Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 215 views

    (CASE DIGEST) Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 129406)

    Uploaded by

    Kaiser
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion in its rulings favoring Roberto Benedicto in his case against the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG). The Sandiganbayan's rulings were consistent with the Compromise Agreement that the PCGG entered into with Benedicto to lift the sequestration of his 227 shares in the Negros Occidental Golf and Country Club. By entering into this agreement, the PCGG waived its immunity from suit and could be held accountable like any other party to a contract if it did not fulfill its obligations.

    Copyright:

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

    (CASE DIGEST) Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 129406)

    Uploaded by

    Kaiser
    215 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion in its rulings favoring Roberto Benedicto in his case against the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG). The Sandiganbayan's rulings were consistent with the Compromise Agreement that the PCGG entered into with Benedicto to lift the sequestration of his 227 shares in the Negros Occidental Golf and Country Club. By entering into this agreement, the PCGG waived its immunity from suit and could be held accountable like any other party to a contract if it did not fulfill its obligations.

    Original Title

    [CASE DIGEST] Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 129406)

    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 ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion in its rulings favoring Roberto Benedicto in his case against the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG). The Sandiganbayan's rulings were consistent with the Compromise Agreement that the PCGG entered into with Benedicto to lift the sequestration of his 227 shares in the Negros Occidental Golf and Country Club. By entering into this agreement, the PCGG waived its immunity from suit and could be held accountable like any other party to a contract if it did not fulfill its obligations.

    Copyright:

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

    (CASE DIGEST) Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 129406)

    Uploaded by

    Kaiser
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion in its rulings favoring Roberto Benedicto in his case against the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG). The Sandiganbayan's rulings were consistent with the Compromise Agreement that the PCGG entered into with Benedicto to lift the sequestration of his 227 shares in the Negros Occidental Golf and Country Club. By entering into this agreement, the PCGG waived its immunity from suit and could be held accountable like any other party to a contract if it did not fulfill its obligations.

    Copyright:

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

    [CASE DIGEST] Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No.

    129406)

    March 6, 2006 | G.R. No. 129406

    Republic of the Philippines as represented by the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG),
    petitioner

    Sandiganbayan and Roberto Benedicto, respondents

    FACTS:

    One of the key mandates of the PCGG is to sequester business enterprises, entities, and other properties believed
    to be ill-gotten wealth. One of such sequestrations were the 227 shares of the Negros Occidental Golf and
    Country Club, Inc. (NOGCCI), which shares were supposed to be owned by Roberto Benedicto. Following the
    sequestration of such shares, PCGG representarives sat as members of the Board of Directors of NOGCCI, which
    subsequently approved the imposition of monthly membership due to share owners amounting to P150 per
    share. This was later changed to P250 per share.

    Instead of opposing such impositions, the PCGG representatives sitting as members of the Board of Directors
    approved the same. Due to either sheer incompetence or collusion with other share owners, PCGG
    representatives virtually neglected the shares between 1987 until 1989, at which point PCGG's failure to pay the
    monthly membership dues now amounting to P2,959,471.00 led to the auction sale of the delinquent shares.

    On November 3, 1990, in Civil Case No. 0034, the PCGG entered into a Compromise Agreement with Benedicto.
    This agreement stated that PCGG was lifting the sequestration on the 227 NOGCCI shares, implying that said
    shares were not ill-gotten wealth after all and that it was well within Benedicto's capacity to purchase said shares
    using his own money.

    From the time this Compromise Agreement was made, both the PCGG and Benedicto had been turning to
    Sandiganbayan in trying to carry out the terms of the agreement. Because PCGG did not seem intent to return the
    shares to him as agreed upon, Benedicto instituted actions against the Commission. In all instances, the
    Sandiganbayan ruled in favor of Benedicto.

    Subsequently the PCGG filed the instant petition before the SC, contending that: (a) Sandiganbayan's directive on
    March 28, 1995 compelling PCGG to bring before the Clerk of Court the 227 shares registered in the name of
    Benedicto or in default thereof pay P150,000 per share using public money, and its ruling on March 13, 1997
    denying PCGG's Manifestation with Motion for Reconsideration, constituted grave abuse of discretion; and (b)
    that PCGG is immune from any lawsuit following the principle of the non-suability of the State.

    ISSUES:
    1. Whether or not Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling in favor of Benedicto.

    2. Whether or not PCGG is immune from any lawsuit.

    HELD:

    1. No, the Court ruled that all of Sandiganbayan's rulings regarding the matter were all in keeping with the
    Compromise Agreement that was entered into by the PCGG and Benedicto. Therefore, it cannot be faulted for
    simply following the terms of something that PCGG had instituted itself. As a matter of fact, the Court ruled that
    the two assailed rulings have firm basis in fact and in law.

    2. No, by entering into a Compromise Agreement with Benedicto, the PCGG had stripped itself of its immunity
    from suit and placed itself in the level of its adversary. When the State enters into a contract through its officers
    and agents, in furtherance of a legitimate aim or purpose and pursuant to constitutional legislative authority,
    whereby mutual or reciprocal benefits accrue and rights and obligations arise therefrom, the State may be sued
    even without its express consent. By entering into a contract, the sovereign descends to the level of the citizen.

    Email This

    BlogThis!

    Share to Twitter

    Share to Facebook

    Share to Pinterest

    You might also like