Case Digest (G.R. No. 154993)
Facts:
In Hazel Ma. C. Antolin-Rosero v. Professional Regulation Commission, Board of Accountancy, et al. (G.R. No. 220378, June 30, 2021), petitioner Hazel Antolin-Rosero failed the October 1997 Certified Public Accountant licensure examination administered by the Board of Accountancy (BOA) and later sought her examination documents and answer keys to verify possible grading errors. The BOA, through Acting Chairman Domondon and fellow members Gamboa, Gangan, Josef, Ramos, and Ibe, denied her request, citing Section 36 of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Regulation and Practice of Professionals and Section 20 of PRC Resolution No. 338 (1994), which restricts release of used test questions unless the test bank contains at least 2,000 questions. Petitioner filed a verified petition for a writ of mandamus with damages in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Manila (Civil Case No. 98-86881), amending her pleadings and impleading the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). Although she pCase Digest (G.R. No. 154993)
Facts:
- Background of the Case
- In October 1997, petitioner Hazel Ma. C. Antolin-Rosero took the CPA licensure examinations. She failed four subjects and received the following grades:
- Theory of Accounts 65%
- Business Law 66%
- Management Services 69%
- Auditing Theory 82%
- Auditing Problems 70%
- Practical Accounting I 68%
- Practical Accounting II 77%
- Petitioner requested her answer sheets, examination questionnaires, answer keys, and grading system explanation. The Board of Accountancy (BOA) denied full access, citing:
- RRG Art. III, Sec. 36 (only access to answer sheets; reconsideration only for mechanical error or malfeasance).
- PRC Resolution No. 338, Sec. 20 (prohibits reproducing “questions that have been given in the examination” unless the test bank has at least 2,000 questions).
- Prior Proceedings
- January 12, 1998: Petitioner filed a petition for mandamus with damages before RTC Manila, Branch 33 (later Branch 41). Relief prayed: access to examination documents and, if warranted, issuance of CPA certificate.
- RTC dismissed petition as moot (petitioner passed May 1998 exams), then reversed that dismissal, admitted amended pleadings, and ordered respondents to preserve documents (Nov 11, 2002).
- CA consolidated and granted certiorari petitions of BOA members, reinstating RTC’s mootness dismissal (2004); other CA petitions likewise dismissed petition as moot (2006).
- Supreme Court in 2010 (Antolin v. Domondon) set aside CA decisions, held right to information on board exams is a matter of public concern, remanded for further proceedings without compelling recorrection.
- Proceedings on Remand and RTC Rulings
- PRC answered (2011), certifying test bank has not reached 2,000 questions. Trial ensued; BOA members successfully moved for judgment on the evidence (Omnibus Order Dec 19, 2013; denied MR Apr 8, 2014).
- RTC tried petitioner’s case against respondent Ibe and PRC, received testimony on PRC’s workload and confidentiality concerns.
- RTC Decision dated July 20, 2015 dismissed petition for mandamus as to all respondents, holding PRC Res. 338, Sec. 20 is a valid restriction on access to exam questions; MR denied Sep 11, 2015.
- Petitioner filed this Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari.
Issues:
- Procedural Issues
- Did petitioner commit forum shopping by failing to disclose respondent Ibe’s separate CA appeal (No. 143078)?
- Did petitioner timely assail the RTC Omnibus Orders of December 19, 2013 and April 8, 2014?
- Substantive Issue
- Whether a writ of mandamus lies to compel respondents to release the 1997 CPA examination documents, notwithstanding PRC Resolution No. 338, Sec. 20’s restriction, under petitioner’s constitutional right to information (Art. III, Sec. 7) and RA 6713, Sec. 5(e).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)