BANCO CENTRAL DE COSTA RICA

This code, promulgated on 5 September 1989, shall take effect on 20 October 1989.

Liabilities of Judges

Administrative Liabilities:

 Grounds for administrative sanctions against judges (Sec. 67 of the Judiciary Act of

1(48)

1. Serious misconduct - implies malice or wrongful intent, not mere error of judgment, judicial acts complained of must be corrupt or inspired by an intention to violate the law. or were in persistent disregard for well-known legal rules

2. Inefficiency - implies negligence, incompetence, ignorance, and carelessness, when the judge fails to observe in the performance of his duties that diligence, prudence and circumspection which the law require: in the rendition of any public service.

Instances of serious misconduct:

1. Unjustifiable failure to decide cases within reglementary period 2. Failure to deposit funds with the municipal treasurer or to produce

them despite his promise to do so 3. Misappropriation of fiduciary funds

4. Extorting money from a party-litigant who has a case before his court 5. Solicitation of donation for office equipment

6. Unlawful solicitation in violation of R.A. No. 6713 7. Frequent unauthorized absences in office

8. Falsification of certificate of service to collect salary

9. Declaring Wednesdays as non-session days which the judge declared as his "Mid-week pause"

10. Indefinite postponement for, several years of a criminal case pending in his sala

11. Judges is poking his gun to another in a restaurant while in a sate of intoxication

12. Pistol-whipping the complainant on the latter's left face without any justification

13. Acting as counsel and/or attorney-in-fact for all the, parties with opposing interests on a parcel of land in pursuance of his personal

self-________________________________________________________________

interest

14. Using intemperate language unbecoming of a judge

15. Failure to reply to a show cause resolution of the Supreme Court 16. Loss of records

17. Inaction by judge which is the tantamount to partiality in favor of one party ... among others.

 Instances of gross inefficiency:

1. Delay in the disposition of cases

2. Unduly granting repeated motions for postponement of a case 3. Gross incompetence and ignorance of the law

4. Reducing to a ridiculous amount the bail bond of the accused in a murder case

5. Including execution in the judgment itself

6. Dismissing uncalendared criminal cases without verifying whether the other parties had received the notices of court hearings…among others

 Procedure for filing an administrative complaint (Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of

Court):

1. Complaint in writing setting forth clearly the facts and circumstances relied upon and sworn to and supported by affidavits and documents 2. Service or dismissal, which must followed by an answer within 10 days

from date of service ‘ 3. Answer and hearing

4. Report filed with the Supreme Court of findings accompanied by evidence and documents

Civil Liabilities:

 Civil Liabilities Re Official Functions:

a. Obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs the civil rights.

b. Willful or negligent rendition of a decision which causes damages to another

c. For damages: rendering/neglecting to decide a case causing loss to a party.

 Civil Code Disabilities:

Rule: Can't purchase properties subject of litigation is his court.

Exception: Does not apply where the subject property was not acquired from any of the parties to the case, nor will it apply when the litigation is already finished.

 Donations made to a judge by reason of his office are void.

 Taking advantage of his position to boost his candidacy amounts to 'gross misconduct.

________________________________________________________________

 Cannot serve as officers or advisers of political groups.

Criminal Liabilities

 Malfeasance under the RPC:

a. Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment (Art. 204, RPC) The elements are.

1. That the officer is a judge;

2. That he renders judgment in a case submitted to him for decision;

3. That the judgment is unjust;

4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust.

b. Judgment Rendered Through Negligence (Art. 205, RPC) The elements are:

1. That the offender is a judge;

2. That he renders judgment in a case submitted to him for decision

3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust;

4. That it is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance.

Notaries Public

I. Qualifications (Sec 232 and 234, Revised Administrative Code (RAC)) A. Filipino citizen

B. Over 21 years of age

C. Should not have been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude

D. Training

1. Those admitted to the practice of law

2. Those who have passed the studies of law in a reputable university

3. A clerk or deputy clerk of court or one who has at some time held the position of clerk or' deputy clerk of court for a period of not less than two (2) years

4. Those qualified for the office of Notary Public de officio under Spanish sovereignty

5. Municipal judges as notaries public de officio in municipalities or Municipal districts

i. where there are no persons with the necessary qualifications

ii. where there are qualified persons but they refuse Appointment

________________________________________________________________

 non-lawyers as notaries:

General Rule: SC Circular No. 16 of 1985 directed appointing judges to refrain and desist from appointing and/or renewing the appointment of non-lawyers as notaries public because of the unethical practices of notaries public who are non-lawyers;

Exception: In places where there are no lawyers, or there are not enough lawyers, the appointment of lawyers as notaries public may be allowed, but a non-lawyer who wishes to be commissioned as a notary public must apply.

Define the following:

1. Court – A board or other tribunal which decides a litigation or contest. (Hidalgo vs. Manglapus, 64 O.G. 3189).

2. Judge – A public officer who by virtue of his office, is clothed with judicial authority. A public officer lawfully appointed to decide litigated questions in accordance with law. (People vs. Manantan, 5 SCRA 687).

3. De jure judge – one who is exercising the office of judge as a matter of right; an officer of a court who has been duly and legally elected or appointed.

An officer of the law fully vested with all the powers and functions conceded under the law to a judge, which relate to the administration of justice within the jurisdiction over which he presides. (Lino Luna vs. Rodriguez, 37 Phil. 191).

A judge who is in all respect legally appointed and qualified as such and whose term of office has not expired. (Tayko vs.

Capistrano, 53 Phil. 872).

4. De Facto judge – A judge who in good faith continues to act and is recognized by common error after the abolition of his court by statute is deemed judge de facto of the new court which succeeds to the jurisdiction of that presided over by him. (US. vs. Abalos, 1 Phil. 76).

An officer who is not fully invested with all of the powers and duties conceded to judges, but is exercising the office of judge under some color of right. ( Lino Luna vs. Rodriguez, ibid.)

One who exercises the duties of a judicial officer under color of an appointment or election thereto. (Tayko vs. Capistrano, 53 Phil.

872).

The acts of a de facto judge are just as valid for all purposes as those of a de jure judge so far as the public or third persons who

________________________________________________________________

are interested therein are concerned. x x x. The decision of a de facto judge cannot be collaterally attacked. (Nacionalista Party vs.

De Vera, 85 Phil. 132).

The decision of a judge is void, if on the day it is promulgated, the judge ceased to be a judge. (Rodriguez vs. Tesorero de Filipinas, 84 Phil. 368; Ong Sui vs. Paredes, 17 SCRA 661; People vs. Solis, CA-G.R. No. 141117-R, November 20, 1965).