Title
Act No. 2128
Date
Feb 1, 1912
The Philippine Jurisprudence case examines Act No. 2128, which grants the Supreme Court administrative control and management over its internal operations, including personnel appointments, financial disbursements, and leave regulations, ensuring efficient functioning of the court.
Font Size:

Law Summary

SECTION 1: Administrative Control

  • Explanation: The Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands is granted administrative authority over all internal operations.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Supreme Court" refers to the highest court in the Philippines.
  • Requirements/Procedures: N/A
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Establishes the Supreme Court's independence in managing its affairs.

SECTION 2: Appointment and Employment

  • Explanation: The Supreme Court is authorized to appoint its Reporter, Clerk, and other employees, with salaries determined by the court, while adhering to the Civil Service Act for most positions.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Reporter" refers to the official responsible for documenting court proceedings.
    • "Clerk" refers to the administrative officer assisting the court.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Appointments and employment decisions must comply with the Civil Service Act and its Rules.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Non-compliance with Civil Service regulations could lead to invalid appointments.

SECTION 3: Disbursement of Appropriations

  • Explanation: Appropriations for the Supreme Court must be disbursed by designated officers, with oversight from the Chief Justice or a designated Associate Justice.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Appropriations" refer to the allocated funds for court operations.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Disbursement requires approval from the Chief Justice or a designated Associate Justice.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Unauthorized disbursements may lead to administrative penalties.

SECTION 4: Substitution of Approval

  • Explanation: Approval by the Chief Justice replaces previous requirements for administrative approvals in matters within the Supreme Court's control.
  • Key Definitions: N/A
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Chief Justice's approval is sufficient for administrative actions previously requiring other approvals.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Simplifies administrative processes within the court.

SECTION 5: Designation of Vacation Justices

  • Explanation: The court will determine which Justice will remain on duty during vacation periods.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Vacation period" refers to court recesses as designated by law.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Designation is at the court's discretion, made through a resolution.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Ensures continuity of court operations during vacation.

SECTION 6: Leave of Absence for Justices

  • Explanation: Justices can take leaves of absence, subject to court approval, ensuring quorum is maintained.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Leave of absence" refers to authorized time away from court duties.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Leaves must be arranged to not disrupt court operations.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Failure to maintain quorum may affect court sessions.

SECTION 7: Accrued Leave for Justices

  • Explanation: Justices accrue leave equal to one-twelfth of their service, with retroactive application and limits on total accrued leave.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Long vacation" refers to extended leave granted under previous acts.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • No Justice may accrue more leave than allowed for three years of service.
  • Timeframes: Retroactive to July of the year last exercised long vacation.
  • Consequences: Limits leave accumulation and ensures compliance with previous vacation provisions.

SECTION 8: Court Sessions During Vacation

  • Explanation: The Supreme Court may hold sessions during the designated annual vacation period.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Annual court vacation" refers to the court's designated recess period.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Justices may accrue leave but must not exceed limits established in the Act.
  • Timeframes: Accrual begins on April 1 of years when the court resolves to hold sessions.
  • Consequences: Ensures operational flexibility during traditional recess periods.

SECTION 9: Maximum Leave Accrual

  • Explanation: Total leave for any Justice cannot exceed one year.
  • Key Definitions: N/A
  • Requirements/Procedures: N/A
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Prevents excessive leave accumulation that could disrupt court functionality.

SECTION 10: Reporting Requirements

  • Explanation: Certified copies of relevant orders and resolutions must be provided to specific government officials.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Insular Auditor," "Insular Treasurer," and "Director of Civil Service" are key officials for oversight.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Compliance with this reporting requirement is mandatory.
  • Timeframes: N/A
  • Consequences: Failure to comply could lead to administrative oversight issues.

SECTION 11: Effectivity

  • Explanation: The Act takes effect upon passage, with certain sections contingent on appropriations.
  • Key Definitions:
    • "Appropriation" relates to allocated funding for the Supreme Court.
  • Requirements/Procedures:
    • Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4 will only take effect with a separate appropriation.
  • Timeframes: Effective upon passage, with conditional sections.
  • Consequences: Delays implementation of specific provisions until funding is secured.

Key Takeaways

  • Act No. 2128 empowers the Supreme Court with administrative control over its operations.
  • It establishes provisions for the appointment, employment, and management of court personnel.
  • Justices have defined rights regarding leave of absence and may hold sessions during traditional vacation periods.
  • Key administrative actions are streamlined through the substitution of Chief Justice approval.
  • The Act emphasizes accountability through mandatory reporting to governmental oversight officials.

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is an AI-powered legal research tool in the Philippines with case digests and full jurisprudence. AI summaries highlight key points but may miss details, so always refer to the full text for accuracy.

You can use Jur as a traditional legal research tool. Click to only show full texts.