Sunday, March 24, 2024

Brasales v. Borja, A.M. No. P-21-024, [June 16, 2021]

 CASE DIGEST


Brasales v. Borja

A.M. No. P-21-024, [June 16, 2021]

SECOND, LOPEZ, M.V 

SC Power of Discipline and Supervision over all court personnel;

 

Rule 140 of the Rules is applied in disciplining court personnel who are not judges or justices since it is the prevailing legal framework. The exception is when its application will be prejudicial, or will work injustice to the court employee, i.e., the gravity of the offense will be increased, or a higher penalty for violation will be imposed. In such instance, the civil service rules, which is the framework of rules prevailing at the time of the commission of the offense, will apply. 

 

Maxima Z. Borja, Clerk of Court IV, faced charges of Abuse of Authority and Malfeasance issued by Judge Marlo C. Brasales for allegedly approving the leave of absence applications of Court Stenographer II Rachel N. Dadivas without proper authority, contrary to verbal instructions and court regulations. Borja's defense cited the overwhelming workload of her position, leading to occasional forgetfulness regarding the prescribed protocols.

 

Whether or not Maxima is guilty of violation of reasonable office rules and regulations. 

YES. Maxima was found guilty of violating reasonable office rules and regulations, specifically A.C. No. 08-2017, which mandates that the clerk of court may only approve leave of absence applications for lower court personnel with prior written authorization from the presiding judge. Despite lacking authorization from Judge Brasales, Maxima approved Rachel's leave applications, offering her workload as an excuse. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) correctly determined Maxima's breach of office rules and regulations. However, regarding the penalty, the retroactive application of Rule 140 of the Rules of Court was deemed prejudicial to Maxima. While Rule 140 prescribes suspension for violations of Supreme Court (SC) rules, directives, and circulars, the 2011 Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RRACCS) categorizes Maxima's offense as a light offense punishable by reprimand for the first offense. In such instance, the civil service rules, which is the framework of rules prevailing at the time of the commission of the offense, will apply. Consequently, the reprimand was the appropriate penalty for Maxima's transgression of A.C. No. 08-2017.

 

 

 

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL TEXT

No comments:

Post a Comment

Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King, G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005

 CASE DIGEST Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005 THIRD DIVISION, CORONA J.     C...