This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-10-12 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| The above case became the authority in granting claims of a contractor against the government based on a void contract. This exercise of equity to compensate contracts with the government was repeated in Eslao vs. COA.[28] In the said case, the respondent therein, Commission on Audit (COA), was ordered to pay the company of petitioner for the services rendered by the latter in constructing a building for a state university, notwithstanding the contract's violations of the mandatory requirements of law, including the prior appropriation of funds therefor. The Court, in resolving the case, cited the unpublished Resolution in Royal Construction, wherein the Court allowed the payment of the company's services sans the legal requirements of prior appropriation. | |||||
|
2011-01-18 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| Secondly, in ordering the payment of the obligation due respondent on a quantum meruit basis, the Court of Appeals correctly relied on Royal Trust Corporation v. COA,[10] Eslao v. COA,[11] Melchor v. COA, [12] EPG Construction Company v. Vigilar,[13] and Department of Health v. C.V. Canchela & Associates, Architects. [14] All these cases involved government projects undertaken in violation of the relevant laws, rules and regulations covering public bidding, budget appropriations, and release of funds for the projects. Consistently in these cases, this Court has held that the contracts were void for failing to meet the requirements mandated by law; public interest and equity, however, dictate that the contractor should be compensated for services rendered and work done. | |||||