Download Recent Jurisprudence Digest Compilation, 2014-2015 PDF

TitleRecent Jurisprudence Digest Compilation, 2014-2015
TagsDefamation Due Process Clause Birth Control Crimes Crime & Justice
File Size2.2 MB
Total Pages151
Document Text Contents
Page 151

UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS DIGEST COMPILATION


PAGE 149 of 149

Laguesma Magsalin Consulta and Gastardo v COA
Jan. 13, 2015 / G.R. No. 185544


Facts: Clark Development Corp (CDC) approached Laguesma Magsalin to handle the labor cases.
While the OGCC originally did not approve this request, it later did. Thus, Laguesma Magsalin began
rendering legal services. However, it had yet to get the approval of the COA. Eventually, however,
neither OGCC nor COA wanted to concur until the other did.

The COA decided the matter by denying the request for clearance of engaging Laguesma Magsalin,
ruling that CDC violated the Memorandum that the consent of both the OGCC and the COA was
necessary. Thus, it was not the government’s responsibility to pay the legal fees already incurred by
Clark, but the responsible government officials. MR denied. Hence this petition for certiorari.

Held: When a government entity engages the legal services of private counsel, it must do so with the
necessary authorization required by law; otherwise its officials bind themselves to be personally liable
for compensating private counsel’s services.

Generally, GOCCs are not allowed to engage the services of private counsels, but they are allowed to
only in “extraordinary or exceptional circumstances” or “exceptional cases.” Here, the labor cases
were not of a complicated or peculiar nature that could justify the hiring of a known expert in the field.
Further, the private counsel was engaged without the necessary consent of the OGCC and the COA.

Similer Documents