LEGAL ETHICSFifth Assignment

1. What are the procedures to be followed to effectively remit disqualification under Sec. 6
of Canon 3 on Impartiality?
Under Sec. 6 of Canon 3, to effectively remit disqualification, a judge must
disclose on the record the basis of disqualification and ask parties and
lawyers to consider out of the presence of the judge, whether to waive
disqualification. As long as the disqualification is not based upon personal
bias or prejudice, the parties and lawyers may all agree that the judge
should not be disqualified. If all parties and the lawyer agree that the
judge should participate, the judge may participate, and must incorporate
the agreement into the record of the proceeding.
2. A gave a birthday cake to Judge Romero on the occasion of the latters birthday. Judge
Romero accepted the birthday cake given by his neighbor, knowing that A has no pending
case before him. Did Judge Romero violate Sec. 15 of Canon 4 on Propriety? Explain
your answer.
No. Sec. 15 of Canon 4 provides that subject to law and to any legal
requirements of public disclosure, judges may receive a token gift, award
or benefit as appropriate to the occasion on which it is made, provided
that such gift, award or benefit might not reasonably be perceived as
intended to influence the judge in the performance of official duties or
otherwise give rise to an appearance of partiality.
3. Are errors or irregularities committed by judges in the performance of their official duties
subject to administrative sanction?
No, judges are not expected to be infallible. Not every error or irregularity
committed by judges in the performance of official duties is subject to
administrative sanctions.
3(a)In order not to constitute misconduct and give rise to a charge of gross
ignorance of the law, what should be proved by the judge? (Cruz v. Ituralde)
- In the absence of bad faith, fraud, dishonesty, or deliberate intent
to do injustice, incorrect ruling do not constitute misconduct and
may not give rise to a charge of gross ignorance of the law.
3(b)Are judges liable for erroneous order or decision? (Dantes v. Caguioa)
 - No. Judges are not liable for every erroneous order or decision;
otherwise, the judicial office becomes unbearable and they will be
the objects of endless harassment.
3(c)What defenses are sufficient to charges of ignorance of the law? (Chan v.
Lantion)
- Good faith and absence of malice or corruption are sufficient
defenses to charges of ignorance of the law.
4. When is good faith as a defense not applicable? (Dantes v. Caguioa)
The Supreme Court admonished that good faith in situations of fallible
discretions involves only within the parameters of tolerable judgment and
does not apply where the issues are so simple and the applicable legal
principles evident and basic as to be beyond possible margin of error.
5. What are the two principal sources of international law?
The Constitution incorporates the two principal sources of international
lawgeneral or customary norms AND conventional norms.
5(a)What are norms of international law referred to in Sec. 2, Article II
of the Constitution, which provides that the Philippines adopt the
generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the
land?
- The norms referred to are customary norms, which are binding on
all States.
5(b)To what norms does the Constitution refers to in Sec. 21, Article VII
of the Constitution when it provides that when at least two-thirds of all
members of the Senate concur in a treaty or international agreement, it
may become part of domestic law?
- The norms referred to are conventional or treaty laws.
6. Judge Makupad decided a case one year after the case was submitted for decision. What
Section of Canon 6 on Competence and Diligence was violated by Judge Makupad?
Judge Makupad violated Sec. 5 of Canon 6 on Competence and
Diligence as it provides that judges shall perform all judicial duties,
including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly and with
reasonable promptness.
7. A judge must compulsorily disqualify himself for hearing a case when any of the parties
therein is related to him by consanguinity or affinity within what civil degree?
Within the sixth civil degree.