Macariola Vs. Asuncion 114 SCRA 77
Facts:
On June 8,
1963, respondent Judge Elias Asuncion rendered a decision in Civil Case 3010
final for lack of an appeal.
On October 16, 1963, a project of partition was submitted to
Judge Asuncion. The project of partition of lots was not signed by the parties
themselves but only by the respective counsel of plaintiffs and petitioner Bernardita R. Macariola. The
Judge approved it in his order dated October 23, 1963.
One of the lots in the project of partition was Lot 1184,
which was subdivided into 5 lots denominated as Lot 1184 A – E. Dr. Arcadio
Galapon bought Lot 1184-E on July 31, 1964, who was issued transfer of
certificate of Title No, 2338 of the Register of Deeds of Tacloban City. On
March 6, 1965, Galapon sold a portion of the lot to Judge Asuncion and his
wife.
On August 31, 1966, spouses Asuncion and Galapon conveyed
their respective shares and interest inn Lot 1184-E to the Traders
Manufacturing & Fishing Industries Inc. Judge Asuncion was the President
and his wife Victoria was the Secretary. The Asuncions and Galapons were also
the stockholder of the corporation.
Respondent Macariola charged Judge Asuncion with "Acts
unbecoming a Judge" for violating the following provisions:
Article 1491, par. 5 of the New Civil Code, Article 14, par. 1 & 5 of the
Code of Commerce, Sec. 3 par H of RA 3019 also known as the Anti-Graft &
Corrupt Practice Act., Sec. 12, Rule XVIII of the Civil Service Rules and Canon
25 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics.
On November 2, 1970 a certain Judge Jose D. Nepomuceno dismissed
the complaints filed against Asuncion.
Issue:
Whether or Not the respondent Judge violated the
mentioned provisions.
Ruling:
No. Judge Asuncion did not violate the mentioned
provisions constituting of "Acts unbecoming a Judge" but was reminded
to be more discreet in his private and business activities.
Respondent Judge did not buy the lot 1184-E directly on the
plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 3010 but from Dr. Galapon who earlier purchased
the lot from 3 of the plaintiffs. When the Asuncion bought the lot on March 6,
1965 from Dr. Galapon after the finality of the decision which he rendered on
June 8, 1963 in Civil Case No 3010 and his two orders dated October and
November, 1963. The said property was no longer the subject of litigation.
In the case at bar, Article 14 of Code of Commerce has no
legal and binding effect and cannot apply to the respondent. Upon the
sovereignty from the Spain to the US and to the Republic of the Philippines,
Art. 14 of this Code of Commerce, which sourced from the Spanish Code of
Commerce, appears to have been abrogated because whenever there is a change in
the sovereignty, political laws of the former sovereign are automatically
abrogated, unless they are reenacted by Affirmative Act of the New Sovereign.
Asuncion cannot also be held liable under the par. H, Sec. 3
of RA 3019, citing that the public officers cannot partake in any business in
connection with this office, or intervened or take part in his official
capacity. The Judge and his wife had withdrawn on January 31, 1967 from the
corporation and sold their respective shares to 3rd parties, and it appears
that the corporation did not benefit in any case filed by or against it in
court as there was no case filed in the different branches of the Court of
First Instance from the time of the drafting of the Articles of Incorporation
of the corporation on March 12, 1966 up to its incorporation on January 9,
1967. The Judge realized early that their interest in the corporation
contravenes against Canon 25.
