ARD Law & Notary Public

05/06/2026

24/05/2026

READ: May 24, 2026 Statement of Spokesperson Atty. Camille Sue Mae L. Ting on the release of the Resolution in G.R. No. 278747, Rodrigo Roa Duterte and Senator Ronald “Bato” M. Dela Rosa v. Hon. Lucas Bersamin, et al. tomorrow.

The Resolution is only on the denial of the temporary restraining order / status quo ante order; no decision yet on the main petition.

LINK: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/statement-of-the-supreme-court-spokesperson-may-24-2026/

11/05/2026

07/05/2026

Disbarred o tinanggalan ng lisensya ng ang isang abogado dahil sa paggamit ng pekeng Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) compliance number sa kanyang mga isinumiteng pleading.

Sa isang Per Curiam na Desisyon, tinanggal ng En Banc ng Korte Suprema sa pagka-abogado si Atty. Jose R. Hidalgo (Atty. Hidalgo) dahil sa dishonest conduct o hindi tapat na asal na lumalabag sa Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA).

Nagsilbing abogado si Atty. Hidalgo para sa defendant sa isang kaso ng malicious prosecution na nakabinbin sa Branch 153 ng Regional Trial Court (RTC) sa Lungsod ng Biñan. Sa sagot na inihain niya para sa kanyang kliyente, isinama ni Atty. Hidalgo ang kanyang MCLE compliance number na hinihingi sa mga abogado.

Nagsampa ng motion to expunge ang abogado ng nagrereklamo para burahin ang sagot ni Atty. Hidalgo mula sa mga rekord dahil hindi siya sumunod sa mga kahingian ng MCLE. Kalakip ng nasabing mosyon ang isang Sertipikasyon mula sa Tanggapan ng MCLE na nagsasaad na hindi nakadalo sa MCLE si Atty. Hidalgo mula sa unang compliance period hanggang sa kasalukuyan.

Sa pagtanggal ng lisensya ni Atty. Hidalgo, iginiit ng Korte Suprema ang Canon II ng CPRA na nag-aatas sa mga abogado na kumilos nang maayos (propriety) at panatilihin ang imahe ng kaayusan sa personal at propesyunal na pakikipag-ugnayan, maging tapat at magalang, at itaguyod ang dangal ng legal na propesyon alinsunod sa pinakamataas na pamantayan ng etikal na pag-uugali.

Sa ilalim ng Canon III, hinihingi din sa mga abogado na itaguyod ang Konstitusyon, sundin ang mga batas ng lupain, at isulong ang paggalang sa mga batas at prosesong legal.

Sinabi ng Korte Suprema na nilabag ni Atty. Hidalgo ang mga Canon na ito at sinabing ang gawain ng paglalagay ng maling impormasyon sa mga pleading na isinampa niya ay nagpapakita ng bad faith o masamang hangarin at kawalan ng katapatan, at nagpapakita ng lantarang kawalan ng paggalang sa mga hukuman at sa mga panuntunan nito.

Pinatawan si Atty. Hidalgo ng PHP 35,000 na multa para sa willful disobedience o sadyang pagsuway dahil sa hindi pagpansin sa atas ng IBP na magsumite siya ng sagot at isang verified position paper.

Basahin ang press release sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164745.

Basahin ang Desisyon sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164728.

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

06/05/2026

06/05/2026

Newly uploaded pleadings in current cases involving public interest:

G.R. No. 279245 (PDP LABAN, et al. v. COMELEC through George Erwin Garcia, and DFA through Enrique Austria Manalo)

- Resolution (April 15, 2026)https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/GR-No.-279245-4-15-26.pdf

- Motion to Intervenehttps://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/G.R.-No.-279245.Motion-to-Intervene.pdf

Copies of recent pleadings and orders in cases involving public interest are regularly uploaded to the Current Cases page of the website. SCAN the QR Code for the latest uploads.

09/04/2026

Kaisa ng buong bayan ang Kagawaran ng Katarungan sa paggunita ng Araw ng Kagitingan.

Kasama ng bawat Pilipino sa pag‑alaala sa mga bayani sa Bataan at Corregidor at sa kanilang dakilang sakripisyo, patuloy na maglilingkod ang Kagawaran nang may integridad, tapang, at pagmamahal sa bayan.

01/04/2026

📣 ARD LAW HOLY WEEK SCHEDULE 📣

In observance of Holy Week, office operations will be temporarily adjusted.

Regular hours (9:00 AM–6:00 PM) will resume on April 6, 2026.

Thank you!

14/01/2026

The 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 has suspended the sentence of a child in conflict with the law (CICL), reaffirming the intent of Republic Act No. 9344, or the 𝘑𝘶𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘞𝘦𝘭𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘈𝘤𝘵, to promote the best interests and rehabilitation of the child.

In a Decision written by then Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, the SC 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 denied the appeal of ###265302 (accused) and found him guilty of qualified r**e of a minor, imposing a penalty of 12 years to 14 years, eight months and one day in prison.

It remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to order the accused's confinement in an agricultural camp or other training facility under Section 51 of the law.

The accused, who was 15 years old at the time of the incident, was charged with ra**ng his five-year-old playmate.

The RTC found ###265302 guilty of statutory r**e after he turned 18 years old. It imposed on him the penalty of imprisonment for eight years and one day to 14 years, eight months and one day, but it suspended his sentence, following Section 38 of RA 9344.

A few months later, the RTC issued an arrest warrant, and ###265302 was detained at the New Bilibid Prison. The Court of Appeals denied his appeal.

The SC affirmed ###265302’s conviction but clarified that the crime was qualified r**e and ordered the suspension of his sentence.

Section 40 of RA 9344 provides that when the CICL reaches 18 while under suspended sentence, the court may discharge them, order the ex*****on of their sentence, or extend the suspended sentence for a period or until they reach the maximum age of 21 years old.

In this case, the accused, who was transferred to the Davao Prison and Penal Farm, is now 25 years old.

Nonetheless, the SC extended the suspension of his sentence to fulfill the law’s legislative intent, which prioritizes the child offender’s restoration, rehabilitation, and reintegration into the community.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159175.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159085.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.