FERDINAND RAYMUND C. BACOLOT, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. JESSIBEL M. PABLO­-DRIESSEN, CLERK OF COURT VI, OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT (OCC); VICENTE B. ANGCON, JR., SHERIFF IV, BRAN…

Bacolot versus Pablo-Driessen

The Case

This is an administrative complaint for grave misconduct and gross dishonesty filed by Ferdinand Raymund C. Bacolot, general manager of A-1 Properties, Inc., against four personnel of the Regional Trial Court of Pagadian City, Zamboanga del Sur: Atty. Jessibel M. Pablo-Driessen, Clerk of Court VI; Sheriff Vicente B. Angcon, Jr.; Sheriff Jimelito O. Babor; and Dax S. Suarin, Clerk III. The complaint arose from an extrajudicial foreclosure sale conducted in favor of the Land Bank of the Philippines despite the bank's failure to pay the filing fees. The case matters because it fixes the administrative liability of clerks of court and sheriffs under the rules on extrajudicial foreclosure, and it draws the line between simple neglect of duty, simple misconduct, and grave misconduct in the civil service.

Procedural History

The complaint was filed before the Office of the Court Administrator, which initially assumed jurisdiction and directed the respondents to file their comments. The Supreme Court later referred the case to Executive Judge Dennis P. Vicoy for investigation, report, and recommendation, and ordered the addition of Suarin as co-respondent. Executive Judge Vicoy submitted an Amended Investigation Report absolving Atty. Pablo-Driessen and Suarin and recommending fines against the two sheriffs. The Office of the Court Administrator indorsed the report to the Clerk of Court of the Second Division, and the Court noted it and referred the matter to the Judicial Integrity Board. The Judicial Integrity Board rendered its own report, concurring in the facts but modifying the conclusions of law. The case then came before the Supreme Court as a regular administrative matter, and the Court adopted the Board's findings of fact but modified its conclusions of law.

Facts

On October 12, 2009, A-1 Properties mortgaged twenty-eight parcels of land to Landbank as security for an eleven million peso loan. When the company defaulted, Landbank filed an application for extrajudicial foreclosure before the Office of the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court of Pagadian City on December 14, 2011. That application was received by Suarin, who advised the Landbank representative and Sheriff Angcon to wait for Atty. Pablo-Driessen for the assessment of filing fees. Sheriff Angcon instead told Suarin to stamp the application as received and have it docketed, and then left with the case records.

Sheriff Angcon issued a Notice of Sale dated January 4, 2012, which Sheriff Babor approved while acting as officer-in-charge of the Office of the Clerk of Court. The sale was deferred because of a stay order in a corporate rehabilitation case, but it pushed through on December 14, 2017, with Landbank as the highest bidder. Atty. Pablo-Driessen issued the Certificate of Sale on February 28, 2018.

When A-1 Properties requested copies of the entire foreclosure records, the request went unacted upon, and a second letter was sent. Atty. Pablo-Driessen then personally retrieved the records from Sheriff Angcon, had them photocopied at her own expense, and gave the copies to the company's representative. Reviewing the records, she discovered that the filing fees had never been paid, and she reported the matter to Executive Judge Vicoy. When Landbank could not present proof of payment, the executive judge declared the extrajudicial foreclosure void. Bacolot then filed this complaint, later moving to drop Atty. Pablo-Driessen as respondent and to include Suarin.

Issues

• Whether or not Atty. Pablo-Driessen is guilty of grave misconduct or gross dishonesty, or only of simple neglect of duty.
• Whether or not Sheriff Angcon is guilty of grave misconduct.
• Whether or not Sheriff Babor is guilty of simple misconduct.
• Whether or not Suarin is administratively liable for receiving and docketing the application for foreclosure.

Applicable Provisions

The Court anchored its ruling on the procedure in extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage, which provides:

Upon receipt of an application for extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage, it shall be the duty of the Clerk of Court to receive and docket said application and to stamp thereon the corresponding file number, date and time of filing; collect the filing fees therefore pursuant to Rule 141, Section 7(c), as amended by A.M. No. 00-2-01-SC, and issue the corresponding official receipt.

This provision makes the collection of filing fees the personal duty of the Clerk of Court, which is why the Court held Atty. Pablo-Driessen to a standard of diligence.

The same resolution provides on the raffle of applications:

The Executive Judge shall, with the assistance of the Clerk of Court, raffle applications for extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage under the direction of the sheriff among all sheriffs, including those assigned to the Office of the Clerk of Court and Sheriffs IV assigned in the branches.

This bears on Sheriff Angcon's taking of the records and his conduct of the sale without a proper raffle.

On the certificate of sale, the resolution states:

No certificate of sale shall be issued in favor of the highest bidder until all fees provided for in the aforementioned sections and in Rule 141, Section 9(1), as amended by A.M. No. 00-2-01-SC, shall have been paid.

This confirms that the sale could not validly proceed while the fees remained unpaid.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court found Atty. Pablo-Driessen guilty only of simple neglect of duty. She had no knowledge of the 2011 application, and when she learned of the nonpayment she immediately reported it to the executive judge. Still, as Clerk of Court she bore the duty to collect the filing fees, and a simple exercise of diligence would have enabled her to notice what was taking place around her.

On the second issue, the Court found Sheriff Angcon guilty of grave misconduct. It was his actions that set the irregular foreclosure in motion: he directed that the application be stamped and docketed without payment, he took the records with him, and he failed to act on the requests for copies of the records.

On the third issue, the Court found Sheriff Babor guilty of simple misconduct. He approved the Notice of Sale without authority to act as officer-in-charge, and he misled Atty. Pablo-Driessen into believing that no computation of filing fees was needed for the petition for resumption.

On the fourth issue, the Court held Suarin not liable. Receiving and docketing the application was his ministerial duty, and he had no authority or discretion to determine whether the filing fees had been paid.

Doctrine

A Clerk of Court who fails to collect the filing fees on an application for extrajudicial foreclosure, though without bad faith, is guilty of simple neglect of duty, because the collection of those fees is a personal and non-delegable duty under the rules on extrajudicial foreclosure. A sheriff who takes the records, causes the docketing of an application without payment of fees, and withholds the records from the parties is guilty of grave misconduct. A sheriff who approves a notice of sale without authority and misleads the Clerk of Court on the computation of fees is guilty of simple misconduct. A clerk who merely receives and dockets an application in the performance of a ministerial duty incurs no administrative liability.

Disposition

The Court found Atty. Pablo-Driessen and Suarin guilty of simple neglect of duty, found Sheriff Angcon guilty of grave misconduct and Sheriff Babor guilty of simple misconduct, and imposed the corresponding fines, with the amounts deductible from their leave credits or retirement benefits if unpaid.

Remember This

Remember that the collection of filing fees in extrajudicial foreclosure is the Clerk of Court's own duty, and a sheriff who bypasses it commits grave misconduct. Examiners use this case to test the distinction between simple neglect of duty, simple misconduct, and grave misconduct among court personnel.