Case Digest (G.R. No. 158891) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Disini v. Republic of the Philippines (G.R. No. 205172, June 15, 2021), Herminio T. Disini, a close associate of former President Marcos, petitioned for review of the Sandiganbayan’s April 11, 2012 Decision and its October 24, 2012 Resolution in Civil Case No. 0013, which declared ill-gotten wealth the commissions he allegedly received in connection with the award and execution of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) contract to Westinghouse Electric Corporation and Burns & Roe, Inc. The Republic, through the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), had filed on July 23, 1987 a complaint for reconveyance, accounting and damages. Disini was declared in default after summons went unserved and by publication. The PCGG presented ex parte evidence—including the affidavits of Lourdes Magno, Rodolfo Jacob, Angelo Manahan, Rafael Sison, Cristina Beranilla, Ricardo Paras III, Jesus Disini, Jesus Vergara, and the deposition of Rolando Gapud—and documentary annexes. It allege Case Digest (G.R. No. 158891) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the BNPP project
- In 1976, the Republic awarded the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) project to Westinghouse Electric Corporation (main contractor) and Burns & Roe, Inc. (architect-engineer).
- The BNPP remains inoperable to date.
- Initiation of litigation
- On July 23, 1987, the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) filed a complaint for reconveyance, reversion, accounting, restitution and damages against Herminio T. Disini (Disini), Ferdinand E. Marcos and Imelda Marcos for alleged ill-gotten commissions tied to the BNPP contract.
- Disini was declared in default after summons remained unserved and summons by publication was effected; the default order was affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2010.
- Evidence presented by the Republic
- Ex parte witnesses: PCGG officers, former executives of Herdis Group, Asia Industries, DBP, Security Bank, and financial adviser Rolando Gapud.
- Documentary exhibits: series of alphabet-coded private documents (A–Z, AA–ZZ, AAA–ZZZ, AAAA–DDDD) and translations.
- Republic’s version: Disini acted as “Special Sales Representative” (SSR) for Westinghouse (3% commission) and Burns & Roe (10% commission), leveraging his influence with President Marcos; commissions routed through Swiss accounts and Interbank in the Philippines.
- Sandiganbayan decisions
- April 11, 2012 Decision: declared Disini’s BNPP commissions amounting to US$50,562,500 as ill-gotten, ordered him to account for and reconvey that sum with interest; dismissed other damage claims.
- October 24, 2012 Resolution: denied both the Republic’s partial motion for reconsideration (seeking to hold the Marcoses liable and additional damages) and Disini’s motions to strike out and for reconsideration.
Issues:
- Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in admitting and relying on Republic’s Exhibit E-9 (a tabulation of commissions) without proper authentication.
- Whether the Republic had a valid civil cause of action against Disini for reconveyance of US$50,562,500.
- Whether the Sandiganbayan violated Article VIII, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution in concluding the Westinghouse and Burns & Roe contracts existed without producing them.
- Whether the court erred in concluding Disini actually received the US$50,562,500 without adequate proof.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)