[ A.C. No. 2500. March 1, 2000]

EUSEBIO S. MILLAR vs. ATTY. BENJAMIN I. CAPARAS, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated MAR 1 2000.

A.C. No. 2500 (Eusebio S. Millar vs. Atty. Benjamin I. Caparas and Atty. Reverito P. Carurucan).

In the Internal Resolution dated 6 December 1999 the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) was required by this Court to report within ten (10) days from notice the steps it undertakes after an administrative case is referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and recommendation to ensure prompt compliance by the IBP of the Court's orders and directives.

In her Report dated 21 January 2000 filed in compliance thereto, Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confidant Erlinda C. Versoza informed the Court of the steps the OBC undertakes-

On the basis of the list of administrative cases referred to the IBP provided from time to time by the Office of the Division Clerk of Court concerned, the OBC verifies the status of each case and whether there was service of the records of the case upon the IBP. Thereafter, those cases still pending with the IBP beyond the period given for investigation, report and recommendation are reported to the respective Divisions of the Court which invariably issues resolutions requiring the IBP to submit a status report and/or its report and recommendation.

The administrative case before us was first referred to the IBP for investigation, report and recommendation on 6 June 1988. 1 This was again referred to the IBP for further investigation per Resolution of 6 December 1999. However, compliance by way of IBP Resolution No. XIV-99-98 dated 27 September 1999 recommending dismissal of the case was not received by the Court until more than ten (10) years later or on 6 October 1999. Considering that the OBC as a matter of practice "reports to the respective Divisions of the Court those cases still pending with the IBP beyond the period given for investigation, report and recommendation," an explanation is definitely in order as to why the OBC failed to report the IBP's long inaction. The fact that our Resolution dated 6 June 1988 imposed no specific period within which the required report and recommendation was to be submitted by the IBP is of no moment considering that ten (10) years can in no way be considered a reasonable time within which to do so.

ACCORDINGLY, the Office of the Bar Confidant, this Court, is required to explain within five (5) days from notice hereof why it failed to report to the concerned Division of this Court the non-compliance of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), as it allegedly was won't to do, for a period of more than ten (10) years. [INTER RESOLUTION]

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com