English translation of Aquino inaugural - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos
(Editor’s note: INQUIRER.net is posting the English translation of the full text of President Benigno Aquino III’s inaugural speech at the Quirino Grandstand in Manila on June 30, 2010.)
His Excellency Jose Ramos Horta, Former President Fidel V. Ramos, Former President Joseph Estrada, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and members of the Senate, House Speaker Prospero Nograles and members of the House, justices of the Supreme Court, members of the foreign delegations,Your Excellencies of the diplomatic corps, fellow colleagues in government, aking mga kababayan. My presence here today is proof that you are my true strength. I never expected that I will be here taking my oath of office before you, as your president. I never imagined that I would be tasked with continuing the mission of my parents. I never entertained the ambition to be the symbol of hope, and to inherit the problems of our nation.I had a simple goal in life: to be true to my parents and our country as an honorable son, a caring brother, and a good citizen.My father offered his life so our democracy could live. My mother devoted her life to nurturing that democracy. I will dedicate my life to making our democracy reach its fullest potential: that of ensuring equality for all. My family has sacrificed much and I am willing to do this again if necessary. Although I was born to famous parents, I know and feel the problems of ordinary citizens. We all know what it is like to have a government that plays deaf and dumb. We know what it is like to be denied justice, to be ignored by those in whom we placed our trust and tasked to become our advocates.Have you ever been ignored by the very government you helped put in power? I have. Have you had to endure being rudely shoved aside by the siren-blaring escorts of those who love to display their position and power over you? I have, too. Have you experienced exasperation and anger at a government that instead of serving you, needs to be endured by you? So have I.I am like you. Many of our countrymen have already voted with their feet - migrating to other countries in search of change or tranquility. They have endured hardship, risked their lives because they believe that compared to their current state here, there is more hope for them in another country, no matter how bleak it may be. In moments when I thought of only my own welfare, I also wondered—is it possible that I can find the peace and quiet that I crave in another country? Is our government beyond redemption? Has it been written that the Filipino’s lot is merely to suffer?Today marks the end of a regime indifferent to the appeals of the people. It is not Noynoy who found a way. You are the reason why the silent suffering of the nation is about to end. This is the beginning of my burden, but if many of us will bear the cross we will lift it, no matter how heavy it is. Through good governance in the coming years, we will lessen our problems. The destiny of the Filipino will return to its rightful place, and as each year passes, the Filipino’s problems will continue to lessen with the assurance of progress in their lives.We are here to serve and not to lord over you. The mandate given to me was one of change. I accept your marching orders to transform our government from one that is self-serving to one that works for the welfare of the nation.This mandate is the social contract that we agreed upon. It is the promise I made during the campaign, which you accepted on election day.During the campaign we said, “If no one is corrupt, no one will be poor.” That is no mere slogan for posters—it is the defining principle that will serve as the foundation of our administration.Our foremost duty is to lift the nation from poverty through honest and effective governance.The first step is to have leaders who are ethical, honest, and true public servants. I will set the example. I will strive to be a good model. I will not break the trust you have placed in me. I will ensure that this, too, will be the advocacy of my Cabinet and those who will join our government.I do not believe that all of those who serve in our government are corrupt. In truth, the majority of them are honest. They joined government to serve and do good. Starting today, they will have the opportunity to show that they have what it takes. I am counting on them to help fight corruption within the bureaucracy.To those who have been put in positions by unlawful means, this is my warning: we will begin earning back the trust of our people by reviewing midnight appointments. Let this serve as a warning to those who intend to continue the crooked ways that have become the norm for too long.To our impoverished countrymen, starting today, your government will be your champion.We will not disregard the needs of our students. We will begin by addressing the glaring shortage in classrooms and educational facilities. Gradually, we will lessen the lack of infrastructures for transportation, tourism and trade. From now on, mediocre work will not be good enough when it comes to roads, bridges, and buildings because we will hold contractors responsible for maintaining their projects in good condition.We will revive the emergency employment program established by former President Corazon Aquino. This will provide jobs for local communities and will help in the development of their and our economy.We will not be the cause of your suffering or hardship. We will strengthen collections by the Bureau of Internal Revenue and we will fight corruption in the Bureau of Customs in order to fund our objectives for the public welfare, such as:• Quality education, including vocational education, so that those who choose not to attend college or those who cannot afford it can find dignified livelihood;• Improved public health services such as PhilHealth for all within three years;• A home for every family, within safe communities.We will strengthen the armed forces and the police, not to serve the interests of those who want to wield power with impunity, but to give added protection for ordinary folk. The armed forces and the police risk their lives daily so that the nation can live in peace and security. The population has doubled and yet their numbers remain unchanged. It is not right that those who make sacrifices are treated pitifully.If there was a fertilizer scam in the past, today there will be security for farmers. We will help them with irrigation, extension services, and marketing their products at the best possible prices.We are directing Secretary Alcala to set up trading centers that will directly link farmers and consumers thereby eliminating middlemen and opportunities for corruption. In this way, funds can be shared by farmers and consumers. We will make our country attractive to investors. We will cut red tape dramatically and implement stable economic policies. We will level the playing field for investors and make government an enabler, not a hindrance to business. This is the only means by which we can provide jobs for our people.Our goal is to create jobs at home so that there will be no need to look for employment abroad. However, as we work towards that end, I am ordering the DFA, POEA, OWWA, and other relevant agencies to be even more responsive to the needs and welfare of our overseas Filipino workers.We will strengthen the process of consultation and feedback. We will strive to uphold the constitutional right of citizens to information on matters of public concern.We relived the spirit of people power during the campaign. Let it take us to good and effective governance. Those who believe in people power put the welfare of others before their own.I can forgive those who did me wrong but I have no right to forgive those who abused our people.To those who talk about reconciliation, if they mean that they would like us to simply forget about the wrongs that they have committed in the past, we have this to say: there can be no reconciliation without justice. When we allow crimes to go unpunished, we give consent to their occurring over and over again. Secretary de Lima, you have your marching orders. Begin the process of providing true and complete justice for all.We are also happy to inform you the acceptance of Chief Justice Hilario Davide of the challenge of strengthening and heading a Truth Commission that will shed light on many unanswered issues that continue to haunt our country.My government will be sincere in dealing with all the peoples of Mindanao. We are committed to a peaceful and just settlement of conflict, inclusive of the interests of all -- may they be Lumads, Bangsamoro or Christian.We shalI defeat the enemy by wielding the tools of justice, social reform, and equitable governance leading to a better life. With proper governance life will improve for all. When we are all living well, who will want to go back to living under oppression?If I have all of you by my side, we will be able to build a nation in which there will be equality of opportunity, because each of us fulfilled our duties and responsibilities equally.After the elections, you proved that it is the people who wield power in this country. This is what democracy means. It is the foundation of our unity. We campaigned for change. Because of this, the Filipino stands tall once more. We are all part of a nation that can begin to dream again.To our friends and neighbors around the world, we are ready to take our place as a reliable member of the community of nations, a nation serious about its commitments and which harmonizes its national interests with its international responsibilities.We will be a predictable and consistent place for investment, a nation where everyone will say, “it all works.”Today, I am inviting you to pledge to yourselves and to our people. No one shall be left behind.No more junkets, no more senseless spending. No more turning back on pledges made during the campaign, whether today or in the coming challenges that will confront us over the next six years. No more influence-peddling, no more patronage politics, no more stealing. No more sirens, no more short cuts, no more bribes. It is time for us to work together once more.We are here today because we stood together and believed in hope. We had no resources to campaign other than our common faith in the inherent goodness of the Filipino.The people who are behind us dared to dream. Today, the dream starts to become a reality. To those among you who are still undecided about sharing the common burden I have only one question: Are you going to quit now that we have won?You are the boss so I cannot ignore your orders. We will design and implement an interaction and feedback mechanism that can effectively respond to your needs and aspirations.You are the ones who brought me here—our volunteers—old, young, celebrity, ordinary folks who went around the country to campaign for change; my household help who provided for all my personal needs; my family, friends, colleagues at work, who shared, cared, and gave their support; my lawyers who stayed all hours to guard my votes and make sure they were counted; and the millions of Filipinos who prevailed, kept faith, and never lost hope - I offer my heartfelt gratitude.I will not be able to face my parents and you who have brought me here if do not fulfill the promises I made.My parents sought nothing less, died for nothing less, than democracy and peace. I am blessed by this legacy. I shall carry the torch forward.My hope is that when I leave office, everyone can say that we have traveled far on the right path, and that we are able to bequeath a better future to the next generation. Join me in continuing this fight for change.Thank you and long live the Filipino people!
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Inaugural Speech of President Benigno C. Aquino III
INQUIRER.netFirst Posted 12:43:00 06/30/2010
His Excellency Jose Ramos Horta, Former President Fidel V. Ramos, Former President Joseph Estrada, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and members of the Senate, House Speaker Prospero Nograles and members of the House, justices of the Supreme Court, members of the foreign delegations,Your Excellencies of the diplomatic corps, fellow colleagues in government, aking mga kababayan.
Ang pagtayo ko dito ngayon ay patunay na kayo ang aking tunay na lakas. Hindi ko inakala na darating tayo sa puntong ito, na ako’y manunumpa sa harap ninyo bilang inyong Pangulo. Hindi ko pinangarap maging tagapagtaguyod ng pag-asa at tagapagmana ng mga suliranin ng ating bayan.Ang layunin ko sa buhay ay simple lang: maging tapat sa aking mga magulang at sa bayan bilang isang marangal na anak, mabait na kuya, at mabuting mamamayan.Nilabanan ng aking ama ang diktaturya at ibinuwis niya ang kanyang buhay para tubusin ang ating demokrasya. Inalay ng aking ina ang kanyang buhay upang pangalagaan ang demokrasyang ito. Ilalaan ko ang aking buhay para siguraduhin na ang ating demokrasya ay kapaki-pakinabang sa bawat isa. Namuhunan na kami ng dugo at handang gawin itong muli kung kinakailangan. Tanyag man ang aking mga magulang at ang kanilang mga nagawa, alam ko rin ang problema ng ordinaryong mamamayan. Alam nating lahat ang pakiramdam na magkaroon ng pamahalaang bulag at bingi. Alam natin ang pakiramdam na mapagkaitan ng hustisya, na mabalewala ng mga taong pinagkatiwalaan at inatasan nating maging ating tagapagtanggol.Kayo ba ay minsan ring nalimutan ng pamahalaang inyong iniluklok sa puwesto? Ako rin. Kayo ba ay nagtiis na sa trapiko para lamang masingitan ng isang naghahari-hariang de-wangwang sa kalsada? Ako rin. Kayo ba ay sawang-sawa na sa pamahalaang sa halip na magsilbi sa taumbayan ay kailangan pa nila itong pagpasensiyahan at tiisin? Ako rin.Katulad ninyo ako. Marami na sa atin ang bumoto gamit ang kanilang paa—nilisan na nila ang ating bansa sa kanilang paghahanap ng pagbabago at katahimikan. Tiniis nila ang hirap, sinugod ang panganib sa ibang bansa dahil doon may pag-asa kahit kaunti na dito sa atin ay hindi nila nakikita. Sa iilang sandali na sarili ko lang ang aking inaalala, pati ako ay napag-isip din—talaga bang hindi na mababago ang pamamahala natin dito? Hindi kaya nasa ibang bansa ang katahimikang hinahanap ko? Saan ba nakasulat na kailangang puro pagtitiis ang tadhana ng Pilipino?Ngayon, sa araw na ito—dito magwawakas ang pamumunong manhid sa mga daing ng taumbayan. Hindi si Noynoy ang gumawa ng paraan, kayo ang dahilan kung bakit ngayon, magtatapos na ang pagtitiis ng sambayanan. Ito naman ang umpisa ng kalbaryo ko, ngunit kung marami tayong magpapasan ng krus ay kakayanin natin ito, gaano man kabigat.Sa tulong ng wastong pamamahala sa mga darating na taon, maiibsan din ang marami nating problema. Ang tadhana ng Pilipino ay babalik sa tamang kalagayan, na sa bawat taon pabawas ng pabawas ang problema ng Pinoy na nagsusumikap at may kasiguruhan sila na magiging tuloy-tuloy na ang pagbuti ng kanilang sitwasyon. Kami ay narito para magsilbi at hindi para maghari. Ang mandato ninyo sa amin ay pagbabago—isang malinaw na utos para ayusin ang gobyerno at lipunan mula sa pamahalaang iilan lamang ang nakikinabang tungo sa isang pamahalaang kabutihan ng mamamayan ang pinangangalagaan. Ang mandatong ito ay isa kung saan kayo at ang inyong pangulo ay nagkasundo para sa pagbabago—isang paninindigan na ipinangako ko noong kampanya at tinanggap ninyo noong araw ng halalan.
Sigaw natin noong kampanya: “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.” Hindi lamang ito pang slogan o pang poster—ito ang mga prinsipyong tinatayuan at nagsisilbing batayan ng ating administrasyon. Ang ating pangunahing tungkulin ay ang magsikap na maiangat ang bansa mula sa kahirapan, sa pamamagitan ng pagpapairal ng katapatan at mabuting pamamalakad sa pamahalaan. Ang unang hakbang ay ang pagkakaroon ng tuwid at tapat na hanay ng mga pinuno. Magsisimula ito sa akin. Sisikapin kong maging isang mabuting ehemplo. Hinding hindi ko sasayangin ang tiwalang ipinagkaloob ninyo sa akin. Sisiguraduhin ko na ganito rin ang adhikain ng aking Gabinete at ng mga magiging kasama sa ating pamahalaan. Naniniwala akong hindi lahat ng nagsisilbi sa gobyerno ay corrupt. Sa katunayan, mas marami sa kanila ay tapat. Pinili nilang maglingkod sa gobyerno upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ngayon, magkakaroon na sila ng pagkakataong magpakitang-gilas. Inaasahan natin sila sa pagsupil ng korapsyon sa loob mismo ng burukrasya.Sa mga itinalaga sa paraang labag sa batas, ito ang aking babala: sisimulan natin ang pagbabalik ng tiwala sa pamamagitan ng pag-usisa sa mga “midnight appointments.” Sana ay magsilbi itong babala sa mga nag-iisip na ipagpatuloy ang baluktot na kalakarang nakasanayan na ng marami.Sa mga kapuspalad nating mga kababayan, ngayon, ang pamahalaan ang inyong kampeon. Hindi natin ipagpapaliban ang mga pangangailangan ng ating mga estudyante, kaya’t sisikapin nating punan ang kakulangan sa ating mga silid-aralan. Unti-unti din nating babawasan ang mga kakulangan sa imprastraktura para sa transportasyon, turismo at pangangalakal. Mula ngayon, hindi na puwede ang “puwede na” pagdating sa mga kalye, tulay at gusali dahil magiging responsibilidad ng mga kontratista ang panatilihing nasa mabuting kalagayan ang mga proyekto nila. Bubuhayin natin ang programang “emergency employment” ng dating pangulong Corazon Aquino sa pagtatayo ng mga bagong imprastraktura na ito. Ito ay magbibigay ng trabaho sa mga local na komunidad at makakatulong sa pagpapalago ng kanila at ng ating ekonomiya. Hindi kami magiging sanhi ng inyong pasakit at perwisyo. Palalakasin natin ang koleksyon at pupuksain natin ang korapsyon sa Kawanihan ng Rentas Internas at Bureau of Customs para mapondohan natin ang ating mga hinahangad para sa lahat, tulad ng:• dekalidad na edukasyon, kabilang ang edukasyong bokasyonal para makapaghanap ng marangal na trabaho ang hindi makapag-kolehiyo; • serbisyong pangkalusugan, tulad ng Philhealth para sa lahat sa loob ng tatlong taon; • tirahan sa loob ng mga ligtas na komunidad. Palalakasin at palalaguin natin ang bilang ng ating kasundaluhan at kapulisan, hindi para tugunan ang interes ng mga naghahari-harian, ngunit para proteksyunan ang mamamayan. Itinataya nila ang kanilang buhay para mayroong pagkakataon sa katahimikan at kapayapaan sa sambayanan. Dumoble na ang populasyong kanilang binabantayan, nanatili naman sila sa bilang. Hindi tama na ang nagmamalasakit ay kinakawawa. Kung dati ay may fertilizer scam, ngayon ay may kalinga na tunay para sa mga magsasaka. Tutulungan natin sila sa irigasyon, extension services, at sa pagbenta ng kanilang produkto sa pinakamataas na presyong maaari. Inaatasan natin si papasok na Kalihim Alcala na magtayo ng mga trading centers kung saan diretso na ang magsasaka sa mamimili - lalaktawan natin ang gitna, kasama na ang kotong cop. Sa ganitong paraan, ang dating napupunta sa gitna ay maari nang paghatian ng magsasaka at mamimili. Gagawin nating kaaya-aya sa negosyante ang ating bansa. We will cut red tape dramatically and implement stable economic policies. We will level the playing field for investors and make government an enabler, not a hindrance, to business. Sa ganitong paraan lamang natin mapupunan ang kakulangan ng trabaho para sa ating mga mamamayan. Layunin nating paramihin ang trabaho dito sa ating bansa upang hindi na kailanganin ang mangibang-bansa para makahanap ng trabaho. Ngunit habang ito ay hindi pa natin naaabot, inaatasan ko ang mga kawani ng DFA, POEA, OWWA at iba pang mga kinauukulang ahensiya na mas lalo pang paigtingin ang pagtugon sa mga hinaing at pangangailangan ng ating mga overseas Filipino workers. Papaigtingin namin ang proseso ng konsultasyon at pag-uulat sa taumbayan. Sisikapin naming isakatuparan ang nakasaad sa ating Konstitusyon na kinikilala ang karapatan ng mamamayan na magkaroon ng kaalaman ukol sa mga pampublikong alintana.Binuhay natin ang diwa ng people power noong kampanya. Ipagpatuloy natin ito tungo sa tuwid at tapat na pamamahala. Ang naniniwala sa people power ay nakatuon sa kapwa at hindi sa sarili.Sa mga nang-api sa akin, kaya ko kayong patawarin, at pinapatawad ko na kayo. Sa mga nang-api sa sambayanan, wala akong karapatan na limutin ang inyong mga kasalanan.To those who are talking about reconciliation, if they mean that they would like us to simply forget about the wrongs that they have committed in the past, we have this to say: there can be no reconciliation without justice. Sa paglimot ng pagkakasala, sinisigurado mong mauulit muli ang mga pagkakasalang ito. Secretary de Lima, you have your marching orders. Begin the process of providing true and complete justice for all. Ikinagagalak din naming ibahagi sa inyo ang pagtanggap ni dating Chief Justice Hilario Davide sa hamon ng pagtatatag at pamumuno sa isang Truth Commission na magbibigay linaw sa maraming kahinahinalang isyu na hanggang ngayon ay walang kasagutan at resolusyon. Ang sinumang nagkamali ay kailangang humarap sa hustisya. Hindi maaaring patuloy ang kalakaran ng walang pananagutan at tuloy na pang-aapi.My government will be sincere in dealing with all the peoples of Mindanao. We are committed to a peaceful and just settlement of conflicts, inclusive of the interests of all – may they be Lumads, Bangsamoro or Christian. We shalI defeat the enemy by wielding the tools of justice, social reform, and equitable governance leading to a better life. Sa tamang pamamahala gaganda ang buhay ng lahat, at sa buhay na maganda, sino pa ang gugustuhing bumalik sa panahon ng pang-aapi?Kung kasama ko kayo, maitataguyod natin ang isang bayan kung saan pantay-pantay ang pagkakataon, dahil pantay-pantay nating ginagampanan ang ating mga pananagutan.Kamakailan lamang, ang bawat isa sa atin ay nanindigan sa presinto. Bumoto tayo ayon sa ating karapatan at konsensiya. Hindi tayo umatras sa tungkulin nating ipaglaban ang karapatang ito.Pagkatapos ng bilangan, pinatunayan ninyo na ang tao ang tunay na lakas ng bayan. Ito ang kahalagahan ng ating demokrasya. Ito ang pundasyon ng ating pagkakaisa. Nangampanya tayo para sa pagbabago. Dahil dito taas-noo muli ang Pilipino. Tayong lahat ay kabilang sa isang bansa kung saan maaari nang mangarap muli.To our friends and neighbors around the world, we are ready to take our place as a reliable member of the community of nations, a nation serious about its commitments and which harmonizes its national interests with its international responsibilities. We will be a predictable and consistent place for investment, a nation where everyone will say, “it all works.” Inaanyayahan ko kayo ngayon na manumpa sa ating mga sarili, sa sambayanan, WALANG MAIIWAN. Walang pangingibang-bayan at gastusan na walang wastong dahilan. Walang pagtatalikod sa mga salitang binitawan noong kampanya, ngayon at hanggang sa mga susunod pang pagsubok na pagdadaanan sa loob ng anim na taon. Walang lamangan, walang padrino at walang pagnanakaw. Walang wang-wang, walang counterflow, walang tong. Panahon na upang tayo ay muling magkawang-gawa. Nandito tayo ngayon dahil sama-sama tayong nanindigan at nagtiwala na may pag-asa. The people who are behind us dared to dream. Today, the dream starts to become a reality. Sa inyong mga nag-iisip pa kung tutulong kayo sa pagpasan ng ating krus, isa lang ang aking tanong – kung kailan tayo nanalo, saka pa ba kayo susuko? Kayo ang boss ko, kaya’t hindi maaaring hindi ako makinig sa mga utos ninyo. We will design and implement an interaction and feedback mechanism that can effectively respond to the people’s needs and aspirations. Kayo ang nagdala sa akin sa puntong ito—ang ating mga volunteers—matanda, bata, celebrity, ordinaryong tao, na umikot sa Pilipinas para ikampanya ang pagbabago; ang aking mga kasambahay, na nag-asikaso ng lahat ng aking mga personal na pangangailangan; ang aking pamilya, kaibigan at katrabaho, na dumamay, nag-alaga at nagbigay ng suporta sa akin; ang ating mga abogado, na nagpuyat para bantayan ang ating mga boto at siguraduhing mabibilang ang bawat isa; ang aking mga kapartido at kaalyado na kasama kong nangahas mangarap; at ang milyun-milyong Pilipinong nagkaisa, nagtiwala at hindi nawalan ng pag-asa—nasa inyo ang aking taus-pusong pasasalamat.Hindi ko makakayang harapin ang aking mga magulang, at kayong mga nagdala sa akin sa yugto ng buhay kong ito, kung hindi ko maisasakatuparan ang aking mga binitawang salita sa araw na ito.My parents sought nothing less and died for nothing less than democracy, peace and prosperity. I am blessed by this legacy. I shall carry the torch forward.Layunin ko na sa pagbaba ko sa katungkulan, masasabi ng lahat na malayo na ang narating natin sa pagtahak ng tuwid na landas at mas maganda na ang kinabukasang ipapamana natin sa susunod na henerasyon. Samahan ninyo ako sa pagtatapos ng laban na ito. Tayo na sa tuwid na landas.Maraming salamat po at mabuhay ang sambayanang Pilipino!
His Excellency Jose Ramos Horta, Former President Fidel V. Ramos, Former President Joseph Estrada, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and members of the Senate, House Speaker Prospero Nograles and members of the House, justices of the Supreme Court, members of the foreign delegations,Your Excellencies of the diplomatic corps, fellow colleagues in government, aking mga kababayan.
Ang pagtayo ko dito ngayon ay patunay na kayo ang aking tunay na lakas. Hindi ko inakala na darating tayo sa puntong ito, na ako’y manunumpa sa harap ninyo bilang inyong Pangulo. Hindi ko pinangarap maging tagapagtaguyod ng pag-asa at tagapagmana ng mga suliranin ng ating bayan.Ang layunin ko sa buhay ay simple lang: maging tapat sa aking mga magulang at sa bayan bilang isang marangal na anak, mabait na kuya, at mabuting mamamayan.Nilabanan ng aking ama ang diktaturya at ibinuwis niya ang kanyang buhay para tubusin ang ating demokrasya. Inalay ng aking ina ang kanyang buhay upang pangalagaan ang demokrasyang ito. Ilalaan ko ang aking buhay para siguraduhin na ang ating demokrasya ay kapaki-pakinabang sa bawat isa. Namuhunan na kami ng dugo at handang gawin itong muli kung kinakailangan. Tanyag man ang aking mga magulang at ang kanilang mga nagawa, alam ko rin ang problema ng ordinaryong mamamayan. Alam nating lahat ang pakiramdam na magkaroon ng pamahalaang bulag at bingi. Alam natin ang pakiramdam na mapagkaitan ng hustisya, na mabalewala ng mga taong pinagkatiwalaan at inatasan nating maging ating tagapagtanggol.Kayo ba ay minsan ring nalimutan ng pamahalaang inyong iniluklok sa puwesto? Ako rin. Kayo ba ay nagtiis na sa trapiko para lamang masingitan ng isang naghahari-hariang de-wangwang sa kalsada? Ako rin. Kayo ba ay sawang-sawa na sa pamahalaang sa halip na magsilbi sa taumbayan ay kailangan pa nila itong pagpasensiyahan at tiisin? Ako rin.Katulad ninyo ako. Marami na sa atin ang bumoto gamit ang kanilang paa—nilisan na nila ang ating bansa sa kanilang paghahanap ng pagbabago at katahimikan. Tiniis nila ang hirap, sinugod ang panganib sa ibang bansa dahil doon may pag-asa kahit kaunti na dito sa atin ay hindi nila nakikita. Sa iilang sandali na sarili ko lang ang aking inaalala, pati ako ay napag-isip din—talaga bang hindi na mababago ang pamamahala natin dito? Hindi kaya nasa ibang bansa ang katahimikang hinahanap ko? Saan ba nakasulat na kailangang puro pagtitiis ang tadhana ng Pilipino?Ngayon, sa araw na ito—dito magwawakas ang pamumunong manhid sa mga daing ng taumbayan. Hindi si Noynoy ang gumawa ng paraan, kayo ang dahilan kung bakit ngayon, magtatapos na ang pagtitiis ng sambayanan. Ito naman ang umpisa ng kalbaryo ko, ngunit kung marami tayong magpapasan ng krus ay kakayanin natin ito, gaano man kabigat.Sa tulong ng wastong pamamahala sa mga darating na taon, maiibsan din ang marami nating problema. Ang tadhana ng Pilipino ay babalik sa tamang kalagayan, na sa bawat taon pabawas ng pabawas ang problema ng Pinoy na nagsusumikap at may kasiguruhan sila na magiging tuloy-tuloy na ang pagbuti ng kanilang sitwasyon. Kami ay narito para magsilbi at hindi para maghari. Ang mandato ninyo sa amin ay pagbabago—isang malinaw na utos para ayusin ang gobyerno at lipunan mula sa pamahalaang iilan lamang ang nakikinabang tungo sa isang pamahalaang kabutihan ng mamamayan ang pinangangalagaan. Ang mandatong ito ay isa kung saan kayo at ang inyong pangulo ay nagkasundo para sa pagbabago—isang paninindigan na ipinangako ko noong kampanya at tinanggap ninyo noong araw ng halalan.
Sigaw natin noong kampanya: “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.” Hindi lamang ito pang slogan o pang poster—ito ang mga prinsipyong tinatayuan at nagsisilbing batayan ng ating administrasyon. Ang ating pangunahing tungkulin ay ang magsikap na maiangat ang bansa mula sa kahirapan, sa pamamagitan ng pagpapairal ng katapatan at mabuting pamamalakad sa pamahalaan. Ang unang hakbang ay ang pagkakaroon ng tuwid at tapat na hanay ng mga pinuno. Magsisimula ito sa akin. Sisikapin kong maging isang mabuting ehemplo. Hinding hindi ko sasayangin ang tiwalang ipinagkaloob ninyo sa akin. Sisiguraduhin ko na ganito rin ang adhikain ng aking Gabinete at ng mga magiging kasama sa ating pamahalaan. Naniniwala akong hindi lahat ng nagsisilbi sa gobyerno ay corrupt. Sa katunayan, mas marami sa kanila ay tapat. Pinili nilang maglingkod sa gobyerno upang gumawa ng kabutihan. Ngayon, magkakaroon na sila ng pagkakataong magpakitang-gilas. Inaasahan natin sila sa pagsupil ng korapsyon sa loob mismo ng burukrasya.Sa mga itinalaga sa paraang labag sa batas, ito ang aking babala: sisimulan natin ang pagbabalik ng tiwala sa pamamagitan ng pag-usisa sa mga “midnight appointments.” Sana ay magsilbi itong babala sa mga nag-iisip na ipagpatuloy ang baluktot na kalakarang nakasanayan na ng marami.Sa mga kapuspalad nating mga kababayan, ngayon, ang pamahalaan ang inyong kampeon. Hindi natin ipagpapaliban ang mga pangangailangan ng ating mga estudyante, kaya’t sisikapin nating punan ang kakulangan sa ating mga silid-aralan. Unti-unti din nating babawasan ang mga kakulangan sa imprastraktura para sa transportasyon, turismo at pangangalakal. Mula ngayon, hindi na puwede ang “puwede na” pagdating sa mga kalye, tulay at gusali dahil magiging responsibilidad ng mga kontratista ang panatilihing nasa mabuting kalagayan ang mga proyekto nila. Bubuhayin natin ang programang “emergency employment” ng dating pangulong Corazon Aquino sa pagtatayo ng mga bagong imprastraktura na ito. Ito ay magbibigay ng trabaho sa mga local na komunidad at makakatulong sa pagpapalago ng kanila at ng ating ekonomiya. Hindi kami magiging sanhi ng inyong pasakit at perwisyo. Palalakasin natin ang koleksyon at pupuksain natin ang korapsyon sa Kawanihan ng Rentas Internas at Bureau of Customs para mapondohan natin ang ating mga hinahangad para sa lahat, tulad ng:• dekalidad na edukasyon, kabilang ang edukasyong bokasyonal para makapaghanap ng marangal na trabaho ang hindi makapag-kolehiyo; • serbisyong pangkalusugan, tulad ng Philhealth para sa lahat sa loob ng tatlong taon; • tirahan sa loob ng mga ligtas na komunidad. Palalakasin at palalaguin natin ang bilang ng ating kasundaluhan at kapulisan, hindi para tugunan ang interes ng mga naghahari-harian, ngunit para proteksyunan ang mamamayan. Itinataya nila ang kanilang buhay para mayroong pagkakataon sa katahimikan at kapayapaan sa sambayanan. Dumoble na ang populasyong kanilang binabantayan, nanatili naman sila sa bilang. Hindi tama na ang nagmamalasakit ay kinakawawa. Kung dati ay may fertilizer scam, ngayon ay may kalinga na tunay para sa mga magsasaka. Tutulungan natin sila sa irigasyon, extension services, at sa pagbenta ng kanilang produkto sa pinakamataas na presyong maaari. Inaatasan natin si papasok na Kalihim Alcala na magtayo ng mga trading centers kung saan diretso na ang magsasaka sa mamimili - lalaktawan natin ang gitna, kasama na ang kotong cop. Sa ganitong paraan, ang dating napupunta sa gitna ay maari nang paghatian ng magsasaka at mamimili. Gagawin nating kaaya-aya sa negosyante ang ating bansa. We will cut red tape dramatically and implement stable economic policies. We will level the playing field for investors and make government an enabler, not a hindrance, to business. Sa ganitong paraan lamang natin mapupunan ang kakulangan ng trabaho para sa ating mga mamamayan. Layunin nating paramihin ang trabaho dito sa ating bansa upang hindi na kailanganin ang mangibang-bansa para makahanap ng trabaho. Ngunit habang ito ay hindi pa natin naaabot, inaatasan ko ang mga kawani ng DFA, POEA, OWWA at iba pang mga kinauukulang ahensiya na mas lalo pang paigtingin ang pagtugon sa mga hinaing at pangangailangan ng ating mga overseas Filipino workers. Papaigtingin namin ang proseso ng konsultasyon at pag-uulat sa taumbayan. Sisikapin naming isakatuparan ang nakasaad sa ating Konstitusyon na kinikilala ang karapatan ng mamamayan na magkaroon ng kaalaman ukol sa mga pampublikong alintana.Binuhay natin ang diwa ng people power noong kampanya. Ipagpatuloy natin ito tungo sa tuwid at tapat na pamamahala. Ang naniniwala sa people power ay nakatuon sa kapwa at hindi sa sarili.Sa mga nang-api sa akin, kaya ko kayong patawarin, at pinapatawad ko na kayo. Sa mga nang-api sa sambayanan, wala akong karapatan na limutin ang inyong mga kasalanan.To those who are talking about reconciliation, if they mean that they would like us to simply forget about the wrongs that they have committed in the past, we have this to say: there can be no reconciliation without justice. Sa paglimot ng pagkakasala, sinisigurado mong mauulit muli ang mga pagkakasalang ito. Secretary de Lima, you have your marching orders. Begin the process of providing true and complete justice for all. Ikinagagalak din naming ibahagi sa inyo ang pagtanggap ni dating Chief Justice Hilario Davide sa hamon ng pagtatatag at pamumuno sa isang Truth Commission na magbibigay linaw sa maraming kahinahinalang isyu na hanggang ngayon ay walang kasagutan at resolusyon. Ang sinumang nagkamali ay kailangang humarap sa hustisya. Hindi maaaring patuloy ang kalakaran ng walang pananagutan at tuloy na pang-aapi.My government will be sincere in dealing with all the peoples of Mindanao. We are committed to a peaceful and just settlement of conflicts, inclusive of the interests of all – may they be Lumads, Bangsamoro or Christian. We shalI defeat the enemy by wielding the tools of justice, social reform, and equitable governance leading to a better life. Sa tamang pamamahala gaganda ang buhay ng lahat, at sa buhay na maganda, sino pa ang gugustuhing bumalik sa panahon ng pang-aapi?Kung kasama ko kayo, maitataguyod natin ang isang bayan kung saan pantay-pantay ang pagkakataon, dahil pantay-pantay nating ginagampanan ang ating mga pananagutan.Kamakailan lamang, ang bawat isa sa atin ay nanindigan sa presinto. Bumoto tayo ayon sa ating karapatan at konsensiya. Hindi tayo umatras sa tungkulin nating ipaglaban ang karapatang ito.Pagkatapos ng bilangan, pinatunayan ninyo na ang tao ang tunay na lakas ng bayan. Ito ang kahalagahan ng ating demokrasya. Ito ang pundasyon ng ating pagkakaisa. Nangampanya tayo para sa pagbabago. Dahil dito taas-noo muli ang Pilipino. Tayong lahat ay kabilang sa isang bansa kung saan maaari nang mangarap muli.To our friends and neighbors around the world, we are ready to take our place as a reliable member of the community of nations, a nation serious about its commitments and which harmonizes its national interests with its international responsibilities. We will be a predictable and consistent place for investment, a nation where everyone will say, “it all works.” Inaanyayahan ko kayo ngayon na manumpa sa ating mga sarili, sa sambayanan, WALANG MAIIWAN. Walang pangingibang-bayan at gastusan na walang wastong dahilan. Walang pagtatalikod sa mga salitang binitawan noong kampanya, ngayon at hanggang sa mga susunod pang pagsubok na pagdadaanan sa loob ng anim na taon. Walang lamangan, walang padrino at walang pagnanakaw. Walang wang-wang, walang counterflow, walang tong. Panahon na upang tayo ay muling magkawang-gawa. Nandito tayo ngayon dahil sama-sama tayong nanindigan at nagtiwala na may pag-asa. The people who are behind us dared to dream. Today, the dream starts to become a reality. Sa inyong mga nag-iisip pa kung tutulong kayo sa pagpasan ng ating krus, isa lang ang aking tanong – kung kailan tayo nanalo, saka pa ba kayo susuko? Kayo ang boss ko, kaya’t hindi maaaring hindi ako makinig sa mga utos ninyo. We will design and implement an interaction and feedback mechanism that can effectively respond to the people’s needs and aspirations. Kayo ang nagdala sa akin sa puntong ito—ang ating mga volunteers—matanda, bata, celebrity, ordinaryong tao, na umikot sa Pilipinas para ikampanya ang pagbabago; ang aking mga kasambahay, na nag-asikaso ng lahat ng aking mga personal na pangangailangan; ang aking pamilya, kaibigan at katrabaho, na dumamay, nag-alaga at nagbigay ng suporta sa akin; ang ating mga abogado, na nagpuyat para bantayan ang ating mga boto at siguraduhing mabibilang ang bawat isa; ang aking mga kapartido at kaalyado na kasama kong nangahas mangarap; at ang milyun-milyong Pilipinong nagkaisa, nagtiwala at hindi nawalan ng pag-asa—nasa inyo ang aking taus-pusong pasasalamat.Hindi ko makakayang harapin ang aking mga magulang, at kayong mga nagdala sa akin sa yugto ng buhay kong ito, kung hindi ko maisasakatuparan ang aking mga binitawang salita sa araw na ito.My parents sought nothing less and died for nothing less than democracy, peace and prosperity. I am blessed by this legacy. I shall carry the torch forward.Layunin ko na sa pagbaba ko sa katungkulan, masasabi ng lahat na malayo na ang narating natin sa pagtahak ng tuwid na landas at mas maganda na ang kinabukasang ipapamana natin sa susunod na henerasyon. Samahan ninyo ako sa pagtatapos ng laban na ito. Tayo na sa tuwid na landas.Maraming salamat po at mabuhay ang sambayanang Pilipino!
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
High court suspends Lozano, daughter for professional misconduct
By Tetch Torres INQUIRER.net
First Posted 16:45:00 06/22/2010
Filed Under: Punishment, Legal issues, Judiciary (system of justice)
MANILA, Philippines—A month after his appointment, Chief Justice Renato Corona Tuesday sanctioned three lawyers, a retired judge and two court employees for committing various infractions, including father and daughter lawyers Oliver Lozano and Evangeline Lozano-Endriano.
The Lozanos were indefinitely suspended for grave professional misconduct. In its resolution, the high court en banc said the Lozanos have misquoted and misused constitutional provisions and showed “a reckless lack of respect and disregard for our system of justice” for filing without any legal or factual basis a criminal complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against retired Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. and retired SC Justice Alicia Austria-Martinez.
It pointed that the Lozanos are “unfit to continue to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities belonging to the office of an attorney.” The suspension took effect immediately. The Court also held that any proven violation of the said suspension order would result in the Lozanos’ outright disbarment.
Last March 2, the high court issued a resolution dismissing for utter lack of merit the graft complaint against retired Chief Justice Davide, Jr. and Justice Martinez and ordered the Lozanos to “explain in writing” why they should not be sanctioned.
The criminal complaint against Davide and Martinez stemmed from their participation in the Resolution of the high court’s first division that ruled in the consolidated cases of Heirs of Antonio Pael v. CA and Destura v. CA.
In their complaint, the Lozanos alleged that Davide, then Division Chair, and Martinez, committed unlawful acts in resolving the cases, including overturning the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals.
Meanwhile, the high court, through Senior Justice Antonio T. Carpio, ordered Atty. James Benedict Florido suspended for one year for violating Canon 19 and Rules 1.02 and 15.07 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Florido is the counsel for the minority stockholders of the Rural Bank of Calape, Inc. (RBCI) Bohol, and his clients forcibly took over the management and the premises of RBCI on April 1, 2002 without a valid court order.
In its ruling, the Court ruled that “a lawyer must employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client and that it’s one’s duty to counsel his clients to use peaceful and lawful methods in seeking justice and refrain from doing an intentional wrong to their adversaries.”
The high court also fined (Ret.) Judge Antonio A. Carbonell of the San Fernando City, La Union Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, P10,000 for simple misconduct. The amount shall be deducted from Carbonell’s retirement benefits which have been withheld.
Carbonell has been sanctioned after the high court affirmed the findings of the Office of the Court Administrator.
First Posted 16:45:00 06/22/2010
Filed Under: Punishment, Legal issues, Judiciary (system of justice)
MANILA, Philippines—A month after his appointment, Chief Justice Renato Corona Tuesday sanctioned three lawyers, a retired judge and two court employees for committing various infractions, including father and daughter lawyers Oliver Lozano and Evangeline Lozano-Endriano.
The Lozanos were indefinitely suspended for grave professional misconduct. In its resolution, the high court en banc said the Lozanos have misquoted and misused constitutional provisions and showed “a reckless lack of respect and disregard for our system of justice” for filing without any legal or factual basis a criminal complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against retired Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. and retired SC Justice Alicia Austria-Martinez.
It pointed that the Lozanos are “unfit to continue to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities belonging to the office of an attorney.” The suspension took effect immediately. The Court also held that any proven violation of the said suspension order would result in the Lozanos’ outright disbarment.
Last March 2, the high court issued a resolution dismissing for utter lack of merit the graft complaint against retired Chief Justice Davide, Jr. and Justice Martinez and ordered the Lozanos to “explain in writing” why they should not be sanctioned.
The criminal complaint against Davide and Martinez stemmed from their participation in the Resolution of the high court’s first division that ruled in the consolidated cases of Heirs of Antonio Pael v. CA and Destura v. CA.
In their complaint, the Lozanos alleged that Davide, then Division Chair, and Martinez, committed unlawful acts in resolving the cases, including overturning the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals.
Meanwhile, the high court, through Senior Justice Antonio T. Carpio, ordered Atty. James Benedict Florido suspended for one year for violating Canon 19 and Rules 1.02 and 15.07 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Florido is the counsel for the minority stockholders of the Rural Bank of Calape, Inc. (RBCI) Bohol, and his clients forcibly took over the management and the premises of RBCI on April 1, 2002 without a valid court order.
In its ruling, the Court ruled that “a lawyer must employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client and that it’s one’s duty to counsel his clients to use peaceful and lawful methods in seeking justice and refrain from doing an intentional wrong to their adversaries.”
The high court also fined (Ret.) Judge Antonio A. Carbonell of the San Fernando City, La Union Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, P10,000 for simple misconduct. The amount shall be deducted from Carbonell’s retirement benefits which have been withheld.
Carbonell has been sanctioned after the high court affirmed the findings of the Office of the Court Administrator.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
How to Digest Cases
Case digest is a digest, hence it must be concise.
1. Speed read the entire case. This will give you an overall picture or idea of what the case is all about.
2. Read the dispositive portion. This can be found at the last part of the decision which usually states "WHEREFORE ... "
3. Identify the issue first. So that while reading the whole text, you will know which facts are important.
4. Read the entire case at your normal speed.
5. Pick up only the ultimate facts which are relevant to the issue. Ignore those which do not have something to do with how the issue came about. This includes unnecessary dates. This is the reason why you need to know the issue first.
6. Identify how the Supreme Court ourt settled the issue. If you are using the SCRA, check the syllabi of the case. Quote the exact phrase/s or paragraph/s.
-->
Thursday, June 17, 2010
THE RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC November 21, 2000
RE: THE RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
R E S O L U T I O N
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson, Technical Working Group, Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court, submitting for the consideration and approval of the Court the proposed "The Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases," the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same.
The Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 following its publication two (2) newspaper of general circulation.
September 9, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
Section 1. Title. - This Rule shall be known as " The Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases."
Section 2. Scope. - This Rule shall govern the procedure in actions before the Metropolitan trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts for payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Section 3. Definiton of Terms. - For purposes of this Rule:
(a) Plaintiff - refers to the party who initiated a small claims action. The term includes a defendant who has filed a counterclaim against plainfill;
(b) Defendant - is the party against whom the plaintiff has filed a small claims action. The term includes a plaintiff against whom a defendant has filed a claim, or a person who replies to the claim;
(c) Person - is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership, association, or other juridical entity endowed with personality by law;
(d) Individual - is a natural person;
(e) Motion - means a party's request, written or oral, to the court for an orderaction. It shall include an informal written request to the court, such as a letter;
(f) Good cause - means circumtances sufficient to justify the requested order or other action, as determined by the judge; and
(g) Affidavit - means a written statement or declaration of facts that are shown or affirmed to be true.
Section 4. Applicability - The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall apply this Rule in all actions which are; (a) purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or reimbursement of sum of money, and (b) the civil aspect of criminal action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule of 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
These claims or demands may be;
(a) For money owned under any of the following;
1. Contract of Lease;
2. Contract of Loan;
3. Contract of Services;
4. Contract of Sale; or
5. Contract of Mortgage;
(b) For damages arising from any of the following;
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
(c) The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving a money claim covered by this Rule pursuant to Sec. 417 of Republic Act 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991.
Section 5. Commencement of Small Claims Action. - A small claims action is commenced by filing with the court an accomplished and verified Statement of Claim (Form 1 - SCC) in duplicate, accompanied by a Certification of Non-forum Shopping (Form 1-A,SCC), and two (2) duly certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subjects of the claim, as well as the affidavits of witnesses and other evidence to support the claim. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
No formal pleading, other than the Statement of Claim described in this Rule, is necessary to initiate a small claims action.
Section 6. Joinder of Claims - Plaintiff may join in a single statement of claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant provided that the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed P100,00.00.
Section 7. Affidavits - The affidavits submitted under this Rule shall state only facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants which are admissible in evidence.
A violation of this requirement shall subject the party, and the counsel who assisted the party in the preparation of the affidavits, if any, to appropriate disciplinary action. The inadmissible affidavit(s) or portion(s) thereof shall be expunged from the record.
Section 8. Payment of Filing Fees. - The plaintiff shall pay the docket and other legal fees prescribed under Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court, unless allowed to litigate as an indigent.
A claim filed with a motion to sue as indigent (Form 6-SCC) shall be referred to the Executive Judge for immediate action in case of multi-sala courts, or to the Presiding Judge of the court hearing the small claims case. If the motion is granted by the Executive Judge, the case shall be raffled off or assigned to the court designated to hear small claims cases. If the motion is denied, the plaintiff shall be given five (5) days within which to pay the docket fees, otherwise, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice. In no case shall a party, even if declared an indigent, be exempt from the payment of the P1,000.00 fee for service of summons and processes in civil cases.
Section 9. Dismissal of the Claim. - After the court determines that the case falls under this Rule, it may, from an examination of the allegations of the Statement of Claim and such evidence attached thereto, by itself, dismiss the case outright of any of the grounds apparent from the Claim for the dismissal of a civil action.
Section 10. Summons and Notice of Hearing - If no ground for dismissal is found, the court shall forthwith issue Summons (Form 2-SCC) on the day of receipt of the Statement of Claim, directing the defendant to submit a verified Response.
The court shall also issue a Notice (Form 4-SCC) to both parties, directing them to appear before it on a specific date and time for hearing, with a warning that no unjustified postponement shall be allowed, as provided in Section 19 of this Rule.
The summons and notice to be served on the defendant shall be accompanied by a copy of the Statement of Claim and documents submitted by plaintiff, and a copy of the Response (Form 3-SCC) to be accomplished by the defendant. The Notice shall contain an express prohibition against the filing of a motion to dismiss or any other motion under Section 14 of this Rule.
Section 11. Response - The defendant shall file with the court and serve on the plaintiff a duly accomplished and verified Response within a non - extendible period of ten (10) days from receipt of summons. The Response shall be accompanied by certified photocopies of documents, as well as affidavits of witnesses and other evidence in support thereof. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Response, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
Section 12. Effect of Failure to File Response - Should the defendant fail to file his response within the required period, the court by itself shall render judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of claim limited to what is prayed for. The court however, may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of damages for being excessive or unconscionable
Section 13. Counterclaims Within the Coverage of this Rule - If at the time the action is commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim; (c) does not require for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another pending action, the claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the response; otherwise, the defendant shall be barred from suit on the counterclaim.
The defendant may also elect to the file a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence , provided that the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket and the other legal fees are paid.
Section 14. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions - The following pleadings, motions, and petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:
(a) Motion to dismiss the compliant except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction;
(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgement, or for reopening of trial;
(d) Petiton for relief from judgement;
(e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper;
(f) Memoranda;
(g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
(h) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(i) Dilatory motions for postponement;
(j) Reply;
(k) Third-party complaints; and
(l) Interventions.
Section 15. Availability of Forms; Assistance by Court Personnel. - The Clerk of Court or other personnel shall provide such assistance as may be requested by a plaintiff or a defendant regarding the availability of forms and other information about the coverage, requirements as well as procedure for small claims cases.
Section 16. Appearance. - the parties shall appear at the designated date of hearing personally or through a representative authorized under a Special Power of Attorney (Form 5-SCC ) to enter into an amicable settlement, to submit of Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and of documentary exhibits
Section 17. Appearance of Attorneys Not Allowed. - No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the plaintiff or defendant.
If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim or defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual who is not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter's consent.
Section 18. Non-appearance of Parties. - Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall be cause for the dismissal of the claim without prejudice. The defendant who appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive counterclaim.
Failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to file a Response under Section 12 of this Rule. This shall not apply where one of two or more defendants who are sued under a common cause of action and have pleaded a common defense appears at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall cause the dismissal with prejudice of both the claim and counterclaim.
Section 19. Postponement When Allowed. - A request for postponement of a hearing may be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the court on the scheduled date and time. A party may avail of only one (1) postponement.
Section 20. Duty of the Court. - At the beginning of the court session, the judge shall read aloud a short statement explaining the nature, purpose and the rule of procedure of small claims cases.
Section 21. Judicial Dispute Resolution. - At the hearing, the judge shall conduct Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) through mediation, conciliation, early neutral evaluation, or any other mode of JDR. Any settlement (Form 7-SCC) or resolution (Form 8-SCC) of the dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by the parties and submitted to the court for approval (Form 12-SCC).
Section 22. Failure of JDR. - If JDR fails and the parties agree in writing (Form 10-SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall so proceed in an informal and expeditious manner and terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala court , the case shall, on the same day, be transmitted (Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of Court for immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing judge for hearing and decision within five (5) working days from referral; and (b) in case of single sala court, the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case in the court of origin within five (5) working days from referral by the JDR judge.
Section 23. Decision. - After the hearing, the court shall render its decision on the same day, based on the facts established by the evidence (Form 13-SCC). The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in the court docket for civil cases and a copy thereof forthwith served on the parties.
The decision shall be final and unappealable.
Section 24. Execution. - If the decision is rendered in favor of the plaintiff, execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-SCC).
Section 25. Applicability. of the Rules of Civil Procedure - The Rules of Civil procedure shall apply suppletorily insofar as they are not inconsistent with this rule.
Section 26. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 for the pilot courts designated to apply the procedure for small claims cases following its publication in two newspaper of general circulation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATIONALE
of the
Proposed Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases
a. Introduction
The most significant recurring theme of every program for judicial reform of the Supreme Court is the pressing need for a more accessible, much swifter and less expensive delivery of justice. Undeniably, the slow grind of the wheels of justice is the result of a variety of factors, foremost of which is the perennial congestion of court dockets which has transformed court litigation into a protracted battle, that invariably exhausts the time, effort and resources of party-litigants, especially the poor. Many strategies have been devised to unclog heavy court dockets, and one such approach is the use on mandatory Pre-trial and Alternative Dispute Resolutions mechanisms such as mediation, arbitration and conciliation. Another scheme that has been widely used in many foreign legal system but which has yet to be tried in the Philippines is the small claims case processing method used by small claims courts, often referred to as the "People’s Court," as it comes most directly into contact with the citizenry of a jurisdiction.
Small claims courts are courts of limited jurisdiction that hear civil cases between private litigants. Courts authorized to try small claims may also have other judicial functions, and the name by which such a court is known varies by jurisdiction: it may be known by such names as county court or magistrate’s court. Small claims courts can be found in Australia, Canada, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, South Africa, Hong Kong, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States.
b. The History and the Reforms of Small Claims Court
1.In the United States1
For almost a century now, small claims courts have provided a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in the United States. Originating around 1912 or 1913, these courts were established primarily as a means for small businesses to collect money from borrowers through a process that was faster, less formal, and less expensive than traditional civil litigation.
Following the lead of the establishment of the initial small claim court in Kansas, USA in 1912 or 1913, every state in the United States has created some form of a small claims court system. Although the financial claims limits, methods or procedure, and overall structure vary from state to state, the concept is essentially the same, i.e., that relatively minor disputes, involving dollar amounts that are insufficient to warrant processing the case through the normal court procedure, justify expeditious and simplified handling.
The consumer justice reform movements of the 1960s and 1970s brought renewed research and interest in the small claims courts. This movement emphasized the need for reform of small claims courts to facilitate the adjudication of consumer grievances. Although "consumer justice reformers" were concerned that businesses and corporations were more likely to use attorneys in small claims courts thereby placing inexperienced individual defendants at a disadvantage, studies showed that defendants with an attorney were more likely to win against plaintiff’s than unrepresented defendants, whereas palintiffs without attorneys did just as well as represented plaintiffs against unrepresented defendants. The result was an appraisal of the need to bar attorneys and collection agencies from the small claims courts.
Small claims courts in the United States are often considered courts of equity and are not necessarily bound by the letter of the law. The courts have flexibility to use more holistic approaches to problem solving and dispute resolution than what is typical. Most judges act according to what makes sense to them, even if this means setting aside legal formalities. Moreover, traditional rules of evidence and court processes do not apply. The rules of small claims courts emphasize conciliation and pragmatism over winning, and rules of evidence and evil procedure have been simplified to allow maximum access to the courts by individuals unable to afford an attorney.
2. Small Claims Courts in Canada2
All provinces in Canada have procedures for small claims. In general, there are two different models. In most provinces, as in British Columbia, Alberta, and new Brunswick, small claims courts operate independently of the superior courts. In other jurisdictions, the small claims courts are either branches or divisions of the superior courts.
The small claims courts are meant to be an easier and less expensive way to resolve disputes than in the superior courts. Small Claims Court procedure is regulated both by provincial legislation and rules in most provinces. It is simplified and less costly with no strict pleading requirements and formal discovery process.
3. Small Claims Courts in England and Wales?3
From early times, England had a tradition of local courts where ordinary men could pursue justice in the form of civil claims without the aid of lawyers. Some were set up by local statutes, others by custom. These local courts could not keep pace with the changes in the society brought about by the Industrial Revolution. By the 1830s, the decade of great liberal reform, there was a great public awakening to the urgent need for constitutional reform in the administration of justice. The result was the County Courts Act of 1846, described in its preamble as an "Act For The More Easy Recovery of Small Debts and Demands in England. " It was initially a poor man’s court. Andrew Amos, the first judge at Marylebone County, described regular litigants as being "a great proportion of the poorer classes, gaining their livelihoods by bricklaying, gardening or other out of door occupations against whom are usually issued in the summer months." The county court’s jurisdiction for claims brought in contract and tort gradually increased from ₤50 in1888 to ₤5,000 in 1894.
The purpose and structure of the county court system has in many ways remained the same since 1846. The aim is still to make civil justice available locally – there are now 223 county courts in England and Wales. They have continued to be responsive to the needs of smaller cases which, although small in terms of their financial value, are important to the litigants involved. However, recent decades have seen two major changes in relation to small claims – first, the introduction of the Civil procedure Rules reforms of 1998 with emphasis on proportionality.
4
Since January 1996, when the small claims limits in England and Wales was trebled overnight to ₤3,000, district judges have been expected to play the role of "interventionist" and assist litigants in presenting their own cases personally at small claims hearings. Like adjudicators in other parts of the world, district judges in these countries have been encouraged to intervene to an increasing extent at small claims hearings. Such interventionism is, indeed, vital and although there may be wide variations between jurisdictions in the methods that are adopted to deal with small claims, the idea of the adjudicator freely entering the arena of the dispute to assist unrepresented litigants is fundamental in almost all matters about small claims.
4. Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore5
The Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore have been in operation since 1 February 1985. The tribunals have fulfilled an integral role in providing the community with accessible justice for civil claims involving small amounts. Various features and programs have been put in place to enhance access to justice for the community, by removing barriers such as cost, delay, distance, time and inconvenience. The Tribunals, constituted as part of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore, were established for the primary purpose of providing a quick and inexpensive avenue for the resolution of small claims arising from disputes between consumers and suppliers. There was a need for a less expensive and less formal forum to deal with such small claims. Hence, in 1985, the Small Claims Tribunals Act was passed, which authorized the setting up of one or more Tribunals to help consumers who have claims of up to $2,000 relating to disputes arising from contracts for the sale of goods or the provision of services.
c. Introduction of the Concept of Small Claims Court in the Philippines
The idea of establishing Small Claims Courts in the Philippines was first proposed to the Supreme Court through a study conducted in 1999 by Justice Josue N. Bellosillo, former Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. After observing small claims courts and interviewing judges of such courts in Dallas, Texas, United States in 1999, Justice Bellosillo proposed in a Report that courts can be established in the Philippines to handle exclusively small claims without the participation of lawyers and where ordinary litigants can prosecute and defend a small claims action through ready-made forms. He envisioned the small claims courts as another positive approach, in addition to mandatory pre-trial, for solving court congestion and delay. 6The study and report was subsequently endorsed for legislative action to Senator Franklin Drilon who later funded a project for this purpose.
At the regular session of the Fourteenth Congress, House Bill No. 2921 entitled "An Act Establishing Small Claims Courts" was introduced by Congressman Jose V. Yap. Thereafter, on July 3, 2007, Senate Bill No. 800 entitled "Philippines Small Claims Court Act" was filed by Senator Ramon A. Revilla, Jr. and, on September 3, 2007, the bill passed First Reading and was referred to the Committee(s) on Justice and Human Rights and Finance. The same is still pending with these committees at present.
In 2007, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded a two-year grant to the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA-ROLI) to pursue judicial reform activities in the Philippines for the fiscal period October 2007 to September 30, 2009. 7In a letter to Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno dated October 10, 2007, ABA-ROLI proposed the establishment of small claims pilot courts among first level courts in different regions of the Philippines. The small claims pilot court project was proposed by ABA to USAID after consultation with various Supreme Court officials in conjunction with the 2000 Action Plan for Judicial Reform.
Among the critical issues being addressed by the APJR are case congestion and delay. The congestion of case dockets is central to a multitude of problems, either as cause or effect; it is either the manifestation of the source of other difficulties. Addressing this concern is thus an imperative8 which is why present reforms in judicial systems and procedures have included the following:
1. streamlining procedural rules to eliminate provisions that cause delay and permit dilatory tactics;
2. re-engineering the jurisdictional structure of the courts to ensure easy geographical access to the courts particularly by the poor litigants.
9
3. improving the case management system toward more transparency, accountability and integrity of the judicial process and for better efficiency; and
4. strengthening of the mediation mechanism to promote early dispute resolution nationwide. This involves the institutionalization of court-annexed mediation, and the establishment of a Mediation Center to continually monitor and assess the performance of the system and provide training and research.
Notwithstanding the absence of a law at the present time creating small claims courts in our country, 10the Supreme Court through a program in partnership with ABA-ROLI and USAID, can promulgate and implement a simplified rule of procedure exclusively for small claims and assign a certain number of existing first level courts to take cognizance of small claims. 11This does not need legislative action as the Court can designate several first level courts all over the country to jump-start the pilot project. Thus, pursuant to its rule-making power, 12the Court under the present Constitution can adopt a special rule of procedure to govern small claims cases and select pilot courts that would empower the people to bring suits before them pro se to resolve legal disputes involving simple issues of law and procedure without the need for legal representations and extensive judicial intervention. This system will enhance access to justice especially by those who cannot afford the high costs of litigation even in cases of relatively small value.13 It is expeditious rules and means, our Court can improve the perception of justice in this country, thus giving citizens a renewed "stake" in preserving peace in the land. This is a hopeful message to our people that "there is no need to despair for there is deliverance in law; that is a promise that has been fulfilled by law in the past; it is a promise law will again fulfill in the future."14
In December 2007, the Supreme Court established a Technical Working Group composed of the Court Administrator, the Program Management Office Administrator, selected judges and other officials of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to undertake the following activities:
5. The development of Rules and Procedures to Implement pilot Small Claims Courts;
6. The establishment of Criteria to Select Appropriate regions/Judges for pilot Small Claims Courts and set Peso Limits for the Small Claims Courts;
7. Through the Philippine Judicial Academy, the conduct of training programs for Judges and their personnel participating in the Pilot Small Claims Courts project; and
8. The employment of "justice on Wheels" buses to launch pilot small claims tribunals.
15
On June 23, 2008, the Technical Working Group finalized its draft of a Rule of procedure for Small Claims Cases. Highlights of the Proposed Rule are the following;
9. The Rule governs the procedure in actions before the first level courts, i.e., Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trials Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (excluding Shari’a Circuit Courts) for the payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos (₧100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Explanatory note: The purpose of a small claims process is to provide an inexpensive and expeditious means to settle disputes over small amounts. For purposes of the project, the amount has been set for claims involving amounts of not more than ₧100,000.00.
The theory behind the small claims system is that ordinary litigation fails to bring practical justice to the parties when the disputed claim is small, because the time and expense required by the ordinary litigation process is so disproportionate to the amount involved that it discourages a just resolution of the dispute. The small claims process is designed to function quickly and informally. There are no attorneys, no formal pleadings and no strict legal rules of evidence. The small claims court system is not a " typical inferior court." Parties are encouraged to file small claims court actions to resolve their minor disputes as opposed to resorting to self-help or forcible means to seek their remedy. (Pace v. Hillcrest Motor Co.,161 Cal. Rptr. 663, 664 Ct. App. 1980)
10. This Rule applies to all actions that are: (a) purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment/reimbursement of a sum of money, and (b) the civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed prior to the institution of the criminal action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. These claims or demands may be:
a. For money owed under any of the following:
1. Contract of lease;
2. Contract of loan;
3. Contract of services;
4. Contract of sale; or
5. Contract of mortgage;
b. For damages arising from:
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
c. Enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving money claims covered by this Rule pursuant to Sec. 417 of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the "Local Government Code of 1991."
Explanatory Note: The kinds of cases that can be filed in Small Claims Court vary, but the case must seek money only. For example, a suit cannot be brought in Small Claims Court to force a person or business to fix a damaged good; or to demand fulfillment of a promised obligation which is not purely for money, or to seek money to compensate for pain and suffering. Some of the kinds of cases which are allowed as small claims include the following:
d. Actual damage caused to vehicles, other personal property, real property or person;
e. Payment or reimbursement for property, deposit, or money loaned;
f. Payment for services rendered, insurance claim, rent, commissions, or for goods sold and delivered;
g. Money claim pursuant to contact, warranty or agreement; and
h. Purely civil action for payment of money covered by bounced or stopped check.
h. A small claims action is commenced by filing with the court an accomplished and verified Statement of Claim in duplicate, accompanied by Certification of Non-Forum Shopping, a nd two (2) duly certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subject of the claim. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
h. Plaintiff may join in a single Statement of Claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant as long as the costs, does not exceed P100,000.00.
h. The plaintiff shall pay the prescribed fees upon filing, unless allowed to litigate as an indigent.
h. For the purposes of this rule: (a) Plaintiff is the party who has filed a small claims action. The term includes a defendant who has filed a counterclaim against a plaintiff, (b) Defendant is the party against whom the plaintiff has a filed a small claims action. The term includes a plaintiff against whom defendant has filed a claim, or a person who replies to the claim; (c) Person is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership, association, or other entity; (d) Individual is natural person: (e) Motion means a party’s request, written or oral, to the court for an order or other action. It shall include an informal written request to the court, such as a letter; (f) Good cause means circumstances sufficient to justify the requested order or other action, as determined by the judge; and (g) Affidavit means a written statement or declaration of facts that are sworn or affirmed to be true.
Explanatory Note: A plaintiff may commence an action in the small claims court by filing a Statement of claim under oath with the Clerk of the first level court in person or by mail. The claim form shall be a simple non technical form approved or adopted by the Supreme Court. The claim form shall set forth (1) the name and address of the defendant, if known; (2) the amount and the basis of the claim: (3) that the plaintiff, where possible, has demanded payment and, in applicable cases, possession of the property; (4) that the defendant has failed or refused to pay, and where applicable, has refused to surrender the property; and (5) that the plaintiff understands that the judgement on his or her claim will be conclusive and without a right of appeal. The plaintiff should attach to the claim all documents necessary to proved his/her right to reliefs prayed for. The form or accompanying instructions shall include information that the plaintiff (1) may not represented by an attorney; (2) has no right to appeal; and (3) may ask the court to waive fees for filing and serving the claim on the ground that the plaintiff is indigent unable to pay them, using the forms approved by the Supreme Court for the purpose.
h. The Court may dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for dismissal of a civil actions provided by the Rules of the Civil Procedure. A defendant may challenges jurisdiction or venue or court location by including these defenses in his Response before appearing in the hearing, the court shall inquire into the facts sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction and authority of the court over the action are proper, and shall make its determination accordingly.
Explanatory Note: Jurisdiction and venue requirements in small claims action shall be the same as in other civil actions provided in the Rules of Civil Procedure. A defendant may challenge jurisdiction or venue or court location by including these defenses in his Response before appearing in the scheduled hearing. In all cases, even if the defendant does not ask for dismissal of the case in the Response or appear at the hearing, the court shall inquire into the facts sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction and authority of the court over the action are proper, and shall make its determination accordingly.
h. No Motion to Dismiss shall be allowed except on the grounds under Section 13 thereof (See No. X below).
h. Should the defendant fail to file a response within the required period, the court shall render judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of Claim and limited to what prayed for therein. The court may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of damages for being excessive or otherwise unconscionable.
h. If at the time the action is commenced, a defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this Rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim; (c) does not require, for its adjudication, the joiner or third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another pending action, this claim shall be included as a counterclaim in the Response, otherwise, such counterclaim shall be barred.
The defendant may also elect to include in the Response a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the transaction or occurrence provided that the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket fees are paid.
Explanatory Note: If a defendant has claim against a plaintiff that exceeds the limits stated in Section 2 of this Rule, and the claim relates to the contract, transaction, matter, or event which is the subject of the plaintiff’s claim, the defendant may commence an action against the plaintiff in a court of competent jurisdiction. If said claim which is beyond the limit of money claim provided in this Rule is filed with the Response befire the Small Claims Court, the latter shall dismiss the counterclaim.
h. Prohibited pleadings and motions: (a) Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction; (b) Motion for bill of particulars; (c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgement, or for reopening of trial; (d) Petition for relief from judgement; (e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper; (f) Memoranda; (g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court; (h) Motion to declare the defendant in default; (i) Dilatory motions for postponement; (j) Reply; (k) Third-party complaints; and (l) Interventions.
h. Availability of Forms for the Parties who shall be assisted by Clerk of Court.
h. The parties must personally appear at the hearing; if unable, then through a designated representative who must be duly authorized to enter into an amicable settlement.
h. Attorneys are not allowed at the hearing, except as plaintiff or defendant. However this does not preclude them from offerings their services in assisting the party to small claims case to prepare for the hearing or for other matters outside of the hearing. If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim of defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual, who is not an attorney, to assist that party upon the latter’s consent.
Explanatory Note: Except as permitted by this section, no attorney shall appear in a small claims action except when the latter shall maintain or defend an action in any of the following capacities:
a. By or against himself or herself;
b. By or against a partnership in which he or she is general partner and in which all the partners are attorneys; or
c. By or against a professional corporation of which he or she is an officer or director and of which all other officers and directors are attorneys.
Nothing in this section shall prevent an attorney from doing any of the following:
d. Providing advice to a party to a small claims action, either before or after the commencement of the action; or
e. Submitting an affidavit as a witness for a party in order to state facts of which he or she has personal knowledge and about which he or she competent to do so.
If the court determines that the party does not speak or understand English or Filipino sufficiently to comprehend the proceedings or give testimony, to the questions of the court, if any, and needs assistance in so doing, the court may permit another individual (other than an attorney) to assist that the party. Any additional continuances shall be at the sound discretion of the court. If the court interpreter or other competent interpreter of the language or dialect known to the party is not available to aid that party in a small claims action, at the first hearing of the case the court shall postpone the hearing one time only to allow the party the opportunity to obtain another individual (other than an attorney) to assist that party An additional continuances shall be at the sound discretion of the court.
XV. Non-appearance of Parties. Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall be a cause for the dismissal of the complaint without prejudice. The defendant who appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive counterclaim.
On the other hand failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to file a Response under Section 12 of this Rule. This is however shall not apply where one of two or more defendants sued under a common cause of action and who pleaded a common defense shall appear at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall causes the dismissal with prejudice of both the claim and counterclaim.
XVI. A request for postponement of a hearing may be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the court on that date and time. Every party may avail of only one (1) postponement.
Explanatory Note: A Party may submit an oral or written request to postpone a hearing date for good cause, as follows:
0. If the written request is writing, it may be made either by letter or on a form adopted or approved by the Supreme Court;
1. The request shall be filed before the hearing date and accompanied by proof of physical inability, unless the court determines that the requesting party has good cause to file the request on the date of hearing itself: and
2. If the court finds that the interest of justice would be served by postponing the hearing, the court shall do so and shall notify all parties by mail on the same day of the new hearing date, time and place.
This section does not limit the inherent power of the court to order postponement of hearing in strictly appropriate circumstances. The postponement fee of One Hundred Pesos (or as provided in Rule 141, Revised Rules of Court, as amended on Legal Fees) shall be charged and collected before the filing of a request for postponement and rescheduling of a hearing date.
XVII. Judicial Dispute Resolution. At the hearing, the court shall exert all efforts to encourage the parties to resolve their dispute through mediation, conciliation, early neutral evaluating or any other mode of JDR. Any settlement or resolution of the dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by the parties, and submitted to the court for approval.
XVIII. If JDR fails and the parties agree in writing (Form 10-SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall so proceed in an informal and expeditious manner and terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala court, the court shall, on the same day, be transmitted (Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of Court for immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing judge for hearing and decision within five (5) working days from referral; and )b) in case of a single sala court, the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case in the court of origin within five (5) working days from referral by the JDR judge.
Explanatory Note: In hearing before the small claims court, witnesses shall still be sworn in. The judge shall conduct the hearing in an informal manner so as to do substantial justice between the parties. The judge shall have the discretion to admit all evidence which may be of probative value although not in accordance with formal rules of practice, procedure, pleading or evidence provided in the Rules of Court, except that privileged communications shall not be admissible. The object of such hearings shall be to determine the rights of the litigants on the merits and to dispense expeditious justice between the parties.
An interventionist role by judges in such hearings is effective in eliciting evidence from litigants in person. It is seen by unrepresented parties as a "helping hand" which they appreciate, provided that judges avoid the danger of appearing to be partial. By discussing the facts of the case, judges find what common ground does exist between the parties. This tends to narrow the differences between the parties and make the final judicial decision easier – whereas traditional open court trials, with the presence of lawyers and the use of cross-examination tend to polarize the parties, increase antagonism and heighten the differences.
In this regard, Lord Woolf, Great Britain’s case management expert, has observed:
"The role of the judge in small claims is not only that of an adjudicator. It is a key safeguard of the rights of both parties. In most cases, the judge is effectively a substitute for a legal representative. His duty is to ascertain the main matters at issue, to elicit the evidence, to reach a view on the facts of the matter and to give a decision. In some cases he may encourage the parties to settle. In doing so he should ensure that both parties have presented the evidence and called the witnesses germane to their case and that he has identified and considered any issue of law which is pertinent to the case in hand. He must also hold the ring and ensure that each party has a fair chance to present his own case and to challenge that of his opponent."
The key judicial skills in conducting such hearings are to maintain a balance between informality and fairness, to ensure a level playing field and to protect the weak and the scrupulous. In practice, this is achieved by preventing interruptions and parties talking over each other, and making it clear that both parties will have plenty of time to say all that they wish before the end of the hearing.
XIX. Decision. After the hearing, the court shall, on the same day, render its decision using the form provided. The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in the court docket for civil cases and a copy thereof served on the parties. The decision is final and unappealable.
Explanatory Note: Despite the relative informality of the procedure, judgements are based upon a strict application of the substantive law and an objective judicial analysis of the facts. The judge is duty-bound to give the legal basis for the findings.
The prohibition against appeals assures immediate and swift justice.
The right to appeal is not a natural right nor a part due process. It is merely a statutory privilege and a procedural remedy of statutory origin, a remedy that may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law authorizing such exercise. The applicable provisions of the law allowing appeals from decisions of the first level courts are Sections 36 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended, also known as "The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980." The procedure on appeal is subject to the limitations and restrictions provided by this Act and any such rules as the Supreme Court may hereafter prescribe. Sec. 36 of B.P. Blg. 129 provides an instance wherein the Supreme Court may adopt special procedures, including cases where appeal may not be allowed, to achieve an expeditious and inexpensive determination of particular cases requiring summary disposition.
XX. Execution. If the decision is rendered in favor of the plaintiff, execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-SCC).
Footnotes
1 " The People's Court Examind: A Legal and Empricial Analysis of the Small Claims Court System, by Bruce Tucker and Monica Her, San Francisco Law Review, Winter 2003.
2 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/small_claims_court.
3 " Small Claims Hearings: The Interventionist Role Played District Judges" by John Baldwin, Civil Justice Quarterly, Sweet and Maxwell limited and Contributors, January 17, 1998.
4 See Note 2.
5 "The Singapore Small Claims Tribunals - Accessible Justice to the Community" by Chong Kah Wei, paper prepared for the 2nd Annual AIJA Tribunals Conference held in Sydney, Australia on 10 September 1999.
6 " A Moral Renaissance For A Lasting Peace" Speech delivered by Senior Associate Justice Josue N. Bellosillo as Keynote Speaker of the 3rd Annual National Seminar-Convention of the Philippine trial Judges Lague, Inc. on the theme Championing Peace Through Justice, "held3-5 October 2002 at Prince Hotel, Baguio City.
7 "The Totality of Reforms for a transformed Judiciary" by Former Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban (ret), The Court Systems Journal, December 2005, p. 69
8 Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) 2001-2006 published by the Supreme Court in August 2001, p.6
9 Ibid.
10 Supplement to APJR, published by the Supreme Court in 2001 at p. 2-12.
11 See Note 7 at p. 12
12 See Note 9 at p. 2-15.
13 Memorandum For the Honorable Reynato S. Puno, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, dated December 19, 2007, from Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño , Re: Proposal to Establish a Pilot Project on Small Claims Courts in First Level Courts in the Philippines.
14 " Justice, Peace and Development: The Role and Responsibility of Lawyers, "Article by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno, The Court System s Journal, March 2006 Volume 11 No. 1, p. 26.
15 See Note3, 20-34 at Chapter 26.
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC November 21, 2000
RE: THE RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
R E S O L U T I O N
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson, Technical Working Group, Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court, submitting for the consideration and approval of the Court the proposed "The Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases," the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same.
The Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 following its publication two (2) newspaper of general circulation.
September 9, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
Section 1. Title. - This Rule shall be known as " The Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases."
Section 2. Scope. - This Rule shall govern the procedure in actions before the Metropolitan trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts for payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Section 3. Definiton of Terms. - For purposes of this Rule:
(a) Plaintiff - refers to the party who initiated a small claims action. The term includes a defendant who has filed a counterclaim against plainfill;
(b) Defendant - is the party against whom the plaintiff has filed a small claims action. The term includes a plaintiff against whom a defendant has filed a claim, or a person who replies to the claim;
(c) Person - is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership, association, or other juridical entity endowed with personality by law;
(d) Individual - is a natural person;
(e) Motion - means a party's request, written or oral, to the court for an orderaction. It shall include an informal written request to the court, such as a letter;
(f) Good cause - means circumtances sufficient to justify the requested order or other action, as determined by the judge; and
(g) Affidavit - means a written statement or declaration of facts that are shown or affirmed to be true.
Section 4. Applicability - The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall apply this Rule in all actions which are; (a) purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or reimbursement of sum of money, and (b) the civil aspect of criminal action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule of 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
These claims or demands may be;
(a) For money owned under any of the following;
1. Contract of Lease;
2. Contract of Loan;
3. Contract of Services;
4. Contract of Sale; or
5. Contract of Mortgage;
(b) For damages arising from any of the following;
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
(c) The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving a money claim covered by this Rule pursuant to Sec. 417 of Republic Act 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991.
Section 5. Commencement of Small Claims Action. - A small claims action is commenced by filing with the court an accomplished and verified Statement of Claim (Form 1 - SCC) in duplicate, accompanied by a Certification of Non-forum Shopping (Form 1-A,SCC), and two (2) duly certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subjects of the claim, as well as the affidavits of witnesses and other evidence to support the claim. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
No formal pleading, other than the Statement of Claim described in this Rule, is necessary to initiate a small claims action.
Section 6. Joinder of Claims - Plaintiff may join in a single statement of claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant provided that the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed P100,00.00.
Section 7. Affidavits - The affidavits submitted under this Rule shall state only facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants which are admissible in evidence.
A violation of this requirement shall subject the party, and the counsel who assisted the party in the preparation of the affidavits, if any, to appropriate disciplinary action. The inadmissible affidavit(s) or portion(s) thereof shall be expunged from the record.
Section 8. Payment of Filing Fees. - The plaintiff shall pay the docket and other legal fees prescribed under Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court, unless allowed to litigate as an indigent.
A claim filed with a motion to sue as indigent (Form 6-SCC) shall be referred to the Executive Judge for immediate action in case of multi-sala courts, or to the Presiding Judge of the court hearing the small claims case. If the motion is granted by the Executive Judge, the case shall be raffled off or assigned to the court designated to hear small claims cases. If the motion is denied, the plaintiff shall be given five (5) days within which to pay the docket fees, otherwise, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice. In no case shall a party, even if declared an indigent, be exempt from the payment of the P1,000.00 fee for service of summons and processes in civil cases.
Section 9. Dismissal of the Claim. - After the court determines that the case falls under this Rule, it may, from an examination of the allegations of the Statement of Claim and such evidence attached thereto, by itself, dismiss the case outright of any of the grounds apparent from the Claim for the dismissal of a civil action.
Section 10. Summons and Notice of Hearing - If no ground for dismissal is found, the court shall forthwith issue Summons (Form 2-SCC) on the day of receipt of the Statement of Claim, directing the defendant to submit a verified Response.
The court shall also issue a Notice (Form 4-SCC) to both parties, directing them to appear before it on a specific date and time for hearing, with a warning that no unjustified postponement shall be allowed, as provided in Section 19 of this Rule.
The summons and notice to be served on the defendant shall be accompanied by a copy of the Statement of Claim and documents submitted by plaintiff, and a copy of the Response (Form 3-SCC) to be accomplished by the defendant. The Notice shall contain an express prohibition against the filing of a motion to dismiss or any other motion under Section 14 of this Rule.
Section 11. Response - The defendant shall file with the court and serve on the plaintiff a duly accomplished and verified Response within a non - extendible period of ten (10) days from receipt of summons. The Response shall be accompanied by certified photocopies of documents, as well as affidavits of witnesses and other evidence in support thereof. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Response, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
Section 12. Effect of Failure to File Response - Should the defendant fail to file his response within the required period, the court by itself shall render judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of claim limited to what is prayed for. The court however, may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of damages for being excessive or unconscionable
Section 13. Counterclaims Within the Coverage of this Rule - If at the time the action is commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim; (c) does not require for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another pending action, the claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the response; otherwise, the defendant shall be barred from suit on the counterclaim.
The defendant may also elect to the file a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence , provided that the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket and the other legal fees are paid.
Section 14. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions - The following pleadings, motions, and petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:
(a) Motion to dismiss the compliant except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction;
(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgement, or for reopening of trial;
(d) Petiton for relief from judgement;
(e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper;
(f) Memoranda;
(g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
(h) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(i) Dilatory motions for postponement;
(j) Reply;
(k) Third-party complaints; and
(l) Interventions.
Section 15. Availability of Forms; Assistance by Court Personnel. - The Clerk of Court or other personnel shall provide such assistance as may be requested by a plaintiff or a defendant regarding the availability of forms and other information about the coverage, requirements as well as procedure for small claims cases.
Section 16. Appearance. - the parties shall appear at the designated date of hearing personally or through a representative authorized under a Special Power of Attorney (Form 5-SCC ) to enter into an amicable settlement, to submit of Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and of documentary exhibits
Section 17. Appearance of Attorneys Not Allowed. - No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the plaintiff or defendant.
If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim or defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual who is not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter's consent.
Section 18. Non-appearance of Parties. - Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall be cause for the dismissal of the claim without prejudice. The defendant who appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive counterclaim.
Failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to file a Response under Section 12 of this Rule. This shall not apply where one of two or more defendants who are sued under a common cause of action and have pleaded a common defense appears at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall cause the dismissal with prejudice of both the claim and counterclaim.
Section 19. Postponement When Allowed. - A request for postponement of a hearing may be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the court on the scheduled date and time. A party may avail of only one (1) postponement.
Section 20. Duty of the Court. - At the beginning of the court session, the judge shall read aloud a short statement explaining the nature, purpose and the rule of procedure of small claims cases.
Section 21. Judicial Dispute Resolution. - At the hearing, the judge shall conduct Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) through mediation, conciliation, early neutral evaluation, or any other mode of JDR. Any settlement (Form 7-SCC) or resolution (Form 8-SCC) of the dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by the parties and submitted to the court for approval (Form 12-SCC).
Section 22. Failure of JDR. - If JDR fails and the parties agree in writing (Form 10-SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall so proceed in an informal and expeditious manner and terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala court , the case shall, on the same day, be transmitted (Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of Court for immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing judge for hearing and decision within five (5) working days from referral; and (b) in case of single sala court, the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case in the court of origin within five (5) working days from referral by the JDR judge.
Section 23. Decision. - After the hearing, the court shall render its decision on the same day, based on the facts established by the evidence (Form 13-SCC). The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in the court docket for civil cases and a copy thereof forthwith served on the parties.
The decision shall be final and unappealable.
Section 24. Execution. - If the decision is rendered in favor of the plaintiff, execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-SCC).
Section 25. Applicability. of the Rules of Civil Procedure - The Rules of Civil procedure shall apply suppletorily insofar as they are not inconsistent with this rule.
Section 26. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on October 01, 2008 for the pilot courts designated to apply the procedure for small claims cases following its publication in two newspaper of general circulation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATIONALE
of the
Proposed Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases
a. Introduction
The most significant recurring theme of every program for judicial reform of the Supreme Court is the pressing need for a more accessible, much swifter and less expensive delivery of justice. Undeniably, the slow grind of the wheels of justice is the result of a variety of factors, foremost of which is the perennial congestion of court dockets which has transformed court litigation into a protracted battle, that invariably exhausts the time, effort and resources of party-litigants, especially the poor. Many strategies have been devised to unclog heavy court dockets, and one such approach is the use on mandatory Pre-trial and Alternative Dispute Resolutions mechanisms such as mediation, arbitration and conciliation. Another scheme that has been widely used in many foreign legal system but which has yet to be tried in the Philippines is the small claims case processing method used by small claims courts, often referred to as the "People’s Court," as it comes most directly into contact with the citizenry of a jurisdiction.
Small claims courts are courts of limited jurisdiction that hear civil cases between private litigants. Courts authorized to try small claims may also have other judicial functions, and the name by which such a court is known varies by jurisdiction: it may be known by such names as county court or magistrate’s court. Small claims courts can be found in Australia, Canada, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, South Africa, Hong Kong, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States.
b. The History and the Reforms of Small Claims Court
1.In the United States1
For almost a century now, small claims courts have provided a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in the United States. Originating around 1912 or 1913, these courts were established primarily as a means for small businesses to collect money from borrowers through a process that was faster, less formal, and less expensive than traditional civil litigation.
Following the lead of the establishment of the initial small claim court in Kansas, USA in 1912 or 1913, every state in the United States has created some form of a small claims court system. Although the financial claims limits, methods or procedure, and overall structure vary from state to state, the concept is essentially the same, i.e., that relatively minor disputes, involving dollar amounts that are insufficient to warrant processing the case through the normal court procedure, justify expeditious and simplified handling.
The consumer justice reform movements of the 1960s and 1970s brought renewed research and interest in the small claims courts. This movement emphasized the need for reform of small claims courts to facilitate the adjudication of consumer grievances. Although "consumer justice reformers" were concerned that businesses and corporations were more likely to use attorneys in small claims courts thereby placing inexperienced individual defendants at a disadvantage, studies showed that defendants with an attorney were more likely to win against plaintiff’s than unrepresented defendants, whereas palintiffs without attorneys did just as well as represented plaintiffs against unrepresented defendants. The result was an appraisal of the need to bar attorneys and collection agencies from the small claims courts.
Small claims courts in the United States are often considered courts of equity and are not necessarily bound by the letter of the law. The courts have flexibility to use more holistic approaches to problem solving and dispute resolution than what is typical. Most judges act according to what makes sense to them, even if this means setting aside legal formalities. Moreover, traditional rules of evidence and court processes do not apply. The rules of small claims courts emphasize conciliation and pragmatism over winning, and rules of evidence and evil procedure have been simplified to allow maximum access to the courts by individuals unable to afford an attorney.
2. Small Claims Courts in Canada2
All provinces in Canada have procedures for small claims. In general, there are two different models. In most provinces, as in British Columbia, Alberta, and new Brunswick, small claims courts operate independently of the superior courts. In other jurisdictions, the small claims courts are either branches or divisions of the superior courts.
The small claims courts are meant to be an easier and less expensive way to resolve disputes than in the superior courts. Small Claims Court procedure is regulated both by provincial legislation and rules in most provinces. It is simplified and less costly with no strict pleading requirements and formal discovery process.
3. Small Claims Courts in England and Wales?3
From early times, England had a tradition of local courts where ordinary men could pursue justice in the form of civil claims without the aid of lawyers. Some were set up by local statutes, others by custom. These local courts could not keep pace with the changes in the society brought about by the Industrial Revolution. By the 1830s, the decade of great liberal reform, there was a great public awakening to the urgent need for constitutional reform in the administration of justice. The result was the County Courts Act of 1846, described in its preamble as an "Act For The More Easy Recovery of Small Debts and Demands in England. " It was initially a poor man’s court. Andrew Amos, the first judge at Marylebone County, described regular litigants as being "a great proportion of the poorer classes, gaining their livelihoods by bricklaying, gardening or other out of door occupations against whom are usually issued in the summer months." The county court’s jurisdiction for claims brought in contract and tort gradually increased from ₤50 in1888 to ₤5,000 in 1894.
The purpose and structure of the county court system has in many ways remained the same since 1846. The aim is still to make civil justice available locally – there are now 223 county courts in England and Wales. They have continued to be responsive to the needs of smaller cases which, although small in terms of their financial value, are important to the litigants involved. However, recent decades have seen two major changes in relation to small claims – first, the introduction of the Civil procedure Rules reforms of 1998 with emphasis on proportionality.
4
Since January 1996, when the small claims limits in England and Wales was trebled overnight to ₤3,000, district judges have been expected to play the role of "interventionist" and assist litigants in presenting their own cases personally at small claims hearings. Like adjudicators in other parts of the world, district judges in these countries have been encouraged to intervene to an increasing extent at small claims hearings. Such interventionism is, indeed, vital and although there may be wide variations between jurisdictions in the methods that are adopted to deal with small claims, the idea of the adjudicator freely entering the arena of the dispute to assist unrepresented litigants is fundamental in almost all matters about small claims.
4. Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore5
The Small Claims Tribunals in Singapore have been in operation since 1 February 1985. The tribunals have fulfilled an integral role in providing the community with accessible justice for civil claims involving small amounts. Various features and programs have been put in place to enhance access to justice for the community, by removing barriers such as cost, delay, distance, time and inconvenience. The Tribunals, constituted as part of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore, were established for the primary purpose of providing a quick and inexpensive avenue for the resolution of small claims arising from disputes between consumers and suppliers. There was a need for a less expensive and less formal forum to deal with such small claims. Hence, in 1985, the Small Claims Tribunals Act was passed, which authorized the setting up of one or more Tribunals to help consumers who have claims of up to $2,000 relating to disputes arising from contracts for the sale of goods or the provision of services.
c. Introduction of the Concept of Small Claims Court in the Philippines
The idea of establishing Small Claims Courts in the Philippines was first proposed to the Supreme Court through a study conducted in 1999 by Justice Josue N. Bellosillo, former Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. After observing small claims courts and interviewing judges of such courts in Dallas, Texas, United States in 1999, Justice Bellosillo proposed in a Report that courts can be established in the Philippines to handle exclusively small claims without the participation of lawyers and where ordinary litigants can prosecute and defend a small claims action through ready-made forms. He envisioned the small claims courts as another positive approach, in addition to mandatory pre-trial, for solving court congestion and delay. 6The study and report was subsequently endorsed for legislative action to Senator Franklin Drilon who later funded a project for this purpose.
At the regular session of the Fourteenth Congress, House Bill No. 2921 entitled "An Act Establishing Small Claims Courts" was introduced by Congressman Jose V. Yap. Thereafter, on July 3, 2007, Senate Bill No. 800 entitled "Philippines Small Claims Court Act" was filed by Senator Ramon A. Revilla, Jr. and, on September 3, 2007, the bill passed First Reading and was referred to the Committee(s) on Justice and Human Rights and Finance. The same is still pending with these committees at present.
In 2007, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded a two-year grant to the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA-ROLI) to pursue judicial reform activities in the Philippines for the fiscal period October 2007 to September 30, 2009. 7In a letter to Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno dated October 10, 2007, ABA-ROLI proposed the establishment of small claims pilot courts among first level courts in different regions of the Philippines. The small claims pilot court project was proposed by ABA to USAID after consultation with various Supreme Court officials in conjunction with the 2000 Action Plan for Judicial Reform.
Among the critical issues being addressed by the APJR are case congestion and delay. The congestion of case dockets is central to a multitude of problems, either as cause or effect; it is either the manifestation of the source of other difficulties. Addressing this concern is thus an imperative8 which is why present reforms in judicial systems and procedures have included the following:
1. streamlining procedural rules to eliminate provisions that cause delay and permit dilatory tactics;
2. re-engineering the jurisdictional structure of the courts to ensure easy geographical access to the courts particularly by the poor litigants.
9
3. improving the case management system toward more transparency, accountability and integrity of the judicial process and for better efficiency; and
4. strengthening of the mediation mechanism to promote early dispute resolution nationwide. This involves the institutionalization of court-annexed mediation, and the establishment of a Mediation Center to continually monitor and assess the performance of the system and provide training and research.
Notwithstanding the absence of a law at the present time creating small claims courts in our country, 10the Supreme Court through a program in partnership with ABA-ROLI and USAID, can promulgate and implement a simplified rule of procedure exclusively for small claims and assign a certain number of existing first level courts to take cognizance of small claims. 11This does not need legislative action as the Court can designate several first level courts all over the country to jump-start the pilot project. Thus, pursuant to its rule-making power, 12the Court under the present Constitution can adopt a special rule of procedure to govern small claims cases and select pilot courts that would empower the people to bring suits before them pro se to resolve legal disputes involving simple issues of law and procedure without the need for legal representations and extensive judicial intervention. This system will enhance access to justice especially by those who cannot afford the high costs of litigation even in cases of relatively small value.13 It is expeditious rules and means, our Court can improve the perception of justice in this country, thus giving citizens a renewed "stake" in preserving peace in the land. This is a hopeful message to our people that "there is no need to despair for there is deliverance in law; that is a promise that has been fulfilled by law in the past; it is a promise law will again fulfill in the future."14
In December 2007, the Supreme Court established a Technical Working Group composed of the Court Administrator, the Program Management Office Administrator, selected judges and other officials of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to undertake the following activities:
5. The development of Rules and Procedures to Implement pilot Small Claims Courts;
6. The establishment of Criteria to Select Appropriate regions/Judges for pilot Small Claims Courts and set Peso Limits for the Small Claims Courts;
7. Through the Philippine Judicial Academy, the conduct of training programs for Judges and their personnel participating in the Pilot Small Claims Courts project; and
8. The employment of "justice on Wheels" buses to launch pilot small claims tribunals.
15
On June 23, 2008, the Technical Working Group finalized its draft of a Rule of procedure for Small Claims Cases. Highlights of the Proposed Rule are the following;
9. The Rule governs the procedure in actions before the first level courts, i.e., Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trials Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (excluding Shari’a Circuit Courts) for the payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos (₧100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs.
Explanatory note: The purpose of a small claims process is to provide an inexpensive and expeditious means to settle disputes over small amounts. For purposes of the project, the amount has been set for claims involving amounts of not more than ₧100,000.00.
The theory behind the small claims system is that ordinary litigation fails to bring practical justice to the parties when the disputed claim is small, because the time and expense required by the ordinary litigation process is so disproportionate to the amount involved that it discourages a just resolution of the dispute. The small claims process is designed to function quickly and informally. There are no attorneys, no formal pleadings and no strict legal rules of evidence. The small claims court system is not a " typical inferior court." Parties are encouraged to file small claims court actions to resolve their minor disputes as opposed to resorting to self-help or forcible means to seek their remedy. (Pace v. Hillcrest Motor Co.,161 Cal. Rptr. 663, 664 Ct. App. 1980)
10. This Rule applies to all actions that are: (a) purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment/reimbursement of a sum of money, and (b) the civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed prior to the institution of the criminal action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in court, pursuant to Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. These claims or demands may be:
a. For money owed under any of the following:
1. Contract of lease;
2. Contract of loan;
3. Contract of services;
4. Contract of sale; or
5. Contract of mortgage;
b. For damages arising from:
1. Fault or negligence;
2. Quasi-contract; or
3. Contract;
c. Enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving money claims covered by this Rule pursuant to Sec. 417 of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the "Local Government Code of 1991."
Explanatory Note: The kinds of cases that can be filed in Small Claims Court vary, but the case must seek money only. For example, a suit cannot be brought in Small Claims Court to force a person or business to fix a damaged good; or to demand fulfillment of a promised obligation which is not purely for money, or to seek money to compensate for pain and suffering. Some of the kinds of cases which are allowed as small claims include the following:
d. Actual damage caused to vehicles, other personal property, real property or person;
e. Payment or reimbursement for property, deposit, or money loaned;
f. Payment for services rendered, insurance claim, rent, commissions, or for goods sold and delivered;
g. Money claim pursuant to contact, warranty or agreement; and
h. Purely civil action for payment of money covered by bounced or stopped check.
h. A small claims action is commenced by filing with the court an accomplished and verified Statement of Claim in duplicate, accompanied by Certification of Non-Forum Shopping, a nd two (2) duly certified photocopies of the actionable document/s subject of the claim. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the Claim, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional evidence.
h. Plaintiff may join in a single Statement of Claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant as long as the costs, does not exceed P100,000.00.
h. The plaintiff shall pay the prescribed fees upon filing, unless allowed to litigate as an indigent.
h. For the purposes of this rule: (a) Plaintiff is the party who has filed a small claims action. The term includes a defendant who has filed a counterclaim against a plaintiff, (b) Defendant is the party against whom the plaintiff has a filed a small claims action. The term includes a plaintiff against whom defendant has filed a claim, or a person who replies to the claim; (c) Person is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership, association, or other entity; (d) Individual is natural person: (e) Motion means a party’s request, written or oral, to the court for an order or other action. It shall include an informal written request to the court, such as a letter; (f) Good cause means circumstances sufficient to justify the requested order or other action, as determined by the judge; and (g) Affidavit means a written statement or declaration of facts that are sworn or affirmed to be true.
Explanatory Note: A plaintiff may commence an action in the small claims court by filing a Statement of claim under oath with the Clerk of the first level court in person or by mail. The claim form shall be a simple non technical form approved or adopted by the Supreme Court. The claim form shall set forth (1) the name and address of the defendant, if known; (2) the amount and the basis of the claim: (3) that the plaintiff, where possible, has demanded payment and, in applicable cases, possession of the property; (4) that the defendant has failed or refused to pay, and where applicable, has refused to surrender the property; and (5) that the plaintiff understands that the judgement on his or her claim will be conclusive and without a right of appeal. The plaintiff should attach to the claim all documents necessary to proved his/her right to reliefs prayed for. The form or accompanying instructions shall include information that the plaintiff (1) may not represented by an attorney; (2) has no right to appeal; and (3) may ask the court to waive fees for filing and serving the claim on the ground that the plaintiff is indigent unable to pay them, using the forms approved by the Supreme Court for the purpose.
h. The Court may dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for dismissal of a civil actions provided by the Rules of the Civil Procedure. A defendant may challenges jurisdiction or venue or court location by including these defenses in his Response before appearing in the hearing, the court shall inquire into the facts sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction and authority of the court over the action are proper, and shall make its determination accordingly.
Explanatory Note: Jurisdiction and venue requirements in small claims action shall be the same as in other civil actions provided in the Rules of Civil Procedure. A defendant may challenge jurisdiction or venue or court location by including these defenses in his Response before appearing in the scheduled hearing. In all cases, even if the defendant does not ask for dismissal of the case in the Response or appear at the hearing, the court shall inquire into the facts sufficiently to determine whether jurisdiction and authority of the court over the action are proper, and shall make its determination accordingly.
h. No Motion to Dismiss shall be allowed except on the grounds under Section 13 thereof (See No. X below).
h. Should the defendant fail to file a response within the required period, the court shall render judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of Claim and limited to what prayed for therein. The court may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of damages for being excessive or otherwise unconscionable.
h. If at the time the action is commenced, a defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the coverage of this Rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim; (c) does not require, for its adjudication, the joiner or third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another pending action, this claim shall be included as a counterclaim in the Response, otherwise, such counterclaim shall be barred.
The defendant may also elect to include in the Response a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the transaction or occurrence provided that the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket fees are paid.
Explanatory Note: If a defendant has claim against a plaintiff that exceeds the limits stated in Section 2 of this Rule, and the claim relates to the contract, transaction, matter, or event which is the subject of the plaintiff’s claim, the defendant may commence an action against the plaintiff in a court of competent jurisdiction. If said claim which is beyond the limit of money claim provided in this Rule is filed with the Response befire the Small Claims Court, the latter shall dismiss the counterclaim.
h. Prohibited pleadings and motions: (a) Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction; (b) Motion for bill of particulars; (c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgement, or for reopening of trial; (d) Petition for relief from judgement; (e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper; (f) Memoranda; (g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court; (h) Motion to declare the defendant in default; (i) Dilatory motions for postponement; (j) Reply; (k) Third-party complaints; and (l) Interventions.
h. Availability of Forms for the Parties who shall be assisted by Clerk of Court.
h. The parties must personally appear at the hearing; if unable, then through a designated representative who must be duly authorized to enter into an amicable settlement.
h. Attorneys are not allowed at the hearing, except as plaintiff or defendant. However this does not preclude them from offerings their services in assisting the party to small claims case to prepare for the hearing or for other matters outside of the hearing. If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her claim of defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual, who is not an attorney, to assist that party upon the latter’s consent.
Explanatory Note: Except as permitted by this section, no attorney shall appear in a small claims action except when the latter shall maintain or defend an action in any of the following capacities:
a. By or against himself or herself;
b. By or against a partnership in which he or she is general partner and in which all the partners are attorneys; or
c. By or against a professional corporation of which he or she is an officer or director and of which all other officers and directors are attorneys.
Nothing in this section shall prevent an attorney from doing any of the following:
d. Providing advice to a party to a small claims action, either before or after the commencement of the action; or
e. Submitting an affidavit as a witness for a party in order to state facts of which he or she has personal knowledge and about which he or she competent to do so.
If the court determines that the party does not speak or understand English or Filipino sufficiently to comprehend the proceedings or give testimony, to the questions of the court, if any, and needs assistance in so doing, the court may permit another individual (other than an attorney) to assist that the party. Any additional continuances shall be at the sound discretion of the court. If the court interpreter or other competent interpreter of the language or dialect known to the party is not available to aid that party in a small claims action, at the first hearing of the case the court shall postpone the hearing one time only to allow the party the opportunity to obtain another individual (other than an attorney) to assist that party An additional continuances shall be at the sound discretion of the court.
XV. Non-appearance of Parties. Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall be a cause for the dismissal of the complaint without prejudice. The defendant who appears shall be entitled to judgement on a permissive counterclaim.
On the other hand failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to file a Response under Section 12 of this Rule. This is however shall not apply where one of two or more defendants sued under a common cause of action and who pleaded a common defense shall appear at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall causes the dismissal with prejudice of both the claim and counterclaim.
XVI. A request for postponement of a hearing may be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the court on that date and time. Every party may avail of only one (1) postponement.
Explanatory Note: A Party may submit an oral or written request to postpone a hearing date for good cause, as follows:
0. If the written request is writing, it may be made either by letter or on a form adopted or approved by the Supreme Court;
1. The request shall be filed before the hearing date and accompanied by proof of physical inability, unless the court determines that the requesting party has good cause to file the request on the date of hearing itself: and
2. If the court finds that the interest of justice would be served by postponing the hearing, the court shall do so and shall notify all parties by mail on the same day of the new hearing date, time and place.
This section does not limit the inherent power of the court to order postponement of hearing in strictly appropriate circumstances. The postponement fee of One Hundred Pesos (or as provided in Rule 141, Revised Rules of Court, as amended on Legal Fees) shall be charged and collected before the filing of a request for postponement and rescheduling of a hearing date.
XVII. Judicial Dispute Resolution. At the hearing, the court shall exert all efforts to encourage the parties to resolve their dispute through mediation, conciliation, early neutral evaluating or any other mode of JDR. Any settlement or resolution of the dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by the parties, and submitted to the court for approval.
XVIII. If JDR fails and the parties agree in writing (Form 10-SCC) that the hearing of the case shall be presided over by the judge who conducted the JDR, the hearing shall so proceed in an informal and expeditious manner and terminated within one (1) day.
Absent such agreement, (a) in case of a multi-sala court, the court shall, on the same day, be transmitted (Form 11-SCC) to the Office of the Clerk of Court for immediate referral by the Executive Judge to the pairing judge for hearing and decision within five (5) working days from referral; and )b) in case of a single sala court, the pairing judge shall hear and decide the case in the court of origin within five (5) working days from referral by the JDR judge.
Explanatory Note: In hearing before the small claims court, witnesses shall still be sworn in. The judge shall conduct the hearing in an informal manner so as to do substantial justice between the parties. The judge shall have the discretion to admit all evidence which may be of probative value although not in accordance with formal rules of practice, procedure, pleading or evidence provided in the Rules of Court, except that privileged communications shall not be admissible. The object of such hearings shall be to determine the rights of the litigants on the merits and to dispense expeditious justice between the parties.
An interventionist role by judges in such hearings is effective in eliciting evidence from litigants in person. It is seen by unrepresented parties as a "helping hand" which they appreciate, provided that judges avoid the danger of appearing to be partial. By discussing the facts of the case, judges find what common ground does exist between the parties. This tends to narrow the differences between the parties and make the final judicial decision easier – whereas traditional open court trials, with the presence of lawyers and the use of cross-examination tend to polarize the parties, increase antagonism and heighten the differences.
In this regard, Lord Woolf, Great Britain’s case management expert, has observed:
"The role of the judge in small claims is not only that of an adjudicator. It is a key safeguard of the rights of both parties. In most cases, the judge is effectively a substitute for a legal representative. His duty is to ascertain the main matters at issue, to elicit the evidence, to reach a view on the facts of the matter and to give a decision. In some cases he may encourage the parties to settle. In doing so he should ensure that both parties have presented the evidence and called the witnesses germane to their case and that he has identified and considered any issue of law which is pertinent to the case in hand. He must also hold the ring and ensure that each party has a fair chance to present his own case and to challenge that of his opponent."
The key judicial skills in conducting such hearings are to maintain a balance between informality and fairness, to ensure a level playing field and to protect the weak and the scrupulous. In practice, this is achieved by preventing interruptions and parties talking over each other, and making it clear that both parties will have plenty of time to say all that they wish before the end of the hearing.
XIX. Decision. After the hearing, the court shall, on the same day, render its decision using the form provided. The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in the court docket for civil cases and a copy thereof served on the parties. The decision is final and unappealable.
Explanatory Note: Despite the relative informality of the procedure, judgements are based upon a strict application of the substantive law and an objective judicial analysis of the facts. The judge is duty-bound to give the legal basis for the findings.
The prohibition against appeals assures immediate and swift justice.
The right to appeal is not a natural right nor a part due process. It is merely a statutory privilege and a procedural remedy of statutory origin, a remedy that may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law authorizing such exercise. The applicable provisions of the law allowing appeals from decisions of the first level courts are Sections 36 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended, also known as "The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980." The procedure on appeal is subject to the limitations and restrictions provided by this Act and any such rules as the Supreme Court may hereafter prescribe. Sec. 36 of B.P. Blg. 129 provides an instance wherein the Supreme Court may adopt special procedures, including cases where appeal may not be allowed, to achieve an expeditious and inexpensive determination of particular cases requiring summary disposition.
XX. Execution. If the decision is rendered in favor of the plaintiff, execution shall issue upon motion (Form 9-SCC).
Footnotes
1 " The People's Court Examind: A Legal and Empricial Analysis of the Small Claims Court System, by Bruce Tucker and Monica Her, San Francisco Law Review, Winter 2003.
2 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/small_claims_court.
3 " Small Claims Hearings: The Interventionist Role Played District Judges" by John Baldwin, Civil Justice Quarterly, Sweet and Maxwell limited and Contributors, January 17, 1998.
4 See Note 2.
5 "The Singapore Small Claims Tribunals - Accessible Justice to the Community" by Chong Kah Wei, paper prepared for the 2nd Annual AIJA Tribunals Conference held in Sydney, Australia on 10 September 1999.
6 " A Moral Renaissance For A Lasting Peace" Speech delivered by Senior Associate Justice Josue N. Bellosillo as Keynote Speaker of the 3rd Annual National Seminar-Convention of the Philippine trial Judges Lague, Inc. on the theme Championing Peace Through Justice, "held3-5 October 2002 at Prince Hotel, Baguio City.
7 "The Totality of Reforms for a transformed Judiciary" by Former Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban (ret), The Court Systems Journal, December 2005, p. 69
8 Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) 2001-2006 published by the Supreme Court in August 2001, p.6
9 Ibid.
10 Supplement to APJR, published by the Supreme Court in 2001 at p. 2-12.
11 See Note 7 at p. 12
12 See Note 9 at p. 2-15.
13 Memorandum For the Honorable Reynato S. Puno, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, dated December 19, 2007, from Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño , Re: Proposal to Establish a Pilot Project on Small Claims Courts in First Level Courts in the Philippines.
14 " Justice, Peace and Development: The Role and Responsibility of Lawyers, "Article by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno, The Court System s Journal, March 2006 Volume 11 No. 1, p. 26.
15 See Note3, 20-34 at Chapter 26.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
PUP College of Law
SOURCE: puplawstudent.blogspot.com
UPDATE: Thirteen (13) PUP bar examinees, twelve (12) of whom are first takers, passed the recent 2010 bar examination. The College got a commendable 28.26% passing rate which is much higher than the National percentage of only 20.26%.
Congratulations to the new PUP lawyers!!! Long live PUP Law!!!
The College of Law
The PUP College of Law was established in 2001. Its first dean was former Supreme Court Justice Dante Tinga. Young as the College may seem, it has nevertheless fared very well in bar examinations.
Its faculty is composed of professors who are also teaching in prestigious law schools.
Bar passers of PUP College of Law
2010 Bar examination (13/46)
PUP passing rate - 28.26%
National percentage of passers - 20.26%
ABONG, Mark Julio U .
CERO, De Mille V .
DALIVA, JR., Anacleto I .
DELA CRUZ, JR., Cresencio D.
FLORES, Reynaldo L .
MANGROBANG, III, Jonas Cesar C .
MATEO, Arnel D .
NUDO, John Joenelle V.
RAMOS, Ronald Allan D .
RODRIGUEZ, Josefina S .
TOLENTINO, Aaron S .
TORREJA, Richard P .
VALENCIA, Dianeth L .
2009 Bar examination (16/40)
PUP Percentage of passing - 40%
National percentage of passers - 24.58%
Maricris Alura
Maricel Cano
Alvin Guiterrez
Harold Kim Hernando
Ericson Lameyra
Edward Magat
Rosalie Mazo
Ryan Medrano
Ronald Crisanto Mercado
Dennis Palad
Epicurus Charlo Salcedo
Melissa San Miguel
Arlyn Santos- Montebon
Florences Sta. Ana
2008 Bar examination
NO DATA
National percentage of passers - 20.58%
2007 Bar Examination (9)
PUP Percentage of passing - 32%
National percentage of passers - 22.91%
Aquino , Aristotle R.
Aurellana, Rinchel E.
Cristobal Laurrie Layne P.
Deticio, Aileen Grace U.
Figueroa, Eddalaine
Lampa, Rex D.
Omadto, Arnold Ninoy Jr. P.
Suril, Ethel Rea G.
Tandog, Jonathan G.
2006 Bar examinations (8)
PUP Percentage of passing - 33.33%
National percentage of passers - 30.60%
Eric Opriasa
Christian Bautista
Ricky Gonzaga
Nova Delas Armas
Alvin Claridades
Anna Victoria Carlos
Maybelle Ramos
Rossano Pietro Veloso.
FEES:
Tuition (per unit) PhP 500.00
Miscellaneous
Application/Entrance Exam Fee 300.00
Registration Fee 100.00
Library Fee 100.00
Medical and Dental 50.00
ID (upon admission) 200.00
IT Utilization 100.00
Energy Fee (per month) 100.00
Certification (Letter Form) 50.00
Graduation Fee 200.00
Diploma Fee 100.00
Transcript of Records (per page) 100.00
Fine for Late Payment 100.00
Re-Admission Fee 200.00
Retrieval Fee 50.00
Validation Fee 50.00
Admission Fee for Transfer Students (from private) 500.00
Admission Fee for Transfer Students (from SUC) 300.00
Tags: Pup College Of Law Bar Passer 2011
UPDATE: Thirteen (13) PUP bar examinees, twelve (12) of whom are first takers, passed the recent 2010 bar examination. The College got a commendable 28.26% passing rate which is much higher than the National percentage of only 20.26%.
Congratulations to the new PUP lawyers!!! Long live PUP Law!!!
The College of Law
The PUP College of Law was established in 2001. Its first dean was former Supreme Court Justice Dante Tinga. Young as the College may seem, it has nevertheless fared very well in bar examinations.
Its faculty is composed of professors who are also teaching in prestigious law schools.
Bar passers of PUP College of Law
2010 Bar examination (13/46)
PUP passing rate - 28.26%
National percentage of passers - 20.26%
ABONG, Mark Julio U .
CERO, De Mille V .
DALIVA, JR., Anacleto I .
DELA CRUZ, JR., Cresencio D.
FLORES, Reynaldo L .
MANGROBANG, III, Jonas Cesar C .
MATEO, Arnel D .
NUDO, John Joenelle V.
RAMOS, Ronald Allan D .
RODRIGUEZ, Josefina S .
TOLENTINO, Aaron S .
TORREJA, Richard P .
VALENCIA, Dianeth L .
2009 Bar examination (16/40)
PUP Percentage of passing - 40%
National percentage of passers - 24.58%
Maricris Alura
Maricel Cano
Alvin Guiterrez
Harold Kim Hernando
Ericson Lameyra
Edward Magat
Rosalie Mazo
Ryan Medrano
Ronald Crisanto Mercado
Dennis Palad
Epicurus Charlo Salcedo
Melissa San Miguel
Arlyn Santos- Montebon
Florences Sta. Ana
2008 Bar examination
NO DATA
National percentage of passers - 20.58%
2007 Bar Examination (9)
PUP Percentage of passing - 32%
National percentage of passers - 22.91%
Aquino , Aristotle R.
Aurellana, Rinchel E.
Cristobal Laurrie Layne P.
Deticio, Aileen Grace U.
Figueroa, Eddalaine
Lampa, Rex D.
Omadto, Arnold Ninoy Jr. P.
Suril, Ethel Rea G.
Tandog, Jonathan G.
2006 Bar examinations (8)
PUP Percentage of passing - 33.33%
National percentage of passers - 30.60%
Eric Opriasa
Christian Bautista
Ricky Gonzaga
Nova Delas Armas
Alvin Claridades
Anna Victoria Carlos
Maybelle Ramos
Rossano Pietro Veloso.
FEES:
Tuition (per unit) PhP 500.00
Miscellaneous
Application/Entrance Exam Fee 300.00
Registration Fee 100.00
Library Fee 100.00
Medical and Dental 50.00
ID (upon admission) 200.00
IT Utilization 100.00
Energy Fee (per month) 100.00
Certification (Letter Form) 50.00
Graduation Fee 200.00
Diploma Fee 100.00
Transcript of Records (per page) 100.00
Fine for Late Payment 100.00
Re-Admission Fee 200.00
Retrieval Fee 50.00
Validation Fee 50.00
Admission Fee for Transfer Students (from private) 500.00
Admission Fee for Transfer Students (from SUC) 300.00
Tags: Pup College Of Law Bar Passer 2011
Friday, June 11, 2010
Is Noynoy the best choice to lead the Philippines?
Yes. Despite being criticized for lacking experience and having few accomplishments during his short stint as a senator, he is still the most appropriate person right now to lead this country among the presidential hopefuls. The presidency is now not a question of intelligence or lack of it as we have tried all those kinds of leaders in the past and yet the country still remains poor (if not become worse). They all failed to eradicate or at least curb the rampant corruption in the government which is basically the very basic reason which hampers the country's progress.
For a number of reasons aside from his own claims of no corruption, Aquino has some signs or indicators of non- or less corrupt administration. First, his current assets and lifestyle speak for contentment in life--his current assets is only roughly 14 million. Second, he did not intend in the first place to run as president even when his mom died were it not for the public clamor, and he even took some time to decide. Thirdly, he has a family legacy to protect, and a slight anomaly will definitely ruin or disgrace his parents; this I believe he will not allow but rather he will boost further.
For a number of reasons aside from his own claims of no corruption, Aquino has some signs or indicators of non- or less corrupt administration. First, his current assets and lifestyle speak for contentment in life--his current assets is only roughly 14 million. Second, he did not intend in the first place to run as president even when his mom died were it not for the public clamor, and he even took some time to decide. Thirdly, he has a family legacy to protect, and a slight anomaly will definitely ruin or disgrace his parents; this I believe he will not allow but rather he will boost further.
CASE DIGEST in Transportation Law: PHILIPPINE AMERICAN GENERAL INSURANCE CO., INC. vs. MGG MARINE SERVICES, INC. (G.R. No. 135645, March 8, 2002)
FACTS: On March 1, 1987, San Miguel Corporation insured several beer bottle cases with petitioner Philippine American General Insurance Company. The cargo were loaded on board the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G to be transported from Mandaue City to Bislig, Surigao del Sur.
After having been cleared by the Coast Guard Station in Cebu the previous day, the vessel left the port of Mandaue City for Bislig, Surigao del Sur on March 2, 1987. The weather was calm when the vessel started its voyage.
After having been cleared by the Coast Guard Station in Cebu the previous day, the vessel left the port of Mandaue City for Bislig, Surigao del Sur on March 2, 1987. The weather was calm when the vessel started its voyage.
The following day, M/V Peatheray Patrick-G listed and subsequently sunk off Cawit Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur. As a consequence thereof, the cargo belonging to San Miguel Corporation was lost.
Petitioner paid San Miguel Corporation the full amount of the cargo pursuant to the terms of their insurance contract, and as subrogee filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City a case for collection against private respondents to recover the amount it paid.
Meanwhile, the Board of Marine Inquiry conducted its own investigation and found that the cause of the sinking of the vessel was the existence of strong winds and enormous waves in Surigao del Sur, a fortuitous event that could not have been for seen at the time the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G left the port of Mandaue City. It was further held by the Board that said fortuitous event was the proximate and only cause of the vessel's sinking.
ISSUE: Whether or not respondent MGG should be held liable.
HELD: No. [Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of public policy, are mandated to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them. Owing to this high degree of diligence required of them, common carriers, as a general rule, are presumed to have been at fault or negligent if the goods transported by them are lost, destroyed or if the same deteriorated.
However, this presumption of fault or negligence does not arise in the cases enumerated under Article 1734 of the Civil Code:
Common carriers are responsible for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods, unless the same is due to any of the following causes only:(1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning or other natural disaster or calamity;(2) Act of the public enemy in war, whether international or civil;(3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods;(4) The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;(5) Order or act of competent public authority.]
In order that a common carrier may be absolved from liability where the loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods is due to a natural disaster or calamity, it must further be shown that the such natural disaster or calamity was the proximate and only cause of the loss; there must be "an entire exclusion of human agency from the cause of the injury of the loss."Moreover, even in cases where a natural disaster is the proximate and only cause of the loss, a common carrier is still required to exercise due diligence to prevent or minimize loss before, during and after the occurrence of the natural disaster, for it to be exempt from liability under the law for the loss of the goods. If a common carrier fails to exercise due diligence--or that ordinary care which the circumstances of the particular case demand -- to preserve and protect the goods carried by it on the occasion of a natural disaster, it will be deemed to have been negligent, and the loss will not be considered as having been due to a natural disaster under Article 1734 (1).
[In the case at bar, the issues may be narrowed down to whether the loss of the cargo was due to the occurrence of a natural disaster, and if so, whether such natural disaster was the sole and proximate cause of the loss or whether private respondents were partly to blame for failing to exercise due diligence to prevent the loss of the cargo.
The parties do not dispute that on the day the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G sunk, said vessel encountered strong winds and huge waves ranging from six to ten feet in height. The vessel listed at the port side and eventually sunk at Cawit Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur.
The Court of Appeals, citing the decision of the Board of Marine Inquiry in the administrative case against the vessel's crew (BMI--646-87), found that the loss of the cargo was due solely to the existence of a fortuitous event, particularly the presence of strong winds and huge waves at Cortes, Surigao del Sur on March 3, 1987:]
CASE DIGEST in Transportaion Law: Zamboanga Transportation Co. vs. CA
GR L-25292, 29 November 1969)
FACTS: In the evening of 13 August 1955, the spouses Ramon and Josefina Dagamanuel boarded a bus at Manicahan, Zamboanga City, to attend a benefit dance at the Bunguiao Elementary School, also in Zamboanga City, where Josefina was a public school teacher. After the dance, the couple boarded the same bus to return to Manicahan. At around 1 a.m. of 14 August 1955, the bus (1955 TPU-1137), and driven by Valeriano Marcos, fell off the road and pinned to death the said spouses and several other passengers.
Jose Mario Dagamanuel, the only child of the deceased spouses, through his maternal grandmother as guardian ad-litem, Pascuala Julian de Punzalan, instituted an action against Zamboanga Transportation Co., Inc. (Zamtanco) and the Zamboanga Rapids Co., Inc. (Zambraco) for breach of contract of carriage, alleging that the accident was due to the fault and negligence of the driver in operating the bus and due to the negligence of the companies in their supervision of their driver. the trial court rendered judgment sentencing the three, jointly and severally, to indemnify the private respondents. The CA affirmed the decision of the court a quo.
ISSUE: Whether or not Zamtranco and Zambraco are jointly and severally liable.
HELD: Yes.
While it is true that according to previous decisions of the Supreme Court, transfer of a certificate of public convenience to operate a transportation service is not effective and binding insofar as the responsibility of the grantee under the franchise in its relation to the public is concerned, without the approval of the transfer by the Public Service Commission required by the Public Service Act, and that in contemplation of law, the transferor of such certificate continues to be the operator of the service as long as the transfer is not yet approved, and as such operator, he is the one responsible jointly and severally with his driver for damages incurred by passengers or third persons in consequence of injuries or deaths resulting from the operation of such service, the Court does not find any need for applying these rulings to the present case for the simple reason that in their respective third-party complaints, the companies both admitted separately that they are the owners of the bus involved in the incident in question and that Valeriano Marcos, the driver of said bus at the time of said incident, was in their employ.
Jose Mario Dagamanuel, the only child of the deceased spouses, through his maternal grandmother as guardian ad-litem, Pascuala Julian de Punzalan, instituted an action against Zamboanga Transportation Co., Inc. (Zamtanco) and the Zamboanga Rapids Co., Inc. (Zambraco) for breach of contract of carriage, alleging that the accident was due to the fault and negligence of the driver in operating the bus and due to the negligence of the companies in their supervision of their driver. the trial court rendered judgment sentencing the three, jointly and severally, to indemnify the private respondents. The CA affirmed the decision of the court a quo.
ISSUE: Whether or not Zamtranco and Zambraco are jointly and severally liable.
HELD: Yes.
While it is true that according to previous decisions of the Supreme Court, transfer of a certificate of public convenience to operate a transportation service is not effective and binding insofar as the responsibility of the grantee under the franchise in its relation to the public is concerned, without the approval of the transfer by the Public Service Commission required by the Public Service Act, and that in contemplation of law, the transferor of such certificate continues to be the operator of the service as long as the transfer is not yet approved, and as such operator, he is the one responsible jointly and severally with his driver for damages incurred by passengers or third persons in consequence of injuries or deaths resulting from the operation of such service, the Court does not find any need for applying these rulings to the present case for the simple reason that in their respective third-party complaints, the companies both admitted separately that they are the owners of the bus involved in the incident in question and that Valeriano Marcos, the driver of said bus at the time of said incident, was in their employ.
There is no application of the ruling in the previous cases to the present case. There, the registered owners invariably sought to pass on liability to the actual operators on the pretext that they had already sold or transferred their units to the latter, whereas in the present case, the registered owner, the Zambraco, admits whatever liability it has and vigorously objects to any finding that the actual operator, the Zamtranco, is also liable with it, claiming that as registered owner, it alone should be adjudged liable. We would not inquire into the motive of the Zambraco why instead of sharing whatever liability it has with the Zamtranco, it prefers to shoulder it alone. But the fact stands out in bold relief that although still the registered owner at the time of the accident, it had already sold the vehicle to Zamtranco and the latter was actually operating it.
For the better protection of the public that both the owner of record and the actual operator, as held by the Court in the past, should be adjudged jointly and severally liable with the driver (see Dizon vs. Octavio, et al., 51 O.G. No. 8, 4059-4061; Castanares vs. Pages, CA-G.R. 21809-R, March 8, 1962; Redado vs. Bautista, CA-G.R. 19295-R, Sept. 19, 1961; Bering vs. Noeth, CA-G.R. 28483-R, April 29, 1965).
SOME ASSESSMENTS ON THE 2010 PHILIPPINE ELECTION
The 2010 automated Election, being the first in our history, has tickled the curiosity of most Filipinos. It attracted both the active voters and the apathetics, and even people with disabilities; they all tried their bests to locate their respective precincts and excitedly queued amid the scorching heat. Some however went home frustrated after realizing that their names were delisted or deactivated due to failure to vote during the previous election. My mother and my elder brother are a first-hand experience in this kind of election problem. My brother even spent hours in the line before knowing that he is not in the master list of voters.
It may be asked why he lined up in the first place without first verifying his name which is supposedly the proper procedure. Actually, the truth of the matter is that, upon entering the school where our precinct is located, we noticed a number of clustered PPCRV volunteers who obviously were there to assist the public in locating their respective precincts. Without noticing the signs for respective barangays as they are written so small that an average adult might not even notice, we assumed that all PPCRV groups have the complete master list, and so we verified our names. The volunteer can't find our names, then asked what barangay do we belong. After hearing our answer he suddenly commented in a high voice and in an embarrassing manner that we are in the wrong place as we have to find the right barangay. Embarrassed by the sudden outburst, we lost our temper and we yelled back a her and even lashing at her as she is still uttering annoying comments. Irked, we disregarded the verifying and rather searched our familiar neighbors and there we just lined up.
As observed by many, the retrieval or counting was indeed fast. After casting my vote, and upon reaching home, news about partial unofficial results were already being reported in almost every tv station. After 7 pm, which is the official cut-off time for casting of votes, almost all precincts have already either transmitted the results or at least finished conducting the voting. I was so excited that my eyes were almost glued on the tv, as every minute modifies the numbers of the partial unofficial result. By 12 midnight, the votes counted were already substantial. It was really both amazing and exciting.
Just a day after, some national candidates, especially in the presidential race, are already conceding to leading candidates. This is far different from our previous elections -- and I thought this thing only happens in foreign elections. In the past, objections and protests are prevalent and are the common marks of Philippine Election, and concessions are but rather a boxing fight’s vocabulary.
Another observation is that, the automated election incrementally decreased the election related violence. The elimination of manual counting also reduced the chance of losing candidate’s tactic of disturbing the counting or instigating violence with the end in view of getting a declaration of failure of election, and hoping (or manipulating?) later to win in the special election. This also rendered obsolete the modus operandi of ballot snatching while on its way to the city or municipal hall. All that is left for them now is to buy votes.
First among the election problems, both old and new, is the turtle-moving queue where some voters spent long hours before finally casting their votes. I, for one, started to fall in line around 11 am, and it was already 4 pm when I finally cast my vote. This is properly attributable either to lack of PCOS machine or to small classroom space. The COMELEC should have added extra PCOS machines to high volume clusters, or at least used a bigger area and increased the number of simultaneous voters.
Second is the perennial problem of missing names in the voter’s list or deactivated names for failure to vote last election. An announcement was allegedly made for them to reactivate during the registration period. But the fact that still many of them were unaware of it means that the information campaign was not sufficient if not ineffective. My brother who is a lawyer is one of those who never heard of that fact. An intensive campaign should have been employed.
Third is the failure or malfunctioning of some PCOS machines. This however should be imputed to SMARTMATIC-TIM for being negligent in ensuring the quality of the machines before being deployed to different parts of the country.
Fourth is vote buying: another classic poll cheating strategy. This is one of the areas where the impact of the automation is very negative. This is because the automation rendered the manual counting-associated violations obsolete but on the other it just shifted the black ops funds into this kind of violation. But unlike others, the blame here also extends to voters.
Fifth, the high-tech rigging by switching of flash drives, intercepting transmitted data, etc. These allegations arose only after almost all votes have been counted and local winning candidates have been proclaimed.
These are just some of the major problems observed, and certainly, there are a lot more. But on the positive side, at least we have significantly improved compared to past election in terms of the speed of counting which effectively lessened poll-related violence and some cheatings consistently identified with manual counting.
It may be asked why he lined up in the first place without first verifying his name which is supposedly the proper procedure. Actually, the truth of the matter is that, upon entering the school where our precinct is located, we noticed a number of clustered PPCRV volunteers who obviously were there to assist the public in locating their respective precincts. Without noticing the signs for respective barangays as they are written so small that an average adult might not even notice, we assumed that all PPCRV groups have the complete master list, and so we verified our names. The volunteer can't find our names, then asked what barangay do we belong. After hearing our answer he suddenly commented in a high voice and in an embarrassing manner that we are in the wrong place as we have to find the right barangay. Embarrassed by the sudden outburst, we lost our temper and we yelled back a her and even lashing at her as she is still uttering annoying comments. Irked, we disregarded the verifying and rather searched our familiar neighbors and there we just lined up.
As observed by many, the retrieval or counting was indeed fast. After casting my vote, and upon reaching home, news about partial unofficial results were already being reported in almost every tv station. After 7 pm, which is the official cut-off time for casting of votes, almost all precincts have already either transmitted the results or at least finished conducting the voting. I was so excited that my eyes were almost glued on the tv, as every minute modifies the numbers of the partial unofficial result. By 12 midnight, the votes counted were already substantial. It was really both amazing and exciting.
Just a day after, some national candidates, especially in the presidential race, are already conceding to leading candidates. This is far different from our previous elections -- and I thought this thing only happens in foreign elections. In the past, objections and protests are prevalent and are the common marks of Philippine Election, and concessions are but rather a boxing fight’s vocabulary.
Another observation is that, the automated election incrementally decreased the election related violence. The elimination of manual counting also reduced the chance of losing candidate’s tactic of disturbing the counting or instigating violence with the end in view of getting a declaration of failure of election, and hoping (or manipulating?) later to win in the special election. This also rendered obsolete the modus operandi of ballot snatching while on its way to the city or municipal hall. All that is left for them now is to buy votes.
First among the election problems, both old and new, is the turtle-moving queue where some voters spent long hours before finally casting their votes. I, for one, started to fall in line around 11 am, and it was already 4 pm when I finally cast my vote. This is properly attributable either to lack of PCOS machine or to small classroom space. The COMELEC should have added extra PCOS machines to high volume clusters, or at least used a bigger area and increased the number of simultaneous voters.
Second is the perennial problem of missing names in the voter’s list or deactivated names for failure to vote last election. An announcement was allegedly made for them to reactivate during the registration period. But the fact that still many of them were unaware of it means that the information campaign was not sufficient if not ineffective. My brother who is a lawyer is one of those who never heard of that fact. An intensive campaign should have been employed.
Third is the failure or malfunctioning of some PCOS machines. This however should be imputed to SMARTMATIC-TIM for being negligent in ensuring the quality of the machines before being deployed to different parts of the country.
Fourth is vote buying: another classic poll cheating strategy. This is one of the areas where the impact of the automation is very negative. This is because the automation rendered the manual counting-associated violations obsolete but on the other it just shifted the black ops funds into this kind of violation. But unlike others, the blame here also extends to voters.
Fifth, the high-tech rigging by switching of flash drives, intercepting transmitted data, etc. These allegations arose only after almost all votes have been counted and local winning candidates have been proclaimed.
These are just some of the major problems observed, and certainly, there are a lot more. But on the positive side, at least we have significantly improved compared to past election in terms of the speed of counting which effectively lessened poll-related violence and some cheatings consistently identified with manual counting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)