A no the wto agreement does not violate article ii

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: on occasions of emergency: Provided, that the officials concerned do not derive monetary compensation therefrom. (Section 90[c], LGC) Q: May a municipality adopt the work already performed in good faith by a private lawyer, which work proved beneficial to it? A: Although a municipality may not hire a private lawyer to represent it in litigations, in the interest of substantial justice, however, it was held, that a municipality may adopt the work already performed in good faith by such private lawyer, which work is beneficial to it, provided that no injustice is thereby headed on the adverse party and provided further that no compensation in any guise is paid therefore by said municipality to the private lawyer. Unless so expressly adopted, the private lawyer’s work cannot bind the municipality (Ramos v. CA, G.R. No. 99425, Mar. 3, 1997) Q: May a municipality be represented by a private law firm which had volunteered its services for free, in collaboration with the municipal attorney and the fiscal? A: Such representation will be violative of Section 1983 of the old Administrative Code. Private lawyers may not represent municipalities on their own. Neither may they do so even in collaboration with authorized government lawyers. This is anchored on the principle that only accountable public officers may act for and in behalf of public entities and that public funds should not be expended to hire private lawyers. (Ramos v. CA, G.R. No. 99425, Mar.3, 1997) Note: The municipality’s authority to employ a private lawyer is expressly limited only to situations where the provincial fiscal is disqualified to represent it. For the exception to apply, the fact that the provincial fiscal was disqualified to handle the municipality’s case must appear on record. The refusal of the provincial fiscal to represent the municipality is not a legal justification for employing the services of private counsel. Instead of engaging the services of special attorney, the municipal council should request the Secretary of Justice to appoint an acting provincial fiscal in place of the provincial fiscal who has declined to handle and prosecute its case in court. (Pililla v. CA, G.R. No. 105909, June 28,...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online