OCA Circular No. 105-2022 Dated 11 May 2022 (A.M. No. 21-03-04-SC [Re: Request for Investigation of Divina Law Office Relative to Civil Case No. R-MKT-20-02448-SC, S.P. No. 20-02409-SP, and Civil Case No. R-PSY-20-02268-CV])

July 11, 2022

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 176-2022

 

On 11 May 2022, this Office issued OCA Circular No. 105-2022 circularizing the Resolution dated 22 February 2022 of the Court En Banc in A.M. No. 21-03-04-SC. In said administrative matter, the Court resolved to adopt guideposts in the voluntary inhibition of judges based on the ruling in A.M. No. 87-9-3918-RTC (Re: Query of Executive Judge Estrella T. Estrada, Regional Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, on the Conflicting Views of Regional Trial Court Judges Masadao and Elizaga Re: Criminal Case No. 4954-M), partially quoted hereunder, thus:

(iii) The Judge who is either immediately designated by the Executive Judge to hear the inhibited case or to whom the inhibited case was re-raffled, shall immediately take cognizance of the inhibited case and try the same before the premises of the inhibiting judge.

Thereupon, several inquiries and issues were brought to the attention of this Office, particularly on the aforequoted provision. Thus, for clarity and to address probable confusion in the interpretation or application of the subject provision, this Office sees the need to issue a clarification on the procedure to be undertaken in the inhibition of cases.

For one, please be advised that the abovementioned paragraph (iii) pertain more to inhibited cases in single sala courts. Second, all concerned are advised to observe the following procedure on inhibition of cases, taking into account the station or court type, e.g., single sala or multi sala station, whether in first level or second level courts:

The Judge who is either immediately designated by the Executive Judge within his/her area of administrative supervision to hear the inhibited case in first level courts, or to whom the inhibited case was re-raffled in multi sala stations, shall immediately take cognizance of the inhibited case.

In single-branch courts where the inhibited case is referred to a court of another station in accordance with existing issuances on pairing system, 1 the judge to whom the inhibited case was referred shall try and decide the same in the court of the inhibiting judge.

In multi sala courts where the inhibited case is re-raffled to another branch within the same station, the inhibited case shall be heard and decided in the court of the judge to whom the same is re-raffled.

A newly-filed case shall be assigned by raffle in multiple-branch stations to the disqualified or inhibiting judge to replace the case so removed from his/her docket.

For your guidance and information.

(SGD.) RAUL B. VILLANUEVACourt Administrator

Footnotes

1. 9 February 2021 Resolution in A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC (Guidelines on the Selection and Designation of Executive Judges and Defining their Powers, Prerogatives and Duties) relative to the amendment of Annex "A" of the Resolution dated 27 January 2004; Circularized: OCA Circular No. 72-2021 dated 4 June 2021.