Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 46 views

    Quizo Vs Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    CMG
    The petitioner in Quizo vs Sandiganbayan successfully proved that none of the missing funds from his office were used for his personal gain. The bulk of the reported shortage referred to cash advances given to co-workers, which were later verified as correct by an auditor. While negligence occurred, there was no evidence of malice or intent to defraud the government, as the cash advances were granted in good faith and the practice was tolerated in the office. Similarly, in another case, the Court acquitted an accused municipal treasurer of malversation charges for missing funds, as he did not use them personally and the improper payments were made in good faith without fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    Quizo Vs Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    CMG
    46 views1 page
    The petitioner in Quizo vs Sandiganbayan successfully proved that none of the missing funds from his office were used for his personal gain. The bulk of the reported shortage referred to cash advances given to co-workers, which were later verified as correct by an auditor. While negligence occurred, there was no evidence of malice or intent to defraud the government, as the cash advances were granted in good faith and the practice was tolerated in the office. Similarly, in another case, the Court acquitted an accused municipal treasurer of malversation charges for missing funds, as he did not use them personally and the improper payments were made in good faith without fraudulent intent.

    Original Description:

    good faith as a defense in malversation

    Original Title

    Quizo vs Sandiganbayan

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner in Quizo vs Sandiganbayan successfully proved that none of the missing funds from his office were used for his personal gain. The bulk of the reported shortage referred to cash advances given to co-workers, which were later verified as correct by an auditor. While negligence occurred, there was no evidence of malice or intent to defraud the government, as the cash advances were granted in good faith and the practice was tolerated in the office. Similarly, in another case, the Court acquitted an accused municipal treasurer of malversation charges for missing funds, as he did not use them personally and the improper payments were made in good faith without fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    46 views1 page

    Quizo Vs Sandiganbayan

    Uploaded by

    CMG
    The petitioner in Quizo vs Sandiganbayan successfully proved that none of the missing funds from his office were used for his personal gain. The bulk of the reported shortage referred to cash advances given to co-workers, which were later verified as correct by an auditor. While negligence occurred, there was no evidence of malice or intent to defraud the government, as the cash advances were granted in good faith and the practice was tolerated in the office. Similarly, in another case, the Court acquitted an accused municipal treasurer of malversation charges for missing funds, as he did not use them personally and the improper payments were made in good faith without fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    In Quizo vs Sandiganbayan1

    petitioner successfully overthrew the presumption of guilt. He


    satisfactorily proved that not a single centavo of the missing
    funds was used by him for his own personal interest, a fact
    conceded by the Tanodbayan 'the bulk of the reported shortage
    actually referred to the items disallowed by the Audit Team
    representing cash advances extended to co-employees. In
    fact, evidence disclosed that the itemized list of the cash
    advances xxxxxxx was verified and found to be correct by an
    Auditing Examiner, Petitioner explained that the granting of the
    cash advances was done in good faith, with no intent to gain and
    borne out of goodwill considering that it was a practice tolerated in
    the office. Such being the case, negligence evidentiary of malice
    or intent to defraud the government cannot be imputed to him.
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Significantly, in the recent case of Villacorta vs.
    People, G.R. No. 68268, November 12, 1986, the Court
    acquitted the accused. the municipal treasurer of Pandan,
    Catanduanes. of the crime of malversation of public funds on
    grounds that he did not put the missing funds to personal uses,
    that his having "allowed others to freely participate of the
    chits/vouchers" was a practice which seemed to have been
    tolerated even during the time of his predecessor and that there
    was no negligence approximating malice or fraud because the
    wrong payments were made in good faith;

    1 Quizo vs Sandiganbayan G.R. No. 77120 April 6, 1987

    You might also like