ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-2011 Jurisprudence                 

  • [G.R. No. 191261, March 02 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. JENNY TUMAMBING Y TAMAYO, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 191361, March 02 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE,VS. MARIANITO TERIAPIL Y QUINAWAYAN, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 192217, March 02 : 2011] DANILO L. PAREL, PETITIONER, VS. HEIRS OF SIMEON PRUDENCIO, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 182525, March 02 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. BERTHA PRESAS Y TOLENTINO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 193482, March 02 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. NILO ROCABO, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 181298, March 02 : 2011] BELLE CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 167751, March 02 : 2011] HARPOON MARINE SERVICES, INC. AND JOSE LIDO T. ROSIT, PETITIONERS, VS. FERNAN H. FRANCISCO, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 188705, March 02 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. FEDERICO LUCERO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 178159, March 02 : 2011] SPS. VICENTE DIONISIO AND ANITA DIONISIO, PETITIONER, VS. WILFREDO LINSANGAN, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-10-2247 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 09-3143-RTJ), March 02 : 2011] JOCELYN DATOON, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE BETHANY G. KAPILI, PRESIDING JUDGE OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 24, MAASIN CITY, SOUTHERN LEYTE, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 181371, March 02 : 2011] CENTRAL LUZON DRUG CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 172161, March 02 : 2011] SLL INTERNATIONAL CABLES SPECIALIST AND SONNY L. LAGON, PETITIONERS, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, 4TH DIVISION, ROLDAN LOPEZ, EDGARDO ZUƑIGA AND DANILO CAƑETE, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 194259, March 06 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JIMMY ALVERIO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 191389, March 07 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. LUISITO LALICAN Y ARCE, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 191561, March 07 : 2011] BANK OF COMMERCE, PETITIONER, VS. GOODMAN FIELDER INTERNATIONAL PHILIPPINES, INC. RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 172011, March 07 : 2011] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS. TEODORO P. RIZALVO, JR., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 192856, March 08 : 2011] FERNANDO V. GONZALEZ, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RENO G. LIM, STEPHEN C. BICHARA AND THE SPECIAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS CONSTITUTED PER RES. DATED JULY 23, 2010 OF THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 157838, March 08 : 2011] CANDELARIO L. VERZOSA, JR. (IN HIS FORMER CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY), PETITIONER, VS. GUILLERMO N. CARAGUE (IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT), RAUL C. FLORES, CELSO D. GANGAN, SOFRONIO B. URSAL AND COMMISSION ON AUDIT, RESPONDENTS.

  • [A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC, March 08 : 2011] RE: LETTER OF THE UP LAW FACULTY ENTITLED "RESTORING INTEGRITY: A STATEMENT BY THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW ON THE ALLEGATIONS OF PLAGIARISM AND MISREPRESENTATION IN THE SUPREME COURT"

  • [G.R. No. 187714, March 08 : 2011] AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL, JR., MANUEL B. VILLAR, JOKER P. ARROYO, FRANCIS N. PANGILINAN, PIA S. CAYETANO, AND ALAN PETER S. CAYETANO, PETITIONERS, VS. SENATE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPRESENTED BY SENATE PRESIDENT JUAN PONCE ENRILE, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 170071, March 09 : 2011] HEIRS OF JOSE MARCIAL K. OCHOA NAMELY: RUBY B. OCHOA, MICAELA B. OCHOA AND JOMAR B. OCHOA, PETITIONERS, VS.G & S TRANSPORT CORPORATION, RESPONDENT. [G.R. No. 170125] G & S TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. HEIRS OF JOSE MARCIAL K. OCHOA NAMELY: RUBY B. OCHOA, MICAELA B. OCHOA AND JOMAR B. OCHOA, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 163530, March 09 : 2011] PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, PETITIONER, VS. RAMON VALENZUELA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. Nos. 159017-18, March 09 : 2011] PAULINO S. ASILO, JR., PETITIONER, VS. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SPOUSES VISITACION AND CESAR C. BOMBASI, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 159059] VICTORIA BUETA VDA. DE COMENDADOR, IN REPRESENTATION OF DEMETRIO T. COMENDADOR, PETITIONER, VS. VISITACION C. BOMBASI AND CESAR C. BOMBASI, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 185758, March 09 : 2011] LINDA M. CHAN KENT, REPRESENTED BY ROSITA MANALANG, PETITIONER, VS. DIONESIO C. MICAREZ, SPOUSES ALVARO E. MICAREZ & PAZ MICAREZ, AND THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS, DAVAO DEL NORTE, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 168523, March 09 : 2011] SPOUSES FERNANDO AND ANGELINA EDRALIN, PETITIONERS, VS. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 191388, March 09 : 2011] ASIA UNITED BANK, CHRISTINE T. CHAN, AND FLORANTE C. DEL MUNDO, PETITIONERS, VS. GOODLAND COMPANY, INC., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. Nos. 181566 and 181570, March 09 : 2011] DAVAO FRUITS CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 177467, March 09 : 2011] PFIZER, INC. AND/OR REY GERARDO BACARRO, AND/OR FERDINAND CORTES, AND/OR ALFRED MAGALLON, AND/OR ARISTOTLE ARCE, PETITIONERS, VS. GERALDINE VELASCO, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 174034, March 09 : 2011] HEIRS OF MARILOU K. SANTIAGO, REPRESENTED BY DENNIS K. SANTIAGO, LOURDES K. SANTIAGO AND EUFEMIA K. SANTIAGO, PETITIONERS, VS. ALFONSO AGUILA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 181370, March 09 : 2011] JULIAN S. LEBRUDO AND REYNALDO L. LEBRUDO, PETITIONERS, VS. REMEDIOS LOYOLA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 192649, March 09 : 2011] HOME GUARANTY CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. R-II BUILDERS INC., AND NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 171189, March 09 : 2011] LORES REALTY ENTERPRISES, INC., LORENZO Y. SUMULONG III, PETITIONERS, VS. VIRGINIA E. PACIA, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. P-09-2677 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07-2582-P), March 09 : 2011] ANGELINA C. LIM AND VIVIAN M. GADUANG, COMPLAINANTS, VS. MARIBETH G. AROMIN, RECORDS OFFICER I, OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, MEYCAUAYAN, BULACAN, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-08-2149 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 08-2787-RTJ), March 09 : 2011] LYDIA A. BENANCILLO, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE VENANCIO J. AMILA, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 3, TAGBILARAN CITY, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 158576, March 09 : 2011] CORNELIA M. HERNANDEZ, PETITIONER, VS. CECILIO F. HERNANDEZ, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-10-2241[Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 09-3224-RTJ], March 09 : 2011] FERDINAND C. BACOLOT, COMPLAINANT, VS. HON. FRANCISCO D. PAƑO, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 93, SAN PEDRO, LAGUNA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 189981, March 09 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ALLAN GABRINO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 181249, March 14 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. BAIDA SALAK Y BANGKULAS, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 190171, March 14 : 2011] ALEN ROSS RODRIGUEZ AND REGIDOR TULALI, PETITIONERS, VS. THE HON. BIENVENIDO BLANCAFLOR, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PALAWAN, BRANCH 52, AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 178272, March 14 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. RODRIGO SALCEDO ALIAS "DIGOL," APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 191392, March 14 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ROLLY SORIAGA Y STO. DOMINGO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 172087, March 15 : 2011] PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT AND GAMING CORPORATION (PAGCOR), PETITIONER, VS. THE BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR), REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HON. JOSE MARIO BUƑAG, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, PUBLIC RESPONDENT, JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE, WHO ARE PERSONS ACTING FOR, IN BEHALF, OR UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF RESPONDENT. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESPONDENTS.

  • [A.M. No. 2010-11-SC, March 15 : 2011] RE: EMPLOYEES INCURRING HABITUAL TARDINESS IN THE SECOND SEMESTER OF 2009

  • [A.C. No. 8253(Formerly CBD Case No. 03-1067), March 15 : 2011] ERLINDA R. TAROG, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. ROMULO L. RICAFORT, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 152033, March 16 : 2011] FILIPINAS SYNTHETIC FIBER CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. WILFREDO DE LOS SANTOS, BENITO JOSE DE LOS SANTOS, MARIA ELENA DE LOS SANTOS AND CARMINA VDA. DE LOS SANTOS, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 169717, March 16 : 2011] SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA SA CHARTER CHEMICAL SOLIDARITY OF UNIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES FOR EMPOWERMENT AND REFORMS (SMCC-SUPER), ZACARRIAS JERRY VICTORIO - UNION PRESIDENT, PETITIONER,VS. CHARTER CHEMICAL AND COATING CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 190341, March 16 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. ROMY FALLONES Y LABANA, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 169599, March 16 : 2011] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS. JUANITO MANIMTIM, JULIO UMALI, REPRESENTED BY AURORA U. JUMARANG, SPOUSES EDILBERTO BAƑANOLA AND SOFIA BAƑANOLA, ZENAIDA MALABANAN, MARCELINO MENDOZA, DEMETRIO BARRIENTOS, FLORITA CUADRA, AND FRANCISCA MANIMTIM, RESPONDENTS.

  • [A.M. No. MTJ-08-1718, March 16 : 2011] ATTY. RAFAEL T. MARTINEZ, AND SPOUSES DAN AND EDNA REYES, COMPLAINANTS, VS. JUDGE GRACE GLICERIA F. DE VERA, PRESIDING JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, SAN CARLOS CITY, PANGASINAN, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. P-06-2206, March 16 : 2011] EXECUTIVE JUDGE LEONILO B. APITA, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 7, TACLOBAN CITY, COMPLAINANT, VS. MARISSA M. ESTANISLAO, COURT LEGAL RESEARCHER II, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 34, TACLOBAN CITY, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 185390, March 16 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ALEX PALING, ERNIE VILBAR @ "DODONG" (AT LARGE), AND ROY VILBAR, ACCUSED, ALEX PALING, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 182239, March 16 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. HERMIE M. JACINTO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 157476, March 16 : 2011] VENANCIO GIVERO, EDGARDO GIVERO AND FLORIDA GAYANES, PETITIONERS, VS. MAXIMO GIVERO AND LORETO GIVERO, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 168651, March 16 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. EDITH RAMOS ABAT, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 185683, March 16 : 2011] UNION LEAF TOBACCO CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. HILARION P. UY, PETITIONER, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 131481, March 16 : 2011] BUKLOD NANG MAGBUBUKID SA LUPAING RAMOS, INC., PETITIONER, VS. E. M. RAMOS AND SONS, INC., RESPONDENT. [G.R. No. 131624] DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, PETITIONER, VS. E. M. RAMOS AND SONS, INC., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 178323, March 16, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ARMANDO CHINGH Y PARCIA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [A.M. No. P-11-2914 [FORMERLY A.M. OCA IPI NO. 09-3159-P], March 16 : 2011] DY TEBAN TRADING CO., INC., COMPLAINANT, VS. ARCHIBALD C. VERGA, SHERIFF IV, RTC, BRANCH 33 BUTUAN CITY, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 169103, March 16 : 2011] COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, PETITIONER, VS. MANILA BANKERS' LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 171870, March 16 : 2011] SPOUSES ANTONIO F. ALAGAR AND AURORA ALAGAR, PETITIONER, VS. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 173780, March 21 : 2011] METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, PETITIONER, VS. MARINA B. CUSTODIO, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. P-07-2297 (formerly A.M. No. 07-1-04-MTC -Re: Report on the Financial Audit Conducted in the MTC, Argao, Cebu), March 21 : 2011] OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, COMPLAINANT, VS. MS. MIRA THELMA V. ALMIRANTE, INTERPRETER AND FORMER OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, ARGAO, CEBU, RESPONDENT. D E C I S I O N

  • [G.R. No. 165427, March 21 : 2011] BETTY B. LACBAYAN, PETITIONER, VS. BAYANI S. SAMOY, JR., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 192821, March 21 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. APPELLEE, SIXTO PADUA Y FELOMINA, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 174504, March 21 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN (THIRD DIVISION) AND MANUEL G. BARCENAS, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 182458, March 21 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. REX NIMUAN Y CACHO, APPELLANT.

  • [A.M. No. MTJ-08-1727 (FORMERLY A.M. OCA I.P.I. NO. 03-1465-MTJ), March 22 : 2011] MILAGROS VILLACERAN AND OMAR T. MIRANDA, COMPLAINANTS, VS. JUDGE MAXWEL S. ROSETE AND PROCESS SERVER EUGENIO TAGUBA, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, BRANCH 2, SANTIAGO CITY, ISABELA, RESPONDENTS.

  • [A.M. No. SCC-98-4, March 22 : 2011] ASHARY M. ALAUYA, CLERK OF COURT, SHARI'A DISTRICT COURT, MARAWI CITY, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE CASAN ALI L. LIMBONA, SHARI'A CIRCUIT COURT, LANAO DEL SUR, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 190529, March 22 : 2011] PHILIPPINE GUARDIANS BROTHERHOOD, INC., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-GENERAL GEORGE "FGBF GEORGE" DULDULAO, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 166471, March 22 : 2011] TAWANG MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, PETITIONER, VS. LA TRINIDAD WATER DISTRICT, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 193256, March 22 : 2011] ABC (ALLIANCE FOR BARANGAY CONCERNS) PARTY LIST, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS CHAIRMAN, JAMES MARTY LIM, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND MELANIO MAURICIO, JR., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 170446, March 23 : 2011] EDGEWATER REALTY DEVELOPMENT, INC., PETITIONER, VS. METROPOLITAN WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM AND MANILA WATER COMPANY, INC., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 178096, March 23 : 2011] ROSA DELOS REYES, PETITIONER, VS. SPOUSES FRANCISCO ODONES AND ARWENIA ODONES, NOEMI OTALES, AND GREGORIO RAMIREZ, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 164693, March 23 : 2011] JOSEFA S. ABALOS* AND THE DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONERS, VS. SPS. LOMANTONG DARAPA AND SINAB DIMAKUTA, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 169260, March 23 : 2011] SANDEN AIRCON PHILIPPINES AND ANTONIO ANG, PETITIONERS, VS. LORESSA P. ROSALES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 189821, March 23 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. ANTONIO OTOS ALIAS ANTONIO OMOS, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 176058, March 23 : 2011] PRESIDENTIAL ANTI-GRAFT COMMISSION (PAGC) AND THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, PETITIONERS, VS. SALVADOR A. PLEYTO, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 151369, March 23 : 2011] ANITA MONASTERIO-PE AND THE SPOUSES ROMULO TAN AND EDITHA PE-TAN, PETITIONERS, VS. JOSE JUAN TONG, HEREIN REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, JOSE Y. ONG, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 146839, March 23 : 2011] ROLANDO T. CATUNGAL, JOSE T. CATUNGAL, JR., CAROLYN T. CATUNGAL AND ERLINDA CATUNGAL-WESSEL, PETITIONERS, VS. ANGEL S. RODRIGUEZ, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 160736, March 23 : 2011] AIR ADS INCORPORATED, PETITIONER, VS. TAGUM AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (TADECO), RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 156142, March 23 : 2011] SPOUSES ALVIN GUERRERO AND MERCURY M. GUERRERO, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. LORNA NAVARRO DOMINGO, IN HER CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 201, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, LAS PIƑAS CITY & PILAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 192416, March 23 : 2011] GRANDTEQ INDUSTRIAL STEEL PRODUCTS, INC., ABELARDO GONZALES,[1] RONALD A. DE LEON,[2] NOEL AGUIRRE, FELIX ARPIA, AND NICK EUGENIO, PETITIONERS, VS. ANNALIZA M. ESTRELLA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 172678, March 23 : 2011] SEA LION FISHING CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 193664, March 23 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. DOMINGO BANAN Y LUMIDO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 164321, March 23 : 2011] SKECHERS, U.S.A., INC., PETITIONER, VS. INTER PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL TRADING CORP., AND/OR INTER PACIFIC TRADING CORP. AND/OR STRONG SPORTS GEAR CO., LTD., AND/OR STRONGSHOES WAREHOUSE AND/OR STRONG FASHION SHOES TRADING AND/OR TAN TUAN HONG AND/OR VIOLETA T. MAGAYAGA AND/OR JEFFREY R. MORALES AND/OR ANY OF ITS OTHER PROPRIETOR/S, DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND/OR OCCUPANTS OF ITS PREMISES LOCATED AT S-7, ED & JOE'S COMMERCIAL ARCADE, NO. 153 QUIRINO AVENUE, PARAƑAQUE CITY, RESPONDENTS. TRENDWORKS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, PETITIONER-INTERVENOR, VS. INTER PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL TRADING CORP. AND/OR INTER PACIFIC TRADING CORP. AND/OR STRONG SPORTS GEAR CO., LTD., AND/OR STRONGSHOES WAREHOUSE AND/OR STRONG FASHION SHOES TRADING AND/OR TAN TUAN HONG AND/OR VIOLETA T. MAGAYAGA AND/OR JEFFREY R. MORALES AND/OR ANY OF ITS OTHER PROPRIETOR/S, DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES AND/OR OCCUPANTS OF ITS PREMISES LOCATED AT S-7, ED & JOE'S COMMERCIAL ARCADE, NO. 153 QUIRINO AVENUE, PARAƑAQUE CITY, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 190001, March 23 : 2011] GENUINO ICE COMPANY, INC., HECTOR S. GENUINO AND EDGAR A. CARRJAGA, PETITIONERS. VS. ERIC Y. LAVA AND EDDIE BOY SODELA, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 182550, March 23 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. RUEL VELARDE ALIAS DOLOY BELARDE, APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 169895, March 23 : 2011] ISAGANI M. YAMBOT, LETTY JIMENEZ-MAGSANOC, JOSE MA. D. NOLASCO, ARTEMIO T. ENGRACIA, JR. AND VOLT CONTRERAS, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. ARTEMIO TUQUERO IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, AND ESCOLASTICO U. CRUZ, JR., RESPONDENTS.

  • [A.M. No. P-09-2651, March 23 : 2011] EMMANUEL M. GIBAS, JR., COMPLAINANT, VS. MA. JESUSA E. GIBAS, COURT STENOGRAPHER I, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, GUIGUINTO, BULACAN, AND FRANCONELLO S. LINTAO, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 83, MALOLOS CITY, BULACAN, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 185454, March 23 : 2011] STAR TWO (SPV-AMC), INC., PETITIONER, VS. HOWARD KO, MIN MIN SEE KO, JIMMY ONG, AND GRACE NG ONG, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 176596, March 23 : 2011] JUDGE ADORACION G. ANGELES, PETITIONER, VS. HON. MANUEL E. GAITE, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY FOR LEGAL AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT; HON. RAUL GONZALES, SECRETARY, AND HON. JOVENCITO ZUƑO, CHIEF STATE PROSECUTOR, BOTH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ); HON. RAMON R. GARCIA (SUBSTITUTED BY HON. JOSEPH LOPEZ), CITY PROSECUTOR, ACP MARLINA N. MANUEL, AND ACP ADELIZA H. MAGNO-GUINGOYON, ALL OF THE MANILA PROSECUTION SERVICE; AND SSP EMMANUEL VELASCO, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 179844, March 23 : 2011] EMERSON B. BAGONGAHASA, GIRLIE B. BAGONGAHASA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM - PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER OF LAGUNA, AND REGISTER OF DEEDS OF SINOLOAN, LAGUNA, PETITIONERS, VS. JOHANNA L. ROMUALDEZ, RESPONDENT. SPOUSES CESAR M. CAGUIN AND GERTRUDES CAGUIN, SPOUSES TEODORO MADRIDEJOS AND ANICETA IBANEZ MADRIDEJOS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM - PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER OF LAGUNA, AND REGISTER OF DEEDS OF SINOLOAN, LAGUNA, PETITIONERS, VS. DIETMAR L. ROMUALDEZ, RESPONDENT. SOTELA D. ADEA, SPOUSES ESPERANZA AND LEONCIO MARIO, SPOUSES DELIA AND DANILO CACHOLA, SPOUSES MA. ALICIA AND REYMUNDO CAINTO, EDUARDO B. DALAY, SPOUSES JOSE LEVITICO AND EPIFANIA DALAY, SPOUSES JIFFY AND FAUSTINO DALAY, SPOUSES MA. RUTH AND MELCHOR PACURIB, MA. JERIMA B. DALAY, SPOUSES CLEOFAS AND TERESITA VITOR, SPOUSES CELESTINA AND ALEJANDRO COSICO, SPOUSES AUREA AND ANTONIO HERNANDEZ, SPOUSES JULIA AND RAFAEL DELA CRUZ, SPOUSES RAQUEL AND SEBASTIAN SAN JUAN, SPOUSES MARGARITA AND PABLITO LLANES, SR., FIDEL M. DALAY, SPOUSES JAIME AND MELVITA DALAY, SPOUSES EMILY AND FLORENCIO PANGAN, SPOUSES FELIPE AND ROSALIE DALAY, SPOUSES MARCELO AND CATALINA B. DALAY, AND SPOUSES RENATO AND ELIZABETH DALAY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM - PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER OF LAGUNA, AND REGISTER OF DEEDS OF SINOLOAN, LAGUNA, PETITIONERS, VS. SPOUSES DANIEL AND ANA ROMUALDEZ, AND JACQUELINE L. ROMUALDEZ, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 175697, March 23 : 2011] RURAL BANK OF TOBOSO, INC. (NOW UCPB SAVINGS BANK), PETITIONER, VS. JEAN VENIEGAS AGTOTO, RESPONDENT. [G.R. NO. 176103] JEAN VENIEGAS AGTOTO, PETITIONER, VS. RURAL BANK OF TOBOSO, INC. AND ANTONIO ARBIS IN HIS CAPACITY AS EX-OFFICIO PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF NEGROS OCCIDENTAL, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 167518, March 23 : 2011] BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PETITIONER, VS. PIO ROQUE S. COQUIA, JR., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 192877, March 23 : 2011] BR> SPOUSES HERMES P. OCHOA AND ARACELI D. OCHOA, PETITIONERS, VS. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 192789, March 23 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. NGANO SUGAN, NGA BEN LATAM, FRANCING, GAGA LATAM, SALIGO KUYAN AND KAMISON AKOY, ACCUSED, GAGA LATAM, SALIGO KUYAN AND KAMISON AKOY, APPELLANTS.

  • [A.M. No. MTJ-11-1782 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-1807-MTJ], March 23 : 2011] JOSEFINA NAGUIAT, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE MARIO B. CAPELLAN, PRESIDING JUDGE, MTCC, BR. 1, MALOLOS CITY, BULACAN, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R.No. 170195, March 28 : 2011] SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION AND SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, PETITIONER, VS. TERESA G. FAVILA, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 187425, March 28 : 2011] COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, PETITIONER, VS. AGFHA INCORPORATED, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. P-09-2686 (FORMERLY OCA I.P.I NO. 06-2441-P), March 28 : 2011] PRISCILLA L. HERNANDO, COMPLAINANT, VS. JULIANA Y. BENGSON, LEGAL RESEARCHER, RTC, BRANCH 104, QUEZON CITY, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 185556, March 28 : 2011] SUPREME STEEL CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. NAGKAKAISANG MANGGAGAWA NG SUPREME INDEPENDENT UNION (NMS-IND-APL), RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 178454, March 28 : 2011] FILIPINA SAMSON, PETITIONER, VS. JULIA A. RESTRIVERA, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. P-09-2637 (Formerly A.M. No. 08-12-682-RTC), March 29 : 2011] OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. MAGDALENA L. LOMETILLO, FORMER CLERK OF COURT VII, VICTORIA S. PATOPATEN, CASHIER II, LINDA C. GUIDES, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER I, LENNY GEMMA P. CASTILLO, CLERK III, AND BRENDA M. LINACERO, CLERK III, ALL OF REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, ILOILO CITY, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 191560, March 29 : 2011] HON. LUIS MARIO M. GENERAL, COMMISSIONER, NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION, PETITIONER, VS. HON. ALEJANDRO S. URRO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE NEW APPOINTEE VICE HEREIN PETITIONER HON. LUIS MARIO M. GENERAL, NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION, RESPONDENT. HON. LUIS MARIO M. GENERAL, COMMISSIONER, NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION, PETITIONER, VS. PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, THRU EXECUTIVE SECRETARY LEANDRO MENDOZA, IN HER CAPACITY AS THE APPOINTING POWER, HON. RONALDO V. PUNO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND AS EX-OFFICIO CHAIRMAN OF THE NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION AND HON. EDUARDO U. ESCUETA, ALEJANDRO S. URRO, AND HON. CONSTANCIA P. DE GUZMAN AS THE MIDNIGHT APPOINTEES, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 171427, March 30 : 2011] STERLING SELECTIONS CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. LAGUNA LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (LLDA) AND JOAQUIN G. MENDOZA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS GENERAL MANAGER OF LLDA, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 159450, March 30 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. OLIVIA ALETH GARCIA CRISTOBAL, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 177324, March 30 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. REYNALD DELA CRUZ Y LIBANTOCIA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 189834, March 30 : 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JAY MANDY MAGLIAN Y REYES, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 169575, March 30 : 2011] IMELDA PANTOLLANO (FOR HERSELF AS SURVIVING SPOUSE AND IN BEHALF OF HER 4 CHILDREN HONEYVETTE, TIERRA BRYN, KIENNE DIONNES, SHERRA VEDA MAE, THEN ALL MINORS, WITH DECEASED SEAMAN VEDASTO PANTOLLANO), PETITIONER, VS. KORPHIL SHIPMANAGEMENT AND MANNING CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 170351, March 30 : 2011] LEYTE GEOTHERMAL POWER PROGRESSIVE EMPLOYEES UNION - ALU - TUCP, PETITIONER, VS. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL OIL COMPANY - ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [A. M. No. P-10-2803, March 30 : 2011] JUDGE JEOFFRE W. ACEBIDO, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 41, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, COMPLAINANT,VS. LUDYCISSA A. HALASAN, COURT STENOGRAPHER III, AND JOEL A. LARGO, UTILITY WORKER I, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 41, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 181355, March 30 : 2011] BENJAMIN BELTRAN, JR. AND VIRGILIO BELTRAN, PETITIONERS, VS. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS AND THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G. R. No. 169766, March 30 : 2011] ESTRELLITA JULIAJVO-LLAVE, PETITIONER, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, HAJA PUTRI ZORAYDA A. TAMANO AND ADIB AHMAD A. TAMANO, RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 182177, March 30 : 2011] RICHARD JUAN, PETITIONER, VS. GABRIEL YAP, SR., RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 184980, March 30 : 2011] DANILO MORO, PETITIONER, VS. GENEROSO REYES DEL CASTILLO, JR., RESPONDENT. D E C I S I O N

  • [G.R. No. 177260, March 30 : 2011] LOTTO RESTAURANT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY SUAT KIM GO, PETITIONER, VS. BPI FAMILY SAVINGS BANK, INC., RESPONDENT.

  •  




     
     

    [A.M. No. 2010-11-SC, March 15 : 2011]   RE: EMPLOYEES INCURRING HABITUAL TARDINESS IN THE SECOND SEMESTER OF 2009

     
    EN BANC

    [A.M. No. 2010-11-SC, March 15 : 2011]

    RE: EMPLOYEES INCURRING HABITUAL TARDINESS IN THE SECOND SEMESTER OF 2009

    D E C I S I O N


    BERSAMIN, J.:

    Employees of the Judiciary should observe punctuality in reporting to work. Tardiness, if habitual, prejudices the efficiency of the service being rendered by the Judiciary to the people, and cannot be tolerated. Thus, we sanction certain administrative employees of the Court for their habitual tardiness.

    This administrative matter emanated from the reports dated June 16, 2010 and June 17, 2010 made by the Leave Division under the Office of Administrative Services (OAS) to the Complaints and Investigation Division, also under the OAS, to the effect that the following employees had been habitually tardy in the second semester of 2009, viz:

     
    No. of times Reported Tardy for the 2nd
    Semester of 2009
    Names
    Jul
    Aug
    Sept
    Oct
    Nov
    Dec
    1. Mr. Marc Reman A. Bessat
      Computer Maintenance Technologist III
      Systems Planning & Project Evaluation Division, MISO
    10     10    
    1. Mr. Melquiades A. Briones
      Clerk III
      Office of the Clerk of Court, En Banc
    14 15        
    1. Mr. Benjie B. Cajandig
      Judicial Staff Assistant II
      Mediation Planning & Research Division PHILJA
    12   10 12    
    1. Ms. Sherrylyn A. Nate-Cruz
      Fiscal Clerk II
      Finance Division, FMBO
    10     10    
    1. Mr. Florentino A. Pascual
      Human Resource Management Officer II
      Personnel Division, OAS-OCA
        10 11    
    1. Mr. Albert C. Semilla
      Computer Operator III
      Records Division Office of the Chief Attorney
        12   10  
    1. Ms. Jolina Pauline T. Tuazon
      Executive Assistant II
      Publication Division, PIO
        11 11    
    1. Mary Jingle M. Villocero
      Court Stenographer III
      Judicial Supervision & Monitoring Division, CMO-OCA
    11     10    


    On July 5, 2010, the OAS directed the concerned employees to explain in writing why no administrative disciplinary action should be taken against them for their habitual tardiness during the covered period, which habitual tardiness was in violation of Civil Service Commission (CSC) Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1991, viz:

    An employee shall be considered habitually tardy if he incurs tardiness, regardless of the number of minutes, ten (10) times a month for at least two (2) months in a semester or at least two (2) consecutive months during the year. xxx

    The concerned employees subsequently rendered their respective explanations, which the OAS summarized thuswise:[1]

    A. Employees previously penalized for habitual tardiness:

    1. Mr. ALBERT C. SEMILLA - He was tardy for twelve (12) times in the month of September and ten (10) times in the month of November.  In his explanation dated July 9, 2010, Mr. Semilla readily admitted having incurred those tardiness and humbly submitted to any disciplinary action for the offense.  He stated that due to financial difficulties, he reports to work and likewise returns home through his bicycle.  He supports his family as a solo parent and even enrolled in a short course for Medical Transcriptionists in an attempt to improve their plight.  He added that in the summer of 2009, his blood pressure started to rise abnormally. It was the cause why he was rushed to the hospital twice.  Since May 2009, he was under the care of the SC Clinic for Benign Prostatic Hyperthropy, which ailment caused him many sleepless nights.

      As shown by the records, this is Mr. Semilla's fourth incursion of habitual tardiness.  He was REPRIMANDED for his first incursion of the offense pursuant to the Court En Banc resolution dated August 8, 2000 in A.M. No. 00-6-09-SC, Re: Imposition of Corresponding Penalties to Employees Committing Habitual Tardiness; SUSPENDED for five (5) days for committing habitual tardiness for the second time pursuant to A.M. No. 00-6-09-SC dated November 27, 2002, Re: Imposition of Corresponding Penalties for Habitual Tardiness committed during the Second Semester of 2000; and SUSPENDED for ten (10) days for committing the same offense for the third time pursuant to A.M. No. 00-06-09-SC dated March 16, 2004, Re: Imposition of Corresponding Penalties for Habitual Tardiness committed during the 1st and 2nd Semester of 2003.

      His service records show that Mr. Semilla entered the government service in the Supreme Court as Messenger on November 7, 1979. He was promoted as Clerk on July 1, 1983, Clerk III on July 1, 1989, and Computer Operator III on October 17, 2006, the position he is holding at present. His performance ratings for the 1st and 2nd semesters of the year 2009 show that he performed his work very satisfactorily. Since 2003, this is the only time again that he has incurred tardiness.

    2. Mr. FLORENTINO A. PASCUAL - He was tardy for ten (10) times in the month of September and eleven (11) times in the month of October.  In his letter dated July 7, 2010, he explained that his tardiness was caused by his unstable blood pressure and the traffic situation.  He manifested that to the best of his ability, he will try to be punctual despite his present health condition caused by a mild stroke.

      As shown by the records, this is Mr. Pascual's second incursion of habitual tardiness.  He was REPRIMANDED for his first incursion of the offense pursuant to the Court En Banc Resolution dated March 16, 2004 in A.M. No. 00-06-09-SC, Re: Habitual Tardiness for the 1st and 2nd Semester of 2003.

    B. Employees incurring habitual tardiness for the first time:

    1. Mr. MARC REMAN A. BESSAT - He was tardy for ten (10) times each for the months of July and October.  In his explanation dated July 9, 2010, he stated that during the said period, he experienced abdominal cramping, bloating, gassiness and painful bowel habits, especially on mornings. He claimed that he consulted a Gastroenterologist on March 2010 and was diagnosed with Internal Hemorrhoids. He promised to do everything to improve his time of arrival.

    2. Mr. MELQUIADES A. BRIONES - He was tardy for fourteen (14) times in the month of July and fifteen (15) times in the month of August.  In his letter dated July 6, 2010, Mr. Briones explained that during those times, he was the only one who could manage to accompany his son in going to school and was always caught in traffic. His wife could not replace him in accompanying their son to school because she has fatal diabetes and could hardly move and travel far. He added that during the said period, he was also having his medication concerning his allergies in both hands and feet.

    3. Mr. BENJIE B. CAJANDIG - He was tardy for twelve (12) times each in the months of July and October, and ten (10) times in the month of October. In his letter dated July 7, 2010, Mr. Cajandig explained that his tardiness was mostly due to the distance of his residence from the office and due to heavy traffic which he encounters when traveling from Marcos Highway to the LRT 2 Santolan Station. He averred that this was aggravated during the rainy season since most of his tardiness were incurred during those months. He manifested that he will do his best to address his tardiness.

    4. Ms. SHERRYLYN A. NATE-CRUZ - She was tardy for ten (10) times each in the months of July and October.  In her letter dated July 6, 2010, Ms. Cruz explained that due to the alarming increase in her blood sugar during those days, she was required to have a regular medical checkup that resulted to her tardiness in reporting for work.  She added that at present, she is six (6) months pregnant on her second child and has pre-gestational diabetes.  But she said she will try her best not to be late for work.

    5. Ms. JOLINA PAULINE T. TUAZON - She was tardy for eleven (11) times each in the months of September and October.  In her letter dated July 8, 2010, she explained that during the said period, she was preparing for an entrance examination scheduled for November aside from the reviews she had in the evening. Thus during the months of September and October, she had been going home late  which at times caused her to be late for work the next day.  She expressed regret in committing the offense and promised to avoid the same violation.

    6. Ms. MARY JINGLE M. VILLOCERO - She was tardy for eleven (11) times in the month of July and ten (10) times in the month of October.  In her explanation dated July 8, 2010, Ms. Villocero stated that her tardiness was caused by the fact that she has three (3) children and without any maid to assist her in taking care of them. Her husband is under medication with anti-depressant, thus, she sometimes cannot compel him to take care of everything and attend to all her children's needs.  She averred that she is also a working student with classes during Saturdays and Sundays, and has been working hard for the advancement of her career. She added that she has been trying her best to meet her duties and obligations, both as a responsible employee of the judiciary and as a mother, but in the process, she still incurred tardiness.  She vowed not to violate again the rules on tardiness.

    The OAS concluded that the concerned employees had incurred habitual tardiness and that their justifications were unacceptable. Thus, it recommended the penalties to be imposed on the concerned employees,[2] as follows:

    1. Mr. Albert Semilla, for having been found habitually tardy for the fourth time, be meted the penalty of SUSPENSION for three (3) months without pay with a FINAL WARNING that a repetition of the same offense will be dealt with more severely;

    2. Mr. Florentino A. Pascual, for having been found habitually tardy for the second time, be meted the penalty of SUSPENSION for five (5) days with a WARNING that a repetition of the same shall be dealt with more severely;

    3. Messrs. Marc Remman A. Bessat, Melquiades A. Briones, Benjie B. Cajandig, Mmes. Sherrylyn A. Nate-Cruz, Jolina Pauline T. Tuazon, and Mary Jingle M. Villocero, for having been found habitually tardy for the first time, be meted the penalty of REPRIMAND with the same warning that a repetition of the same shall be dealt with more severely.

    Ruling

    We adopt the evaluation of the OAS.

    It is a canon under the Constitution that a public office is a public trust.[3]  This canon includes the mandate for the observance of prescribed office hours and the efficient use of every moment of such hours for the public service, because only thereby may the public servants recompense the Government and the people for shouldering the costs of maintaining the Judiciary.[4] Accordingly, court officials and employees must at all times strictly observe official hours to inspire the public's respect for the justice system.[5]

    The exacting standards of ethics and morality imposed upon court officials and employees reflect the premium placed on the image of the courts of justice. That image is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and women who work in the Judiciary. It thus becomes the imperative duty of everyone involved in the dispensation of justice, from the judge to the lowliest clerk, to maintain the courts' good name and standing as true temples of justice.[6]

    There is no question that all the concerned employees incurred habitual tardiness within the context of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1991, supra. Thereby, they fell short of the standard of conduct demanded from everyone connected with the administration of justice.  Worthy of stress is that the nature and functions of the employment of the officials and employees of the Judiciary require them to be role models in the faithful observance of the constitutional canon that public office is a public trust. They are always accountable to the people, whom they must serve with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency. They can surely inspire public respect for the justice system by strictly observing official time, among others. Absenteeism and tardiness are, therefore, impermissible.[7]

    The respective justifications of the concerned employees (consisting of illness or poor health, travel difficulties, household responsibilities, and similar causes) are not unacceptable. Already in Re: Supreme Court Employees Incurring Habitual Tardiness in the 2nd Semester of 2005,[8] we enunciated that justifications for absences and tardiness falling under the categories of illness, moral obligation to family and relatives, performance of household chores, traffic and health or physical condition are neither novel nor persuasive, and hardly evoke sympathy. If at all, such justifications may only mitigate liability.

    We next discuss the penalties.

    CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 1999, considers habitual tardiness as a light offense with the following penalties:

    First Offense           Reprimand
    Second Offense        Suspension
    Third Offense           Dismissal

    The penalties recommended by the OAS are well taken. However, in the case of Albert C. Semilla, we moderate the recommended penalty of suspension for three months without pay to one month suspension without pay but with a final warning that a repetition will be dealt with more severely upon humanitarian considerations. Although we insist that every official or employee of the Judiciary must meet the standards of public service, we must practice compassion in deserving cases to avoid the wrong and unwanted impression that the Court wields only mailed fists. Semilla deserves a degree of mitigation. In that regard, Section 53 of Rule IV of the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service[9] grants the disciplining authority the discretion to consider mitigating circumstances in the imposition of the proper penalty. Thus, the mitigating factors in Semilla's favor are the following:

    (a) His length of service and satisfactory performance (i.e., having started as messenger of the Court on November 7, 1979 and having served continuously until the present, with his performance in the first and second semesters of 2009, the year in question, being satisfactory);

    (b) The fact that this infraction of habitual tardiness was his first since 2003; and

    (c) His pleas for compassion (due to his medical condition of benign prostatic hyperthropy, for which he was under the care of the SC Clinic since May 2009, and due to his reporting to work and returning home through his bicycle to add to his financial capacity as a solo parent of his family).

    Even so, we hereby emphatically hold all the concerned employees to their respective promises that they will not commit the same infraction hereafter, or else they will be at the end of the mailed fists of the Court.  Our compassion, which is not limitless but discriminating, should not be taken for granted.

    WHEREFORE, we find and pronounce:

    1. Albert Semilla guilty of habitual tardiness for the fourth time and suspended for one (1) month without pay, with a final warning that a repetition of the same offense will be dealt with more severely;

    2. Florentino A. Pascual guilty of habitual tardiness for the second time and suspended for five (5) days without pay, with a warning that a repetition of the same offense will be dealt with more severely; and

    3. Marc Remman A. Bessat, Melquiades A. Briones, Benjie B. Cajandig, Sherrylyn A. Nate-Cruz, Jolina Pauline T. Tuazon, and Mary Jingle M. Villocero guilty of habitual tardiness for the first time and reprimanded, with warning that a repetition of the same offense will be dealt with more severely.

    SO ORDERED.

    Corona, C.J., Carpio, Carpio Morales, Velasco, Jr., Leonardo-De Castro, Peralta, Del Castillo, Abad, Villarama, Jr., Perez, Mendoza, and Sereno, JJ., concur.
    Nachura and Brion, JJ., on leave.

    Endnotes:


    [1] Rollo, left flap, pp. 2-5.

    [2] OAS Memorandum dated August 9, 2010.

    [3] Section 1, Article XI, Constitution.

    [4] Re: Employees Incurring Habitual Tardiness in the First Semester of 2005, A.M. No. 2005-25-SC, July 6, 2006, 494 SCRA 422, 429, citing Administrative Circular No. 2-99 (Strict Observance of Working Hours and Disciplinary Action  for Absenteeism and Tardiness). 

    [5] Id., pp. 29-30,  citing Administrative Circular No. 1-99 (Enhancing the Dignity of Courts as Temples of Justice and Promoting Respect for their Officials and Employees).

    [6] Id., citing Basco v. Gregorio, A.M. No. P-94-1026, July 6, 1995, 245 SCRA 614, 619.

    [7] Re: Employees Incurring Habitual Tardiness in the 1st Semester of 2007: Ms. Marivic C. Azurin, et al., A.M. No. 2007-15-SC, January 19, 2009, 576 SCRA 121, 133-134.

    [8] A.M. No. 2006-11-SC, September 13, 2006, 501 SCRA 638, 645.

    [9] CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19-99 (September 14, 1999).

    [A.M. No. 2010-11-SC, March 15 : 2011]   RE: EMPLOYEES INCURRING HABITUAL TARDINESS IN THE SECOND SEMESTER OF 2009






    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

               

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED