ChanRobles Virtual law Library

FIRST DIVISION

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated OCT 3 2005.

G.R. No. 139930 ( Republic of the Philippines vs. Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr., et al .)

For consideration is the motion of the counsel for respondent Ma. Clara Lobregat praying for the dismissal of the case against the said respondent in view of her death during the pendency of the present case.

Respondent Ma. Clara M. Lobregat, together with the other respondents, was charged with the violation of Section 3 of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) in the Office of the Ombudsman in her capacity as a member of the Board of Directors of the United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) which passed and approved Resolution No. 247-79 authorizing the UCPB, as administrator of the Coconut Industry Investment Fund, a public fund, to invest the amount of not more than P500,000,000 in the equities of the United Coconut Oil Mills, Inc. (UNICOM); and for approving UNICOM's capitalization. Petitioner alleged that these transactions allowed the other respondents unwarranted benefits as they were able to utilize P95,000,000 in government funds to increase their investment in the UNICOM from P5,000,000 to P100,000,000, which were undeniably grossly disadvantageous to the government.

The Office of the Ombudsman approved the memorandum of the Office of the Special Prosecutor dated March 15, 1999 recommending the dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of prescription and insufficiency of evidence. From the said dismissal, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing the petitioner, Republic of the Philippines, appealed to this Court.

During the pendency of this case, respondent Ma. Clara Lobregat died on January 2, 2004 due to multi-organ failure. On May 14, 2004, respondent's counsel moved for the dismissal of the case on the ground that the death of respondent Lobregat extinguishes both her criminal as well as civil liability based solely on the act complained of.

The OSG opposed the motion on the ground that respondent's death does not extinguish her civil liability because the same is not solely based on the offense committed, i.e ., civil liability ex delicto in senso strictiore . The OSG, citing People v. Bayotas ¹ maintains that while respondent's death extinguishes her criminal liability, the same cannot be made to apply with regard to her civil liability. The OSG avers that as a director of UCPB and the UNICOM, respondent had duties and liabilities under the law and in accordance with her employment contract. It cites that under Sections 31 and 33 of the Corporation Code, any director who willfully and knowingly votes for or assents to patently unlawful acts of the corporation or who is guilty of gross negligence or bad faith in directing the affairs of the corporation shall be liable jointly and severally for all damages resulting therefrom suffered by the corporation, its stockholders or members and other persons.

The heirs of the late respondent counter that the ruling in People v. Bayotas does not apply because in the said case, the accused was convicted and died during the pendency of the appeal. On the contrary, in the present case, respondent was a mere respondent in a complaint which the Office of the Ombudsman had dismissed. They explained that even assuming that the Bayotas ruling applies, the death of the respondent extinguished her civil liability, if any, since the same could only be based on delict.

In a similar case, Benedicto v. Court of Appeals , ² the Court, applying Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code, dismissed the charges against the deceased petitioner, Benedicto, which were then pending before the trial court, as death extinguished any criminal as well as civil liability ex delicto that might be attributable to him. In a recently decided case, Republic v. Desierto , ³ where herein deceased respondent was also a respondent, the Court, in a subsequent Resolution dated August 16, 2004, ordered the dismissal of charges against herein respondent, then pending before the Office of the Ombudsman, stating that any criminal as well as civil liability ex delicto that might arise from said case is declared extinguished by reason of her death.

WHEREFORE , in view of the foregoing, the motion of the counsel for the deceased respondent, Ma. Clara M. Lobregat, praying for the dismissal of the case against her is GRANTED. Any criminal as well as civil liability ex delicto that might arise from said case is declared extinguished by reason of her death.

CARPIO, J., no part.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA ESGUERRA-VIDAL

Clerk of Court