen (17)participants. Three (3) batches of the Module onPersonal Productivity Tools were conducted on thefollowing dates: February 23 to 24, 2006 witheighteen (18) participants; February 27 to 28, 2006with seventeen (17) participants; and March 2 to3, 2006 with nineteen (19) participants. The Moduleon Case Management Information Systems (CMIS) werealso conducted in three (3) batches on March 20 to21, 2006 with eighteen (18) participants; on March23 to 24, 2006 with eighteen (18) participants; andon March 27 to 28, 2006 with sixteen (16)participants.

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

FOR JUDICIAL PERSONNEL

Participants of the Conference onArbitration for the Judiciary with ChiefJustice Artemio V. Panganiban, PHILJAChancellor Ameurfina A.Melencio Herrera,and lecturers from KLRCA, namely, Dato’Kevin Woo and Mr. Chong Thaw Sing.

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS


DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

FOR JUDICIAL PERSONNEL

SYMPOSIUM AND WORKSHOP ON GENDER

SENSITIVITY FOR SUPREME COURT LAWYERS

In celebration of the Women’s Month, PHILJA,in cooperation with the Committee on GenderResponsiveness in the Judiciary (CGRJ) and Sub-Committee on Training and Capacity Building,conducted the Symposium and Workshop on GenderSensitivity for Supreme Court Lawyers on March 28,2006 held at the Old Session Hall, Old Building,Supreme Court of the Philippines. The objectiveof the said event was to build awareness amongSupreme Court lawyers about the current issueson women and children.

The symposium, attended by thirty-five (35)participants, discussed Leveling of Expectations; GenderIssues encountered by the Supreme Court Lawyers; Genderand Human Rights; and Gender Sensitivity in Court:Protecting the Vulnerable. PHILJA Chancellor JusticeAmeurfina A. Melencio-Herrera, in her ClosingRemarks, said that the objectives of Kamalayan,Katarungan, and Kababaihan (KKK) were met at theSymposium. Moreover, she inspired the SupremeCourt Lawyers to strive for credibility, integrity andprobity in the discharge of their duties.

To cap the celebration of Women’s Month in March, PHILJA held a symposium and workshop onGender Sensitivity for Supreme Court lawyers. This symposium met the objectives of the themeKamalayan, Katarungan and Kababaihan of the Supreme Court’s Committee on Gender and Sensitivity co-chaired by Justices Adolfo S. Azcuna and Alicia Austria-Martinez. The latter discussed SALIN(Sensitivity, Awareness, Language and Information) as important points for greater awareness andunderstanding of issues relating to gender.

The construction and inauguration of the PMC Tacloban unit, and the establishment of the Talisay,Bogo, Argao and Toledo PMCs were affirmations of support for Mediation as a tool for the decongestionof court dockets. Re-Orientation Seminars for Court-Annexed Mediators were conducted and aworkshop was held to review both the Orientation Program for Judges and the Training Program inJudicial Dispute Resolution.

Amid all these, PHILJA managed to conduct separate roundtable discussions on R.A. 9208 and R.A.9262 for NCJR Family Court Judges and the Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals; and an outstandingPanel Discussion on Grave Abuse of Discretion in the Context of Separation of Powers, with eminentpanelists Senior Associate Justice Reynato S. Puno, Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna and Fulbright Fellow Dr.John S. Baker of the Louisiana State University, also as Resource Speaker.

Surely, we have reason to be thankful for the opportunity to achieve milestones that bring us closer toour target, a judiciary that we can all be proud of.

FFFFFrom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’s Desks Desks Desks Desks Desk (Continued from page 1)

ORIENTATION-WORKSHOP ON THE

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR

COURT OF APPEALS PERSONNEL

The Academy, in collaboration with theSupreme Court’s Program Management Office (SC-PMO), and the American Bar Association – AsiaLaw Initiative (ABA-Asia) conducted six (6) batchesof Judicial Reform Advocacy: Orientation-Workshop onthe Code of Conduct for Court Personnel of the Court ofAppeals-Manila. The first two (2) batches wereconducted on February 23 and 24, 2006, at the PanPacific Hotel, Manila and the next four (4) batcheswere conducted on March 2, 3, 8, and 9, 2006, atthe Manila Pavilion Hotel. A total of eight hundredfifty-two (852) Court of Appeals employeesattended the orientation-workshop.


RE-ORIENTATION SEMINAR FOR

COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATORS AND

OATH TAKING CEREMONY OF

NEWLY-ACCREDITED MEDIATORS

The Academy’s Philippine Mediation Center(PMC) conducted three (3) re-orientation seminarsfor Court-Annexed Mediators and two (2) oathtaking ceremonies for the first quarter of 2006.

The Re-Orientation Seminar for Court-AnnexedMediators and Oath Taking Ceremony for Newly-Accredited Cebu Mediators was conducted on February6 to 7, 2006, at the Cebu Grand Hotel, Cebu City,wherein forty-five (45) accredited mediatorsattended. Moreover, the PHILJA Mediation Teamwith the PMC Assistant Coordinator traveled toCities of Toledo, Talisay and Argao and gaveseparate Orientation Meetings with executivejudges, clerks of court and accredited court-annexedmediators in the respective areas. The Team Leaderhad agreed with the executive judges for theopening of PMC Units wherein mediators may startaccepting cases at these new PMC Units effectiveFebruary 13, 2006.

Under the Davao Mediation Program, the Re-orientation Seminar for Court-Annexed Mediators wasconducted on February 20 to 21, 2006, at the RoyalMandaya Hotel, Davao City. This seminar wasattended by sixty-two (62) mediators.

On the other hand, another Re-OrientationSeminar for Court-Annexed Mediators and Oath TakingCeremony for Newly-Accredited Metro Manila Mediatorswas held on March 2 to 3, 2006, at the ManilaPavilion Hotel, Manila, wherein fifty-seven (57)mediators were awarded accreditation.

Moreover, the Workshop to Review the OrientationProgram for Judges on Court-Annexed Mediation and theTraining Program in Judicial Dispute Resolution wasconducted on March 21 to 22, 2006, at the PearlManila Hotel, Manila, with a total of twenty-two(22) attendees. The workshop aimed at refiningthe curriculum design of two (2) existing trainingprograms, namely, 1) the Court-AnnexedMeditation (CAM) orientation of judges and 2) theJURIS Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) trainingfor judges. The outputs of the workshop wasincorpoated in the curriculum to be prepared by

ON MEDIATION

the Institute for Social Studies and Action (ISSA)team.

The Academy and the Philippine MediationCenter, in cooperation with the United StatesAgency for International Development (USAID)and The Asia Foundation (TAF) conducted a Re-orientation Seminar for Court-Annexed Mediators;Inauguration of PMC Tacloban Unit; and Oath-TakingCeremony of Mediators on March 30 to 31, 2006, atthe Ritz Tower De Leyte and Hotel Alejandro,Tacloban City. The re-orientation seminar wasattended by thirty (30) accredited mediators, whileninety (90) participants including judges, localofficials, mediators and other stakeholders attendedthe Inauguration and Oath-Taking Ceremony.

FACULTY DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP FOR

JUDGES’ TRAINING AND COURSE ON

COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION AND

JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT FOR JUDGES ON JDRFOR BENGUET, LA UNION,

AND CAGAYAN DE ORO JUDGES

The Academy’s Philippine Mediation Center(PMC), the Justice Reform Initiatives Support(JURIS) Project, and the National Judicial Institute(NJI) of Canada conducted the Faculty DevelopmentWorkshop Judges’ Training on February 16 to 18, 2006,at the Ridgewood Residence, Baguio City. This wasfollowed by the Course on Court-Annexed Mediationand Judicial Settlement Conference for Judges on JudicialDispute Resolution (JDR) for Benguet and La UnionJudges on February 21 to 23, 2006, at the BaguioCountry Club, South Drive, Baguio City. A totalof twenty-four (24) participants attended theworkshop. Objectives of these two (2) events wereto teach judges in the new model court sites theskills of JDR in order for them to conduct JDR intheir respective courts; to train judges in theexisting model court sites to become trainers,coaches and facilitators in a JDR training; and topilot test peer-to-peer training where judges willtrain and coach fellow judges.

In Cagayan de Oro City, a Course on Court-Annexed Mediation and Judicial Settlement Conference forJudges on Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) was alsoconducted on March 8 to 10, 2006, at the PrycePlaza attended by a total of fifty-eight (58)participants.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURTTTTT10

The requirement provided in the Molina casefor the Solicitor General to issue a certificationstating his reasons for his agreement oropposition to the petition for annulment ofmarriage has been dispensed with followingthe implementation of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC,or the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullityof Void Marriages and Annulment of VoidableMarriages.

Molina had provided for an additionalrequirement that the Solicitor General issue acertification stating his reasons for his agreementor opposition to the petition. This requirementhowever was dispensed with following theimplementation of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, or theRule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of VoidMarriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages.Still, Article 48 of the Family Code mandates thatthe appearance of the prosecuting attorney orfiscal assigned be on behalf of the State to takesteps to prevent collusion between the partiesand to take care that evidence is not fabricatedor suppressed. Obviously, collusion is not anissue in this case, considering the consistentvigorous opposition of respondent to the petitionfor declaration of nullity. In any event, the fiscal’sparticipation in the hearings before the trial courtis extant from the records of this case.

(Tinga, J., Leonilo Antonio v. Marie Ivonne F.Reyes, G.R. No. 155800, March 10, 2006)

REMEDIAL LAW

Foreign Judgment may be barred fromrecognition if it runs counter to public policy.

While the Government refers to a judgmentrendered by a London court in favor of Takenakaand Asahikosan against PIATCO in the amountof US$82 Million, it should be noted that thisforeign judgment is not yet binding on Philippinecourts. It is entrenched in Section 48, Rule 39 ofthe Rules of Civil Procedure that a foreignjudgment on the mere strength of its

CIVIL LAW

promulgation is not yet conclusive, as it can beannulled on the grounds of want of jurisdiction,want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, orclear mistake of law or fact. It is likewiserecognized in Philippine jurisprudence andinternational law that a foreign judgment maybe barred from recognition if it runs counter topublic policy.

(Tinga, J., Republic of the Philippines, et al. v.Hon. Henrick F. Gingoyon, et al., G.R. No.166429, February 1, 2006)

Non-appearance of the parties before thenotary public who notarized the documentdoes not necessarily render the parties’transaction void ab initio.

Notarization converts a private documentinto a public document. However, the non-appearance of the parties before the notary publicwho notarized the document does not necessarilynullify nor render the parties’ transaction void abinitio. Thus:

x x x Article 1358 of the New Civil Codeon the necessity of a public document isonly for convenience, not for validity orenforceability. Failure to follow the properform does not invalidate a contract.Where a contract is not in the formprescribed by law, the parties can merelycompel each other to observe that form,once the contract has been perfected. Thisis consistent with the basic principle thatcontracts are obligatory in whatever formthey may have been entered into,provided all essential requisites arepresent.

Hence, the Lease Contract is valid despiteMayor Perez’s failure to appear before the notarypublic.

(Carpio, J., Manuel Mallari and Millie Mallari v.Rebecca Alsol, G.R. No. 150866, March 6, 2006)

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 DOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 11

POLITICAL LAW

State’s Immunity from suit.

In fact, by entering into a CompromiseAgreement with private respondent Benedicto,petitioner Republic thereby stripped itself of itsimmunity from suit and placed itself in thesame level of its adversary. When the State entersinto contract, through its officers or agents, infurtherance of a legitimate aim and purpose andpursuant to constitutional legislative authority,whereby mutual or reciprocal benefits accrue andrights and obligations arise therefrom, the Statemay be sued even without its express consent,precisely because by entering into a contract thesovereign descends to the level of the citizen. Itsconsent to be sued is implied from the very act ofentering into such contract, breach of which onits part gives the corresponding right to the otherparty to the agreement.

(Garcia, J., Republic of the Philippines v.Sandiganbayan and Roberto S. Benedicto, G.R. No.129406, March 6, 2006)

LABOR LAW

Employer’s power to dismiss an employee is stillsubject to reasonable regulation by the state.

The power to dismiss an employee is arecognized prerogative that is inherent in theemployer’s right to freely manage and regulate hisbusiness. An employer cannot be expected to retainan employee whose lack of morals, respect andloyalty to his employer or regard for his employer’srules and appreciation of the dignity andresponsibility of his office has so plainly andcompletely been bared. An employer may not becompelled to continue to employ a person whosecontinuance in service will patently be inimical tohis interest. The dismissal of an employee, in a way,is a measure of self-protection. Nevertheless,whatever acknowledged right the employer has todiscipline his employee, it is still subject toreasonable regulation by the State in the exerciseof its police power. Thus, it is within the power ofthis Court not only to scrutinize the basis fordismissal but also to determine if the penalty iscommensurate to the offense, notwithstanding thecompany rules.

(Azcuna, J., Dominador Perez v. The Medical CityGeneral Hospital, G.R. No. 150198, March 6, 2006)

CIVIL LAW

Novation, defined.

Novation is defined as the extinguishment ofan obligation by the substitution or change of theobligation by a subsequent one which terminatesthe first, either by changing the object or principalconditions; substituting the person of the debtor;or subrogating a third person in the rights of acreditor. In order that an obligation may beextinguished by another which substitutes thesame, it is imperative that it be so declared inunequivocal terms, or that the old and the newobligations be on every point incompatible witheach other.

Novation cannot be presumed. The animusnovandi, whether partial or total, must appear bythe express agreement of the parties, or by theiracts that are too clear and unequivocal to bemistaken. Further, novation may either beextinctive or modificatory. It is extinctive when anold obligation is terminated by the creation of anew one that takes the place of the former. It ismerely modificatory when the old obligationsubsists to the extent that it remains compatiblewith the amendatory agreement.

(Tinga, J., Gammon Philippines, Inc. v. Metro RailTransit Development Corporation, G.R. No.144792, January 31, 2006)

Tenancy law; Essential Requisites of anAgricultural Tenancy Relationship.

Case law teaches that the essential requisites of anagricultural tenancy relationship are: (1) the partiesare the landowner and the tenant; (2) the subjectis agricultural land; (3) there is consent; (4) thepurpose is agricultural production; (5) there ispersonal cultivation; and (6) there is sharing ofharvests. All these requisites must concur for atenancy relationship to exist. The absence of onedoes not make an occupant of a parcel of land, or acultivator thereof, or a planter thereon, a de juretenant. Unless a person establishes his status as dejure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenurenor covered by the land reform program of thegovernment under existing tenancy laws.

(Garcia, J., Valeriano B. Cano v. Spouses Vicenteand Susan Jumawan, G.R. No. 153860, February6, 2006)

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

In the case of Santos, et al. v. Aranzanso [116SCRA 1, 4 (1982)], this Court has held that thequestion of prescription of the action involves theascertainment of factual matters such as the datewhen the period to bring the action commencedto run. In Lim v. Chan [353 SCRA 55, 60 (2001)],this Court has again decreed that prescription is afactual matter when it held that withoutconducting trial on the merits, the trial courtcannot peremptorily find the existence of estoppel,laches, fraud or prescription of actions as thesematters require presentation of evidence anddetermination of facts.

(Chico-Nazario, J., Marlene Crisostomo and JoseCrisostomo v. Florito M. Garcia, Jr., G.R. No.164787, January 31, 2006)

Jurisdiction; Seizure and Forfeiture Proceedings.

The Supreme Court on numerous occasions,cautioned judges in their issuance of temporaryrestraining orders and writs of preliminaryinjunction against the Collector of Customs basedon the principle enunciated in Mison v. Natividad[213 SCRA 734], and has issued AdministrativeCircular No. 7-99 to carry out this policy. TheCourt again reminds all concerned that the rule isclear: the Collector of Customs has exclusivejurisdiction over seizure and forfeiture proceedingsand trial courts are precluded from assumingcognizance over such matters even throughpetitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus.

(Azcuna, J., Commissioner of Customs v. Court ofAppeals, G.R. Nos. 111202-05, January 31, 2006.

Execution of the Certification of Non-ForumShopping.

The necessity for a certification of non-forumshopping in filing petitions for certiorari is foundin Rule 65, Section 1, in relation to Rule 46, Section3 of the Rules of Court. These provisions require itto be executed by the corresponding petitioner orpetitioners. As no distinction is made as to whichparty must execute the certificate, this requirementis made to apply to both natural and juridicalentities. When the petitioner is a corporation, thecertification should be executed by a naturalperson. Furthermore, not just any person can becalled upon to execute the certification, although

CRIMINAL LAW

Illegal Use of Public Funds or Property (TechnicalMalversation); elements of:

The elements of the offense, also known astechnical malversation, are: (1) the offender is anaccountable public officer; (2) he applies publicfunds or property under his administration tosome public use; and (3) the public use for whichthe public funds or property were applied is differentfrom the purpose for which they were originallyappropriated by law or ordinance. It is clear thatfor technical malversation to exist, it is necessarythat public funds or properties had been divertedto any public use other than that provided for bylaw or ordinance. To constitute the crime, theremust be a diversion of the funds from the purposefor which they had been originally appropriatedby law or ordinance.

(Quisumbing, J., Amando Tetangco v. The Hon.Ombudsman and Mayor Jose L. Atienza, Jr., G.R.No. 156427, January 20, 2006)

REMEDIAL LAW

Question of Fact and Question of Law;Distinguished.

On the issue of whether the defense ofprescription is a question of fact or law, thedistinction is settled that there is a question of factwhen the doubt or difference arises as to the truthor falsehood of the alleged facts. On the otherhand, a question of law exists when there is adoubt or controversy as to what the law is on acertain state of facts. For a question to be one oflaw, the same must not involve an examination ofthe probative value of the evidence presented bythe litigants or any of them. The resolution of theissue must rest solely on what the law provideson the given set of circumstances. Once it is clearthat the issue invites a review of the evidencepresented, the question posed is one of fact.

The test of whether a question is one of lawor of fact is not the appellation given to suchquestion by the party raising the same; rather, itis whether the appellate court can determine theissue raised without reviewing or evaluating theevidence, in which case, it is a question of law;otherwise it is a question of fact.

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 DOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 13

such a person may have personal knowledge of thefacts to be attested to.

x x x

Thus, only individuals vested with authorityby a valid board resolution may sign the certificateof non-forum shopping in behalf of a corporation.In addition, the Court has required that proof ofsaid authority must be attached. Failure to providea certificate of non-forum shopping is sufficientground to dismiss the petition. Likewise, thepetition is subject to dismissal if a certification wassubmitted unaccompanied by proof of thesignatory’s authority

x x x

The required certification of non-forumshopping must be valid at the time of filing of thepetition. An invalid certificate cannot be remediedby the subsequent submission of a Secretary’sCertificate that vests authority only after thepetition had been filed.

(Azcuna, J., Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. FlightAttendants and Stewards Association of thePhilippines (FASAP), G.R. No. 143088, January 24,2006)

Court’s Interference with the Ombudsman’sdetermination of probable cause; when proper.

It is well-settled that the Court will notordinarily interfere with the Ombudsman’sdetermination of whether or not probable causeexists except when it commits grave abuse ofdiscretion. Grave abuse of discretion exists wherea power is exercised in an arbitrary, capricious,whimsical or despotic manner by reason of passionor personal hostility so patent and gross as toamount to evasion of positive duty or virtualrefusal to perform a duty enjoined by, or incontemplation of law. Thus, we held in Roxas v.Vasquez [358 SCRA 636, 646]:

… this Court’s consistent policy has beento maintain non-interference in thedetermination of the Ombudsman of theexistence of probable cause, provided thereis no grave abuse in the exercise of suchdiscretion. This observed policy is basednot only on respect for the investigatory

and prosecutory powers granted by theConstitution to the Office of theOmbudsman but upon practicality as well. Otherwise, the functions of the Court willbe seriously hampered by innumerablepetitions assailing the dismissal ofinvestigatory proceedings conducted by theOffice of the Ombudsman with regard tocomplaints filed before it, in much the sameway that the courts would be extremelyswamped with cases if they could becompelled to review the exercise ofdiscretion on the part of the fiscals orprosecuting attorneys each time they decideto file an information in court or dismiss acomplaint by a private complainant.

(Quisumbing, J., Amando Tetangco v. The Hon.Ombudsman and Mayor Jose L. Atienza, Jr., G.R.No. 156427, January 20, 2006)

In issuing warrants of arrest, judges do notconduct a de novo hearing to determine theexistence of probable cause.

It should be emphasized that before issuingwarrants of arrest, judges merely determinepersonally the probability, not the certainty, of guiltof an accused. Hence, judges do not conduct a denovo hearing to determine the existence of probablecause. They just personally review the initialdetermination of the prosecutor finding a probablecause to see if it is supported by substantial evidence.In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause,the Rules allow the judge to order the prosecutorto present additional evidence. In the present case,it is notable that the resolution issued by StateProsecutor Benny Nicdao thoroughly explains thebases for his findings that there is probable causeto charge all the accused with violation of Article315, par. 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code in relationto P.D. No. 1689.

(Azcuna, J., Chester de Joya v. Judge Placido C.Marquez, et al., G.R. No. 162416, January 31, 2006)

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

SUPREME COURT

RESOLUTION OF THE COURT EN BANC, dated 22November 2005, on A.M. No. 05-11-07-CTA

RE: REVISED RULES OF THE COURT OF TAXAPPEALS

Acting on the letter of the Chairman of theCommittee on Revision of the Rules of Courtsubmitting for this Court’s consideration and approvalthe Proposed Revised Rules of the Court of TaxAppeals, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same.

The Rule shall take effect on the fifteenth day ofDecember 2005 following its publication in anewspaper of general circulation in the Philippinesnot later than 25 November 2005.

22 November 2005.

DAVIDE, JR., CJ, PUNO, PANGANIBAN, QUISUMBING,YNARES-SANTIAGO, SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ,CARPIO, AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, CORONA, CARPIO-MORALES, CALLEJO, SR., AZCUNA, TINGA, GARCIA,JJ. concur, CHICO-NAZARIO,J., on leave.

REVISED RULES OF THECOURT OF TAX APPEALS

Pursuant to Section 8 of Republic Act No. 1125, asfurther amended by Republic Act No. 9282, the Courtof Tax Appeals (hereinafter referred to as the Court)hereby adopts and promulgates the following Rulesfor the conduct of its business:

RULE 1TITLE AND CONSTRUCTION

SECTION 1. Title of the Rules – These Rules shall beknown and cited as the Revised Rules of the Court ofTax Appeals (RRCTA). (RCTA, Rule 1, sec. 1a)

SEC. 2. Liberal construction – The Rules shall beliberally construed in order to promote their objectiveof securing a just, speedy, and inexpensivedetermination of every action and proceeding beforethe Court. (RCTA, Rule 1, sec. 2a)

SEC. 3. Applicability of the Rules of Court. – The Rulesof Court in the Philippines shall apply suppletorily tothese Rules. (n)

RULE 2THE COURT, ITS ORGANIZATION

AND FUNCTIONS

SECTION 1. Composition of the Court – The Court iscomposed of a presiding justice and five associatejustices appointed by the President of the Philippines. In appropriate cases, the Court shall sit en banc, or intwo Divisions of three justices each, including the

presiding justice, who shall be the Chairman of itsFirst Division. (n)

SEC. 2. Exercise of powers and functions – The Courtshall exercise its adjudicative powers, functions andduties en banc or in Divisions.

The Court shall sit en banc in the exercise of itsadministrative, ceremonial and non-adjudicativefunctions. (n)

SEC. 3. Court en banc; quorum and voting – Thepresiding justice or, in his absence, the most seniorjustice in attendance shall preside over the sessions ofthe Court en banc. The attendance of four justices ofthe Court shall constitute a quorum for its sessions enbanc. The presence at the deliberation and theaffirmative vote of four justices of the Court en bancshall be necessary for the rendition of a decision orresolution on any case or matter submitted for itsconsideration. Where the necessary majority votecannot be had, the petition shall be dismissed; inappealed cases, the judgment or order appealed fromshall stand affirmed; and on all incidental matters,the petition or motion shall be denied.

No decision of a Division of the Court may bereversed or modified except by the affirmative vote offour justices of the Court en banc acting on the case.

Interlocutory orders or resolutions shall be actedupon by majority vote of the justices presentconstituting a quorum. (Rules of Court, Rule 56, sec. 7a)

SEC. 4. The Court in Divisions; quorum and voting –The chairman of the Division or, in his absence, itssenior member shall preside over the sessions of theCourt in Divisions. The attendance of at least twojustices of the Court shall be necessary to constitute aquorum for its sessions in Divisions. The presence atthe deliberation and the affirmative vote of at leasttwo justices shall be required for the pronouncementof a judgment or final resolution of the Court inDivisions. (n)

SEC. 5. Hearings – The Court en banc or in Divisionsshall conduct hearings on such days and at such timesand at such places as it may fix, with notice to theparties concerned. However, the Friday of each weekshall be devoted to hearing motions, unless, for specialreasons, the Court en banc or in Divisions shall, motuproprio or upon motion of a party, fix another day forthe hearing of any motion. (RCTA, Rule 3, sec. 2a)

SEC. 6. Disqualification of justices

(a) Mandatory – No justice or other officer oremployee of the Court shall intervene, directly

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 15

A.M. NO. 05-11-07-SC (continued)

or indirectly, in the management or control ofany private enterprise which in any way maybe affected by the functions of the Court. Justices of the Court shall be disqualified fromsitting in any case on the same groundsprovided under the first paragraph, Section 1,Rule 137 of the Rules of Court. No person whohas once served in the Court either as presidingjustice or as associate justice shall be qualifiedto practice as counsel before the Court for aperiod of one year from his retirement orresignation as such. (Rules of Court, Rule 137, sec.1, par. 1a)

(b) Disclosure and consent of parties and lawyers – Ajustice disqualified under the first paragraph,Section 1 of Rule 137 of the Rules of Court, may,instead of withdrawing from a case orproceeding, disclose on the records the basis ofhis disqualification. If, based on such disclosure,the parties and lawyers, independently of thejustice’s participation, all agree in writing thatthe reason for the inhibition is immaterial orunsubstantial, the justice may participate in theaction or proceeding. The agreement, signed byall parties and lawyers, shall be incorporatedin the record of the action or proceeding. (Rulesof Court, Rule 137, sec. 1, par. 1a)

(c) Voluntary – A justice of the Court may, in theexercise of his sound discretion, disqualifyhimself from sitting in a case or proceeding, forjust or valid reasons other than those mentionedabove. (Rules of Court, Rule 137, sec. 1, par. 2a)

A justice of the Court who inhibits himself fromsitting in a case or proceeding shall immediately notifyin writing the presiding justice and the members ofhis Division. (n)

SEC. 7. Motion to inhibit a justice – When a motionfor inhibition of a justice is filed, the Court, en banc orin Division, shall act upon the motion. However, ifthe motion for inhibition is based on a discretionaryground, the Court shall refer the motion to the justiceinvolved for his appropriate action. (n)

RULE 3PLACE OF OFFICE, SEAL AND OFFICE HOURS

SECTION 1. Place of office – The Court shall have itsprincipal office in Metro Manila. (RCTA, Rule 3, sec. 1a)

SEC. 2. Court seal – The seal of the Court shall becircular in form and shall be of the usual size. It shallbear, in its center, a design of the coat of arms of theRepublic of the Philippines with the words “BATASAT BAYAN” immediately underneath the design. On

the upper margin running from left to right are thewords “COURT OF TAX APPEALS,” and on its lowermargin the words “REPUBLIKA NG PILIPINAS.”(RCTA, Rule 2, sec. 1a)

SEC. 3. Seal, where affixed – The seal of the Court shallbe affixed to all summons, subpoenas, notices, decisions,orders or resolutions, certified copies of official recordsand such other papers that the Court may require tobe sealed. (n)

SEC. 4. Office hours – The Office of the Clerk of Courtshall be open for the transaction of business andreceiving petitions, complaints, pleadings, motions,and other papers, during the hours from eight o’clockin the morning to four-thirty o’clock in the afternoonon Mondays to Fridays, except on such days as maybe designated by law or executive proclamation asnon-working official holidays. (RCTA, Rule 3, sec. 3a)

RULE 4JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

SECTION 1. Jurisdiction of the Court – The Court shallexercise exclusive original jurisdiction over orappellate jurisdiction to review by appeal the casesspecified in Republic Act No. 1125, Section 7, asamended by Republic Act No. 9282, Section 7. (n)

SEC. 2. Cases within the jurisdiction of the Court enbanc – The Court en banc shall exercise exclusiveappellate jurisdiction to review by appeal thefollowing:

(a) Decisions or resolutions on motions forreconsideration or new trial of the Court inDivisions in the exercise of its exclusive appellatejurisdiction over:

(1) Cases arising from administrative agencies– Bureau of Internal Revenue, Bureau ofCustoms, Department of Finance,Department of Trade and Industry,Department of Agriculture;

(2) Local tax cases decided by the Regional TrialCourts in the exercise of their originaljurisdiction; and

(3) Tax collection cases decided by the RegionalTrial Courts in the exercise of their originaljurisdiction involving final and executoryassessments for taxes, fees, charges andpenalties, where the principal amount oftaxes and penalties claimed is less than onemillion pesos;

(b) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RegionalTrial Courts in local tax cases decided or resolved

(Continued on NEXT page)


by them in the exercise of their appellatejurisdiction;

(c) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RegionalTrial Courts in tax collection cases decided orresolved by them in the exercise of theirappellate jurisdiction;

(d) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions forreconsideration or new trial of the Court inDivision in the exercise of its exclusive originaljurisdiction over tax collection cases;

(e) Decisions of the Central Board of AssessmentAppeals (CBAA) in the exercise of its appellatejurisdiction over cases involving the assessmentand taxation of real property originally decidedby the provincial or city board of assessmentappeals;

(f) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions forreconsideration or new trial of the Court inDivision in the exercise of its exclusive originaljurisdiction over cases involving criminaloffenses arising from violations of the NationalInternal Revenue Code or the Tariff and CustomsCode and other laws administered by theBureau of Internal Revenue or Bureau ofCustoms;

(g) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions forreconsideration or new trial of the Court inDivision in the exercise of its exclusive appellatejurisdiction over criminal offenses mentionedin the preceding subparagraph; and

(h) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the Regionaltrial Courts in the exercise of their appellatejurisdiction over criminal offenses mentionedin subparagraph (f). (n)

SEC. 3. Cases within the jurisdiction of the Court inDivisions – The Court in Divisions shall exercise:

(a) Exclusive original or appellate jurisdiction toreview by appeal the following:

(1) Decisions of the Commissioner of InternalRevenue in cases involving disputedassessments, refunds of internal revenuetaxes, fees or other charges, penalties inrelation thereto, or other matters arisingunder the National Internal Revenue Codeor other laws administered by the Bureauof Internal Revenue;

(2) Inaction by the Commissioner of InternalRevenue in cases involving disputedassessments, refunds of internal revenue

taxes, fees or other charges, penalties inrelation thereto, or other matters arisingunder the National Internal Revenue Codeor other laws administered by the Bureauof Internal Revenue, where the NationalInternal Revenue Code or other applicablelaw provides a specific period for action: Provided, that in case of disputedassessments, the inaction of theCommissioner of Internal Revenue withinthe one hundred eighty day-period underSection 228 of the National Internal revenueCode shall be deemed a denial for purposesof allowing the taxpayer to appeal his caseto the Court and does not necessarilyconstitute a formal decision of theCommissioner of Internal Revenue on the taxcase; Provided, further, that should the taxpayeropt to await the final decision of theCommissioner of Internal Revenue on thedisputed assessments beyond the onehundred eighty day-periodabovementioned, the taxpayer may appealsuch final decision to the Court under Section3(a), Rule 8 of these Rules; and Provided, stillfurther, that in the case of claims for refund oftaxes erroneously or illegally collected, thetaxpayer must file a petition for review withthe Court prior to the expiration of the two-year period under Section 229 of theNational Internal Revenue Code;

(3) Decisions, resolutions or orders of theRegional Trial Courts in local tax casesdecided or resolved by them in the exerciseof their original jurisdiction;

(4) Decisions of the Commissioner of Customsin cases involving liability for customsduties, fees or other money charges, seizure,detention or release of property affected,fines, forfeitures of other penalties in relationthereto, or other matters arising under theCustoms Law or other laws administeredby the Bureau of Customs;

(5) Decisions of the Secretary of Finance oncustoms cases elevated to himautomatically for review from decisions ofthe Commissioner of Customs adverse tothe Government under Section 2315 of theTariff and Customs Code; and

(6) Decisions of the Secretary of Trade andIndustry, in the case of nonagriculturalproduct, commodity or article, and theSecretary of Agriculture, in the case of



agricultural product, commodity or article,involving dumping and countervailingduties under Section 301 and 302,respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code,and safeguard measures under Republic ActNo. 8800, where either party may appealthe decision to impose or not to impose saidduties;

(b) Exclusive jurisdiction over cases involvingcriminal offenses, to wit:

(1) Original jurisdiction over all criminaloffenses arising from violations of theNational internal Revenue Code or Tariff andCustoms Code and other laws administeredby the Bureau of Internal Revenue of theBureau of Customs, where the principalamount of taxes and fees, exclusive ofcharges and penalties, claimed is one millionpesos or more; and

(2) Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from thejudgments, resolutions or orders of theRegional Trial Courts in their originaljurisdiction in criminal offenses arising fromviolations of the National Internal RevenueCode or Tariff and Customs Code and otherlaws administered by the Bureau of InternalRevenue or Bureau of Customs, where theprincipal amount of taxes and fees,exclusive of charges and penalties, claimedis less than one million pesos or where thereis no specified amount claimed;

(c) Exclusive jurisdiction over tax collection cases,to wit:

(1) Original jurisdiction in tax collection casesinvolving final and executory assessmentsfor taxes, fees, charges and penalties, wherethe principal amount of taxes and fees,exclusive of charges and penalties, claimedis one million pesos or more; and

(2) Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from thejudgments, resolutions or orders of theRegional Trial Courts in tax collection casesoriginally decided by them within theirrespective territorial jurisdiction. (n)

RULE 5FORM AND STYLE OF PAPERS

SECTION 1. Style – All papers filed with the Courtshall be either printed or typewritten, and fastenedon the upper left hand corner. All such papers shallhave a caption, date and signature, and copies, asspecified below. (RCTA, Rule 4, sec. 1a)

SEC. 2. Size and specifications – Printed or typewrittenpapers shall be typed doubled-spaced on good quality,unglazed and plain white paper eight and a half incheswide by thirteen inches long (legal-size), or eight anda quarter inches wide by eleven and three-fourthsinches long (A4-size), at least substance twenty andprinted on one side only without covers. There shallbe a margin at the left-hand side of each page of notless than one and one-half inches in width and at thetop, bottom and right-hand side of each page of notless than one inch in width. (RCTA, Rule 4, sec. 3a)

SEC. 3. Citations – Citations shall be indented at leastone inch from the inside margin and typed single-spaced. (RCTA, Rule 4, sec. 4a)

SEC. 4. Number of copies – The parties shall file elevensigned copies of every paper for cases before the Courten banc and six signed copies for cases before a Divisionof the Court in addition to the signed original copy,except as otherwise directed by the Court. Papers tobe filed in more than one case shall include oneadditional copy for each additional case. (RCTA, Rule4, sec. 5a)

SEC. 5. Clear and legible copies – All copies shall beclear and legible. (RCTA, Rule 4, sec. 6a)

RULE 6PLEADINGS FILED WITH THE COURT

SECTION 1. Complaint; contents. – The complaintshall contain allegations showing jurisdiction of theCourt and a concise statement of the complete facts ofthe plaintiff’s cause or causes of action. The complaintshall be verified and must contain a certificationagainst forum shopping as provided in Sections 4 and5, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court. (n)

SEC. 2. Petition for review; contents – The petition forreview shall contain allegations showing thejurisdiction of the Court, a concise statement of thecomplete facts and a summary statement of the issuesinvolved in the case, as well as the reasons relied uponfor the review of the challenged decision. The petitionshall be verified and must contain a certificationagainst forum shopping as provided in Section 3, Rule46 of the Rules of Court. A clearly legible duplicateoriginal or certified true copy of the decision appealedfrom shall be attached to the petition. (RCTA, Rule 5,sec. 2a)

SEC. 3. Payment of docket fees – The Clerk of Courtshall not receive a petition for review for filing unlessthe petitioner submits proof of payment of the docketfees. Upon receipt of the petition or the complaint, itwill be docketed and assigned a number, which shall




be placed by the parties on all papers thereafter filedin the proceeding. The Clerk of Court will then issuethe necessary summons to the respondent ordefendant. (RCTA, Rule 5, sec. 3a)

SEC. 4. Bill of particulars

(a) Requirement for bill of particulars. – The Court, on itsown initiative or upon motion of either partyfiled before responding to a pleading or, if noresponsive pleading is permitted by these Rules,within ten days after service of the pleadingupon him, may order a party to submit a detailedstatement of the nature of the claim or defenseor of any matter stated in any pleading, whichis not averred with sufficient definiteness orparticularity. Such order or motion shall pointout the defects complained of and the detailsdesired. After service of the bill of particularsor of a more definite pleading, the moving oradverse party may file his responsive pleadingwithin ten days. (RCTA, Rule 8, sec. 1a)

(b) Failure to comply. – If the order issued by the Courtpursuant to paragraph (a) above is not compliedwith within ten days after notice of the order, orwithin such other time as the Court may fix, theCourt may strike out the pleading to which themotion was directed or may make such otherorder as it deems just. The Court may uponmotion set aside the order, or modify it in theinterest of justice. (RCTA, Rule 8, sec. 2a)

(c) Motion for bill of particulars when not allowed. – Nomotion for bill of particulars shall be allowed incases falling under Sections 3(a)(3) and 3(c)(2) ofRule 4 of these Rules. (n)

SEC. 5. Answer

(a) Time for filing and contents. – Within fifteen daysafter service of summons, the respondent or thedefendant shall file an answer to the petition orcomplaint which shall include all defenses inlaw and the specific provisions of law andapplicable jurisprudence and grounds fordismissal of the petition or complaint, or whichshall prevent and bar recovery. (Rule of Procedurefor Civil Forfeiture, Asset Preservation and Freeze Order,Sec. 9, par. 2a; and RCTA, Rule 7, sec. 1a)

(b) Transmittal of records. – The respondentCommissioner of Internal Revenue,Commissioner of Customs, the Secretary ofFinance, the Secretary of Agriculture, or theSecretary of Trade and Industry, within ten daysafter his answer, the chairman of the CentralBoard of Assessment Appeals and the presiding

judges of the Regional Trial Courts, within tendays from receipt of notice, shall certify andforward to the Court all the records of the casein their possession, with the pages dulynumbered, and, if the records are in separatefolders, then the folders will also be numbered. If there are no records, such fact shall bemanifested to the Court within the same periodof ten days. The Court may, on motion, and forgood cause shown, grant an extension of timewithin which to submit the aforesaid recordsof the case. Failure to transmit the recordswithin the time prescribed herein or within thetime allowed by the Court may constituteindirect contempt of court. (RCTA, Rule 7, sec.2a)

SEC. 6. Entry of appearance – An attorney may enterhis appearance by signing the initial pleading. Anattorney may later enter his appearance only by filingan entry of appearance with the written conformityof his client.

The initial pleading or entry of appearance shallshow:

(1) The attorney’s specific address which mustnot be a Post Office Box number;

(2) His Roll of Attorney’s Number;

(3) The date and number of his currentmembership due in the Integrated Bar of thePhilippines (IBP) per Official Receipt, orLifetime Member Number;

(4) Current Professional Tax Receipt (PTR)number together with date and place ofissuance; and

(5) MCLE certificate number and date of issue,unless exempt.

The attorney or party entering his appearanceshall serve a copy of the entry of appearance upon theopposing party. An attorney who appears in opencourt without previously having filed his writtenappearance must give his business address to the Clerkof Court and file his written appearance within forty-eight hours from such open court appearance. Anattorney or party who has filed his appearance andwho changes his address of record shall notify theClerk of Court and the adverse party of such changeof address, and a separate notice of such change ofaddress shall be filed for each additional case. (RCTA,Rule 10, sec. 1a)



RULE 7PROCEDURE IN THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS

SECTION 1. Applicability of the Rules of the Court ofAppeals, exception – The procedure in the Court enbanc or in Divisions in original and in appealed casesshall be the same as those in petitions for review andappeals before the Court of Appeals pursuant to theapplicable provisions of Rules 42, 43, 44 and 46 of theRules of Court, except as otherwise provided for inthese Rules. (n)

RULE 8PROCEDURE IN CIVIL CASES

SECTION 1. Review of cases in the Court en banc – Incases falling under the exclusive appellate jurisdictionof the Court en banc, the petition for review of adecision or resolution of the Court in Division mustbe preceded by the filing of a timely motion forreconsideration or new trial with the Division. (n)

SEC. 2. Review of cases in the Court in Division – Inappealed cases falling under the jurisdiction of theCourt in Division in Sections 3(a)(1) to 3(a)(6) and3(c)(2) of Rule 4, the party filing the case shall be calledthe Petitioner and the party against whom the case isfiled shall be called the Respondent. The pleading shallbe entitled Petition for Review.

In tax collection cases originally filed with theCourt under Section 3(c)(1) of Rule 4, the party filingthe case shall be called the Plaintiff and the partyagainst whom the case is filed shall be called theDefendant. The pleading shall be entitled Complaint. In appealed tax collection cases, the original captionsshall be retained. The party filing the appeal shall becalled the Appellant and the party against whom theappeal is filed shall be called the Appellee. (RCTA,Rule 5, Sec. 1a)

SEC. 3. Who may appeal; period to file petition

(a) A party adversely affected by a decision, rulingor the inaction of the Commissioner of InternalRevenue on disputed assessments or claims forrefund of internal revenue taxes, or by adecision or ruling of the Commissioner ofCustoms, the Secretary of Finance, the Secretaryof Trade and Industry, the Secretary ofAgriculture, or a Regional Trial Court in theexercise of its original jurisdiction may appealto the Court by petition for review filed withinthirty days after receipt of a copy of suchdecision or ruling, or expiration of the periodfixed by law for the Commissioner of InternalRevenue to act on the disputed assessments. Incase of inaction of the Commissioner of Internal

revenue on claims for refund of internal revenuetaxes erroneously or illegally collected, thetaxpayer must file a petition for review withinthe two-year period prescribed by law frompayment or collection of the taxes. (n)

(b) A party adversely affected by a decision orresolution of a Division of the Court on a motionfor reconsideration or new trial may appeal tothe Court by filing before it a petition for reviewwithin fifteen days from receipt of a copy of thequestioned decision or resolution. Upon propermotion and the payment of the full amount ofthe docket and other lawful fees and deposit forcosts before the expiration of the reglementaryperiod herein fixed, the Court may grant anadditional period not exceeding fifteen days fromthe expiration of the original period withinwhich to file the petition for review. (Rules ofCourt, Rule 42, sec. 1a)

(c) A party adversely affected by a decision orruling of the Central Board of AssessmentAppeals and the Regional Trial Court in theexercise of their appellate jurisdiction mayappeal to the Court by filing before it a petitionfor review within thirty days from receipt of acopy of the questioned decision or ruling. (n)

SEC. 4. Where to appeal; mode of appeal

(a) An appeal from a decision or ruling or theinaction of the Commissioner of InternalRevenue on disputed assessments or claim forrefund of internal revenue taxes erroneously orillegally collected, the decision or ruling of theCommissioner of Customs, the Secretary ofFinance, the Secretary of Trade & Industry, theSecretary of Agriculture, and the Regional TrialCourt in the exercise of their originaljurisdiction, shall be taken to the Court by filingbefore it a petition for review as provided inRule 42 of the Rules of Court. The Court inDivision shall act on the appeal. (n)

(b) An appeal from a decision or resolution of theCourt in Division on a motion forreconsideration or new trial shall be taken tothe Court by petition for review as provided inRule 43 of the Rules of Court. The Court en bancshall act on the appeal. (n)

(c) An appeal from a decision or ruling of theCentral Board of Assessment Appeals or theRegional Trial Court in the exercise of theirappellate jurisdiction shall be taken to the Courtby filing before it a petition for review as




provided in Rule 43 of the Rules of Court. TheCourt en banc shall act on the appeal. (n)

RULE 9PROCEDURE IN CRIMINAL CASES

SECTION 1. Review of cases in the Court – The reviewof criminal cases in the Court en banc or in Divisionshall be governed by the applicable provisions of Rule124 of the Rules of Court. (n)

SEC. 2. Institution of criminal actions – All criminalactions before the Court in Division in the exercise ofits original jurisdiction shall be instituted by the filingof an information in the name of the People of thePhilippines. In criminal actions involving violationsof the National Internal Revenue Code and other lawsenforced by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, theCommissioner of Internal Revenue must approve theirfiling. In criminal actions involving violations of thetariff and Customs Code and other laws enforced bythe Bureau of Customs, the Commissioner of Customsmust approve their filing. (Rules of Court, Rule 110, sec.2a; n)

The institution of the criminal action shallinterrupt the running of the period of prescription. (Rules of Court, Rule 110, sec. 1, par. 2a)

SEC. 3. Prosecution of criminal actions – All criminalactions shall be conducted and prosecuted under thedirection and control of the public prosecutor. Incriminal actions involving violation of the NationalInternal Revenue Code or other laws enforced by theBureau of Internal Revenue, and violations of theTariff and Customs Code or other laws enforced bythe Bureau of Customs, the prosecution may beconducted by their respective duly deputized legalofficers. (Rules of Court, Rule 110, sec. 5, par. 6a)

SEC. 4. Warrant of arrest – Within ten days from thefiling of the information, the Division of the Court towhich the case was raffled shall evaluate theresolution of the public prosecutor and its supportingevidence. The Division may immediately dismiss thecase if it finds that the evidence on record clearly failsto establish probable cause. If the Division findsprobable cause, it shall issue a warrant of arrest signedby the Chairman of the Division. In case of doubt onthe existence of probable cause, the Division mayorder the prosecutor to present additional evidence,ex parte, within five days from notice. (Rules of Court,Rule 112, sec. 6a)

SEC. 5. When search warrant may issue – The Divisionmay issue a search warrant signed by its Chairmanfollowing the requirements of Rule 126 of the Rules ofCourt. (n)

SEC. 6. Bail, how amount fixed; approval – The amountof bail to be posted in a case filed with the Court shallbe fixed and approved by the Division to which thecase is raffled: Provided, however, that where the accusedis arrested, detained or otherwise placed in custodyoutside the Metropolitan Manila area, any judge ofthe Regional Trial Court of the place where the arrestis made may accept and approve the bail for his releaseand appearance before the Division to which his caseis assigned. The judge who accepted the bail andreleased the accused shall inform the Division thatissued the order of arrest of his action and forward toit the papers relative to the case. (Rules of Court, Rule114, sec. 17a)

SEC. 7. Conditions of the bail – The conditions of thebail are that the accused shall appear and answer thecomplaint or information in the Division of the Courtto which it is raffled or transferred for trial and submithimself to its orders and processes. If convicted, andthe case is appealed to the Court en banc or to theSupreme Court, he will surrender himself for theexecution of such judgment as the Court en banc or theSupreme Court may render; or that, in the event thecase is to be tried anew or remained for a new trial, heshall appear before the Division to which it may beremanded and submit himself to its orders andprocesses. Rules of Court, Rule 114, sec. 2a)

SEC. 8. Release order – The Clerk of Court shall issuethe corresponding release order. (Rules of Court, Rule114, sec. 3a)

SEC. 9. Appeal; period to appeal

(a) An appeal to the Court in criminal cases decidedby a Regional Trial Court in the exercise of itsoriginal jurisdiction shall be taken by filing anotice of appeal pursuant to Sections 3(a) and 6,Rule 122 of the Rules of Court within fifteen daysfrom receipt of a copy of the decision or finalorder with the court which rendered the finaljudgment or order appealed from and byserving a copy upon the adverse party. TheCourt in Division shall act on the appeal.

(b) An appeal to the Court en banc in criminal casesdecided by the Court in Division shall be takenby filing a petition for review as provided inRule 43 of the Rules of Court within fifteen daysfrom receipt of a copy of the decision orresolution appealed from. The Court may, forgood cause, extend the time for filing of thepetition for review for an additional period notexceeding fifteen days.

(c) An appeal to the Court in criminal cases decided



by the Regional Trial Courts in the exercise oftheir appellate jurisdiction shall be taken byfiling a petition for review as provided in Rule43 of the Rules of Court within fifteen days fromreceipt of a copy of the decision or final orderappealed from. The Court en banc shall act onthe appeal. (n)

SEC. 10. Solicitor General as counsel for the People andgovernment officials sued in their official capacity – TheSolicitor General shall represent the People of thePhilippines and government officials sued in theirofficial capacity in all cases brought to the Court inthe exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. He maydeputize the legal officers of the Bureau of InternalRevenue in cases brought under the National InternalRevenue Code or other laws enforced by the Bureau ofInternal Revenue, or the legal officers of the Bureau ofCustoms in cases brought under the Tariff and CustomsCode of the Philippines or other laws enforced by theBureau of Customs, to appear in behalf of the officialsof said agencies sued in their official capacity: Provided,however, such duly deputized legal officers shall remainat all times under the direct control and supervisionof the Solicitor General. (n)

SEC. 11. Inclusion of civil action in criminal action – Incases within the jurisdiction of the Court, the criminalaction and the corresponding civil action for therecovery of civil liability for taxes and penalties shallbe deemed jointly instituted in the same proceeding. The filing of the criminal action shall necessarily carrywith it the filing of the civil action. No right to reservethe filing of such civil action separately from thecriminal action shall be allowed or recognized. (Rulesof Court, Rule 111, sec. 1[a], par. 1a)

RULE 10SUSPENSION OF COLLECTION OF TAX

SECTION 1. No suspension of collection of tax, exceptas herein prescribed – No appeal taken to the Courtshall suspend the payment, levy, distraint, or sale ofany property of the taxpayer for the satisfaction of histax liability as provided under existing laws, exceptas hereinafter prescribed. (n)

SEC. 2. Who may file – Where the collection of theamount of the taxpayer’s liability, sought by means ofa demand for payment, by levy, distraint or sale ofany property of the taxpayer, or by whatever means,as provided under existing laws, may jeopardized theinterest of the Government or the taxpayer, aninterested party may file a motion for the suspensionof the collection of the tax liability. (RCTA, Rule 12, sec.1a)

SEC. 3. When to file – The motion for the suspensionof the collection of the tax may be filed together withthe petition for review or with the answer, or in aseparate motion filed by the interested party at anystage of the proceedings. (RCTA, Rule 12, sec. 2)

SEC. 4. Contents and attachments of the motion – Themotion for the suspension of the collection of the taxshall be verified and shall state clearly and distinctlythe facts and the grounds relied upon in support ofthe motion. Affidavits and other documentaryevidence in support thereof shall be attached thereto,which, if uncontroverted, would be admissible inevidence as proof of the facts alleged in the motion. (RCTA, Rule 12, sec. 3a)

SEC. 5. Opposition – Unless a shorter period is fixedby the Court because of the urgency of the motion, theadverse party shall, within five days after receipt of acopy of the motion, file an opposition thereto, if any,which shall state clearly and distinctly the facts andthe grounds relied upon in support of the opposition. (RCTA, Rule 12, sec. 4)

SEC. 6. Hearing of the motion – The movant shall, uponreceipt of the opposition, set the motion for hearing atthe next available motion day, and the Court shallgive preference to the motion over all other cases,except criminal cases. At the hearing, both partiesshall submit their respective evidence. If warranted,the Court may grant the motion if the movant shalldeposit with the Court an amount in cash equal to thevalue of the property or goods under dispute or filingwith the Court of an acceptable surety bond in anamount not more than double the disputed amountor value. However, for the sake of expediency, theCourt, motu proprio or upon motion of the parties, mayconsolidate the hearing of the motion for thesuspension of the collection of the tax with the hearingon the merits of the case. (RCTA, Rule 12, sec. 5a)

SEC. 7. Corporate surety bonds – In the selection andqualification of surety companies, the parties and theCourt shall be guided by Supreme Court Circular A.M.No. 04-7-02-SC, dated July 20, 2004. (n)

RULE 11PRE-TRIAL

SECTION 1. Applicability – The rule on pre-trialunder Rules 18 and 118 of the Rules of Court, asamplified in A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC dated July 13, 2004(Re: Rule on Guidelines to be Observed by Trial CourtJudges and Clerk of Court in the Conduct of Pre-Trialand Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures), shallapply to all cases falling within the originaljurisdiction of the Court, except that the parties may




not be allowed to compromise the criminal liabilityor submit the case to mediation, arbitration or othermode of alternative dispute resolution. (n)

SEC. 2. Mandatory pre-trial – In civil cases, the Clerkof Court shall set the case for pre-trial on the firstavailable date immediately following the tenth dayafter the filing of the answer.

In criminal cases, the Clerk of Court shall set thecase for pre-trial not later than ten days afterarraignment, if the accused is detained, nor later thanthirty days if the accused is on bail. (RCTA, Rule 11, sec.1a)

SEC. 3. Setting for an earlier date – Where, due to theurgency of the case, either party desires that the pre-trial be set on an earlier date, such party shall so statein his pleading, in which event the clerk of Court shallset the pre-trial on the first available date immediatelyafter the filing of the answer. (RCTA, Rule 11, sec. 2a)

SEC. 4. Duty of the Court – The Court shall conferwith the parties in pre-trial conferences with a viewto narrowing the issues, making admissions of orstipulating on facts, simplifying the presentation ofevidence, or otherwise assisting in the preparation fortrial or possible disposition of the case in whole or inpart without trial. (n)

SEC. 5. Procedure in civil cases – In civil cases, theparties shall submit, at least three days before the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial briefs containing thefollowing:

(a) A statement of their willingness to compromisethe civil liability indicating its desired terms,except that the case shall not be subject to referralto mediation, arbitration or other mode ofalternative dispute resolution;

(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposedstipulation of facts;

(c) The issues to be tried or resolved;

(d) The documents or exhibits to be presented,stating their purpose. No evidence shall beallowed to be presented and offered during thetrial in support of a party’s evidence-in-chiefother than those that had been pre-marked andidentified, unless allowed by the Court toprevent manifest injustice;

(e) A manifestation of their having availedthemselves of discovery procedures or referralto commissioners; and

(f) The numbers and names of the witnesses, thesubstance of their testimonies and the

approximate number of hours that will berequired by the parties for the presentation oftheir respective witnesses.

The consequence on the party at fault shall be thesame as the effect of failure to appear.

Failure to file the pre-trial brief or to comply withits required contents shall have the same effect asfailure to appear at the pre-trial. (Rules of Court, Rule18, sec. 6a)

SEC. 6. Procedure in criminal cases

(a) Before the preliminary conference. – Before the pre-trial conference, the Court may issue an orderreferring the case to the Division Clerk of Courtfor a preliminary conference of the parties atleast three days prior to the pre-trial:

(1) To mark the documents or exhibits to bepresented by the parties and copies to beattached to the records after comparison;

(2) To consider other matters as may aid in itsdisposition; and

(3) To inform the parties that no evidence shallbe allowed to be presented and offeredduring the trial other than those identifiedand marked during the pre-trial unlessallowed by the Court to prevent manifestinjustice. (Rule on Guidelines to be Observed byTrial Court Judges and Clerks of Court in theConduct of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures, Sec. 1B[2]a)

(b) During the preliminary conference. – The DivisionClerk of Court shall:

(1) Mark the documents to be presented asexhibits and copies attached to the recordsafter comparison;

(2) Ascertain from the parties the undisputedfacts and admission on the genuineness anddue execution of documents marked asexhibits; and

(3) Consider such other matters as may aid inthe prompt disposition of the case.

The proceedings during the preliminaryconference shall be recorded in the minutes ofpreliminary conference to be signed by both partiesand counsel. The Division Clerk of Court shall attachthe minutes of preliminary conference and the exhibitsto the case record before the pre-trial. (Rule on Guidelinesto be Observed by Trial Court Judges and Clerks of Court in theConduct of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures,Sec. IB[3]a)



(c) During the pre-trial conference. – The Court at thepre-trial conference shall consider the following:

(1) Stipulation of facts and issues raised;

(2) Marking for identification of evidence of theparties;

(3) Waiver of objections to admissibility ofevidence;

(4) Modification of order of trial; and

(5) Such matters as will promote a fair andexpeditious trial of the criminal and civilaspects of the case.

(Rules of Court, Rule 118, sec. 1a).

All agreements or admissions made or enteredduring the pre-trial conference shall be in writing andsigned by the accused and counsel; otherwise, theycannot be used in evidence against the accused. Theagreements shall be subject to the approval of theCourt.

(Rule on Guidelines to be Observed by Trial Court Judgesand Clerks of Court in the Conduct of Pre-trial and Use ofDeposition –Discovery Measures, Sec. IB[8]a; and Rules ofCourt, Rule 118, sec. 2a)

The Court may impose appropriate sanctions orpenalties on the accused or counsel or the prosecutorwho does not appear at the pre-trial conference anddoes not offer an acceptable excuse for his absence andlack of cooperation. (Rules of Court, Rule 118, sec. 3a)

(d) Pre-trial order. – After the pre-trial conference, theCourt shall issue a pre-trial order reciting theactions taken, the facts stipulated, theadmissions made, evidence marked, and suchother matters covered during the pre-trialconference. The order shall bind the parties,limit the trial to matters not disposed of andcontrol the course of the action during the trial,unless modified by the Court to preventmanifest injustice. (Rules of Court, Rule 118, sec.4a)

RULE 12TRIAL

SECTION 1. Procedure – The Court shall conduct thetrial in accordance with Rule 30 of the Rules of Courtin civil cases and Rule 119 thereof in criminal cases. (n)

SEC. 2. Power of the Court to receive evidence – TheCourt may receive evidence in the following cases:

(a) In all cases falling within the original

jurisdiction of the Court in Division pursuantto Section 3, Rule 4 of these Rules; and

(b) In appeals in both civil and criminal cases wherethe Court grants a new trial pursuant to Section2, Rule 53 and Section 12, Rule 124 of the Rulesof Court. (n)

SEC. 3. Taking of evidence by a justice – The Courtmay, motu proprio or upon proper motion, direct that acase, or any issue therein, be assigned to one of itsmembers for the taking of evidence, when thedetermination of a question of fact arises at any stageof the proceedings, or when the taking of an accountis necessary, or when the determination of an issue offact requires the examination of a long account. Thehearing before such justice shall proceed in all respectsas though the same had been made before the Court.

Upon the completion of such hearing, the justiceconcerned shall promptly submit to the Court awritten report thereon, stating therein his findingsand conclusions. Thereafter, the Court shall renderits decision on the case, adopting, modifying, orrejecting the report in whole or in part, or, the Courtmay, in its discretion, recommit it to the justice withinstructions, or receive further evidence. (n)

SEC. 4. Taking of evidence by Court official – In defaultor ex parte hearings, or in any case where the partiesagree in writing, the Court may delegate the receptionof evidence to the Clerk of Court, the Division Clerksof Court, their assistants who are members of thePhilippine bar, or any Court attorney. The receptionof documentary evidence by a Court official shall befor the sole purpose of marking, comparison with theoriginal, and identification by witnesses of suchdocumentary evidence. The Court official shall haveno power to rule on objections to any question or tothe admission of exhibits, which objections shall beresolved by the Court upon submission of his reportand the transcripts within ten days from terminationof the hearing. (Rules of Court, Rule 30, sec. 9a)

SEC. 5. Presentation of voluminous documents or longaccounts – In the interest of speedy administration ofjustice, the following rules shall govern thepresentation of voluminous documents or longaccounts, such as receipts, invoices and vouchers, asevidence to establish certain facts:

(a) Summary and CPA certification – The party whodesires to introduce in evidence suchvoluminous documents or long accounts must,upon motion and approval by the Court, referthe voluminous documents to an independent



PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS

Certified Public Accountant (CPA) for thepurpose of presenting:

(1) A summary containing, among othermatters, a chronological listing of thenumbers, dates and amounts covered by theinvoices or receipts and the amount(s) oftaxes paid; and

(2) A certification of an independent CPAattesting to the correctness of the contentsof the summary after making anexamination, evaluation and audit ofvoluminous receipts, invoices or longaccounts.

The name of the Certified Public Accountant orpartner of a professional partnership of certified publicaccountants in charge must be stated in the motion. The Court shall issue a commission authorizing himto conduct an audit and, thereafter, testify relative tosuch summary and certification.

(b) Pre-marking and availability of originals – Thereceipts, invoices, vouchers or other documentscovering the said accounts or payment to beintroduced in evidence must be pre-marked bythe party concerned and submitted to the Courtin order to be made accessible to the adverseparty who desires to check and verify thecorrectness of the summary and CPAcertification. The original copies of thevoluminous receipts, invoices or accounts mustbe ready for verification and comparison in casedoubt on its authenticity is raised during thehearing or resolution of the formal offer ofevidence. (n)

RULE 13TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER

SECTION 1. Appointment of independent CertifiedPublic Accountant (CPA) – A party desiring to presentvoluminous documents in evidence before the Courtmay secure the services of an independent certifiedPublic Accountant (CPA) at its own expense. The Courtshall commission the latter as an officer of the Courtsolely for the purpose of performing such auditfunctions as the Court may direct. (n)

SEC. 2. Duties of independent CPA – The independentCPA shall perform audit functions in accordance withthe generally accepted accounting principles, rulesand regulations, which shall include:

(a) Examination and verification of receipts,invoices, vouchers and other long accounts;

(b) Reproduction of, and comparison of such

reproduction with, and certification that thesame are faithful copies of original documents,and pre-marking of documentary exhibitsconsisting of voluminous documents;

(c) Preparation of schedules or summariescontaining a chronological listing of thenumbers, dates and amounts covered byreceipts or invoices or other relevantdocuments and the amount(s) of taxes paid;

(d) Making findings as to compliance withsubstantiation requirements under pertinenttax laws, regulations and jurisprudence;

(e) Submission of a formal report with certificationof authenticity and veracity of findings andconclusions in the performance of the audit;

(f) Testifying on such formal report; and

(g) Performing such other functions as the Courtmay direct. (n)

SEC. 3. Findings of independent CPA – The submissionby the independent CPA of pre-marked documentaryexhibits shall be subject to verification andcomparison with the original documents, theavailability of which shall be the primaryresponsibility of the party possessing such documentsand, secondarily, by the independent CPA. Thefindings and conclusions of the independent CPA maybe challenged by the parties and shall not beconclusive upon the Court, which may, in whole or inpart, adopt such findings and conclusions subject toverification. (n)

SEC. 4. Other referral to commissioner – Wheneverpracticable and convenient, the Court may apply theprocedure prescribed in Rule 32 of the Rules of Court. When the parties stipulate that a commissioner’sfindings of fact shall be final, only questions of lawshall thereafter be considered. (n)

SEC. 5. Compensation of Commissioner – The Courtshall allow the commissioners such reasonablecompensation as the circumstances of the case maywarrant. (Rules of Court, Rule 32, sec. 13a)

RULE 14JUDGMENT, ITS ENTRY AND EXECUTION

SECTION 1. Rendition of judgment – The Court shalldecide the cases brought before it in accordance withSection 15, paragraph (1), Article VIII of the 1987Constitution. The conclusions of the Court shall bereached in consultation by the Members on the meritsof the case before its assignment to a Member for thewriting of the decision. The presiding justice or


24

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006 RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-MarJanuary-March 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006ch 2006

chairman of the Division shall include the case in anagenda for a meeting of the Court en banc or inDivision, as the case may be, for its deliberation. If amajority of the justices of the Court en banc or inDivision agree on the draft decision, the ponente shallfinalize the decision for the signature of theconcurring justices and its immediate promulgation. Any justice of the Court en banc or in Division maysubmit a separate written concurring or dissentingopinion within twenty days from the date of thevoting on the case. The concurring and dissentingopinions, together with the majority opinion, shallbe jointly promulgated and attached to the rollo.

In deciding the case, the Court may not limit itselfto the issues stipulated by the parties but may alsorule upon related issues necessary to achieve anorderly disposition of the case. (2002 Internal Rules ofthe Court of Appeals, Rule VI, secs. 9 and 10a; and Rules ofCourt, Rule 51, sec. 2a)

SEC. 2. Form of decision – Every decision or finalresolution of the Court shall be in writing, statingclearly and distinctly the findings of fact and theconclusions of law on which it is based, and signedby the justices concurring therein. Such findings andconclusions shall be contained in the decision or finalresolution itself. However, in appealed cases, theCourt may adopt by reference the findings andconclusions set forth in the decision, order orresolution appealed from.

Every decision of the Court shall be accompaniedby a certification signed by the presiding justice oracting presiding justice, chairman or most seniormember as acting chairman of the Court en banc or inDivision in the following form:

“Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of theConstitution, it is hereby certified that theconclusions in the above decision were reached inconsultation before the case was assigned to thewriter of the opinion of the Court.” (Rules of Court,Rule 51, sec 5a; and 2002 Internal Rules of the Court ofAppeals, Rule VI, sec. 11a)

SEC. 3. Amended decision – Any action modifying orreversing a decision of the Court en banc or in Divisionshall be denominated as Amended Decision. (2002Internal Rules of the Court of Appeals, Rule VI, sec. 12a)

SEC. 4. Resolution – Any disposition of the Court enbanc or in Divisions other than on the merits shall beembodied in a Resolution. (2002 Internal Rules of theCourt of Appeals, Rule VI, sec. 12a)

SEC. 5. Promulgation and notice of decision andresolution – The Clerk of Court or Deputy Clerk of

Court shall have the direct responsibility for thepromulgation of the decision and resolution of theCourt. He shall see to it that the decision and resolutionare properly signed by the concurring and dissentingjustices and the required certification is dulyaccomplished.

Promulgation consists of the filing of the decisionor resolution with the Clerk of Court or Division Clerkof Court, who shall forthwith annotate the date andtime of receipt and attest to it by his signature thereon. He shall serve notice of such decision or resolution uponthe parties or their counsel, furnishing them withcertified true copies thereof. (2002 Internal Rules of theCourt of Appeals, Rule VI, sec. 13a; and Rules of Court, Rule51, sec. 9a)

In criminal cases originally filed with and decidedby the Court in Division, the chairman shall cause thedecision or resolution to be filed with the Division Clerkof Court in a sealed envelope, who shall schedule itspromulgation, giving notice to the prosecution, theaccused personally or through his bondsman orwarden, and counsel requiring their presence at thepromulgation.

The promulgation shall consist of the reading bythe Division Clerk of Court of the dispositive portion ofthe decision or resolution in the presence of the accusedand a justice of the Division that rendered the same. Ifthe accused is detained, the warden shall produce himbefore the Court. However, if he is detained outsideMetro Manila, the Court may authorize the executivejudge of the Regional Trial Court having territorialjurisdiction over the place of detention to promulgatethe decision or resolution at such place. (Rules of Court,Rule 120, sec. 6a)

SEC. 6. Entry of judgment and final resolution – If noappeal or motion for reconsideration or new trial isfiled within the time provided in these Rules, the Clerkof Court shall forthwith enter the judgment or finalresolution in the book of judgment. The date when thejudgment or final resolution becomes executory shallbe deemed the date of its entry. The entry shall containthe dispositive part of the judgment or final resolutionand shall be signed by the Clerk of Court, with acertification that such judgment or resolution hasbecome final and executory. (Rules of Court, Rule 51, sec.10a)

SEC. 7. Execution of judgment – Upon the expiration ofthe period to appeal from a judgment or order thatdisposes of the action or proceeding and no appeal hasbeen duly perfected, execution shall issue as a matter ofright, on motion.



25


If an appeal has been duly perfected and finallyresolved, execution may be forthwith applied for inthe court of origin, on motion of the judgment obligee,submitting therewith a certified true copy of thejudgment or final order sought to be enforced and ofits entry, with notice to the adverse party. (Rules ofCourt, Rule 39, sec. 1a)

RULE 15MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

OR NEW TRIAL

SECTION 1. Who may and when to file motion – Anyaggrieved party may seek a reconsideration or newtrial of any decision, resolution or order of the Court. He shall file a motion for reconsideration or new trialwithin fifteen days from the date he received notice ofthe decision, resolution or order of the Court inquestion. (RCTA, Rule 13, sec. 1a)

SEC. 2. Opposition – The adverse party may file anopposition to the motion for reconsideration or newtrial within ten days after his receipt of a copy of themotion for reconsideration or new trial of a decision,resolution or order of the Court. (RCTA, Rule 13, sec.2a)

SEC. 3. Hearing of the Motion – The motion forreconsideration or new trial, as well as the oppositionthereto, shall embody all supporting arguments andthe movant shall set the same for hearing on the nextavailable motion day. Upon the expiration of theperiod set forth in the next preceding section, withoutany opposition having been filed by the other party,the motion for reconsideration or new trial shall beconsidered submitted for resolution, unless the Courtdeems it necessary to hear the parties on oralargument, in which the case the Court shall issue theproper order. (RCTA, Rule 13, sec. 3a)

SEC. 4. Effect of filing the motion – The filing of amotion for reconsideration or new trial shall suspendthe running of the period within which an appeal maybe perfected. (RCTA, Rule 13, sec. 4a)

SEC. 5. Grounds of motion for new trial – A motion fornew trial may be based on one or more of the followingcauses materially affecting the substantial rights ofthe movant:

(a) Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligencewhich ordinary prudence could not haveguarded against and by reason of which suchaggrieved party has probably been impairedin his rights; or

(b) Newly discovered evidence, which he could not,with reasonable diligence, have discovered and

produced at the trial and, which, if presented,would probably alter the result.

A motion for new trial shall include all groundsthen available and those not included shall be deemedwaived. (Rules of Court, Rule 37, sec. 1a)

SEC. 6. Contents of motion for reconsideration or newtrial and notice – The motion shall be in writing statingits grounds, a written notice of which shall be servedby the movant on the adverse party.

A motion for new trial shall be proved in themanner provided for proof of motions. A motion forthe cause mentioned in subparagraph (a) of thepreceding section shall be supported by affidavits ofmerits which may be rebutted by counter-affidavits. A motion for the cause mentioned in subparagraph (b)of the preceding section shall be supported byaffidavits of the witnesses by whom such evidence isexpected to be given, or by duly authenticateddocuments which are proposed to be introduced inevidence.

A motion for reconsideration or new trial that doesnot comply with the foregoing provisions shall bedeemed pro forma, which shall not toll the reglementaryperiod for appeal. (Rules of Court, Rule 37, sec. 2a)

SEC. 7. No second motion for reconsideration or for newtrial – No party shall be allowed to file a second motionfor reconsideration of a decision, final resolution ororder; or for new trial. (Rules of Court, Rule 52, sec. 2a)

SEC. 8. Ruling – The Court shall resolve the motionfor reconsideration or new trial within three monthsfrom the time it is deemed submitted for resolution. (Rules of Court, Rule 52, sec. 3a)

RULE 16APPEAL

SECTION 1. Appeal to Supreme Court by petition forreview on certiorari – A party adversely affected by adecision or ruling of the Court en banc may appealtherefrom by filing with the Supreme Court a verifiedpetition for review on certiorari within fifteen daysfrom receipt of a copy of the decision or resolution, asprovided in Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. If such partyhas filed a motion for reconsideration or for new trial,the period herein fixed shall run from the party’sreceipt of a copy of the resolution denying the motionfor reconsideration or for new trial. (n)

SEC. 2. Effect of appeal – The motion forreconsideration or for new trial filed before the Courtshall be deemed abandoned if, during its pendency,the movant shall appeal to the Supreme Court


26


pursuant to Section 1 of this Rule. (2002 Internal Rulesof the Court of Appeals, Rule VI, sec. 15a)

RULE 17LEGAL FEES AND COSTS

SECTION 1. Additional fees and costs – In addition tothe fees prescribed in Rule 141 of the Rules of Courtand all amendments thereto, the following legal feesand costs shall be collected:

(a) For reception of evidence by a Court officialpursuant to Section 4, Rule 12 of these Rules fivehundred pesos for each day of actual sessions;and

(b) For any other services of the Clerk of Court andother Court officials not provided for in Rule141 of the Rules of Court, two hundred pesos. (n)

RULE 18EFFECTIVITY

SECTION 1. Effectivity of the Revised Rules – TheseRules shall take effect on the fifteenth day of December2005 following their publication in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation in the Philippines not later than25 November 2005. (n)

ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 21-2006

GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OFTHE DRUG PREVENTION PROGRAM FOR THEFIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS

Pursuant to Memorandum Order No. 18-2005dated 25 April 2005 entitled “Establishing a Program toDeter the Use of Dangerous Drugs and Authorizing the Use ofRandom Drug Testing on the Personnel of the Judiciary,” thefollowing guidelines for the Drug Prevention Programin the first and second level courts are hereby adopted:

I. Objectives

1. To detect the use of dangerous drugs amonglower court employees, impose disciplinarysanctions, and provide administrativeremedies in cases where an employee is foundpositive for dangerous drug use.

2. To discourage the use and abuse of dangerousdrugs among first and second level courtemployees and enhance awareness of theiradverse effects by information disseminationand periodic random drug testing.


3. To institute other measures that address themenace of drug abuse within the personnel ofthe Judiciary. .

II. Definition of terms

1. Employee - refers to all judges or personnel ofthe first and second level courts regardless ofstatus of appointment.

2. Area - refers to any of the different judicialregions.

3. Dangerous drugs - refers to prohibited orregulated substances that include those listedin the Schedules annexed to the 1961 SingleConvention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended bythe 1972 Protocol, and in the Schedulesannexed to the 1971 Single Convention onPsychotropic Substances as enumerated in theannexes that form part of Republic Act No.9165.

4. Random drug test - refers to the mandatorymethodical and unannounced conduct of drugtest using appropriate scientific randomsampling technique based on time, area, and/or subjects, with each employee having anequal probability of being selected for testing.

5. Screening test - a rapid test performed toestablish potential or presumptive positiveresult and conducted for the determination ofthe type of drug(s) used by the subject.

6. Confirmatory test - an analytical test using adevice, tool or equipment with a differentchemical or physical principle that is morespecific which will validate and confirm theresult of the screening test.

7. Custody and Control Form (CCF) - a Departmentof Health (DOH) approved form used todocument the collection, transport, security,and test results of the specimen.

III. Coverage

These Guidelines shall cover (1) all officialsand employees in the first and second level courtsof the Judiciary; and (2) all other workers detailedor working in the said courts such as, but notlimited to: (a) personnel detailed to the courts andcompensated by any particular local governmentunit; (b) security and janitorial services personnelhired through service contracts; and (c) otherpersonnel not covered by the term “employees”as defined herein.


27


IV. Mechanics for the implementation of the DrugPrevention Program

A. Creation of a Drug Prevention Committee forFirst and Second Level Courts (DPC-FSLC)

1. Composition - The Drug PreventionCommittee for First and Second LevelCourts (DPC-FSLC) shall be created withthe Court Administrator or hisrepresentative as Chairperson; the Chief ofthe Supreme Court Medical and DentalServices or his representative as Vice-Chairperson; and the representatives ofthe Office of Administrative Services, theCourt Management Office, the Legal Office,and the Financial Management Office in theOffice of the Court Administrator, as wellas two representatives of the PhilippineAssociation of Court Employees (PACE) forthe 1st and 2nd level court employees, asMembers. The Chairperson, in consultationwith the members of the Committee, shalldesignate the DPC-FSLC Recorder-Secretary and Assistant Recorder-Secretary.

2. Functions. - The DPC-FSLC shall:

(a) Determine the area and time for theconduct of the mandatory random: drugtest using appropriate random samplingtechnique;

(b) Oversee the conduct of the mandatoryrandom drug test for the employees ofthe first and second level courts, tappingfor this purpose, the assistance andexpertise of appropriate governmentagencies;

(c) Refer to the appropriate governmentrehabilitation center employees (i) whovoluntarily admit without undergoingthe Screening Test that he or she usesdangerous drugs, and (ii) who fail thedrug test without challenging the resultsthereof;

(d) Evaluate the validity andreasonableness of the ground(s) forrefusal or failure of selected employeesto undergo the required drug test, andforthwith refer the same to the Office ofthe Court Administrator for properdisposition;

(e) Evaluate the fitness of an employee to

return to work after having undergonerehabilitation on the basis of medicalfindings and recommendations;

(f) Keep the results of the mandatoryrandom drug test and all other datagathered in connection therewith;

(g) Act on all concerns that may arise inconnection with the actual conduct ofthe mandatory random drug test; and

(h) Coordinate with the Executive Judges ingathering and receiving informationand other relevant data relative to druguse in their respective regions.

B. Dangerous drug use prevention informationcampaign

The Philippine Judicial Academy, incoordination with the DPC-FSLC, shall createand implement a program that will increasethe awareness and education of the employeesof the first and second level courts on theadverse effects of dangerous drugs.

C. Selection of subject personnel

1. Pursuant to its functions of overseeing theconduct of random drug tests, the DPC-FSLC shall prepare a strategy usingselective sampling of court personnel todetermine the subjects and the area for theconduct of the said test. The number ofemployees to be tested every year must bemore or less fifty percent (50%) of the actualnumber of employees nationwide.

2. The DPC-FSLC may motu proprio or, uponthe recommendation of the properPresiding Judge, the Executive Judge maydirect a court personnel to subject himselfor herself to a drug test should there bereasonable ground to believe that he or sheis a habitual user of dangerous drugs. TheExecutive Judge shall determine suchreasonable ground based on specificcontemporaneous and articulableobservations concerning such matters asthe appearance, behavior, speech orphysical manifestation of the concernedemployee.

D. Random drug testing

1. Procedure

(a) The DPC-FSLC shall authorize a team,which shall include a specimen collector

A.C. NO. 21-2006 (continued)

28


duly authorized by the DOH, thatshall conduct the random drug test inany particular area only after thewritten permission to conduct the testin his jurisdiction shall have beengranted by the Executive Judge.

(b) The team shall ensure that there is aclean toilet or partitioned area wherethe test will be conducted to preventadulteration of specimen.

(c) The authorized specimen collectorshall:

(i) ensure that the subject employeehas not concealed any substancethat might be used to adulteratethe specimen and that he or shehas no access to any suchunregulated substance within thetesting area;

(ii) provide the subject employeewith a clean specimen container;

(iii) remain outside the toilet orpartitioned cubicle as the subjectemployee provides the specimen;

(iv) see to it that the subject employeehands him the specimen beforeflushing the toilet;

(v) check the volume of the urine inthe specimen container;

(vi) check the temperature ofthe urinespecimen;

(vii) inspect the specimen todetermine its color andappearance for any signs ofcontaminants; and

(viii) note any unusual findings on thechain of the custody form.

(d) The subject employee shall:

(i) remove his or her outer garmentsthat might conceal items orsubstances that could be used totamper with or adulterate his orher urine specimen;

(ii) wash and dry his or her hands;

(iii) remain in the presence of theauthorized specimen collector sothat he or she will not have

A.C. NO. 21-2006 (continued)

access to any unregulated source ofwater, soap, dispenser, cleaningagent, or any other material thatcould be used to adulterate thespecimen;

(iv) collect and provide the specimeninside the toilet or partitioned area;and

(v) not flush the toilet until after he or sheshall have handed over the specimento the authorized specimen collector.

(e) Before the urine specimen container issealed and labeled, both the subjectemployee and the authorized specimencollector shall keep it within sight of theteam.

(f) The specimen bottle shall have anidentification label with these entries: (i)name of subject employee; (ii) date ofspecimen collection; (iii) signature of thesubject employee; and (iv) specimenidentification number.

(g) The authorized specimen collector shallprovide all information required in theCustody and Control Form (CCF) andensure that each copy shall be given to theproper custodian thereof.

(h) The DPC-FSLC shall have custody of theresults of the Screening Test, which arestrictly confidential unless its contents arerequired to be disclosed in an appropriateproceeding.

2. An employee who is found positive fordangerous drug use based on the ScreeningTest may either:

(a) admit dangerous drug use, in which casehe or she shall be, immediately referred tothe proper government agency for medicalevaluation, counseling and rehabilitation,as circumstances may require; or

(b) challenge the result of the Screening Testwithin fifteen (I5) days from receiptthereof, in which case, he or she shallundergo a Confirmatory Test.

E. Confirmatory Test

1. The procedure prescribed above for theconduct of the Screening Test shall also beobserved in the conduct of the Confirmatory


29


Test insofar as the same is applicablewithout prejudice to the DPC-FSLC comingup with reasonable supplementalprocedure as its discretion may dictate.

2. An employee who is found positive ofdangerous drug use after the conduct of theConfirmatory Test shall be proceededagainst either administratively orcriminally or both unless he or shevoluntarily admits drug use and undergorehabilitation. The employee shall beaccorded ample opportunity to challengethe result of the Confirmatory Test in theadministrative case.

V. Liability of subject employee

1. An employee who refuses or fails to undergodrug testing for any unmeritorious reason, asdetermined by the DPC-FSLC, shall beadministratively liable for “Insubordination”pursuant to Section 52 (B) (5) of the UniformRules on Administrative Cases in the CivilService;

2. An employee who refuses to undergorehabilitation after having been found positivefor dangerous drug use in a Confirmatory Testshall be administratively liable for “ConductPrejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service,”without prejudice to criminal prosecutionunder the provisions of Republic Act No. 9165.

3. An employee who undergoes rehabilitationshall be considered on sick leave, as may beallowed by civil service rules.

VI. Funding

The cost of random drug testing of officials andemployees shall initially be funded out of theavailable savings of the first and second level courtsuntil its inclusion in the general appropriationslaw for the next fiscal year.

VII. Effectivity

These Guidelines shall take effect immediately.

Issued this 24th day of February 2006.

(Sgd.) ARTEMIO V. PANGANIBAN Chief Justice

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 06-2006

TO : ALL REGIONAL TRIAL COURT JUDGES

SUBJECT: FAITHFUL AND EFFICIENTCOMPLIANCE WITH THEREQUIREMENTS OF R.A. NO. 9165OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE“COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUSDRUGS ACT OF 2002,” PARTICULARLYSECTION 21 PARAGRAPH 4 THEREOF

In order to forestall the suspicion on the“recycling” of dangerous drugs and to ensure the safetyof the community where said dangerous drugs andsubstances are located, you are hereby REMINDED ofthe pertinent provisions under paragraph 4 Section21 of Republic Act No. 9165 otherwise known as the“Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002” whichmandates the immediate destruction and/ordisposition of seized dangerous drugs and substances.Section 21, paragraph 4, thereof provides:

xxx

“Sec. 21. Custody and Disposition ofConfiscated Seized, and/or SurrenderedDangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of DangerousDrugs, Controlled Precursors and EssentialChemicals, Instruments/Paraphernalia and/orLaboratory Equipment - The PDEA shall takecharge and have custody of all dangerous drugs,plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlledprecursors and essential chemicals, as well asinstruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratoryequipment so confiscated, seized and/orsurrendered, for proper disposition in thefollowing manner:

xxx

(4) After the filing of the criminal case, theCourt shall, within seventy-two (72) hours,conduct an ocular inspection of the confiscated,seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs,plant sources of dangerous drugs, andcontrolled precursors and essential chemicals,including the instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment and through the PDEAshall within twenty-four (24) hours thereafterproceed with the destruction or burning of thesame, in the presence of the accused or theperson/s from whom such items wereconfiscated and/or seized, or his/herrepresentative or counsel, a representative fromthe media and the DOJ, civil society groups andany elected public official. The Board shall drawup the guidelines on the manner of proper

OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR

30


OCA CIRCULAR NO. 58-2006

TO: ALL JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS,SANDIGANBAYAN, COURT OF TAX APPEALSAND JUDGES OF THE FIRST AND SECONDLEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO SECTION 8 OF A.M.NO. 03-03-13-SC, RE: RULE ONADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE INSEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES ANDGUIDELINES ON PROPER WORKDECORUM IN THE JUDICIARY

For your information and guidance, quotedhereunder is a portion of the Resolution of this CourtEn Banc dated 07 March 2006, in A.M. No. 05-12-757-RTC, Re: Sexual Harassment Committed by Judge RexelM. Pacuribot, Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, GingoogCity, which AMENDS Section 8 of AM. No. 03-03-13-SC,Re: The Rule on Administrative Procedure in SexualHarassment Cases and Guidelines on Proper Work Decorum inthe Judiciary, to wit:

“NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as it ishereby Resolved, that in accordance withSection 6, Article VIII of the Constitution vestingthis Court with the power of administrativesupervision over all courts and personnelthereof, inclusive of which is the authority todiscipline Judges and Justices, complaints ofsexual harassment against Judges of regularand special courts and Justices of the Court ofAppeals, the Sandiganbayan and the Court ofTax Appeals should be excluded from thejurisdiction of the CODls. Accordingly, Section

disposition and destruction of such item/swhich shall be borne by the offender: Provided,That those item/s of lawful commerce, asdetermined by the Board, shall be donated, usedor recycled for legitimate purposes: Provided,further, That a representative sample dulyweighed and recorded is retained.” [emphasissupplied]

xxx

For your guidance and strict compliance.

16 January 2006.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO. VELASCO, JR. Court Administrator

8 of A.M. No. 03-03-13-SC, the Rule onAdministrative Procedure in Sexual Harassment Casesand Guidelines on Proper Work Decorum in the Judiciaryis hereby amended to read as follows:

Sec. 8. Jurisdiction, powers and responsibilitiesof the CODls. - The CODls shall havejurisdiction over all complaints for sexualharassment committed by the officials andemployees of the Judiciary, except thoseagainst Judges of regular and special courts andJustices of the Court of Appeals. TheSandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals,which shall fundamentally adhere to theproceeding laid down in Section 3 of Rule 140 ofthe Rules of Court, as amended.

CODls shall:

(a) Receive the complaint, investigate itsallegations, and submit a report andrecommendation to the proper courtor authority, as provided for in Section18 of this Rule;

x x x x. [Emphasis supplied.]”

27 March 2006.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Court Administrator

31

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

2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events

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

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

2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events2007 Upcoming PHILJA Events

january-march 2006 philja newsphilja newsphilja.judiciary.gov.ph/files/bulletin/bul29.pdfsa...

Documents