Guidelines for eRaffle in Quezon City Trial Courts

July 23, 2013

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 97-13

 

Pursuant to OCA Circular No. 57-2013 dated 29 April 2013, relating to the Trial Run of the eCourt Program in Quezon City Trial Courts, the Quezon City Regional Trial Court and Metropolitan Trial Court were exempted from the application of rules regarding raffle of cases under A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC, ^* to pave the way for the eRaffle component of the eCourt Program. Nevertheless, because the eRaffle component of the eCourt Program is still being refined based on results of the trial run, certain concerns have arisen which necessitate the issuance of these guidelines.

ACCORDINGLY, these Guidelines for eRaffle in Quezon City Trial Courts are hereby adopted to assist the Executive Judges and Vice-Executive Judges of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court and Metropolitan Trial Court in achieving equality in the distribution of cases among the courts in the station through eRaffle.

1. All raffle shall be done electronically. This shall include the raffle of cases, marriages, publications of judicial notices, and extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgages under Act No. 3135, once the latter have been included in the system and are already operational.

2. To equalize the distribution of cases, A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC fixed the ratio of cases for raffle at 6 (for newly appointed judges): 2 (for incumbent judges): 1 (for the Executive Judge). Since the eRaffle system has not yet been configured to capture this ratio, to allow the courts with new judges to equalize their caseload with the other courts in the station, as mandated under the Manual for Executive Judges, whenever a case is assigned by eRaffle to a court with a newly appointed judge, that first case assigned by eRaffle plus the five (5) succeeding cases on the list for eRaffle shall be assigned automatically to the same court with the newly assigned judge so that that court will receive the mandated six (6) cases.

 This will apply for all types of courts and for all types of cases, regardless of the urgent ancillary reliefs sought in said cases, save Land Registration Cases which shall always be assigned solely by eRaffle at a 1:1 ratio.

3. To further achieve equality in the distribution of cases in Quezon City, considering the great disparity in the volume of cases assigned to certain types of court, the following rules shall be observed: TECcHA

3.a. All courts with Acting Presiding Judges who are designated full time to act in Quezon City shall henceforth be assigned new cases by eRaffle at a ratio of 2:1, like other incumbent judges. When a new judge is appointed to a court where an Acting Judge is assigned, the new judge will only have the balance of the disparity in that court's caseload with the other courts of the same type in the station to equalize with, at a 6:2:1 ratio.

3.b. The two (2) designated Commercial Courts of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branches 90 and 93, shall henceforth be assigned other cases cognizable by regular courts, pursuant to III.A.7 (c) (3) of the Manual for Executive Judges and OCA Circular No. 82-2003, 20 June 2003, at a ratio of 2:1, like other incumbent judges.

4. The re-raffle of cases where a declaration of failed JDR has been made shall also be done by eRaffle and the replacement for each case unloaded by any court due to failed JDR shall also be a case unloaded by another court also due to failed JDR. No new case shall be assigned to replace a case unloaded by a court due to failed JDR.

5. Other matters relating to the assignment of cases by eRaffle among Quezon City Trial Courts which are not expressly provided for herein shall be addressed to the Executive Raffle Committee, respectively, of the Regional Trial Court and the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City for action, consistent with the objectives of the eCourt Program and the rules for the raffle of cases under A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC.

For strict compliance.

 

(SGD.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZCourt Administrator

Footnotes

* Guidelines on the Selection and Appointment of Executive Judges and Defining their Powers, Prerogatives and Duties, effective 15 February 2004.