Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. RICARDO V. GARCIA JR.

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 192074 2014-06-10	LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT AUTHORITY v. AURORA A. SALVAÑA LEONEN, J.
The employer has the right "to select honest and trustworthy employees."[82] When the government office disciplines an employee based on causes and procedures allowed by law, it exercises its discretion. This discretion is inherent in the constitutional principle that "[p]ublic officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives."[83] This is a principle that can be invoked by the public as well as the government office employing the public officer.
	GR No. 185954 2010-02-16	OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN v. MAXIMO D. SISON VELASCO JR., J.
In support of its argument that it has legal interest, the Office of the Ombudsman cites Philippine National Bank v. Garcia, Jr. (Garcia). [13] In the said case, the Philippine National Bank (PNB) imposed upon its employee, Garcia, the penalty of forced resignation for gross neglect of duty. On appeal, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) exonerated Garcia from the administrative charges against him. In accordance with the ruling in Civil Service Commission v. Dacoycoy,[14] this Court affirmed the standing of the PNB to appeal to the CA the CSC resolution exonerating Garcia. After all, PNB was the aggrieved party which complained of Garcia's acts of dishonesty. Should Garcia be finally exonerated, it might then be incumbent upon PNB to take him back into its fold. PNB should, therefore, be allowed to appeal a decision that, in its view, hampered its right to select honest and trustworthy employees, so that it can protect and preserve its name as a premier banking institution in the country.
	GR NO. 168484 2007-07-12	LEAH M. NAZARENO v. CITY OF DUMAGUETE NACHURA, J.
The right to appeal is not a natural right or a part of due process, but a mere statutory privilege that may be exercised only in the manner prescribed by law.[32] It is necessary that the same be instituted by the party who is given such authority. At this point, the concepts of "legal standing" and "real party-in-interest" become relevant.
	GR No. 156039 2003-08-14	KARINA CONSTANTINO-DAVID v. ZENAIDA D. PANGANDAMAN-GANIA BELLOSILLO, J.
The CSC may also seek a review of the decisions of the Court of Appeals that are detrimental to its constitutional mandate as the central personnel agency of the government tasked to establish a career service, adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness and courtesy in the civil service, strengthen the merit and rewards system, integrate all human resources development programs for all levels and ranks, and institutionalize a management climate conducive to public accountability. Nonetheless, the right of the CSC to appeal the adverse decision does not preclude the private complainant in appropriate cases from similarly elevating the decision for review.[26]