Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 223 views

    GR No. 232532, October 1, 2018 (Germar Vs Legaspi)

    Uploaded by

    Sai Pastrana
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Alfredo G. Germar and set aside the Court of Appeal's decision holding him liable for criminal and administrative offenses. Germar had entered into contracts for professional services with six consultants during his term as mayor. Feliciano Legaspi, the former mayor, filed a complaint against Germar and the consultants with the Office of the Ombudsman. The Court ruled that the item "Consultancy Services" in the municipality's appropriation ordinance was sufficient authorization for Germar to sign the contracts, based on prior jurisprudence that no separate authorization is needed if the appropriation ordinance provides details of the project.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    GR No. 232532, October 1, 2018 (Germar Vs Legaspi)

    Uploaded by

    Sai Pastrana
    223 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Alfredo G. Germar and set aside the Court of Appeal's decision holding him liable for criminal and administrative offenses. Germar had entered into contracts for professional services with six consultants during his term as mayor. Feliciano Legaspi, the former mayor, filed a complaint against Germar and the consultants with the Office of the Ombudsman. The Court ruled that the item "Consultancy Services" in the municipality's appropriation ordinance was sufficient authorization for Germar to sign the contracts, based on prior jurisprudence that no separate authorization is needed if the appropriation ordinance provides details of the project.

    Original Description:

    a

    Original Title

    GR No. 232532, October 1, 2018 (Germar vs Legaspi)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Alfredo G. Germar and set aside the Court of Appeal's decision holding him liable for criminal and administrative offenses. Germar had entered into contracts for professional services with six consultants during his term as mayor. Feliciano Legaspi, the former mayor, filed a complaint against Germar and the consultants with the Office of the Ombudsman. The Court ruled that the item "Consultancy Services" in the municipality's appropriation ordinance was sufficient authorization for Germar to sign the contracts, based on prior jurisprudence that no separate authorization is needed if the appropriation ordinance provides details of the project.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    223 views2 pages

    GR No. 232532, October 1, 2018 (Germar Vs Legaspi)

    Uploaded by

    Sai Pastrana
    The Supreme Court granted the petition of Alfredo G. Germar and set aside the Court of Appeal's decision holding him liable for criminal and administrative offenses. Germar had entered into contracts for professional services with six consultants during his term as mayor. Feliciano Legaspi, the former mayor, filed a complaint against Germar and the consultants with the Office of the Ombudsman. The Court ruled that the item "Consultancy Services" in the municipality's appropriation ordinance was sufficient authorization for Germar to sign the contracts, based on prior jurisprudence that no separate authorization is needed if the appropriation ordinance provides details of the project.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Alfredo G. Germar v Feliciano P.

    Legaspi
    G.R. No. 232532. October 1, 2018
    Reyes, Jr., J.

    FACTS:

    After the May 2013 elections, the Municipality of Norzagaray, Province of Bulacan
    witnessed a change of administration. The petitioner, Alfredo G. Germar(Germar), won the
    mayoralty position. He replaced the former mayor, respondent Feliciano P. Legaspi (Legaspi).

    During Germar's term, he entered into contracts for professional service with six (6)
    consultants, namely, Mamerto M. Manahan, Danilo S. Leonardo, Edilberto J. Guballa, Rodolfo
    J. Santos, Epifanio S. Payumo, and Enrique C. Boticario. Respectively, they were to advice the
    office of the mayor on municipal administration and governance, barangay affairs, business
    investment and trade, calamity and disaster, and the last two consultants, on security relations.

    From the records of the case, it appears that the budget for the salary of the consultants is
    found in the appropriation ordinance of the municipality for the year 2013. Particularly, it is a
    line-item called as "Consultancy Services" found under the category "Maintenance and Other
    Operating Expenses" of the Office of the Mayor. These provisions are found in a detailed list
    which is annexed to the appropriation ordinance, with the heading, "Programmed Appropriation
    and Obligation by Object of Expenditure."

    On October 28, 2014, a year into Germar's service as the mayor of the municipality,
    Legaspi filed a complaint against the former, together with the six (6) consultants and the
    Municipal Human Resources Officer of the municipality, before the Office of the Ombudsman
    (OMB). The charges, both criminal and administrative, included Grave Misconduct, Gross
    Dishonesty, Grave Abuse of Authority (docketed as OMB-L-A-15-0054 to 55), Malversation and
    Violation of Republic Act (R.A.) No 7160, R.A. No. 6713, R.A. No. 3019 (docketed as OMB-L-C-
    15-0039 to 40), and R.A. No. 9184.

    On November 23, 2015, the OMB promulgated a Consolidated Resolution. On the


    administrative charges, while the OMB held Germar liable for "Grave Misconduct," it dismissed
    the case against the six (6) consultants and the Human Resources Officer.

    ISSUE:

    May an appropriation ordinance be sufficient authorization for the petitioner to sign the contracts
    for professional service.

    RULING:

    The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition and SET ASIDE Court of Appeal’s decision
    holding incumbent Mayor liable of the abovementioned criminal and administrative offenses.

    On Whether or not the item of "Consultancy Services" in the appropriation ordinance of the
    Municipality of Norzagaray is sufficient authorization for the petitioner to sign the contracts of
    professional service, the Court ruled and based on the jurisprudence stated below:
    In the case of Quisumbing v. Garcia, the Court had the occasion to rule on
    whether a Sangguniang Bayan authorization, which is separate from the
    appropriation ordinance, is still required if the appropriation ordinance itself
    already provided for the transactions, bonds, contracts, documents, and other
    obligations that the local chief executive would enter into in behalf of the
    municipality.

    To answer this query, Quisumbing made a general delineation depending on the


    paiiicular circumstances of the case. According to Quisumbing, if the project is
    already provided for in the appropriation ordinance in sufficient detail, then no
    separate authorization is necessary. On the other hand, if the project is couched
    in general terms, then a separate approval by the Sangguniang Bayan is
    required.

    You might also like