Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 57 views

    Bacani vs. Nacoco Digest

    Uploaded by

    kent kintanar
    1. Bacani and Matoto, court stenographers, provided transcripts of proceedings to NACOCO's counsel and billed NACOCO for their fees, which NACOCO paid. However, the Auditor General required the stenographers to reimburse the fees, claiming NACOCO was a government entity exempt from such fees. 2. The issue is whether NACOCO qualifies as a government entity. The court ruled that NACOCO does not acquire government entity status, as it was incorporated separately from the government and can sue/be sued like a private corporation. 3. While the government established NACOCO to promote the coconut industry, it gave NACOCO

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Bacani vs. Nacoco Digest

    Uploaded by

    kent kintanar
    57 views2 pages
    1. Bacani and Matoto, court stenographers, provided transcripts of proceedings to NACOCO's counsel and billed NACOCO for their fees, which NACOCO paid. However, the Auditor General required the stenographers to reimburse the fees, claiming NACOCO was a government entity exempt from such fees. 2. The issue is whether NACOCO qualifies as a government entity. The court ruled that NACOCO does not acquire government entity status, as it was incorporated separately from the government and can sue/be sued like a private corporation. 3. While the government established NACOCO to promote the coconut industry, it gave NACOCO

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Bacani vs. nacoco digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Bacani and Matoto, court stenographers, provided transcripts of proceedings to NACOCO's counsel and billed NACOCO for their fees, which NACOCO paid. However, the Auditor General required the stenographers to reimburse the fees, claiming NACOCO was a government entity exempt from such fees. 2. The issue is whether NACOCO qualifies as a government entity. The court ruled that NACOCO does not acquire government entity status, as it was incorporated separately from the government and can sue/be sued like a private corporation. 3. While the government established NACOCO to promote the coconut industry, it gave NACOCO

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    57 views2 pages

    Bacani vs. Nacoco Digest

    Uploaded by

    kent kintanar
    1. Bacani and Matoto, court stenographers, provided transcripts of proceedings to NACOCO's counsel and billed NACOCO for their fees, which NACOCO paid. However, the Auditor General required the stenographers to reimburse the fees, claiming NACOCO was a government entity exempt from such fees. 2. The issue is whether NACOCO qualifies as a government entity. The court ruled that NACOCO does not acquire government entity status, as it was incorporated separately from the government and can sue/be sued like a private corporation. 3. While the government established NACOCO to promote the coconut industry, it gave NACOCO

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Bacani v.

    NACOCO Digest

    G.R. No. L-9657 Nov. 29, 1956


    Two-fold Function of the Government

    FACTS: 
    1.    Bacani and Matoto are court stenographers both assigned in the CFI of Manila. During the
    pendency of another civil case (Civil Case No. 2293 entitled 'Francisco Sycip vs. NACOCO'),
    Alikpala, counsel for NACOCO(Nat’l Coconut Corporation) , requested the said stenographers
    for copies of the transcript of the stenographic notes taken by them during the hearing.
    Plaintiffs complied with the request by delivering to Counsel Alikpala the needed transcript
    containing 714 pages and thereafter submitted to him their bills for the payment of their
    fees.  The NACOCO paid the amount of P564 to Bacani and P150 to Matoto for said transcript at
    the rate of P1 per page.

    3.      Subsequently, the Auditor General required the plaintiffs to reimburse said amounts by virtue
    of a DOJ circular which stated that NACOCO, being a government entity, was exempt from the
    payment of the fees in question.

    4.      Petitioners countered that NACOCO is not a government entity within the purview of section
    16, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court while the defendants set up as a defense that the NACOCO is
    a government entity within the purview of section 2 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1917
    hence, exempt from paying the stenographers’ fees under Rule 130 of the Rules of Court.

     ISSUE: Whether or not NACOCO is a government entity.

    No, it is not.

    1.   GOCCs do not acquire that status for the simple reason that they do not come under the
    classification of municipal or public corporation. While NACOCO was organized for the purpose
    of “adjusting the coconut industry to a position independent of trade preferences in the United
    States” and of providing “Facilities for the better curing of copra products and the proper
    utilization of coconut by-products”, a function which our government has chosen to exercise to
    promote the coconut industry. It was given a corporate power separate and distinct from the
    government, as it was made subject to the provisions of the Corporation Law in so far as its
    corporate existence and the powers that it may exercise are concerned (sections 2 and 4,
    Commonwealth Act No. 518). It may sue and be sued in the same manner as any other private
    corporations, and in this sense it is an entity different from our government.

    2.     There are functions which our government is required to exercise to promote its objectives as
    expressed in our Constitution and which are exercised by it as an attribute of sovereignty, and
    those which it may exercise to promote merely the welfare, progress and prosperity of the
    people.
    3.      President Wilson enumerates the constituent functions as follows:
    (1) The keeping of order and providing for the protection of persons and property from violence
    and robbery.
    (2) The fixing of the legal relations between man and wife and between parents and children.
    (3) The regulation of the holding, transmission, and interchange of property, and the
    determination of its liabilities for debt or for crime.
    (4) The determination of contract rights between individuals.
    (5) The definition and punishment of crime.
    (6) The administration of justice in civil cases.
    (7) The determination of the political duties, privileges, and relations of citizens.
    (8) Dealings of the state with foreign powers: the preservation of the state from external
    danger or encroachment and the advancement of its international interests.’
    4.   The most important of the ministrant functions are: public works, public education, public
    charity, health and safety regulations, and regulations of trade and industry. The principles
    deter mining whether or not a government shall exercise certain of these optional functions
    are: (1) that a government should do for the public welfare those things which private capital
    would not naturally undertake and (2) that a government should do these things which by its
    very nature it is better equipped to administer for the public welfare than is any private
    individual or group of individuals.

    You might also like