DOJ Opinion No. 171, s. 1982

DOJ OPINION NO. 171 , s. 1982 August 3, 1982 Respectfully returned to the Deputy Minister of Finance, his within request for opinion on the queries raised in the attached basic memorandum of the Board of Hearing Commissioners of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA) regarding the "additional filing fee" required to be collected under R.A. No. 3870 as amended by P.D. No. 200, Section 4 of which reads: "Sec. 4. In order to provide for the support of the U.P. Law Center, the additional amount of one per cent (1%) of the filing fee imposed, but in no case lower than five pesos, in the case of the appellate courts and the additional amount of one per cent (1%) of the filing fee imposed, but in no case lower than two pesos, in the case of all other courts, including all administrative or special courts, agencies or tribunals exercising quasi-judicial functions, shall be collected by their respective clerks of court, or equivalent functionary, for each action or special proceeding filed therewith and for which fees in any statute or regulation are due and payable. For this purpose the term "special proceeding" shall include any petition or application, or paper or document for the dispensation of official action or establishment of a status or right of a party or a particular fact. Such additional amount shall be receipted for separately as part of a special fund to be known as the "Legal Research Fund" and shall be turned over by the clerks of court or equivalent functionaries to the Chief Accountant of the Ministry of Justice who in turn shall remit the same as of each quarter to the University of the Philippines for the exclusive use of the U.P. Law Center in accordance with this Act." LexLib The queries posed are: 1. "Is the "additional filing fee" under R.A. No. 3870 as amended by P.D. No. 200 applicable to assessment appeals under P.D. No. 466? 2. If it is applicable: "(a) May an assessment appeal be dismissed upon failure to pay the "additional filing fee" within the statutory period of appeal" If it may not be so dismissed, may the case be suspended until the "additional filing fee" is paid and , if so, for how long? (b) Shall the "additional filing fee" be collected from the Assessor who filed an assessment appeal to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals? (c) In case the Assessor and the Owner each file an assessment appeal to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, shall the "additional filing fee" be collected from both? cdll Subject to the extended discussion hereunder, we answer the first query in the negative. The foregoing answer renders it unnecessary to consider the other queries. The afore-quoted provision of the law explicitly provides for the collection of fees for the support of the U.P. Law Center in addition to the filing fee imposed . . . for each action or special proceeding filed with the appellate court and all other courts, including all administrative or special courts, agencies or tribunals exercising quasi-judicial functions. Although the statutory definition of the term special proceeding is quite broad, the additional amount provided for in Section 4, supra , may be collected only whenever filing fees as such, are due and payable pursuant to the Rules of Court or law or regulation. (Opinions Secretary of Justice, Nos. 99, 116, 159, s. 1973). Neither P.D. No. 464, the Real Property Tax Code, nor the Amended Rules of Procedure Before the Central Board of Assessment Appeals prescribes a filing fee for assessment appeals to the Local Board and the Central Board of Assessment Appeals. We are not also aware of any other law, rule or regulation prescribing a filing fee for appeals filed with the aforementioned Boards. Consequently, there being no basic filing fee, there is no additional filing fee which the CBAA may impose under R.A. No. 3870, as amended by P.D. No. 200. With the finding that the CBAA may not collect the additional filing fee imposed under the aforementioned law, the other queries posed become academic and need no further comment. LexLib Wherefore, we reiterate our reply herein before set forth. Very truly yours, (SGD.) RICARDO C. PUNO Minister of Justice