This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2006-07-20 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| In fact, MIAA itself believes that it is a GOCC represents itself as such. It said so itself in the very first paragraph of the present petition before this Court.[97] So does, apparently, the Department of Budget and Management, which classifies MIAA as a "government owned & controlled corporation" on its internet website.[98] There is also the matter of Executive Order No. 483, which evinces the belief of the then-president of the Philippines that MIAA is a GOCC. And the Court before had similarly characterized MIAA as a government-owned and controlled corporation in the earlier MIAA case, Manila International Airport Authority v. Commission on Audit.[99] | |||||
|
2005-06-30 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| The COA asserts that the ruling of the Court in G.R. No. 119385 is in consonance with Philippine Ports Authority v. COA,[16] Manila International Airport Authority v. COA,[17] Philippine International Trading Corp. v. COA,[18] Social Security System v. COA[19] and Government Service Insurance System v. COA,[20] where the Court invariably ruled that in view of the enactment of R.A. No. 6758, additional financial incentives may no longer be granted to government employees. It was, likewise, held in these cases that incumbent government employees as of July 1, 1989 shall continue to receive the non-integrated benefits that they have been receiving as of the said date so as not to upset the legislature's policy on non-diminution of pay and benefits. | |||||
|
2005-06-30 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Similar to that raised in PPA, the issue raised in Manila International Airport Authority v. COA[27] was whether the officials of the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) may continue to receive the RATA at the higher rates prescribed by LOI No. 97 even after July 1, 1989. The Court ruled in the affirmative as it cited the second sentence (first paragraph) of Section 12 of R.A. No. 6758 and reiterated its ruling in PPA:Under the second sentence of the aforementioned provision, such other compensation includes the RATA. Hence, RATA being received by incumbents as of July 1, 1989 are entitled to continue to receive the same. Republic Act No. 6758 has, therefore, to this extent, amended LOI No. 97. By limiting the benefit of the RATA granted by LOI No. 97 to incumbents, Congress has manifested its intent to gradually phase out this RATA privilege under LOI No. 97 without upsetting its policy of non-diminution of pay.[28] | |||||