Case Digest: BIENVENIDO BERNAL, JR v. JOCELYN FERNANDEZ

BIENVENIDO BERNAL, JR v. JOCELYN FERNANDEZ

465 SCRA 386 (2005)

Willful failure to pay just debts by court employee is proscribed by law and hence, subject to disciplinary action.

Jocelyn Fernandez, Court Stenographer of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Caba, La Union, got some grocery items on credit amounting to P20,108.00 from complainant Bienvenido Bernal, Jr.

Fernandez refused to pay her bills. This prompted Bernal to file a complaint against her for willful failure to pay just debt. Nothing has been heard from Fernandez.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), noting the failure of Fernandez to comment on the complaint, considered her to have waived her right ―to submit controverting evidence.‖ It thus finds Fernandez guilty of willful failure to pay just debt and misconduct, and recommends that she be suspended from office for 3 Months, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely. Still, nothing has been heard from her.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the failure of Fernandez to pay just debts may be a subject of disciplinary action

HELD:

For willful failure to pay just debt and misconduct, Fernandez is SUSPENDED from office for 3 Months, with a STERN WARNING that repetition of the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely.

By Fernandez’ failure to comment on the Letter-Complaint, the three opportunities for her to give her side thereon notwithstanding, she is deemed to have admitted the existence and justness of the claim against her. That the just obligation has remained unpaid since the expiration of the 30-day credit extended to her sometime in January 2003 conclusively speaks of her willful refusal to settle the same.

No doubt, willful failure to pay just debt does not become a court employee, hence proscribed and subject to disciplinary action under Book V, Title I, Chapter 7, Subtitle A, Section 46(b)(22) of the Revised Administrative Code (E.O. 292). The offense is classified and penalized under Sec. 22(i), Rule XIV of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended by CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19, s. 1999.