SC junks admin case vs. 3 CA magistrates

May 24, 2012 9:49 pm 

MANILA, May 24 – The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed an administrative case against three Court of Appeals (CA) justices stemming from their alleged error when they handed down a decision against a construction company.

In an en banc decision, the SC dismissed for lack of merit the complaint filed by Perseverando Fullero against CA Associate Justices Ramon Bato Jr., Juan Enriquez Jr. and Florito Macalino.

Fullero administratively charged the CA justices for gross misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, gross ignorance of the law and knowingly rendering an unjust decision.

In its Aug. 9, 2010 ruling and Feb. 21, 2011 resolution, the CA held PMF Construction, Fullero as its president/general manager, and Rudy Co "jointly and severally liable for all the monetary awards to spouses Severino and Melinda Dalangin.

On appeal, the SC upheld the CA's decision.

Despite the finality of the case, Fullero argued in his complaint that the CA justices committed a very serious error.

Fullero argued that the justices allegedly violated the doctrine of separate personality when they rendered him solidarily liable for damages with PMF Construction, which has a personality distinct from his.

The complainant said that he is not legally responsible for damages due to the absence of bad faith in directing the company's affairs.

Because of this, Fullero asked the SC that the corresponding penalties be meted out on the three justices.

In its ruling, the SC held that "Fullero's prayer is baseless."

"The very serious errors allegedly committed by the justices have already been negated by this Court's resolutions during the petition for review on certiorari that assails the CA decision," the SC ruling said.

"When an administrative charge against a judge has no basis whatsoever, this Court will not hesitate to protect the innocent," the SC said. (PNA)



Comments are closed.