Case Digest (G.R. No. 230931)
Facts:
Navotas Industrial Corporation v. Alberto C. Guanzon, G.R. No. 230931, November 15, 2021, the Supreme Court Third Division, Leonen, J., writing for the Court.Navotas Industrial Corporation (petitioner) is a domestic corporation that claimed outstanding receivables from Ganda Energy and Holdings, Inc.. Alberto C. Guanzon (respondent) was a former chair of the Committee on Contract Expiration on Insurance Capacities of the National Power Corporation (NPC). In 1993 Navotas Industrial entered into an Energy Conversion Agreement with Ganda Energy; the parties later executed a Settlement Agreement reducing Ganda Energy’s obligation to Navotas Industrial to $600,000 (or its equivalent), payable by post-dated checks that were subsequently dishonored.
Beginning in October 2000, Navotas Industrial notified NPC of its claim against Ganda Energy and asked NPC to withhold payments to Ganda and instead pay Navotas Industrial. NPC declined, explaining it would not release payments to third parties without express authorization from its contractor or a court order. In March 2003, however, persons purporting to represent Ganda Energy presented a letter of authority allegedly signed by a Ganda director, and through intermediaries the persons identified as Kay Swee Tuan and S.T. Kay & Company obtained payment from NPC of Ganda Energy receivables totaling many millions of pesos and dollars.
Navotas Industrial filed a Complaint‑Affidavit with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) on July 21, 2003. The NBI’s investigation found the authorization letter spurious and that Mr. Foo Lee Khean disowned the signature, but noted that NPC paid the receivables after a memorandum from respondent Guanzon recommending payment to the purported representatives despite absence of a board resolution. The NBI recommended criminal charges against NPC officers, including Guanzon. The Office of the Ombudsman investigated, affirmed the NBI findings, and in a January 28, 2011 Decision found Guanzon guilty of grave misconduct and imposed dismissal and accessory penalties (later denying his motion for reconsideration).
Guanzon appealed to the Court of Appeals. In a May 17, 2016 Decision, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Ombudsman and upheld the finding of grave misconduct. Upon Guanzon’s motion for reconsideration the Court of Appeals issued an Amended Decision dated March 30, 2...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is there substantial evidence to hold respondent Alberto C. Guanzon administratively liable for grave misconduct for recommending and facilitating the release of NPC funds to persons who were not shown to be authorized representatives of Ganda Energy?
- If found guilty but no longer in service, what penalties may properly ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)