Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
159
160
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
161
162
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
Inhercomplaint,Bansignarratedthat,onMay8,1997,
respondent and Gracemarie R. Bunagan (Bunagan),
entered into a contract of marriage, as evidenced by a
certifiedxeroxcopyofthecertificateofmarriageissuedby
theCityCivilRegistryofManila.[2] Bansig is the sister of
GracemarieR.Bunagan,legalwifeofrespondent.
However,notwithstandingrespondentsmarriagewith
Bunagan, respondent contracted another marriage on
January8,1998withacertainMa.CieloPazTorresAlba
(Alba), as evidenced by a certified xerox copy of the
certificate of marriage issued by the City Registration
OfficerofSanJuan,Manila.[3]
Bansig stressed that the marriage between respondent
andBunaganwasstillvalidandinfulllegalexistencewhen
hecontractedhissecondmarriagewithAlba,andthatthe
firstmarriagehadneverbeenannulledorrenderedvoidby
anylawfulauthority.
Bansigallegedthatrespondentsactofcontracting
marriage with Alba, while his marriage is still subsisting,
constitutes grossly immoral and conduct unbecoming of a
memberoftheBar,whichrendershimunfittocontinuehis
membershipintheBar.
In a Resolution[4] dated February 18, 2002, the Court
resolved to require respondent to file a comment on the
instantcomplaint.
Respondent failed to submit his comment on the
complaint, despite receipt of the copy of the Courts
Resolution, as evidenced by Registry Return Receipt No.
30639.Thus,theCourt,inaResolution[5]datedMarch17,
2003,resolvedtorequirerespondenttoshowcausewhyhe
shouldnotbedisci
_______________
[1]Rollo, pp.12.
[2]Id.,atp.4.
[3]Id.,atp.5.
[4]Id.,atp.6.
[5]Id.,atp.14.
163
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
163
164
164
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
nishedacopyofthecomplaintandbegiventimetofilehis
answertothecomplaint.
InaResolution[8]datedJuly7,2003,theCourtresolved
to (a) require Bansig to furnish respondent with a copy of
the administrative complaint and to submit proof of such
service;and(b)requirerespondenttofileacommentonthe
complaintagainsthim.
Incompliance,BansigsubmittedanAffidavitofMailing
to show proof that a copy of the administrative complaint
was furnished to respondent at his given address which is
No.238MayflowerSt.,NinoyAquinoSubdivision,Angeles
City,asevidencedbyRegistryReceiptNo.2167.[9]
On March 17, 2004, considering that respondent failed
anew to file his comment despite receipt of the complaint,
theCourtresolvedtorequirerespondenttoshowcausewhy
he should not be disciplinarily dealt with or held in
contemptforsuchfailure.[10]
On June 3, 2004, respondent, in his Explanation,[11]
reiteratedthathehasyettoreceiveacopyofthecomplaint.
HeclaimedthatBansigprobablyhadnotcompliedwiththe
CourtsOrder,otherwise,hewouldhavereceivedthesame
already. He requested anew that Bansig be directed to
furnishhimacopyofthecomplaint.
Again, on August 25, 2004, the Court granted
respondents prayer that he be furnished a copy of the
complaint, and required Bansig to furnish a copy of the
complainttorespondent.[12]
_______________
[8]Id., atp.17.
[9]Id., atp.18.
[10]Id.,atp.23.
[11]Id., atpp.2425.
[12]Id.,atp.27.
165
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
165
166
166
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
167
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
167
168
168
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
(2006).
169
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
169
170
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
Canon 7 A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity
anddignityofthelegalprofession,andsupporttheactivities
oftheIntegratedBar.
Respondentexhibitedadeplorablelackofthatdegreeof
moralityrequiredofhimasamemberoftheBar.Hemadea
mockery of marriage, a sacred institution demanding
respect and dignity. His act of contracting a second
marriage while his first marriage is subsisting constituted
grossly immoral conduct and are grounds for disbarment
underSection27,Rule138oftheRevisedRulesofCourt.[25]
This case cannot be fully resolved, however, without
addressing rather respondents defiant stance against the
Court as demonstrated by his repetitive disregard of its
Resolution requiring him to file his comment on the
complaint.Thiscasehasdraggedonsince2002.Inthespan
of more than 10 years, the Court has issued numerous
directives for respondents compliance, but respondent
seemedtohavepreselectedonlythosehewilltakenoticeof
and the rest he will just ignore. The Court has issued
severalresolutionsdirectingrespondenttocommentonthe
complaint against him, yet, to this day, he has not
submitted any answer thereto. He claimed to have not
received a copy of the complaint, thus, his failure to
commentonthecomplaintagainsthim.Ironically,however,
whenever it is a show cause order, none of them have
escapedrespondentsattention.Evenassumingthatindeed
thecopiesofthecomplainthadnotreachedhim,hecannot,
however,feignignorancethatthereisacomplaintagainst
himthatispendingbeforethisCourtwhichhecouldhave
easilyobtainedacopyhadhewantedto.
_______________
[25]Id., atp.53.
171
VOL.713,JANUARY14,2014
171
deplorabledisregardofthejudicialprocesswhichthisCourt
cannotcountenance.
Clearly,respondentsactsconstitutewillfuldisobedience
of the lawful orders of this Court, which under Section 27,
Rule138oftheRulesofCourtisinitselfaloneasufficient
cause for suspension or disbarment. Respondents cavalier
attitude in repeatedly ignoring the orders of the Supreme
Courtconstitutesutterdisrespecttothejudicialinstitution.
Respondents conduct indicates a high degree of
irresponsibility. We have repeatedly held that a Courts
Resolution is not to be construed as a mere request, nor
should it be complied with partially, inadequately, or
selectively. Respondents obstinate refusal to comply with
the Courts orders not only betrays a recalcitrant flaw in
his character; it also underscores his disrespect of the
Courts lawful orders which is only too deserving of
reproof.[26]
Section27,Rule138oftheRulesofCourtprovides:
_______________
[26] See Sebastian v. Bajar, 559 Phil. 211, 224; 532 SCRA 435, 449
(2007).
172
172
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
personalfileofrespondent.AlltheCourtsofthePhilippines
andtheIntegratedBarofthePhilippinesshalldisseminate
copiesthereoftoallitsChapters.
SO ORDERED.
Carpio (Actg. CJ.), Velasco, Jr., LeonardoDe Castro,
Brion, Peralta, Bersamin, Del Castillo, Abad, Villarama, Jr.,
Perez, Mendoza, Reyes, PerlasBernabe and Leonen, JJ.,
concur.
174
174
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
BunaganBansig vs. Celera
Sereno (CJ.),OnLeave.