Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AM No. RTJ-15-2426 2015-06-16	OCA v. JUDGE ALEXANDER BALUT PER CURIAM
In its Resolution,[4] dated December 16, 2008, the Court directed Judge Balut to comment on the audit report and, upon the recommendation[5] of the OCA, referred the matter to the Court of Appeals (CA) for investigation, report and recommendation.[6]
	AM NO. P-06-2121 2008-06-26	IN-HOUSE FINANCIAL AUDIT AZCUNA, J.
Delay in the remittances of collections constitutes neglect of duty.[5] Further, we held that the failure to remit on time judiciary collections deprives the court of interest that may be earned if the amounts are deposited in a bank.[6] Under the Civil Service Rules and the Omnibus Rules implementing it, simple neglect of duty is a less grave offense penalized with suspension for one month and one day to six months for the first offense; and dismissal for the second offense.
	AM No. P-08-2434 2008-03-03	COLLECTION OF FEE FOR TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE WITHOUT PROPER RECEIPT BY CLERK OF COURT MARCIANA APAS-PILAPIL NACHURA, J.
Thus, Ms. Pilapil is entrusted with the primary responsibility of correctly and effectively implementing regulations regarding fiduciary funds. Her assertion of good faith cannot override the mandatory nature of the above requirements essentially designed to promote full accountability for government funds. [14]