25. Santiago Ortega, Jr.

vs Judge Rogelio Dacara

AM # RTJ-15-2423, January 11, 2017

FACTS: This is a case where a complaint was charged to Judge Dacara for gross ignorance of the law and
gross inexcusable negligence.

The petitioner/complainant, President of the Siramag Fishing Corporation (SFC), filed a case against
the Regional Director and Chief of Fisheries Resource Management of BFAR-RO-V. The case was raffled to
RTC-Branch 37, Iriga City, Camarines Sur, presided by respondent judge.

After the hearing, the respondent judge denied the complainant’s application for writ of preliminary
mandatory injunction due to lack of clear and inestimable right to be protected, prohibition to the court to
issue such writ based on PD 605 and lack of territorial jurisdiction.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) in their report and recommendation found the respondent
judge favorable as regards to his decision denying to issue the writ. Nevertheless, with regards to territorial
jurisdiction, OCA found the respondent berief of merit.

ISSUE: Whether or not Judge Dacara should be dismissed from the service for his alleged negligence.

HELD: NO. The SC DISMISSED the case for being bereft of merit.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the respondent judge. The respondent was correct in his decision
not to issue the writ since he was prohibited as expressed under Sec. 1 of PD 605. Moreover, the respondent
judge correctly observed that the complainant failed to show that there is a clear and inescapable right to be
protected to justify the issuance.

With regard to territorial jurisdiction, the respondent judge erred since the office concerned was
located in Pili Camarines Sur which was within the jurisdiction of RTC – Branch 37 of Iriga City. However,
considering the circumstances of the case and the lack of malice and bad faith on the part of the respondent,
the court found the respondent judge not liable.