Scribd
Upload
83 views1 page

Visbal v. Vanilla

Judge Vanilla appealed a decision finding him ignorant of the law for archiving a case after issuing an arrest warrant. He argued the prosecutor did not exhaust judicial remedies before filing the complaint. However, the Court ruled exhaustion of remedies does not apply to administrative cases and the filing of such a case is separate from challenging a ruling in the underlying case. The gross ignorance of law was not erased by the exhaustion argument.

Uploaded by

Ridzanna Abdulgafur
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
83 views1 page

Visbal v. Vanilla

Judge Vanilla appealed a decision finding him ignorant of the law for archiving a case after issuing an arrest warrant. He argued the prosecutor did not exhaust judicial remedies before filing the complaint. However, the Court ruled exhaustion of remedies does not apply to administrative cases and the filing of such a case is separate from challenging a ruling in the underlying case. The gross ignorance of law was not erased by the exhaustion argument.

Uploaded by

Ridzanna Abdulgafur
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

152.

Visbal vs Vanilla

The Court rendered a Decision charging Judge Wenceslao B. Vanilla with ignorance of the law after it was es-
tablished that he had archived a case pending in his sala immediately after the warrant of arrest was issued
against the accused.

Judge Vanilla moved for reconsideration of the Court’s Decision on grounds that the complainant, Prosecutor
Robert M. Visbal has not shown that he has exhausted the available judicial remedies before resorting to this
administrative complaint.

Additionally, Judge Vanilla invites the Court’s attention to Prosecutor Visbal’s penchant for filing administra-
tive cases against other judges and court personnel in Leyte.

Issue: W/N the complainant should have first exhausted the available judicial remedies before resorting to this
administrative complaint.
Ruling: No.

The rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies "against errors or irregularities committed in the exercise of
jurisdiction of a trial judge" as the Court noted in Mina could have been raised by Judge Vanilla before, or even
during, the investigation by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).

The rule on exhaustion of judicial remedies does not erase the gross ignorance of the law that he exhibited. It
is not a mandatory sine qua non condition for the filing of an administrative case in the way that it is required
in the filing of a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 and other similar rules in the Rules of Court. The filing of
an administrative case is not an extraordinary remedy that demands that the lower court or tribunal be given
every opportunity to review its finding. In fact, it is not a remedy at all required in the underlying case that was
attended by gross ignorance to challenge or reverse the ruling in that case. It is a totally separate matter
whose objective is to seek disciplinary action against the erring judge.

You might also like