Come to think of this: a small business owner entered into a contract with a supplier, expecting that the agreement would secure the efficient flow of goods to run his business. However, the supplier failed to comply with their agreement. Determined to seek justice, he spent years gathering evidence, consulting lawyers, and investing thousands of pesos in filing a case before the courts. Yet once the dispute reached litigation, he was faced with the reality of the judicial process as some hearings are postponed, proceedings moved slowly, and the case appeared to falter and stall. In legal rhetoric, litigation is often compared to war— expensive, lengthy, and, at times, taxing for the parties involved.

Sadly, this is a common occurrence in the Philippine justice system. For many, prolonged court proceedings can be costly and emotionally draining. This also puts mistrust and provide negative connotation to the courts – believing that their pursuit for justice has been denied. In a system where justice delayed is often perceived as justice denied, how can the courts ensure that disputes are resolved efficiently without compromising due process?

To answer, the Honorable Supreme Court promulgated AM-19-10-20-SC or the 2020 Guidelines for the Conduct of the Court-Annexed Mediation and Judicial Dispute Resolution in Civil Cases. The issuance of the Guidelines is in line with the court’s commitment in promoting efficiency and speedy and just trials.

Cases to be referred for CAM and JDR

The High Court outlined the cases to be referred to CAM and JDR and those cases that are excluded from Sections 1 to 4 of the Guidelines. To elaborate, the cases that are mandatory for Court-Annexed Mediation are all ordinary civil cases, special civil actions (except certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, declaratory relief, and contempt), commercial or intra-corporate disputes, intellectual property cases, environmental cases, summary procedure cases, and specific Family Code or estate settlement disputes that can legally be compromised.

While in Judicial Dispute Resolution, referral is discretionary. It covers the same cases as CAM except environmental cases but only occurs if CAM fails and the judge is highly convinced a settlement is still possible. It also covers specific civil cases brought on appeal to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) from first-level courts. For emphasis, Judicial Dispute Resolution is discretionary, it is within the sound discretion of the Judge assigned in the case.

However, there are also cases that are exempt from being referred. Cases such as the civil status of a person, validity of marriage or legal separation, court jurisdiction, habeas corpus petitions, and probate of wills. Additionally, any case with an active application for a provisional remedy such as the application for an injunction or temporary restraining orders cannot be referred until the judge resolves that specific application.

When does the Referral to CAM and JDR occur?

After the last responsive pleading filed, the clerk of court shall issue a notice of pre-trial in which they shall include the dates set for the pre-trial conference, court-annexed mediation, and if necessary, a date shall be included for the conduct of a judicial dispute resolution.

The court shall furnish a copy of the notice of pre-trial or preliminary conference to the Philippine Mediation Center Unit (PMCU) to ensure that a mediator is available on the scheduled dates.

In the conduct of a Court-Annexed Mediation, the PMCU mediator must not exceed thirty (30) calendar days to complete the mediation process, computed from the date of the order referring the case to CAM. Importantly, this 30-day period is excluded from the court’s mandatory period for trial and rendition of judgment.

For Judicial Dispute Resolution, the judge must terminate the proceedings within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt of the referral order. Unlike CAM, the time spent in JDR is not excluded from the regular and mandatory periods for trial.

What happens when there is no settlement?

When there are no settlements for the court-annexed mediation, the PMCU staff submits a Mediator’s Report to the court stating that no agreement was reached. Upon receiving this, the trial judge conducts a hearing to evaluate if a settlement is still possible. If convinced it is, the judge refers the case to a prospective JDR judge. To protect confidentiality, the case is raffled to a different judge for JDR so that trial vulnerabilities aren’t exposed to the presiding judge. Should the JDR likewise fail, the JDR judge prepares a report and returns the case to the original trial judge, and after which the case proceeds to trial on the merits and facts.

The scenario regarding the small business owner underscores the reality in our courts. After lengthy and tedious judicial process, emotional turmoil, and financial burden of litigation, parties often seek not just a favorable resolution but also a speedy and just trial. Through CAM and JDR, the judiciary provides an opportunity to prospect amicable settlement, reduce expenses, and avoid lengthy proceedings. These mechanisms reinforce the principle that the administration of justice is not solely about deciding cases but also about facilitating fair, efficient, and practical resolutions when possible.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by your access to or use of this content. Readers should consult qualified legal counsel regarding their specific legal concerns.