Case Summary (G.R. No. 75959)
Events Leading to the Accident
An accident report, dated May 27, 1982, confirmed tube leaks at 2:30 AM on May 25. Repair work commenced after the system was declared safe by 8:45 AM. However, at 11:10 AM, a plug from the leaking tube failed, releasing steam and hot water that burned Ernesto Pumaloy of NPC and Domingo Abodizo of the janitorial contractor O.P. Landrito's General Services (OPLGS). The hospitalization expenses for Abodizo amounted to P53,802.26, which NPC initially covered, setting it up as a receivable from OPLGS.
OPLGS's Request for Reimbursement
On August 30 and September 6 of 1982, OPLGS formally requested reimbursement for the hospitalization costs. Orocio, then the officer-in-charge of the Legal Services of NPC, recommended approval of this request in a memorandum on October 1, 1982, citing quasi-delict under Article 2176 of the Civil Code. He suggested that NPC was liable due to the negligence of its crew, opposing the notion that Abodizo's own actions caused his injuries.
Disallowance by the Commission on Audit (COA)
Despite the favorable recommendation, Jose M. Agustin, an auditor from COA, disallowed the refund in a Certificate of Settlement and Balances dated July 30, 1989, based on the non-existence of an employer-employee relationship between NPC and Abodizo. The liability for the disallowance was then attributed to various NPC officials, with Orocio initially excluded.
Reconsideration and Final Liability
Over the following months, a series of memoranda and requests for reconsideration were exchanged between NPC and COA, with Agustin eventually citing the legal opinion as the basis for holding Orocio liable for directing an improper disbursement. In a memorandum dated June 30, 1986, a Debit Memorandum was issued against Orocio's account for the disallowed amount.
Petition for Annulment
On September 28, 1986, Orocio filed a petition to annul the previous decisions, arguing that his legal opinion was a lawful exercise of his duties and did not warrant personal liability. This petition was initially dismissed due to late filing but was later reinstated on June 22, 1987. The respondents maintained that the disbursement was within the COA's audit power and that any disbursement based on Orocio's legal opinion could be held against him under Section 103 of the Government Auditing Code.
Issues for Resolution
Three principal issues emerged: (1) Whether Orocio's legal opinion should bar COA from disallowing the disbursement; (2) The authority of the General Counsel of COA to decide on such motions for reconsideration; (3) Orocio's personal liability for the disallowed amount.
Decision on Legal Authority and Liability
The Supreme Court emphasized that no legal opinion is exempt from scrutiny under COA's authority, which is mandated by the Constitution to audit government expenditures. The Court pointed out that the legal opinion does not possess inherent infallibility, and COA must independently evaluate expenditures for legality and appropriateness.
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 75959)
Case Background
- An accident occurred on 25 May 1982 at the Malaya Thermal Plant of the National Power Corporation (NPC), resulting in injuries to two employees due to a tube leak.
- Ernesto Pumaloy, an NPC employee, suffered burns while Domingo Abodizo, a casual employee of a janitorial contractor (O.P. Landrito's General Services or OPLGS), suffered extensive burns.
- Total hospitalization expenses for Abodizo amounted to P53,802.26, initially advanced by NPC as an account receivable from OPLGS.
Request for Refund
- On 30 August 1982, OPLGS requested a refund for the advanced hospitalization expenses, which was reiterated in a follow-up letter on 6 September 1982.
- Atty. C.Q. Crucillo, NPC's Assistant Chief Legal Counsel, recommended favorable action on OPLGS's request in a memorandum dated 14 September 1982.
Legal Opinion and Subsequent Actions
- Petitioner, Victoriano V. Orocio, as officer-in-charge of the Office of the General Counsel, issued a favorable legal opinion on 1 October 1982, stating NPC's potential liability under quasi-delict principles.
- The amount for hospitalization was subsequently refunded to OPLGS based on this opinion.