EN BANC

[G.R. No. 180986. December 10, 2008.]

NORBERTO ALTRES, EVITA BULINGAN, EVANGELINE SASTINE,

FELIPE SASA, LILIBETH SILLAR, RAMONITO JAYSON, JELO TUCALO,
JUAN BUCA, JR., JUE CHRISTINE CALAMBA, ROMEO PACQUINGAN,
JR., CLEO JEAN ANGARA, LOVENA OYAO, RODOLFO TRINIDAD,
LEONILA SARA, SORINA BELDAD, MA. LINDA NINAL, LILIA PONCE,
JOSEFINA ONGCOY, ADELYN BUCTUAN, ALMA ORBE, MYLENE
SOLIVA, NAZARENE LLOREN, ELIZABETH MANSERAS, DIAMOND
MOHAMAD, MARYDELL CADAVOS, ELENA DADIOS, ALVIN CASTRO,
LILIBETH RAZO, NORMA CEPRIA, PINIDO BELEY, JULIUS HAGANAS,
ARTHUR CABIGON, CERILA BALABA, LIEZEL SIMAN, JUSTINA
YUMOL, NERLITA CALI, JANETH BICOY, HENRY LACIDA, CESARIO
ADVINCULA, JR., MERLYN RAMOS, VIRGIE TABADA, BERNARDITA
CANGKE, LYNIE GUMALO, ISABEL ADANZA, ERNESTO LOBATON,
RENE ARIMAS, FE SALVACION ORBE, JULIE QUIJANO, JUDITHO
LANIT, GILBERTO ELIMIA, MANUEL PADAYOGDOG, HENRY BESIN,
ROMULO PASILANG, BARTOLOME TAPOYAO, JR., RUWENA GORRES,
MARIBETH RONDEZ, FERDINAND CAORONG, TEODOMERO
CORONEL, ELIZABETH SAGPANG, and JUANITA ALVIOLA , petitioners,
vs . CAMILO G. EMPLEO, FRANKLIN MAATA, LIVEY VILLAREN,
RAIDES CAGA, FRANCO BADELLES, ERNESTO BALAT, GRACE
SAQUILABON, MARINA JUMALON and GEORGE DACUP , respondents.

DECISION

CARPIO-MORALES , J : p

Assailed via petition for review on certiorari are the Decision dated February 2,
2007 1 and Order dated October 22, 2007 2 of Branch 3 of the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Iligan City, which denied petitioners' petition for mandamus praying for a writ
commanding the city accountant of Iligan, Camilo G. Empleo (Empleo), or his
successor in o ce, to issue a certi cation of availability of funds in connection with
their appointments, issued by then Iligan City Mayor Franklin M. Quijano (Mayor
Quijano), which were pending approval by the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
Sometime in July 2003, Mayor Quijano sent notices of numerous vacant career
positions in the city government to the CSC. The city government and the CSC
thereupon proceeded to publicly announce the existence of the vacant positions.
Petitioners and other applicants submitted their applications for the different positions
where they felt qualified.
Toward the end of his term or on May 27, June 1, and June 24, 2004, Mayor
Quijano issued appointments to petitioners.
In the meantime, the Sangguniang Panglungsod issued Resolution No. 04-242 3
addressed to the CSC Iligan City Field O ce requesting a suspension of action on the
processing of appointments to all vacant positions in the plantilla of the city
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 government as of March 19, 2004 until the enactment of a new budget.
The Sangguniang Panglungsod subsequently issued Resolution No. 04-266 4
which, in view of its stated policy against "midnight appointments", directed the o cers
of the City Human Resource Management O ce to hold in abeyance the transmission
of all appointments signed or to be signed by the incumbent mayor in order to
ascertain whether these had been hurriedly prepared or carefully considered and
whether the matters of promotion and/or quali cations had been properly addressed.
The same Resolution enjoined all o cers of the said O ce to put off the transmission
of all appointments to the CSC, therein making it clear that non-compliance therewith
would be met with administrative action. CDEaAI

Respondent city accountant Empleo did not thus issue a certi cation as to
availability of funds for the payment of salaries and wages of petitioners, as required by
Section 1 (e) (ii), Rule V of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40, Series of 1998 reading:
xxx xxx xxx
e. LGU Appointment. Appointment in local government units for submission
to the Commission shall be accompanied , in addition to the common
requirements, by the following:

xxx xxx xxx

ii. Certi cation by the Municipal/City Provincial Accountant/Budget

O cer that funds are available. (Emphasis and underscoring
supplied)TAIESD

And the other respondents did not sign petitioners' position description forms.
The CSC Field O ce for Lanao del Norte and Iligan City disapproved the
appointments issued to petitioners invariably due to lack of certi cation of availability
of funds.
On appeal by Mayor Quijano, CSC Regional O ce No. XII in Cotabato City, by
Decision of July 30, 2004, 5 dismissed the appeal, it explaining that its function in
approving appointments is only ministerial, hence, if an appointment lacks a
requirement prescribed by the civil service law, rules and regulations, it would
disapprove it without delving into the reasons why the requirement was not complied
with.
Petitioners thus led with the RTC of Iligan City the above-stated petition for
mandamus against respondent Empleo or his successor in o ce for him to issue a
certi cation of availability of funds for the payment of the salaries and wages of
petitioners, and for his co-respondents or their successors in o ce to sign the position
description forms.
As stated early on, Branch 3 of the Iligan RTC denied petitioners' petition for
mandamus. It held that, among other things, while it is the ministerial duty of the city
accountant to certify as to the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenses
and obligations may properly be charged under Section 474 (b) (4) of Republic Act No.
7160, 6 otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, the city accountant
cannot be compelled to issue a certi cation as to availability of funds for the payment
of salaries and wages of petitioners as this ministerial function pertains to the city
treasurer. In so holding, the trial court relied on Section 344 of the Local Government
Code of 1991 the pertinent portion of which provides: THDIaC

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 Sec. 344. Certi cation and Approval of Vouchers . — No money shall
be disbursed unless the local budget o cer certi es to the existence of
appropriation that has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant
has obligated said appropriation, and the local treasurer certi es to the
availability of funds for the purpose. . . . (Underscoring supplied)
Petitioners led a motion for reconsideration 7 in which they maintained only
their prayer for a writ of mandamus for respondent Empleo or his successor in office to
issue a certi cation of availability of funds for the payment of their salaries and wages.
The trial court denied the motion by Order of October 22, 2007, 8 hence, the present
petition. aCTHEA

By Resolution of January 22, 2008, 9 this Court, without giving due course to the
petition, required respondents to comment thereon within ten (10) days from notice,
and at the same time required petitioners to comply, within the same period, with the
relevant provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
Petitioners led a Compliance Report dated February 18, 2008 1 0 to which they
attached 18 copies of (a) a veri cation and certi cation, (b) an a davit of service, and
(c) photocopies of counsel's Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) o cial receipt for
the year 2008 and his privilege tax receipt for the same year. CcHDaA

Respondents duly led their Comment, 1 1 alleging technical aws in petitioners'

petition, to which Comment petitioners led their Reply 1 2 in compliance with the
Court's Resolution dated April 1, 2008. 1 3
The lone issue in the present petition is whether it is Section 474 (b) (4) or
Section 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991 which applies to the requirement of
certi cation of availability of funds under Section 1 (e) (ii), Rule V of CSC Memorandum
Circular Number 40, Series of 1998. As earlier stated, the trial court ruled that it is
Section 344. Petitioners posit, however, that it is Section 474 (b) (4) under which it is
the ministerial duty of the city accountant to issue the certi cation, and not Section 344
which pertains to the ministerial function of the city treasurer to issue the therein stated
certification.
A discussion rst of the technical matters questioned by respondents is in order.
cIEHAC

Respondents assail as defective the veri cation and certi cation against forum
shopping attached to the petition as it bears the signature of only 11 out of the 59
petitioners, and no competent evidence of identity was presented by the signing
petitioners. They thus move for the dismissal of the petition, citing Section 5, Rule 7 1 4
vis a vis Section 5, Rule 45 1 5 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and Docena v.
Lapesura 1 6 which held that the certi cation against forum shopping should be signed
by all the petitioners or plaintiffs in a case and that the signing by only one of them is
insu cient as the attestation requires personal knowledge by the party executing the
same. 1 7
Petitioners, on the other hand, argue that they have a justi able cause for their
inability to obtain the signatures of the other petitioners as they could no longer be
contacted or are no longer interested in pursuing the case. 1 8 Petitioners plead
substantial compliance, citing Huntington Steel Products, Inc., et al. v. NLRC 1 9 which
held, among other things, that while the rule is mandatory in nature, substantial
compliance under justifiable circumstances is enough. AHCaES

Petitioners' position is more in accord with recent decisions of this Court.

In Iglesia ni Cristo v. Ponferrada, 2 0 the Court held:
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 The substantial compliance rule has been applied by this Court in a
number of cases: Cavile v. Heirs of Cavile, where the Court sustained the validity
of the certi cation signed by only one of petitioners because he is a relative of
the other petitioners and co-owner of the properties in dispute; Heirs of Agapito
T. Olarte v. O ce of the President of the Philippines , where the Court allowed a
certi cation signed by only two petitioners because the case involved a family
home in which all the petitioners shared a common interest; Gudoy v.
Guadalquiver, where the Court considered as valid the certi cation signed by
only four of the nine petitioners because all petitioners led as co-owners pro
indiviso a complaint against respondents for quieting of title and damages, as
such, they all have joint interest in the undivided whole; and DAR v. Alonzo-
Legasto, where the Court sustained the certi cation signed by only one of the
spouses as they were sued jointly involving a property in which they had a
common interest. 2 1 (Italics in the original, underscoring supplied)
TSDHCc

Very recently, in Tan, et al. v. Ballena, et al. , 2 2 the veri cation and certi cation
against forum shopping attached to the original petition for certiorari led with the
Court of Appeals was signed by only two out of over 100 petitioners and the same was
led one day beyond the period allowed by the Rules. The appellate court initially
resolved to dismiss the original petition precisely for these reasons, but on the therein
petitioners' motion for reconsideration, the appellate court ordered the ling of an
amended petition in order to include all the original complainants numbering about 240.
An amended petition was then led in compliance with the said order, but only 180 of
the 240 original complainants signed the veri cation and certi cation against forum
shopping. The Court of Appeals granted the motion for reconsideration and resolved to
reinstate the petition.
In sustaining the Court of Appeals in Tan, the Court held that it is a far better and
more prudent course of action to excuse a technical lapse and afford the parties a
review of the case to attain the ends of justice, rather than dispose of the case on
technicality and cause grave injustice to the parties, giving a false impression of speedy
disposal of cases while actually resulting in more delay, if not a miscarriage of justice.
HDAaIc

The Court further discoursed in Tan:

Under justi able circumstances, we have already allowed the relaxation
of the requirements of veri cation and certi cation so that the ends of justice
may be better served. Veri cation is simply intended to secure an assurance
that the allegations in the pleading are true and correct and not the product of
the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is led in good
faith; while the purpose of the aforesaid certi cation is to prohibit and penalize
the evils of forum shopping.
In Torres v. Specialized Packaging Development Corporation, we ruled
that the veri cation requirement had been substantially complied with despite
the fact that only two (2) out of the twenty- ve (25) petitioners have signed the
petition for review and the veri cation. In that case, we held that the two
signatories were unquestionably real parties-in-interest, who undoubtedly had
su cient knowledge and belief to swear to the truth of the allegations in the
Petition.
In Ateneo de Naga University v. Manalo , we also ruled that there was
substantial compliance with the requirement of veri cation when only one of
the petitioners, the President of the University, signed for and on behalf of the
institution and its officers.
EAcTDH

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 Similarly, in Bases Conversion and Development Authority v. Uy, we
allowed the signature of only one of the principal parties in the case despite the
absence of a Board Resolution which conferred upon him the authority to
represent the petitioner BCDA.
In the present case, the circumstances squarely involve a veri cation that
was not signed by all the petitioners therein. Thus, we see no reason why we
should not uphold the ruling of the Court of Appeals in reinstating the petition
despite the said formal defect.
On the requirement of a certi cation of non-forum shopping, the well-
settled rule is that all the petitioners must sign the certi cation of non-forum
shopping. The reason for this is that the persons who have signed the
certi cation cannot be presumed to have the personal knowledge of the other
non-signing petitioners with respect to the ling or non- ling of any action or
claim the same as or similar to the current petition. The rule, however, admits of
an exception and that is when the petitioners show reasonable cause for failure
to personally sign the certi cation. The petitioners must be able to convince the
court that the outright dismissal of the petition would defeat the administration
of justice. SDHAcI

In the case at bar, counsel for the respondents disclosed that most of the
respondents who were the original complainants have since sought
employment in the neighboring towns of Bulacan, Pampanga and Angeles City.
Only the one hundred eighty (180) signatories were then available to sign the
amended Petition for Certiorari and the accompanying veri cation and
certification of non-forum shopping. 2 3
In the present case, the signing of the veri cation by only 11 out of the 59
petitioners already su ciently assures the Court that the allegations in the pleading are
true and correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation; that
the pleading is led in good faith; and that the signatories are unquestionably real
parties-in-interest who undoubtedly have su cient knowledge and belief to swear to
the truth of the allegations in the petition.
With respect to petitioners' certi cation against forum shopping, the failure of
the other petitioners to sign as they could no longer be contacted or are no longer
interested in pursuing the case need not merit the outright dismissal of the petition
without defeating the administration of justice. The non-signing petitioners are,
however, dropped as parties to the case . HAICcD

In fact, even Docena 2 4 cited by respondents sustains petitioners' position. In

that case, the certi cation against forum shopping was signed by only one of the
petitioning spouses. The Court held that the certi cation against forum shopping
should be deemed to constitute substantial compliance with the Rules considering,
among other things, that the petitioners were husband and wife, and that the subject
property was their residence which was alleged in their veri ed petition to be conjugal.
25

With respect to petitioners' non-presentation of any identi cation before the

notary public at the time they swore to their veri cation and certi cation attached to
the petition, su ce it to state that this was cured by petitioners' compliance 2 6 with the
Court's Resolution of January 22, 2008 2 7 wherein they submitted a notarized
veri cation and certi cation bearing the details of their community tax certi cates.
This, too, is substantial compliance. The Court need not belabor its discretion to
authorize subsequent compliance with the Rules.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 For the guidance of the bench and bar, the Court restates in capsule form the
jurisprudential pronouncements already re ected above respecting non-compliance
with the requirements on, or submission of defective, veri cation and certi cation
against forum shopping:
1) A distinction must be made between non-compliance with the
requirement on or submission of defective veri cation, and non-
compliance with the requirement on or submission of defective
certification against forum shopping.
2) As to veri cation, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein does
not necessarily render the pleading fatally defective. The court may
order its submission or correction or act on the pleading if the
attending circumstances are such that strict compliance with the Rule
may be dispensed with in order that the ends of justice may be served
thereby. 2 8aATHES

3) Verification is deemed substantially complied with when one who has

ample knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations in the
complaint or petition signs the veri cation, and when matters alleged
in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct. 2 9
4) As to certi cation against forum shopping, non-compliance therewith
or a defect therein, unlike in veri cation, is generally not curable by its
subsequent submission or correction thereof, unless there is a need
to relax the Rule on the ground of "substantial compliance" or
presence of "special circumstances or compelling reasons". 3 0
5) The certi cation against forum shopping must be signed by all the
plaintiffs or petitioners in a case; 3 1 otherwise, those who did not sign
will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or justi able
circumstances, however, as when all the plaintiffs or petitioners share
a common interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense,
the signature of only one of them in the certi cation against forum
shopping substantially complies with the Rule. 3 2 TDcHCa

6) Finally, the certi cation against forum shopping must be executed by

the party-pleader, not by his counsel. 3 3 If, however, for reasonable or
justi able reasons, the party-pleader is unable to sign, he must
execute a Special Power of Attorney 3 4 designating his counsel of
record to sign on his behalf.
And now, on respondents' argument that petitioners raise questions of fact
which are not proper in a petition for review on certiorari as the same must raise only
questions of law. They entertain doubt on whether petitioners seek the payment of their
salaries, and assert that the question of whether the city accountant can be compelled
to issue a certi cation of availability of funds under the circumstances herein obtaining
is a factual issue. 3 5
The Court holds that indeed petitioners are raising a question of law.
The Court had repeatedly clari ed the distinction between a question of law and
a question of fact. A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the
correct application of law or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts; or when the issue
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 does not call for an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented, the
truth or falsehood of facts being admitted. 3 6 A question of fact, on the other hand,
exists when the doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when
the query invites calibration of the whole evidence considering mainly the credibility of
the witnesses, the existence and relevance of speci c surrounding circumstances, as
well as their relation to each other and to the whole, and the probability of the situation.
3 7 When there is no dispute as to fact, the question of whether the conclusion drawn
therefrom is correct is a question of law. 3 8 ICTcDA

In the case at bar, the issue posed for resolution does not call for the
reevaluation of the probative value of the evidence presented, but rather the
determination of which of the provisions of the Local Government Code of 1991
applies to the Civil Service Memorandum Circular requiring a certi cate of availability of
funds relative to the approval of petitioners' appointments.
AT ALL EVENTS, respondents contend that the case has become moot and
academic as the appointments of petitioners had already been disapproved by the
CSC. Petitioners maintain otherwise, arguing that the act of respondent Empleo in not
issuing the required certi cation of availability of funds unduly interfered with the
power of appointment of then Mayor Quijano; that the Sangguniang Panglungsod
Resolutions relied upon by respondent Empleo constituted legislative intervention in
the mayor's power to appoint; and that the prohibition against midnight appointments
applies only to presidential appointments as a rmed in De Rama v. Court of Appeals .
39 aTICAc

The Court nds that, indeed, the case had been rendered moot and
academic by the final disapproval of petitioners' appointments by the CSC.
The mootness of the case notwithstanding, the Court resolved to rule
on its merits in order to settle the issue once and for all, given that the
contested action is one capable of repetition 4 0 or susceptible of recurrence .
The pertinent portions of Sections 474 (b) (4) and 344 of the Local Government
Code of 1991 provide: ICTHDE

Section 474. Qualifications, Powers and Duties. —

xxx xxx xxx
(b) The accountant shall take charge of both the accounting and
internal audit services of the local government unit concerned and shall:
xxx xxx xxx
(4) certify to the availability of budgetary allotment to which
expenditures and obligations may be properly charged . (Emphasis and
underscoring supplied) DEICaA

xxx xxx xxx

Sec. 344. Certi cation and Approval of Vouchers . — No money shall
be disbursed unless the local budget o cer certi es to the existence of
appropriation that has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant
has obligated said appropriation , and the local treasurer certi es to the
availability of funds for the purpose. . . . (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Petitioners propound the following distinctions between Sections 474 (b) (4)
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 and 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991: CDaTAI

(1) Section 474(b)(4) speaks of certi cation of availability of

budgetary allotment, while Section 344 speaks of certi cation of availability of
funds for disbursement;
(2) Under Section 474(b)(4), before a certi cation is issued, there
must be an appropriation, while under Section 344, before a certi cation is
issued, two requisites must concur: (a) there must be an appropriation legally
made for the purpose, and (b) the local accountant has obligated said
appropriation;
(3) Under Section 474(b)(4), there is no actual payment involved
because the certi cation is for the purpose of obligating a portion of the
appropriation; while under Section 344, the certi cation is for the purpose of
payment after the local accountant had obligated a portion of the appropriation;
(4) Under Section 474(b)(4), the certi cation is issued if there is an
appropriation, let us say, for the salaries of appointees; while under Section 344,
the certi cation is issued if there is an appropriation and the same is obligated,
let us say, for the payment of salaries of employees. 4 1
Respondents do not squarely address the issue in their Comment.
Section 344 speaks of actual disbursements of money from the local treasury in
payment of due and demandable obligations of the local government unit. The
disbursements are to be made through the issuance, certi cation, and approval of
vouchers. The full text of Section 344 provides:
Sec. 344. Certi cation and Approval of Vouchers. — No money shall
be disbursed unless the local budget o cer certi es to the existence of
appropriation that has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant
has obligated said appropriation, and the local treasurer certi es to the
availability of funds for the purpose. Vouchers and payrolls shall be certi ed to
and approved by the head of the department or o ce who has administrative
control of the fund concerned, as to validity, propriety, and legality of the claim
involved. Except in cases of disbursements involving regularly recurring
administrative expenses such as payrolls for regular or permanent employees,
expenses for light, water, telephone and telegraph services, remittances to
government creditor agencies such as GSIS, SSS, LDP, DBP, National Printing
O ce, Procurement Service of the DBM and others, approval of the
disbursement voucher by the local chief executive himself shall be required
whenever local funds are disbursed.
In cases of special or trust funds, disbursements shall be approved by
the administrator of the fund.
In case of temporary absence or incapacity of the department head or
chief of o ce, the o cer next-in-rank shall automatically perform his function
and he shall be fully responsible therefor. (Italics and underscoring supplied)
"Voucher," in its ordinary meaning, is a document which shows that services have
been performed or expenses incurred. 4 2 When used in connection with disbursement
of money, it implies the existence of an instrument that shows on what account or by
what authority a particular payment has been made, or that services have been
performed which entitle the party to whom it is issued to payment. 4 3 AcDaEH

Section 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991 thus applies only when there
is already an obligation to pay on the part of the local government unit, precisely
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 because vouchers are issued only when services have been performed or expenses
incurred.
The requirement of certi cation of availability of funds from the city treasurer
under Section 344 of the Local Government Code of 1991 is for the purpose of
facilitating the approval of vouchers issued for the payment of services already
rendered to, and expenses incurred by, the local government unit.
The trial court thus erred in relying on Section 344 of the Local Government Code
of 1991 in ruling that the ministerial function to issue a certi cation as to availability of
funds for the payment of the wages and salaries of petitioners pertains to the city
treasurer. For at the time material to the required issuance of the certi cation, the
appointments issued to petitioners were not yet approved by the CSC, hence, there
were yet no services performed to speak of. In other words, there was yet no due and
demandable obligation of the local government to petitioners. TIHDAa

Section 474, subparagraph (b) (4) of the Local Government Code of 1991, on the
other hand, requires the city accountant to "certify to the availability of budgetary
allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged" . 4 4 By
necessary implication, it includes the duty to certify to the availability of funds for the
payment of salaries and wages of appointees to positions in the plantilla of the local
government unit, as required under Section 1 (e) (ii), Rule V of CSC Memorandum
Circular Number 40, Series of 1998, a requirement before the CSC considers the
approval of the appointments.
In ne, whenever a certi cation as to availability of funds is required for purposes
other than actual payment of an obligation which requires disbursement of money,
Section 474 (b) (4) of the Local Government Code of 1991 applies, and it is the
ministerial duty of the city accountant to issue the certification. CSTDIE

WHEREFORE, the Court declares that it is Section 474 (b) (4), not Section 344, of
the Local Government Code of 1991, which applies to the requirement of certi cation
of availability of funds under Section 1 (e) (ii), Rule V of Civil Service Commission
Memorandum Circular Number 40, Series of 1998.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, C.J., Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona,
Azcuna, Tinga, Chico-Nazario, Velasco, Jr., Nachura and Reyes, JJ., concur.
Leonardo-de Castro, J., is on official leave.
Brion, J., is on leave.

Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 17-24.
2. Ibid. at 31-36.
3. Id. at 37-38.
4. Id. at 39-40.
5. Id. at 41-45.
6. Section 474 (b) (4), Republic Act No. 7160 provides:
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 "Section 474. Qualifications, Powers and Duties. —
xxx xxx xxx
(b) The accountant shall take charge of both the accounting and internal audit services
of the local government unit concerned and shall:
xxx xxx xxx
(4) certify to the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and
obligations may be properly charged."
7. Rollo, pp. 25-30.
8. Supra note 2.
9. Rollo, pp. 52-53.
10. Ibid. at 54-55.
11. Id. at 113-127.
12. Id. at 146-157.
13. Id. at 145.
14. Section 5, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court provides: EAcHCI

SEC. 5. Certification against forum shopping. — The plaintiff or principal party shall
certify under oath in the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief,
or in a sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (a) that he
has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues
in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such
other action or claim is pending therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim,
a complete statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if he should thereafter learn
that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report that
fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.AHcCDI

Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere
amendment of the complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the
dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and
after hearing. The submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any of the
undertakings therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to the
corresponding administrative and criminal actions. If the acts of the party or his counsel
clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall be ground for
summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a
cause for administrative sanctions.

15. Section 5, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court provides:

SEC. 5. Dismissal or denial of petition. — The failure of the petitioner to comply with any
of the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees,
deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents
which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal
thereof.
The Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the
appeal is without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.
16. 407 Phil. 1007 (2001). aESIHT

17. Ibid. at 1017.

18. Rollo, p. 151.
19. G.R. No. 158311, November 17, 2004, 442 SCRA 551.

20. G.R. No. 168943, October 27, 2006, 505 SCRA 828.
21. Ibid. at 841-842 (citations omitted).
22. G.R. No. 168111, July 4, 2008.
23. Ibid., citations omitted.
24. Supra note 16.
25. Ibid. at 1017-1021.
26. Supra note 10.
27. Supra note 9.
28. Sari-Sari Group of Companies, Inc. v. Piglas-Kamao, G.R. No. 164624, August 11, 2008.
29. Rombe Eximtrade (Phils.), Inc. v. Asiatrust Development Bank , G.R. No. 164479,
February 13, 2008, 545 SCRA 253.

30. Chinese Young Men's Christian Association of the Philippine Islands v. Remington Steel
Corporation, G.R. No. 159422, March 28, 2008, 550 SCRA 180.
31. Juaban v. Espina, G.R. No. 170049, March 14, 2008, 548 SCRA 588.
32. Pacquing v. Coca-Cola Philippines, Inc ., G.R. No. 157966, January 31, 2008, 543 SCRA
344.
33. Marcopper Mining Corporation v. Solidbank Corporation , G.R. No. 134049, June 17,
2004, 432 SCRA 360. DaEcTC

34. Vide Fuentebella v. Castro , G.R. No. 150865, June 30, 2006, 494 SCRA 183; Eslaban, Jr.
v. Vda. de Onorio, G.R. No. 146062, June 28, 2001, 360 SCRA 230.
35. Rollo, p. 121.
36. Mendoza v. Salinas, G.R. No. 152827, February 6, 2007, 514 SCRA 414, 419; Vide also
Philippine National Construction Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159417,
January 25, 2007, 512 SCRA 684.
37. Ibid.
38. National Power Corporation v. Purefoods Corporation, et al., G.R. No. 160725,
September 12, 2008, citing Gomez v. Sta. Ines, G.R. No. 132537, October 14, 2005, 473
SCRA 25, 37. EDCTIa

39. 405 Phil. 531, 551 (2001).

40. I n David v. Arroyo , G.R. Nos. 171396, 171409, 171485, 171483, 171400, 171489 &
171424, May 3, 2006, 489 SCRA 160, seven petitions for certiorari and prohibition were
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 led assailing the constitutionality of the declaration of a state of national emergency
by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. While the declaration of a state of national
emergency was already lifted during the pendency of the suits, this Court still resolved
the merits of the petitions, considering that the issues involved a grave violation of the
Constitution and affected the public interest. The Court also a rmed its duty to
formulate guiding and controlling constitutional precepts, doctrines or rules, and
recognized that the contested actions were capable of repetition.

In Public Interest Center, Inc. v. Elma, G.R. No. 138965, June 30, 2006, 494 SCRA 53, the
petition sought to declare as null and void the concurrent appointments of Magdangal B.
Elma as Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and as
Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (CPLC) for being contrary to Section 13, Article VII and
Section 7, par. 2, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution. While Elma ceased to hold the two
offices during the pendency of the case, the Court still ruled on the merits thereof,
considering that the question of whether the PCGG Chairman could concurrently hold the
position of CPLC was one capable of repetition. cdphil

In Manalo v. Calderon, G.R. No. 178920, October 15, 2007, 536 SCRA 290, a petition for
habeas corpus was filed by the police officers implicated in the burning of an
elementary school in Batangas at the height of the May 2007 elections. The Court
decided the case on the merits notwithstanding the recall by the Philippine National
Police of the restrictive custody orders against petitioners therein. Citing David v. Arroyo,
the Court held: "Every bad, unusual incident where police officers figure in generates
public interest and people watch what will be done or not done to them. Lack of
disciplinary steps taken against them erodes public confidence in the police institution.
As petitioners themselves assert, the restrictive custody of policemen under investigation
is an existing practice, hence, the issue is bound to crop up every now and then. The
matter is capable of repetition or susceptible of recurrence. It better be resolved now for
the education and guidance of all concerned". cDACST

41. Rollo, p. 148.

42. Atienza v. Villarosa, G.R. No. 161081, May 10, 2005, 458 SCRA 385, 403.
43. Ibid. at 404, citing First National Bank of Chicago v. City of Elgin, 136 III. App. 453.
44. Supra note 6.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com