845 Scra 599

You might also like

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1

Fortune Life Insurance Co., Inc. vs.

Commission on Audit
G.R. No. 213525
Nov 21, 2017

Facts:
 Fortune Life Insurance Co., Inc. (petitioner) and its counsel, Atty. Eduardo S.
Fortaleza, were found guilty of indirect contempt of court.
 The contempt of court was due to offensive statements made in their motion
for reconsideration.
 The Court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration on several
grounds, including late filing and failure to comply with the requirements of
the Efficient Use of Paper.
 The Court required the petitioner and Atty. Fortaleza to show cause why they
should not be punished for indirect contempt of court for using harsh and
disrespectful language towards the Court in their motion for reconsideration.

Issue:
 Should the petitioner and Atty. Fortaleza be punished for indirect contempt of
court for their offensive statements in their motion for reconsideration?

Ruling:
 The Court found the petitioner and Atty. Fortaleza guilty of indirect contempt
of court.
 The Court emphasized that the power to punish for contempt of court is
inherent in all courts and is necessary for the preservation of order in judicial
proceedings and the due administration of justice.
 The Court imposed a fine of P15,000.00 on the petitioner and Atty. Fortaleza.

Ratio:
 The power to punish for contempt of court is essential for maintaining respect
and decorum in judicial proceedings.
 The offensive statements made by the petitioner and Atty. Fortaleza harmed
and degraded the administration of justice by the Court itself.
 The statements attributed gross inefficiency and negligence to the Court and
its staff, which was unfounded and undeserved.
 The Court does not tolerate such disrespectful language and the wrong done to
the reputation and prestige of the Court must be vindicated.
 The petitioner's attempt to shift the blame to the postal system was rejected as
it reflected a lack of remorse and was not reliably proven.
 The Court exercised its discretion to impose a fine of P15,000.00 as a
reasonable penalty for the contemptuous conduct.

You might also like