Case Summary (G.R. No. 245400)
Background Facts
Alejandrino and Pasetes served as Senior Vice-President/Head of Human Resources and Acting Treasurer, respectively, at PNCC, which was previously known as the Construction and Development Corporation of the Philippines (CDCP). In 2011, PNCC engaged the legal services of four private lawyers and paid them salaries without obtaining the necessary written approvals from the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) and the COA, violating COA Circular No. 95-011 and Office of the President Memorandum Circular No. 9.
Notice of Disallowance and Initial Proceedings
On August 9, 2012, the COA Audit Team issued a Notice of Disallowance for the amount of ₱911,580.96, representing salaries paid to the lawyers. The COA asserted that these payments were unauthorized as they lacked the required approvals. PNCC's corporate officers, including Alejandrino and Pasetes, were held liable for this amount. In response, they filed an appeal, arguing that PNCC was not under the full audit authority of COA and contending that it remained a private corporation with the government being merely a majority shareholder.
COA’s Rulings and Findings
The COA denied the appeal, reiterating that PNCC is a government-owned and controlled corporation (GOCC) subject to its audit jurisdiction. The COA emphasized that the hiring of private lawyers was impermissible without the requisite written approval from the OGCC and COA, asserting that the functions of these lawyers overlapped with those of government attorneys, leading to the conclusion that the costs incurred were irregular.
Petitions for Review and Reconsideration
A subsequent Motion for Partial Reconsideration filed by Alejandrino and Pasetes was denied by the COA, which maintained that the petitioners should be held liable for the irregular payments. In their petition for certiorari, Alejandrino and Pasetes challenged COA's authority and decisions and argued that the payments were justified given that they acted within their capacities and in good faith.
Legal Definitions and Jurisdiction
The court analyzed whether PNCC qualifies as a GOCC under administrative definitions, focusing on the criteria of government ownership. It observed that the majority stakes of PNCC had come from the government through previous financial interventions, which signified its status as a GOCC
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 245400)
Background of the Case
- The case involves a Petition for Certiorari filed under Rule 64 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure.
- Petitioners Janice Day E. Alejandrino and Miriam M. Pasetes, former executive officers of the Philippine National Construction Corporation (PNCC), challenge the Decision dated December 13, 2017, and Resolution dated September 27, 2018, by the Commission on Audit (COA).
- COA's Decision No. 2017-409 upheld Notice of Disallowance No. 12-004-(2011), which disallowed a total amount of P911,580.96 representing salaries paid to lawyers hired by PNCC without requisite approvals.
Parties Involved
- Petitioners:
- Janice Day E. Alejandrino: Senior Vice-President/Head, Human Resources and Administration.
- Miriam M. Pasetes: Vice-President/Acting Treasurer.
- Respondents:
- Commission on Audit (COA)
- Leila S. Paras (COA Director CGS-4)
- Cecilia N. Chan (COA Audit Team Leader)
- Manuela E. Dela Paz (COA Supervising Auditor)
Facts of the Case
- In 2011, PNCC engaged four private lawyers for legal services, resulting in salary payments.
- COA issued Notice of Disallowance on August 9, 2012, citing the lack of written conformity from the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) and COA's written concurrence as required by COA Circular No. 95-011 and OP-MC No. 9.
- Affected individual