Versoza vs Carague

Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012 Q. Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) conducted a public bidding for the supply of computer equipment and peripherals. COA through the TSO, tested the reasonableness of the prices of the purchased computers. TSO found that the purchased computers were overpriced/excessive which resulted to the Resident Auditor issuing a Notice of Disallowance for the overpricing. CDA however contends that COA gravely abused its discretion in the manner of the determination of the overpricing was inadequate and thus evidence was not substantial to prove the overpricing of the computers. Is the contention of the CDA correct? A. NO. The general policy of the Court to sustain the decisions of administrative authorities, especially one which is constitutionally- created, not only on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers but also for their presumed expertise in the laws they are entrusted to enforce. Findings of quasi-judicial agencies, such as the COA, which have acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not only respect but at times even finality if such findings are supported by substantial evidence, and the decision and order are not tainted with unfairness or arbitrariness that would amount to grave abuse of discretion. Thus, in this case, there being no grave abuse of discretion in the findings and conclusions of the COA in this case, the Court finds no cogent reason to deviate from these long-settled rules. (Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012) Q. How do you determine overpricing? A.. Price is considered “excessive” if it is more than the 10% allowable pric evariance between the price paid for the item bought and the price of the same item per canvass of the auditor. In determining whether or not the price is excessive, the following factors may be considered: (a) supply and demand forces in the market; (b) government price quotations; (c) warranty of products or special features; (d) brand of products. (Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012)

Upload
che-poblete-cardenas
Category

Documents
view
58
download
0

Embed Size (px):

description

Case digest

Transcript of Versoza vs Carague

Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012

Q. Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) conducted a public bidding for the supply of computer equipment and peripherals. COA through the TSO, tested the reasonableness of the prices of the purchased computers. TSO found that the purchased computers were overpriced/excessive which resulted to the Resident Auditor issuing a Notice of Disallowance for the overpricing. CDA however contends that COA gravely abused its discretion in the manner of the determination of the overpricing was inadequate and thus evidence was not substantial to prove the overpricing of the computers. Is the contention of the CDA correct?

A. NO. The general policy of the Court to sustain the decisions of administrative authorities, especially one which is constitutionally-created, not only on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers but also for their presumed expertise in the laws they are entrusted to enforce.Findings of quasi-judicial agencies, such as the COA, which have acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not only respect but at times even finality if such findings are supported by substantial evidence,and the decision and order are not tainted with unfairness or arbitrariness that would amount to grave abuse of discretion. Thus, in this case, there being no grave abuse of discretion in the findings and conclusions of the COA in this case, the Court finds no cogent reason to deviate from these long-settled rules. (Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012)

Q. How do you determine overpricing?

A..Price is considered excessive if it is more than the 10% allowable pric evariancebetween the price paid for the item bought and the price of the same item per canvass of the auditor. In determining whether or not the price is excessive, the following factors may be considered: (a) supply and demand forces in themarket; (b) government price quotations; (c) warranty of products or special features; (d) brand of products. (Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012)