Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
thence to the Court of Appeals; and since they did not apply for
relief to the Commission prior to their institu-
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION.
164
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
165
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
166
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
167
168
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
169
_______________
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
3 Id., at p. 69.
4 Id., at p. 70.
5 Id., at p. 71.
170
thirty (30) days from the official release of the results of the
examination. Within ten (10) days from such date, he/she may file
his/her request for reconsideration of ratings. Reconsideration of
rating shall be effected only on grounds of mechanical error in the
grading of his/her testpapers or answer sheets, or malfeasance.”6
_______________
6 Id., at p. 72.
7 Id., at p. 38.
8 Id., at pp. 73-78.
9 Rollo (G.R. No. 165036), pp. 107-108.
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
171
_______________
172
If only to underscore the fact that she was not asking for
a re-checking of her exam, the following prayer for relief
was deleted from the Amended Petition: “and, if warranted,
to issue to her a certificate of registration as a CPA.”
On June 23, 1998, respondents filed a Manifestation and
Motion to Dismiss Application for Writ of Preliminary
Mandatory Injunction, on the ground that petitioner had
taken and passed the May 1998 CPA Licensure
Examination and had taken her oath as a CPA.15 Petitioner
filed her Opposition on July 8, 1998.16 Subsequently, on
October 29, 1998, respondents filed their Answer with
Counterclaim to the amended petition. They reiterated
their original allegations and further alleged that there
was no cause of action because at the time the Amended
Petition was admitted, they had ceased to be members of
the Board of Accountancy and they were not in possession
of the documents sought by the petitioner.17
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
In an Order dated October 16, 1998, the trial court
granted respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Petitioner’s
Application for a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction
(not the main case), ruling that the matter had become
moot since petitioner
_______________
173
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
18 Id., at p. 131.
19 Id., at pp. 150-159.
20 Id., at pp. 36-38 penned by Judge Reynaldo G. Ros.
21 Id., at pp. 215-227 on August 26, 2002, private respondents filed their
Comment/Opposition; id., at pp. 234-241. Petitioner filed her Reply, id., at pp. 242-
249.
22 Id., at pp. 29-30.
174
_______________
23 Id., at p. 30.
24 Id., at p. 33.
175
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
176
Issues
_______________
177
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 14/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
Our Ruling
_______________
178
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
32 Id.
33 Lemi v. Valencia, 135 Phil. 185, 193; 26 SCRA 203, 210-211 (1968);
Subido v. Hon. Ocampo, 164 Phil. 438, 447-448; 72 SCRA 443, 452-453
(1976).
34 Creating The Professional Regulation Commission And Prescribing
Its Powers And Functions (1973).
35 See also Section 5(a), which provides:
179
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
180
_______________
181
_______________
182
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
_______________
46 Legaspi v. Civil Service Commission, 234 Phil. 521, 535; 150 SCRA
530, 541 (1987).
183
_______________
184
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/22
11/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 623
central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016e6517f0d72fa339b8003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 22/22