Gorospe v. Perera
This is a civil administrative case, A.C. No. 12993, entitled "PSUPT. Jeffrey T. Gorospe, et al. vs. Atty. Jason Bader L. Perera," decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on June 14, 2021. The case stemmed from a disbarment complaint filed against Atty. Perera for allegedly violating the rule on conflict of interest and committing grave misconduct. However, the Court dismissed the case due to the complainants' failure to prove their claims through relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support their conclusion. The Court emphasized that mere allegations, suspicion, or speculation cannot be given credence in administrative proceedings.
ADVERTISEMENT
FIRST DIVISION
[A.C. No. 12993. June 14, 2021.][Formerly CBD Case No. 16-4879]
PSUPT. JEFFREY T. GOROSPE, ET AL., complainants,vs. ATTY. JASON BADER L. PERERA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated June 14, 2021which reads as follows:
"A.C. No. 12993 ([Formerly CBD Case No. 16-4879] PSupt. Jeffrey T. Gorospe, et al. v. Atty. Jason Bader L. Perera). — After a careful review of the records of this case, We resolve to adopt the findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors and dismiss the administrative case filed by the complainants for their failure to show that respondent Atty. Jason Bader L. Perera is unfit to practice law and to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities pertaining to the office of an attorney.
In administrative proceedings, such as disbarment, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is substantial evidence, i.e., that amount of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Complainants thus have the burden of proving by substantial evidence the allegations in their complaints. The basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to proof. Charges based on mere suspicion and speculation likewise cannot be given credence.
Here, the Court finds that complainants failed to discharge their burden of proof as they did not establish their claims through relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the conclusion that respondent Atty. Jason Bader L. Perera violated the rule on conflict of interest and committed grave misconduct.
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the Resolution dated December 14, 2019 of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors in CBD Case No. 16-4879 and DISMISSES the instant administrative case against respondent Atty. Jason Bader L. Perera.
SO ORDERED."
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
By:
MARIA TERESA B. SIBULODeputy Division Clerk of Court
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU