WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE IN THE KATARUNGAN PAMBARANGAY LAW? 1. While the dispute is under mediation conciliation or arbitration, the prescriptive. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NO INDIVIDUAL CAN GO DIRECTLY TO COURT OR ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICE FOR ADJUDICATION OF HIS/HER . Pambarangay Law? As a general rule, all disputes may be the subject of barangay conciliation before the Katarungang Pambarangay, except for the following.

Author: JoJokus Fegal
Country: Dominica
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 27 December 2008
Pages: 374
PDF File Size: 16.29 Mb
ePub File Size: 3.36 Mb
ISBN: 460-7-73343-991-8
Downloads: 53189
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Samukus

It is operated by the smallest of the local government unitsthe barangayand is overseen by the barangay captainthe highest elected official of the barangay and its executive. Agbayani asserted that these thirty-six 36 documents were surreptitiously and illegally attached to the records of the case, an act constituting extrinsic fraud and grave misconduct.

In particular, petitioner Agbayani alleged that when the petition was filed on March 22,only five 5 documents were attached thereto, namely: He may, motu proprio or upon motion, dismiss the petition for review on any of the following grounds: Disposition of the appeal.

Retrieved 16 November Agbayanis c omment was completely disregarded and suppressed in the records of the DOJ. Anent the charge of non-compliance with the rules on appeal, Sections 5 and 6 of the aforesaid DOJ Circular provide: CAPhil.

In other words, if strict adherence to the letter of the jatarungang would result in absurdity and manifest injustice, or where the merit of a party’s cause is apparent and outweighs consideration of non-compliance with certain formal requirements, procedural rules should definitely be liberally construed. Alfredo Flores Tadiar was the principal author of Presidential DecreeThe Katarungang Pambarangay Law, [8] and he also wrote its implementing rulesrequiring prior conciliation as a condition for judicial recourse.

The Secretary of Justice may dismiss the petition outright if he finds the same to be patently without merit or manifestly intended for delay, or when the issues raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.


Findings of the Secretary of Justice are not subject pambwrangay review unless made with grave abuse of discretion. Accordingly, the City Prosecutor kstarungang Las Pias City is directed to move for the withdrawal of the information for grave oral defamation filed against respondent Loida Marcelina J.

Katarungang Pambarangay – Wikipedia

The party taking the appeal shall be referred to in the petition as either “Complainant-Appellant” or “Respondent-Appellant. That there had been a long-standing animosity between Agbayani and Genabe is not denied. As for Document Nos. She denied that she gave provocation to respondent Genabe, insisting that the latter committed the offense with malice aforethought and not in the heat of anger.

Almost all civil disputes and pqmbarangay crimes with potential prison sentences of one year or less or fines 5, or less. The Supreme Court, in the case of Cruz vs. Moreover, a computer verification requested by the petitioner showed that the prosecutor assigned to the case had received a copy of the petitioners comment. But while prosecutors are given sufficient latitude of discretion in the determination of probable pambrangay, their findings are still subject to review by the Secretary of Justice.

Upon receipt of the complaint, the chairman to the committee, most often the barangay captain, shall the next working day inform the parties of a meeting for mediation. Retrieved 18 December Oral defamation under Article of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is penalized as follows: This matter was readily brought to the attention of Undersecretary Pineda by kattarungang Agbayani in her motion for reconsideration, who however must surely have found such contention without merit, and thus denied the motion.


That other legal or factual grounds exist to warrant a dismissal. Katxrungang, the dismissal of the instant petition is proper. It is grave slander when it is of a serious and insulting nature. Where the complaint a did not state that it is one of the excepted cases, or b it did not allege prior availment of said conciliation process, or c did not have a certification that no conciliation lsw settlement had been reached by the parties, the case should be dismissed x x x.


The Lupon Tagapamayapa is the body that comprises the barangay justice system and on it sit the baranagy captain and 10 to 20 members.

While the foregoing doctrine is handed down in civil cases, it is submitted that the same should apply to criminal cases covered by, but filed without complying with, the provisions of P. Supreme Court Administrative Circular. Respondent Genabe actually mentioned on page 2 of her petition for review to the DOJ the name of the petitioner as the private complainant, as well as indicated the latters address on the last page thereof as RTC BranchLas Pias City.

A ‘best fit’ approach to justice reform? Where the complaint a did not state that it is one of excepted cases, or b it did not allege prior availment of said conciliation process, or c did not have a certification that no conciliation had been reached by the parties, the case should be dismissed.


As alleged by the [petitioner] in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of her complaint-affidavit, respondent uttered the remarks subject matter of the instant case in the heat of anger. Coming now to the DOJ’s llaw that the c omplaint fails to state a cause of action, the CA held that the DOJ committed no grave abuse of discretion in causing the dismissal thereof on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of the Local Government Code ofon the Katarungang Pambarangay conciliation procedure.

Or, he may proceed with the investigation if the complaint in his view is sufficient and in proper form.