A.M. No. MTJ-06-1622; January 27, 2006
Enrique Abadesco, Jr., Complainant, vs. Judge Jaime O. Rafer and Clerk of Court Franca C. Velasco, MCTC, Talisay-Laurel, Batangas, Respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Enrique Abadesco, Jr. entered into a Contract to Sell with respondent Judge Jaime O. Rafer for a one-hectare lot in Batangas. Abadesco fully paid the purchase price of P2,000,000 and was issued a title. However, upon taking possession, he discovered the lot had been sold to another person. Judge Rafer acknowledged a discrepancy and offered options, including a refund. Abadesco opted for a refund, but the judge failed to comply. Abadesco successfully filed a civil case for rescission, obtaining a final judgment ordering Rafer to refund the amount with damages.
A writ of execution was issued. The sheriff discovered a savings account at Land Bank under the names of Judge Rafer and respondent Clerk of Court Franca C. Velasco with a balance over P400,000. Clerk of Court Velasco issued a certification stating the account was a Fiduciary Fund of the MCTC, leading the bank to refuse release of the funds. Abadesco then filed this administrative complaint against both respondents for misrepresentation, gross misconduct, and conspiring to frustrate the writ’s implementation.

ISSUE

Whether respondents Judge Jaime O. Rafer and Clerk of Court Franca C. Velasco are administratively liable for their actions related to the private land transaction and the subsequent execution of the civil judgment.

RULING

The Court found Judge Rafer guilty of impropriety but dismissed the complaint against Clerk of Court Velasco. The legal logic is bifurcated. For Judge Rafer, while the land transaction was private, his conduct violated the standard that a judge’s personal behavior must uphold public confidence in the judiciary. His failure to honor the contract and subsequent court judgment, stemming from an initial misrepresentation (whether fraudulent or a grave mistake), constituted impropriety. This was his second offense for similar conduct, warranting an increased fine of P12,000 to be deducted from his retirement benefits.
For Clerk of Court Velasco, the Court exonerated her. The evidence substantiated her claim that the bank account in question was indeed an official Fiduciary Fund of the court, holding collections and cash bonds. Her certification to that effect was a truthful statement of the account’s nature, not an act of conspiracy to obstruct justice. Therefore, she committed no misconduct in performing her duty to safeguard court funds.