15.

In re Joaquin
241 SCRA 405

Facts:
The respondent in this case, Joaquin T. Borromeo, is not a lawyer but has apparently read some law books,
and ostensibly come to possess some superficial awareness of a few substantive legal principles and
procedural rules. Incredibly, with nothing more than this smattering of learning, the respondent has, for some
sixteen (16) years now, from 1978 to the present, been instituting and prosecuting legal proceedings in
various courts, dogmatically pontificating on errors supposedly committed by the courts, including the
Supreme Court.
Issue:

Whether the respondent-accused is liable for constructive contempt?

Ruling:

Joaquin T. Borromeo is found and declared GUILTY of constructive contempt repeatedly committed over
time, despite warnings and instructions given to him, and to the end that he may ponder his serious errors and
grave misconduct and learn due respect for the Courts and their authority, he is hereby sentenced to serve a
term of imprisonment of TEN (10) DAYS in the City Jail of Cebu City and to pay a fine of ONE
THOUSAND PESOS (P1,000.00). He is warned that a repetition of any of the offenses of which he is herein
found guilty, or any similar or other offense against courts, judges or court employees, will merit further and
more serious sanctions.

Doctrine: An administrative complaint against a judge cannot be pursued simultaneously with the judicial
remedies accorded to parties aggrieved by his erroneous order or judgment. Administrative remedies are
neither alternative nor cumulative to judicial review where such review is available to the aggrieved parties
and the same has not yet been resolved with finality. For until there is a final declaration by the appellate
court that the challenged order or judgment is manifestly erroneous, there will be no basis to conclude
whether respondent judge is administratively liable.