Del Rosario and Agustin Law Offices and Notary Public

Abogado, disbarred dahil sa ilang beses na pangangaliwa

Tinanggalan ng lisensya ng Korte Suprema ang isang abogado dahil sa paulit-ulit na pangangaliwa.

Unang inamin ng lalaking abogado na nagkaroon siya ng tatlong karelasyon habang kasal sa kanyang asawa.

Ikinasal pa siya uli sa ibang babae at nagkaroon ng dalawang anak.

Bukod dito, inamin din niyang pinakitaan niya ang kanyang kasambahay at sekretarya ng mga mahahalay na larawan at nakipag-usap sa kanila tungkol sa maseselan na bagay.

Para sa Korte Suprema, maituturing ang mga ito na “grossly immoral conduct” sa ilalim ng bagong Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability.

Disbarment ang sentensiya para sa unang dalawang kaso habang suspension naman para sa huling dalawang kaso.

Pero dahil isang beses lang pwede ma-disbar, pinagmumulta ang abogado ng P400,001.

Basahin ang buong press release: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-disbars-lawyer-for-extramarital-affairs/

The Supreme Court En Banc, during its session on August 13, 2024, required Congress, the Department of Finance, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, and Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) to file their comment to the petition filed by Senator Aquilino Pimentel III et al.

The petition challenges Section 1(d) of XLIII of the General Appropriations Act 2024 and Department of Finance Circular 003-2023, which allow the return to the national treasury of GOCC excess reserve funds to fund unprogrammed appropriations.

They also seek a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent the transfer of funds from PhilHealth to the National Treasury, and preserve the status of petitioners prior to the transfer of P20 Billion Pesos from PhilHealth to the National Treasury last May 2024.

The Court required the respondents to file their Comment to the petition and prayer for TRO within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice.

A copy of the available pleadings in G.R. No. 274778 will be uploaded at the Public Pleadings section of the Supreme Court website at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/public-pleadings/.

LRTA, walang pananagutan sa mga empleyado ng dating subsidiary

Hindi pwedeng pagbayarin ang Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA) sa higit P200 milyong halaga ng backwages at separation pay para sa mga empleyado ng dati nitong subsidiary na Metro Transit Organization, Inc. (Metro).

Sa desisyong isinulat ni Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, pinagtibay ng Korte Suprema ang desisyon ng Commission on Audit (COA) na tanggihan ang money claim ng ilang empleyado ng Metro.

Natanggal sa trabaho ang mga empleyado dahil hindi ni-renew ng LRTA ang management contract ng Metro. Kaya nagsampa sila ng mga kasong illegal dismissal at unfair labor practice laban sa LRTA at Metro.

Nanalo ang mga empleyado sa labor arbiter at sa National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).

Pero nanalo ang LRTA sa Court of Appeals at sa Korte Suprema dahil walang hurisdiksyon ang NLRC sa isang government-owned and controlled corporation na may sariling charter gaya ng LRTA. Talo naman ang Metro sa hiwalay na apela.

Sinubukan ng mga empleyado na maningil sa COA pero idinepensa ng COA ang desisyon ng Korte Suprema. Paliwanag pa ng COA, nagsara na rin ang Metro kaya wala na itong pondong mailalabas pa.

Sa muling pag-akyat ng kaso sa Korte Suprema, sinabi nito na matagal nang pinal ang SC decision tungkol sa LRTA.

I-uupload ng Supreme Court Public Information Office ang kopya ng desisyon kapag natanggap na mula sa Supreme Court En Banc.

Para sa karagdagang detalye, basahin ang press release: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-affirms-coa-denial-of-ex-metro-transit-workers-money-claims/

REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN | Interested participants for the first leg of the Proposed Amendments to the Rules on Criminal Procedure Regional Consultations, to be held on August 8, 2024 at the De La Salle Lipa in Lipa City, Batangas, may now register by scanning the QR Code below or by visiting the CrimPro Regional Consultations microsite at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/crimpro-revision-project/

Organized by the Supreme Court, the CrimPro Regional Consultations aim to engage various stakeholders, including judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and the academe, in discussing proposed amendments to the Rules on Criminal Procedure. Its objective is to deliberate on key provisions and gather important inputs to ensure that the final version of the Rules will be effective, responsive, and accessible.

Be part of this opportunity to share your insights and feedback to impact the criminal justice process.

Registration for the first leg of regional consultations is from July 22 to 29, 2024. For more information, visit https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/crimpro-revision-project/.

The Law Office offers on-call notarial services for Business Owners and Companies! This is also geared towards catering to those with urgent notarial needs.

Our office is located at Nevada Square, Baguio City, with adequate parking space.

Please set an appointment with Atty. Angel.
Contact number: 09271662908

Send a message to learn more

The Supreme Court has declared that red-tagging, vilification, labelling, and guilt by association threaten a person’s right to life, liberty, or security, which may justify the issuance of a writ of amparo.

READ: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-red-tagging-threatens-right-to-life-liberty-and-security/

SC: Persons Convicted of Heinous Crimes Still Entitled to Good Conduct Time Allowance |

In G.R. No. 249027 and G.R. No. 249155 (Guinto et al., v. Department of Justice; Inmates of New Bilibid Prison, et al. v. Department of Justice), the Supreme Court En Banc, through Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, found that the Department of Justice (DOJ), in enacting its 2019 Implementing Rules and Regulations (2019 IRR), exceeded its power of subordinate legislation when it excluded persons convicted of heinous crimes from the benefits of Republic Act (RA) No. 10592, or the New Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law.

In finding the assailed provisions of the 2019 IRR invalid, the En Banc held that when R.A. No. 10592 amended Article 97 of the Revised Penal Code(RPC), it used the connecting conjunction “or” to express that (1) “any offender qualified for credit imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of the RPC,” and in the alternative (2) “any convicted prisoner in any penal institution, rehabilitation, or detention center in any other local jail” may avail of the benefits granted by R.A. No. 10592.

Thus, the 2019 IRR expanded the scope of R.A. No. 10592 when it excluded recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees, and persons deprived of liberty convicted of heinous crimes from earning GCTA credits when the law itself did not do so.

The Court ruled that Article 97 of the RPC, as amended by R.A. No. 10592, is clear that any convicted prisoner is entitled to GCTA as long as the prisoner is in any penal institution, rehabilitation or detention center, or any other local jail.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-persons-convicted-of-heinous-crimes-still-entitled-to-good-conduct-time-allowance/

*ADVISORY ON THE DEADLINE OF APPLICATION FOR THE 2024 BAR EXAMINATIONS*

The application for the 2024 Bar Exams will close today, April 5, 2024. Thereafter, no requests for extension will be entertained. Applicants are advised to avoid waiting until the last minute to upload mandatory documents and make full payment, especially considering possible technical difficulties during the maintenance period of the Landbank linkbiz.portal in the late hours of the day. Rest assured that all timely applications with complete mandatory documents successfully uploaded in the BARISTA and with confirmed full payment will be processed accordingly.

*For applicants who encountered issues after paying the bar exam fee within the application period (e.g., non-posting/reflecting of payment in the BARISTA), please submit an inquiry/concern form to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) Helpdesk (https://bit.ly/2024BarExamsHelpdesk) and refrain from creating a new BARISTA account for repayment. This will enable the OBC to address your concerns promptly.*

For other inquiries, applicants may refer to the Frequently Asked Questions at (https://bit.ly/2024BarExamsFAQs) or contact the OBC at (02) 8552 9642 or (02) 8552 9690.

Office Hours for the Holy Week:

Open: Monday - Wednesday
11:00am - 4:00pm

Closed: Thursday - Saturday

Have a Blessed Holy Week!

🔔 REMINDER: 30 DAYS LEFT TO APPLY FOR THE 2024 BAR EXAMS |

The application for the 2024 Bar Examinations closes in 30 days, or on April 5, 2024. To apply, create or update your Bar Applicant Registration System and Tech Assistance (BARISTA) account, complete the online entries, upload the required documents, pay the fee exclusively through the BARISTA, and submit |the printed and signed BARISTA-generated application form along with the required documents to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) within ten (10) calendar days from notice of approval of application. Please be assured that your application will be processed as long as you have uploaded all the mandatory documents and paid the fee in full before the deadline.

For more details, see Bar Bulletin No. 2, dated January 11, 2024, at (https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Bar-Bulletin-No-2-S-2024.pdf), the Frequently Asked Questions at (https://bit.ly/2024BarExamsFAQs), or access the OBC Helpdesk at (https://bit.ly/2024BarExamsHelpdesk). Applicants may also contact the OBC at (02) 8552 9642 or (02) 8552 9690.

SC Imposes Imprisonment for Lascivious Conduct; Recommends to the President Mitigation of Severe Penalty

In G.R. No. 228980 (Villanueva v. People), the Court’s Second Division, through Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., affirmed the conviction of the accused for Lascivious Conduct under Article III, Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. (RA) 7610, or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act. The Court found the testimony of the 16-year-old victim to be clear, candid, and categorical when she relayed that the accused lifted her skirt and touched her buttocks, which constitute overt acts of the accused tantamount to lascivious conduct.

For committing Lascivious Conduct against a minor, the accused was sentenced to the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of 14 years and eight months of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 20 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum; and was ordered to pay the private complainant PHP50,000.00 as civil indemnity, PHP50,000.00 as moral damages, and PHP50,000.00 as exemplary damages, to earn legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of finality of the Decision until full payment.

The Court further noted that it is not unmindful of the accused’s claim that the penalty imposed is disproportionate to the crime committed and the surrounding circumstances of its commission. However, the Court stressed that it is duty bound to apply the law in full force and impose the proper penalty for the crime committed by the accused. Thus, considering the severe penalty imposed by the Court in accordance with the law, the Court in this case invoked Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code and submits to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, for study and consideration of the mitigation of the penalty imposed on the accused.

Read more at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-imposes-imprisonment-for-lascivious-conduct-recommends-to-the-president-mitigation-of-severe-penalty/

SC: Employer’s Unlawful Withholding of Union Fees Constitutes Unfair Labor Practice |

A complaint charging the employer for non-remittance of collected union member dues by virtue of a check-off provision in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) constitutes unfair labor practice, not an intra-union dispute.

Thus ruled the Supreme Court’s First Division, in a Decision penned by Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo granting the petition for review on certiorari filed by South Cotabato Integrated Port Services Incorporated (SCIPSI). The petition challenged the rulings by the Court of Appeals which upheld the jurisdiction of the Mediator-Arbiter over a case involving the non-remittance by the employer of union dues to the exclusive bargaining representative.

In resolving the petition, the Court stressed that jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the allegations in the complaint, irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover on his claims.

The Court added that if the allegations in the complaint involve unfair labor practice, which generally refers to acts that violate the worker’s right to self-organization, it is the Labor Arbiter who has jurisdiction pursuant to Article 224 of the Labor Code.

The Court further stressed that the process of check-off, which involves the deduction of fees from the employees and the subsequent remittance of the collected amount to the bargaining representative, assures the latter of continuous funding. “Without such funds, the union, in this case MPLO, would not be effective in discharging its duties and responsibilities as the exclusive bargaining representative of its members.”

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-employers-unlawful-withholding-of-union-fees-constitutes-unfair-labor-practice/

Read the full text of G.R. No. 235569 (South Cotabato Integrated Port Services, Inc. v. Officer-in-Charge Romeo Montefalco, Jr., et al., December 13, 2023) at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/235569-south-cotabato-integrated-port-services-incorporated-scipsi-and-or-gabriel-munasque-as-general-manager-vs-officer-in-charge-romeo-montefalco-jr-and-maria-consuelo-s-bacay-in-their-capa/

RTC Clerk Dismissed for Demanding Money in Exchange for Release of Certificate │

The Supreme Court has meted out on a clerk of the Butuan City Regional Trail Court (RTC) the ultimate penalty of dismissal from service for gross misconduct.

The case stemmed from a letter-complaint from a person under the nom de plume “Danilo D. Divinagracia” (complainant) who accused Michael Vincent L. Ozon (Ozon), Clerk III of Branch 1, RTC, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte, of asking for the amount of PHP 25,000.00 in exchange for the release of the certificate of finality of the former’s case for declaration of nullity of marriage.

Upon investigation by Executive Judge Augustus L. Calo (Executive Judge Calo), it was revealed that at one time, a litigant came crying to the RTC Branch Clerk of Court because the certificate of finality in her case had not yet been issued after repeatedly visiting the court despite giving Ozon PHP 500.00 for its release.

Thereafter, Executive Judge Calo obtained sworn statements from two private individuals who revealed that respondent offered “facilitation services” in declaration of nullity cases. They stated that instead of the usual number of months it would take for processing the service of the decision and the corresponding return card, Ozon would expedite the same process into merely three days by sending the decisions via private courier to the Office of Solicitor General (OSG) in exchange for PHP 5,000.00.

The Court, in a Per Curiam Decision, ruled that Ozon’s bare denial is self-serving and a weak defense vis-à-vis the RTC Branch Clerk of Court’s positive testimony which corroborated complainant’s allegation that Ozon demanded money from litigants for the release of certificates of finality.

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/rtc-clerk-dismissed-for-demanding-money-in-exchange-for-release-of-certificate/

SC: For Online Libel, Courts May Impose Alternative Penalty of Fine Instead of Imprisonment |

A court may sentence an accused found guilty of online libel to payment of fine only, rather than imprisonment.

Thus held the Supreme Court En Banc, through Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., as it denied the Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by the People of the Philippines against Jomerito S. Soliman. The petition claimed that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed grave abuse of discretion when it affirmed the Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicting Soliman for online libel and sentencing him to pay a fine of PhP50,000.

In 2018, Soliman faced charges for online libel under the Cybercrime Prevention Act (Republic Act No. 10175) for a Facebook post criticizing Waldo R. Carpio, then Assistant Secretary of the Department of Agriculture. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and imposed a fine of PhP50,000, citing Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 08-2008. Soliman paid the fine and did not appeal his conviction. However, the Office of the Solicitor General filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals, alleging an abuse of discretion by the RTC for imposing a fine instead of imprisonment.

Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act imposes upon online libel, or libel committed through information and communication technologies, a penalty that is one degree higher than ‘traditional’ libel, or libel under the Revised Penal Code (RPC).

Under the RPC, as amended by RA 10951, the penalty for traditional libel is “prision correcional in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from PhP40,000 to PhP1,200,000, or both.”

The Court ruled that the RPC recognizes that the penalty of fine may be imposed as a single or alternative penalty for libel, as evident in the RPC’s “plain use of the disjunctive word ‘or’ between the term of imprisonment and fine, such word signaling disassociation or independence between the two words.”

Read more at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-for-online-libel-courts-may-impose-alternative-penalty-of-fine-instead-of-imprisonment/.

Read the Decision in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/256700-people-of-the-philippines-vs-jomerito-s-soliman/. Read the Concurring Opinion of Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/256700-concurring-opinion-chief-justice-alexander-g-gesmundo/ and the Separate Opinion of Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/256700-separate-opinion-justice-alfredo-benjamin-s-caguioa/.

HAPPY BAGUIO DAY!

O, BAGUIO HAVEN FOR ALL PEOPLE

Today marks the 114th Charter Day Anniversary of our beloved Baguio City.

Let's greet Baguio a happy birthday by sharing your favorite memories in the city. Drop your comments below ⬇️

Office Hours for Baguio Day:
September 1, 2023

1:00pm-5:00pm

Del Rosario and Agustin Law Offices and Notary Public

Unit 10 Bldg. 3 (floor above Hello Paw Shop)
Nevada Square, Baguio City

With a wide parking space

Office hours:
Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Fridays
11:00am - 5:30pm

Sundays
11:00am - 2:00pm