Bonifacio Law Office v. Judge Bellosillo
by Conrad Lacsina
Facts:
1. Atty. Ricardo M. Salomon Jr. of the Bonifacio Law Office was a plaintiff in an ejectment case,
which was brought before Judge Bellosillo of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City.
2. Bellosillo, however, referred the case back to the barangay for conciliation proceedings despite
the fact that it was alleged in the verified complaint that the matter had already been referred
to the barangay and that a copy of the Certification to File Motion was attached to the verified
complaint as an annex.
3. Following an advice by the clerk of court, Salomon submitted the minutes of the hearings held in
the barangay. Still no action was taken by the court despite the fact that the case falls under the
Rule on Summary Procedure.
4. What is more, the judge took a long time to come up with a determination as to whether
summons should be issued or not, did not act on the Notice of Dismissal filed by Bonifacio, and
disregarded the Rules on Summary Procedure.
5. Salomon therefore charged Judge Bellosillo with ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion,
and obvious partiality.
6. Judge Bellosillo denied the charges against him and alleged that the plaintiff failed to comply
with P.D. 1508, Establishing a System of Amicably Settling Disputes at the Barangay Level, which
is Sec. 412 of the Local Government Code of 1991.
7. The case was referred to the Court Administrator, which found the judge either ignorant or
negligent in referring the case back to the barangay despite the presence of what it considered
to be a valid Certification to File Action.
Issue: Whether or not the judge may not refer back to the barangay a case required by the law to be
first amicably settled therein despite the presence of a Certification to file Action.
Held: Yes.
Ratio:
1. The records reveal that the Certification was improperly and prematurely issued. The Pangkat
was not constituted, no face to face conciliation of the parties had taken place before it is
substantiated by the Minutes submitted by complainant. Evidently, complainant failed to
complete the barangay conciliation proceedings.
2. The records show that the complaint before the barangay was dated February 16, 1996 and the
hearing was set for February 29, 1996. And yet, the Certification to File Action was issued on
March 1, 1996, less than fifteen days after the first scheduled hearing before the barangay
chairman, as mandated by the law.
3. Judges are required by Administrative Circular No. 14-93 to carefully determine if there has
been compliance with prior Barangay conciliation procedure under pertinent laws as a pre-
condition to judicial action, particularly whether the certification to file action attached to the
records of the case comply with the requirements of the law.
4. Therefore, Judge Bellosillo’s referral of the case back to the barangay cannot be equated with
gross ignorance of the law. Neither does it constitute grave abuse of discretion or obvious
partiality.
5. But Judge Bellosillo failed to comply with the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure and is
therefore found guilty of undue delay in rendering a decision and is ordered to pay a fine of
P11,000 to be taken from the retirement benefits heretofore withheld from him.