What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 5pm Tuesday 9am - 5pm Wednesday 9am - 5pm Thursday 9am - 5pm Friday 9am - 5pm

https://www.facebook.com/503998572802473/

Hernandez Campañano Law, Plaza Lor-Del, Bustos Public Market, Market Road, Poblacion, Bustos (2026)

11/06/2026

Let us celebrate Philippine Independence Day with gratitude and reflection.

May we remember that our heroes fought for our freedom so that we may have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Political colors may reflect differences in belief and alliance, but they should never shield anyone from accountability.

True freedom demands not only patriotism, but vigilance, responsibility, and the courage to hold power to account.

22/04/2026

Notice of Disallowance ng COA, ano ba talaga iyon?

Kapag may Notice of Disallowance o ND mula sa Commission on Audit, ang basic meaning niyan ay ito: sinasabi ng COA na may ginastos o ibinayad na government money na hindi pinapayagan sa audit, buo man o bahagi lang. Hindi ito simpleng memo lang. Formal audit finding ito.

Sa madaling salita, ang mensahe ng ND ay: “Ang public funds na ito, hindi dapat nailabas sa ganitong paraan.” Puwedeng dahil ang gasto ay irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, o unconscionable under COA’s constitutional mandate.

Mahalagang tandaan na ang ND ay hindi automatic na criminal case, at hindi rin automatic na guilty na agad ang lahat ng involved. Audit finding muna ito. Pero seryoso pa rin ang effect nito dahil puwede itong humantong sa pagpapabalik ng pera at pagtakda kung sino ang mananagot sa disallowed amount.

Dito kadalasang nalilito ang mga tao: may Notice of Suspension at may Notice of Disallowance. Ang suspension, temporary muna. Parang sinasabi ng COA: “May kulang o may issue dito, ipaliwanag ninyo.” Kapag hindi naayos o hindi sapat ang paliwanag at documents, saka puwedeng mauwi sa disallowance.

Ano ngayon ang practical effect ng ND? Una, puwedeng sabihing hindi valid in audit ang isang payment or transaction. Ikalawa, puwedeng may refund obligation. Ikatlo, puwedeng pangalanan sa ND ang mga taong responsable. Sa ilalim ng COA rules, puwedeng solidary ang liability ng mga taong tinukoy sa ND, pero ayon sa Supreme Court sa Madera, hindi pare-pareho ang balik-pananagutan ng lahat. Mahalaga pa rin kung sino ang approving officer, certifying officer, recipient, at kung may good faith ba o may bad faith, malice, o gross negligence.

Kaya hindi tamang isipin na kapag may ND, automatic na lahat ng nakatanggap o pumirma ay siguradong magbabalik agad nang pare-pareho. Case-to-case pa rin iyan, at may legal rules na sinusunod sa pag-determine kung sino talaga ang dapat mag-refund at hanggang magkano. (Lawphil)

May remedy rin laban sa ND. Puwede itong i-appeal sa loob ng COA process. Pero kapag hindi inaksyunan nang tama at sa tamang panahon, puwede itong maging final and executory. Ibig sabihin, puwede nang ipatupad ang disallowance.

Bottomline: Ang Notice of Disallowance ay hindi pa hatol sa criminal case. Pero malinaw itong babala na sa tingin ng COA, may public funds na nailabas na hindi pinapayagan sa audit, at puwedeng magresulta ito sa refund at pananagutan. Kaya hindi ito dapat binabalewala.

22/04/2026

Notice of Disallowance ng COA, ano ba talaga iyon?

Unang dapat maintindihan: ang Commission on Audit o COA ay isang independent constitutional commission. Hindi ito under ng isang department o opisina na puwedeng magdikta ng findings nito. Sa ilalim ng ating legal framework, COA ang may mandato na mag-audit ng paggamit ng government funds at magtakda ng auditing rules, kasama ang pag-disallow ng mga gastusing hindi pumapasa sa batas at audit standards.

Kaya kapag may Notice of Disallowance o ND, ang ibig sabihin niyan ay simple pero seryoso: may transaction, payment, o paggamit ng pondo na dinis-approve ng COA in audit, buo man o bahagi lang. Hindi ito simpleng memo. Formal audit finding ito na nagsasabing, sa tingin ng COA, may public funds na nailabas o nagamit sa paraang hindi pinapayagan sa audit.

Mahalaga rin ito: ang COA findings ay karaniwang document-driven. Ibig sabihin, hindi lang ito haka-haka o tsismis. Auditors examine disbursement reports, payrolls, vouchers, cashbooks, receipts, liquidation reports, at iba pang supporting documents. Sa liquidation-related transactions, lalo na sa cash advances at special funds, ang audit naturally nakasandal sa liquidation papers at supporting documents na isinumite at nasa custody for audit. Kaya kung kulang, mali, spurious, o hindi tugma ang papeles, doon madalas nagsisimula ang problema.

Hindi rin sapat na sabihing “may authority naman kami gumastos” o “nasa budget naman iyan.” Sa audit, ang tanong hindi lang may appropriation ba. Ang tanong din ay: legal ba, regular ba, kailangan ba, makatwiran ba ang halaga, at kompleto ba ang supporting documents? Sa ilang kaso, sinabi ng Korte Suprema na kahit pasok pa sa ceiling o budget ang gastos, puwede pa rin itong ma-disallow kung excessive, o kung ang claim ay hindi suportado ng receipts at other documents evidencing disbursement.

Ano ngayon ang standards ng disallowance? Dito mas dapat malinaw ang publiko.

Una, may illegal expenditure. Ito ang mga gastos na salungat mismo sa batas, rules, o authority na kailangan para mailabas ang pondo. Kapag walang legal basis ang payment, puwede itong i-disallow.

Ikalawa, may irregular expenditure. Ito ang mga gastos na hindi sumunod sa established rules, regulations, procedural guidelines, policies, o prescribed usages and rules of discipline. Hindi ibig sabihin na masama agad ang purpose. Minsan ang problema ay ang paraan ng paggastos: may nilaktawang procedure, may kulang na required step, o may departure sa tamang proseso.

Ikatlo, may unnecessary expenditure. Ito ang mga gastusing hindi supportive sa objectives at mission ng agency relative sa nature ng operations nito. Sa plain terms: baka gumastos nga ang opisina, pero hindi naman iyon talagang kailangan para sa mandato ng ahensiya. Hindi porket kapaki-pakinabang sa tingin ng iba ay necessary na sa audit sense.

Ikaapat, may excessive expenditure. Ito ang unreasonable expense na incurred at an immoderate quantity or exorbitant price, o iyong lampas sa usual o proper at beyond just measure or amount. Ito ang klase ng gasto na puwedeng may authority at may budget, pero overpriced, sobra ang quantity, o hindi proportionate sa pangangailangan.

Ikalima, may extravagant expenditure. Ito ang mga gastusing lampas sa bounds of propriety. Sa COA’s own terms, immoderate, prodigal, lavish, luxurious, grossly excessive, at injudicious ang ganitong spending. Hindi sapat na sabihin na “ginawa naman para sa opisina.” Tinitingnan din kung may pagka-luxury o sobra sa nararapat para sa public funds.

Ikaanim, may unconscionable expenditure. Ito ang unreasonable at immoderate na gasto na, sa simplehan, ay sobrang hindi makatarungan kaya hindi iyon gagawin ng isang matinong tao kung sarili niyang pera ang pinag-uusapan. Mas mabigat ito kaysa sa simpleng pagiging mahal. Ang focus dito ay ang sobrang kawalan ng fairness at reasonableness ng expenditure.

Ano ang epekto ng ND? Una, sinasabi ng COA na hindi valid in audit ang transaction, in whole or in part. Ikalawa, puwedeng magkaroon ng refund or return obligation. Ikatlo, puwedeng pangalanan sa ND ang mga taong mananagot. Pero hindi rin tama na isipin na automatic pare-pareho ang liability ng lahat. May COA rules on liability, at pinalinaw pa ng Korte Suprema sa mga kaso gaya ng Madera na mahalaga kung sino ang approving officer, certifying officer, recipient, at kung may good faith, bad faith, o gross negligence.

Pinakahuli, ang ND ay hindi pa criminal conviction. Audit disallowance muna ito. Posibleng may administrative, civil, o criminal consequences depende sa facts, pero hiwalay na usapan iyon. Kaya kapag may ND, hindi dapat minamaliit, pero hindi rin dapat mali ang framing.

Ang tamang framing ay ito: COA is formally saying that a government expenditure failed audit standards, and that can trigger refund and accountability issues.

19/04/2026

Impeachment, Ipaliwanag Natin Nang Diretso

Kapag sinabing impeachment, maraming agad ang iniisip na tanggal na, guilty na, o kulong na. Hindi ganoon. Ang impeachment ay constitutional process para alamin kung ang isang impeachable official ay dapat pang manatili sa puwesto dahil sa mabibigat na paglabag. Hindi ito ordinaryong criminal case. At ang pagiging “impeached” ay hindi pa ibig sabihin na “convicted.”

Simple ang proseso. Una, sa House of Representatives nagsisimula ang impeachment. Dito tinitingnan kung may sapat na basehan para umusad ang kaso. Ikalawa, kung umabot sa Senado, doon pa lang ginaganap ang trial proper. Doon boboto ang mga senador kung dapat bang ma-convict o ma-acquit ang opisyal. Para ma-convict, kailangan ng two-thirds vote ng lahat ng senador. Kapag convicted, puwedeng matanggal sa puwesto at ma-disqualify sa future public office. Pero habang wala pang conviction, hindi pa automatic na tanggal, at hindi rin automatic na guilty.

Mahalagang linawin ito sa publiko: ang kasalukuyang “impeachment hearings” laban kay VP Sara Duterte ay hindi pa ang Senate trial. Ayon mismo sa House Justice Committee chair, ang nangyayari sa committee ay isang preliminary or clarificatory stage para matulungan ang committee na magpasya kung may probable cause at kung dapat umusad ang proseso. Trial proper only happens in the Senate.

Sa madaling sabi, nasa House stage pa lang tayo ngayon. Tuloy ang proceedings sa House Committee on Justice. Noong April 8, inutusan ng Supreme Court ang House at ang committee na magsumite ng comments sa mga petisyon na gustong magpatigil ng proceedings, pero wala itong inilabas na TRO. Ibig sabihin, walang legal stop order sa ngayon kaya nagpapatuloy ang hearings.

Sa kasalukuyang update, nagkaroon na ng April 14 hearing, may ilang miyembro ng committee na nagsasabing may probable cause na para umusad ang kaso, at ang susunod na hearing ay naka-set sa April 22, na inaasahang tutok sa alegasyon ng unexplained wealth. Kaya ang tamang paglalarawan sa nangyayari ngayon ay ito: House process pa lang ito, hindi pa Senate impeachment trial.

16/04/2026

No, There Is No “Instant Divorce” in the Philippines

In the Philippines, marriage is not treated as a casual private arrangement that can be ended by shortcut, agreement, or convenience. The Family Code expressly treats marriage as an inviolable social institution. Because of that policy, the law does not allow a simple, walk in, one appearance, fixed fee “divorce” process for marriages governed by the Family Code. As a rule, the judicial remedies that fully address the marital bond are declaration of nullity of marriage for marriages that were void from the beginning, and annulment of marriage for marriages that were valid until set aside by a court. By contrast, legal separation does not sever the marriage bond.

These remedies are not the same. A declaration of nullity applies where the marriage was void from the start, such as in cases covered by the Family Code’s provisions on void marriages. An annulment applies to a voidable marriage, meaning a marriage that is considered valid unless and until a court annuls it on specific legal grounds. This distinction matters because the applicable grounds, evidence, and legal effects are not identical.

It is also important to be precise. For marriages between Filipino spouses governed by the Family Code, there is no local divorce process that can be obtained by simply paying a “package price” to a fixer, signing papers, or appearing before a civil registrar. There is a limited and different rule under Article 26 of the Family Code for certain foreign divorces involving a foreign spouse, but that is not the same thing as a domestic Philippine divorce service being sold to the public.

A legitimate nullity or annulment case requires a proper petition filed in the Family Court. Under the Supreme Court’s rules, a petition for declaration of absolute nullity or annulment is governed by a specific judicial process. The court must also guard against collusion, and the law expressly states that no judgment in these cases may be based merely on a stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment. In other words, this is not something that can lawfully be “arranged” by shortcut.

The role of the civil registry is also often misunderstood. A local civil registrar or the PSA does not dissolve a marriage on its own. Civil registry records may be annotated after the proper court decree and related requirements are complied with. The rules on civil registration likewise distinguish between mere clerical corrections, which may be handled administratively in limited cases, and changes affecting civil status, which require judicial authority. So if someone says your marriage can be “removed from the PSA” without the proper court process, that should immediately raise alarm.

That is why the public should be wary of offers such as these: “one time payment divorce,” “guaranteed cancellation,” “no need to file in court,” “just appear once before a judge,” or “we can fix your PSA record directly.” Those claims are not how Philippine family law works. At best, they may be deceptive. At worst, they may involve falsification or the use of falsified public documents. Under the Revised Penal Code, falsification of public documents and the use of falsified documents are criminal acts. Contracting another marriage before the first marriage has been legally dissolved may also expose a person to bigamy liability.

The safer and lawful path is always the proper one. If a marriage is truly void, there may be grounds for declaration of nullity. If it is voidable, annulment may be the remedy. If a foreign divorce is involved, there may be a separate remedy for judicial recognition, depending on the facts. But none of these should be confused with an “instant divorce” sold by unauthorized persons or processed outside the law.

Bottom line: if someone promises to end your marriage in the Philippines through a shortcut, without the proper petition, without the proper court proceedings, or by directly “fixing” the civil registry or PSA records, be careful. That is not a lawful substitute for annulment or declaration of nullity. It is a red flag, and it may lead not only to wasted money, but also to serious legal consequences.

06/04/2026

GC Conversations as Evidence: Pwede Ba sa Kaso?

Group chats, Messenger threads, Viber messages.

Most conversations today happen online. But when a dispute arises, one question always comes up:

“Pwede ba gamitin ‘to sa kaso?”

The short answer is: Yes. But it is not that simple.

Not All Screenshots Are Automatically Accepted

Many people assume that a screenshot is already enough.

It is not.

Courts do not rely on screenshots alone. What matters is whether the messages can be properly authenticated. In other words, you must prove that:

The conversation is real
The parties involved are who they claim to be
The messages were not altered

Without this, the screenshot can easily be challenged.

You Must Prove Authenticity

Electronic evidence is governed by specific rules.

This means:

You may need the actual device or original file
You may need testimony explaining how the messages were obtained
You may need to show the account belongs to the person you are claiming

A simple printout will not always be enough.

GC Messages Can Be Used Against You

Be careful what you say online.

Statements in group chats can be used as:

Admission of liability
Proof of agreement
Evidence of threats, fraud, or intent

Even casual messages can have legal consequences when taken in context.

Deleted Messages Are Not Always Safe

Deleting a message does not guarantee protection.

There may still be:

Screenshots from other participants
Backups or synced data
Other witnesses in the conversation

Once sent, control over the message is already limited.

Context Matters

A message cannot be taken in isolation.

Courts look at:

The full conversation
The sequence of messages
The intent behind the statements

A single screenshot without context may not carry much weight.

The Practical Advice

Think before you type.

✔ Do not assume private chats are truly private
✔ Avoid making commitments casually online
✔ Be careful with admissions, promises, or threats

What you say in a GC today can become evidence tomorrow.

📌 Hernandez Campañano Law Office

⚖️ Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns, consult a qualified lawyer.

30/03/2026

✝️ HOLY WEEK ADVISORY ✝️

In observance of the Holy Week, please be guided on our office schedule:

📅 April 1, 2026 (Wednesday)
🕐 Half-day operations only

📅 April 2 – April 5, 2026
🚫 Office Closed

📅 April 6, 2026 (Monday)
✅ Operations Resume

May this season be a time for reflection, prayer, and renewal.

📌 Hernandez Campañano Law Office

30/03/2026

🚨 OPEN DEED OF SALE: A RISK YOU DO NOT WANT TO TAKE 🚨

The use of an “open deed of sale” is still common in the Philippines, especially in motor vehicle transactions.

This is where the seller signs the deed but leaves the buyer’s name blank, allowing it to be passed around without proper transfer.

It may seem convenient.
But it can cost you more than you think.

⚠️ YOU MAY STILL BE HELD LIABLE

If the transfer is not registered, you remain the registered owner.

That means:
• If the vehicle is involved in an accident, your name is on record
• If it is used in a crime, authorities trace it back to you
• If there are violations or claims, you may still be held responsible

The Land Transportation Office recognizes the registered owner, not private arrangements.

Even if you already got paid, the law can still treat you as the owner.

⚠️ BUYERS ARE NOT SAFE EITHER

Without a proper and registered deed:
• Ownership is uncertain
• Resale becomes difficult
• Legal protection is weak

You may pay for something you cannot fully claim.

⚠️ CRIMINAL RISKS ARE REAL

Open deeds are often used to avoid taxes and registration.

This can lead to:
• Tax penalties and liabilities
• Issues of falsification or fraud
• Legal exposure in case of multiple transfers

If the vehicle is later used in illegal activity, the registered owner may still be investigated.

⚠️ RISK OF FENCING (PD 1612)

If the property turns out to be stolen, anyone who bought, possessed, or transferred it may be questioned.

Even good faith is not always enough.
You may still need to prove you had no knowledge of any illegal source.

⚠️ FRAUD AND DISPUTES BECOME EASY

An open deed can be reused and passed around without your knowledge.

This leads to:
• Conflicting ownership claims
• Broken transaction history
• Costly legal disputes

✅ THE PRACTICAL ADVICE

Do not take shortcuts.

✔ Complete the deed of sale
✔ Identify the buyer properly
✔ Pay the correct taxes
✔ Register the transfer
✔ Secure updated documents

These are not just formalities.
They are your protection.

📌 Hernandez Campañano Law Office

⚖️ Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns, consult a qualified lawyer.

01/01/2026

Happy New Year 2026!

Warm greetings from Hernandez Campanano Law Office.

As we welcome the new year, we extend our sincere thanks to our clients, colleagues, and partners for the trust and confidence you placed in us throughout 2025. We look forward to continuing our work with renewed purpose, clarity, and commitment in 2026.

May the year ahead bring peace, good health, and continued success.

Hernandez Campañano Law

11/06/2026

22/04/2026

22/04/2026

19/04/2026

16/04/2026

06/04/2026

30/03/2026

30/03/2026

01/01/2026

Address

Opening Hours

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request

Monday	9am - 5pm
Tuesday	9am - 5pm
Wednesday	9am - 5pm
Thursday	9am - 5pm
Friday	9am - 5pm