This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2012-06-25 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| Grave abuse of discretion has been defined as such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment tantamount to lack of jurisdiction. The abuse of discretion must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.[40] We do not find this situation present in this case to merit the nullification of the assailed Resolutions. | |||||
|
2011-07-27 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| To reiterate, the Court is not a trier of facts. As long as there is substantial evidence in support of the Ombudsman's decision, that decision will not be overturned.[21] We are also guided by the ruling in Cortes v. Bartolome,[22] which similarly dealt with a purportedly invalid appointment to an allegedly inexistent office, to wit: It is undisputed that on January 1, 1976, there was no existing position of "Sangguniang Bayan" Secretary in the organizational set-up of the municipal Government of Piddig, Ilocos Norte. Neither was there any appropriation for the said position in the municipal budget for 1975-1976 although an appropriation for the position of Municipal Secretary was retained in said budget. | |||||