This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-07-07 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| (1) That the accused is a public officer or a private person charged in conspiracy with the former; (2) That said public officer commits the prohibited acts during the performance of his or her official duties or in relation to his or her public positions; (3) That he or she causes undue injury to any party, whether the government or a private party; (4) That such injury is caused by giving unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference to such parties; and (5) That the public officer has acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. [17] | |||||
|
2009-09-25 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, granting arguendo that the municipality's budget adopted the incorrect salary rates, this error or mistake was not in any way indicative of bad faith. Under prevailing jurisprudence, mistakes committed by a public officer are not actionable, absent a clear showing that he was motivated by malice or gross negligence amounting to bad faith. It does not simply connote bad moral judgment or negligence. Rather, there must be some dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong, a breach of a sworn duty through some motive or intent, or ill will. It partakes of the nature of fraud and contemplates a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or some motive of self-interest or ill will for ulterior purposes.[40] As we see it, the disbursement of the 5% salary increase was done in good faith. Accordingly, petitioners need not refund the disallowed disbursement in the amount of P895,891.50. | |||||