[G.R. No. 71871. November 6, 1989.

TEODORO M. HERNANDEZ v. THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON

AUDIT.

Facts:

Petitioner Teodoro Hernandez was the OIC disbursing officer of the

Ternate Beach Project. On that unfortunate day, he encashed the checks for
the salaries and wages of the workers. However, it took him until afternoon so he
opted on going home for the night as it would be more practical than heading
straight to Ternate. On his way to Marilao, he was robbed. He tried to chase
after the robbers and caught up with one of them.

He requested to be relieved from money accountability and the General

manager of the Philippine Tourism Authority indorsed it to the Regional Director
of COA, until it reached the COA Chairman who denied the request stating that
Hernandez was negligent.

Issue:

Whether or not Petitioner Hernandez was negligent.

Ruling:

No. As for Hernandez’s choice between Marilao, Bulacan, and Ternate,

Cavite, one could easily agree that the former was the safer destination, being
nearer, and in view of the comparative hazards in the trips to the two places. It
is true that the petitioner miscalculated, but the Court feels he should not be
blamed for that. The decision he made seemed logical at that time and was
one that could be expected of a reasonable and prudent person. And if, as it
happened, the two robbers attacked him in broad daylight in the jeep while it
was on a busy highway, and in the presence of other passengers, it cannot be
said that all this was the result of his imprudence and negligence. This was
undoubtedly a fortuitous event covered by the said provisions, something that
could not have been reasonably foreseen although it could have happened,
and did.