a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer.
|
Doctrine: To constitute malicious prosecution, there must be proof that the prosecutor was prompted by a sinister or devious design to vex and humiliate a person, and that i t was i nitiated deliberately, knowing that the charges are false and groundless. One cannot be held l iable for damages f or malicious prosecution where he acted with probable cause. We also held that a determination that there i s no probable cause cannot be made to rest solely on the f act that the trial court after trial decided to acquit the accused. Neither can l ack of probable cause be made to rest on the f act that the f inding of probable cause of the Special Counsel was reversed by the Secretary of Justice or the Ombudsman as the case may be. The mere act of submitting the case to the authorities for prosecution does not make one l iable f or malicious prosecution. Moreover, the adverse result of an action does not per se make the action wrongful and subject the action to damages, for the l aw could not have meant to i mpose a penalty on the right to l itigate. If damages result from a person’s exercise of a right, it is damnum absque injuria the Sandiganbayan ruled i n i ts decision i n Criminal Cases Nos. 1835-1837 that Saber had the i mplied authority as Executive Vice-President to sell tickets on credit via postdated checks and to allow Basman to l oad his cargoes i n the cargo section of the M/V Sweet Homes; that Saber acted i n good faith; hence, was not criminally l iable therefor; that the respondent bank resorted to the dubious expedience of charging the receivables against the account of Saber, i nstead of availing i tself of l egal remedies f or their collection. However, it cannot thereby be concluded that the Board of Directors of respondent PAB acted in bad faith or with malice. Facts: ● On April 8, 1974 then President Ferdinand E. Marcos appointed Dr. Mamitua Saber, then Dean of Research at the Mindanao State University and Acting Director, National Science Museum, as Executive Vice-President of the Philippine Amanah Bank (PAB). ● He w as a lso d esignated as the Officer-in-Charge of the bank pending the election of its president by the Board of Directors. ● Executive Secretary Alejandro M elchor i nformed C hairman of the PAB Board of Directors D r. Cesar A. Majul, t hat the bank had been designated t o m ake appropriate preparations and arrangements f or the annual pilgrimage o f Filipino Muslims to Mecca. ● Considering that Saber had no e xperience thereon, the P AB B oard of Directors designated Sa ludo as the h ead of the o ne-man oversight committee to oversee the preparations. ● Saber executed a Uniform T ime-Charter on October 1 5, 1974 u nder w hich t he P AB c hartered the M/V Sweet H omes to t ransport the pilgrims to Mecca a nd back to t he P hilippines for P 5,300,000 cash, the amount budgeted by the PAB. ● Sa ber w rote then President Marcos requesting that other parties n ot be allowed t o c harter a ny ship or a ircraft b ringing pilgrims to J eddah, t o a void u nfair competition with the P AB. H owever, P resident Marcos granted C ongressman Ali D imaporo a nd s ome politicians f rom L anao del Sur permission t o c harter a plane to transport the pilgrims. ● Saber f ormed a t hree-man panel c alled t he " Troika," composed o f Atty. L anang Ali, Dialel Basman a nd I brahim M amao, t o coordinate t he arrangements for t he p ilgrimage. R ather t han allow the vessel to l eave for M ecca with m any vacant cabins, Sa ber decided to sell tickets to Basman on credit. ● Al though t hey b elieved t hat t he a greements of Saber with B asman/AGEAC w ere against t he p olicies o f t he P AB, the Troika/Secretariat h ad t o implement the Memoranda, and because of Saber’s insistence, gave the tickets to Basman. ● T he B oard, after e xhaustive deliberations, a pproved Resolution N o. 6 7, Series of 1975, without a ny o bjection, declaring Saber l iable for the receivables on the ground that the Board did not authorize him to sell tickets on credit payable via postdated checks, and to execute the Freight Contract with AGEAC. ● On May 6, 1975, t he PAB Board of D irectors approved Resolution N o. 9 2 confirming the recommendation of the management of t he bank f or the creation of an Investigating Committee of five ( 5) members, chaired by Aradji, t o look i nto the administrative a nd/or criminal l iabilities o f t he persons i nvolved in t he Pilgrimage Project. ○ During t he formal i nvestigation, Saber testified and submitted documentary evidence. Ar adji submitted his Report to the P AB Board of Directors that t here was b asis for Saber to be charged with violation o f Republic Ac t No. 3019, otherwise k nown as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and recommended that t he p roper criminal complaint be filed against h im. The management approved t he recommendation of Aradji. ● Saber f iled a c ivil complaint for damages. He pointed out that Martin Sa ludo, who was appointed b y the Board o f D irectors to oversee the preparation of the pilgrimage, a pproved the said transactions; hence, he i s not personally l iable for the receivables of P1,033,700. ● RTC ruled that the P AB and Aradji were liable for d amages. It also ruled that the s ales o f t he tickets t o B asman on c redit and the e xecution o f the Freight Contract were w ith the prior approval o f M artin Sa ludo, the h ead o f t he O ne-Man O versight C ommittee, as well as Nestor Kalaw, who was the PNB Legal Counsel. ● Court o f Appeals, w hich rendered a judgment reversing the decision of the trial court. ● The h eirs of Saber alleged that Saber w as d eprived of h is r ight t o be investigated b y t he i mpartial investigator. The petitioners stress that respondent Ar adji, a non-lawyer, w as d esignated to head t he Investigating Committee to investigate the pilgrimage f iasco. T he p etitioners also a llege that Saber was denied d ue process, as he was never furnished with a copy of the Report of the Investigating Committee. ● petitioners aver that the respondents are l iable for damages for malicious prosecution because (a) Saber alone was charged f or violation of Rep. Act No. 3019, although there were others who were i nvolved i n the pilgrimage fiasco; and (b) despite the dismissal of the criminal complaint by the Special Counsel, the respondents, nevertheless, pursued their appeal i n the Tanodbayan who found probable cause against Saber which finding was barren of factual basis as confirmed by the decision of the Sandiganbayan acquitting him of the charges. Issue: Whether or not the Board of Directors of the PAB acted i n bad faith or with malice i n designating the respondent Aradji as chairman of the committee, and that the l atter acted i n bad faith or with malice i n accepting the position and i n not i nhibiting himself f rom the said i nvestigation. Held: ● NO ● We agree with the petitioners that a person other than respondent Aradji should have been designated as Chairperson of the Investigating Committee to investigate the pilgrimage fiasco. ○ This i s so because i n his Memorandum to the Board of Directors of the PAB on February 21, 1975, respondent Aradji had declared that the 1974 Mecca pilgrimage under the supervision of Saber was mishandled and there were i ndications then that there was an apparent l ack of exercise of effective l eadership which was so vital and essential to make the bank truly responsive to the needs of the Filipino Muslims. ○ In fine, respondent Aradji attributed the p roblems attendant to the pilgrimage fiasco to Saber. ● But then Saber did not oppose the designation by the Board of Directors for respondent Aradji to be the Chairman of the Investigating Committee, or even asked for the latter’s inhibition. ● Besides, respondent Aradji w as only the chairman o f the committee, and there were four ( 4) other members who could r ule in Saber’s favor. ● Moreover, the report and recommendations o f the committee w ere s till subject to the review of t he B oard of Directors o f the respondent bank, which included t hen Minister Cesar Virata. Respondent Aradji, f or his p art, could also still r ule for Saber, based on the evidence on record. ● Saber failed t o adduce convincing evidence that Saludo a nd r espondent Aradji c onspired to oust him from h is p osition as Assistant Vice-President of the respondent bank. Additional notes: ● The Sandiganbayan ruled i n i ts decision i n Criminal Cases Nos. 1835-1837 that Saber had the i mplied authority as Executive Vice-President to sell tickets on credit via postdated checks and to allow Basman to l oad his cargoes i n the cargo section of the M/V Sweet Homes; that Saber acted i n good f aith; hence, was not criminally l iable therefor; that the respondent bank resorted to the dubious expedience of charging the receivables against the account of Saber, i nstead of availing i tself of l egal remedies for their collection. However, it cannot thereby be concluded that the Board of Directors of respondent PAB acted in bad faith or with malice. ● The respondent PAB cannot be f aulted, n or can i t be o rdered to pay damages and a ttorney’s fees f or i ssuing a conditional clearance to Saber after his resignation from respondent PAB. ● The respondent P AB had no discretion t o i ssue a clearance to Saber. It bears stressing that a public o fficer, i n t he discharge of his duties, has to u se prudence, caution a nd attention i n the management of his a ffairs. In fact, the r espondent PAB was duty bound to withhold such clearance to Saber pending final determination of his monetary accountabilities. ● Even assuming that Saber and/or the petitioners sustained economic difficulties on account of the conditional clearance i ssued by the respondent PAB, the petitioners are not entitled to moral and exemplary damages. The act of the respondent PAB was not wrongful. It i s xfa case of damnum absque i njuria and not of damnum et injuria.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
September 2024
Categories
All
|