CASE STUDY ON J. A. SISON vs.

THE BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY and

ROBERT ORR FERGUZON.

J.A. Sison, the petitioner of the case contests the legality of the issuance of a
certificate by Board of Accountancy to Robert Orr Ferguson, a British national to practice
accountancy in the Philippines on the ground that there is no reciprocity between the
Philippines and the United Kingdom.

Upon knowing this lack of reciprocity, the Board of Accountancy decided to

suspend the certificate given to the respondent pending final revocation if ever they fail
to prove to the Board that (a) Filipinos are allowed to take the professional accountant
examination given by the British government, if any, and (b) Filipino certified public
accountants can, upon application, be registered as chartered accountants or granted
similar degrees by the British Government.
However, due to the fact that RA 9298 expressly states that the Board shall only
have the right to revoke a certificate on the grounds mentioned under section 23 of this
Act or for any unprofessional or unethical conduct, malpractice, violation of any of the
provisions of this Act, and its implementing rules and regulations, the Certified Public
Accountant’s Code of Ethics and the technical and professional standards of practice for
certified public accountants, the Secretary of Justice believed that "the change in
administrative interpretation with respect to the existence of reciprocity between the
Philippines and Great Britain as to the practice of accountancy," does not constitute
sufficient cause for the suspension or revocation of the certificates in question within the
meaning of said provision.

The British minister even emphasized the fact that fact that the Philippines and the
United Kingdom, are bound by a treaty of friendship and commerce, and each nation is
represented in the other by corresponding diplomatic envoy. Hence, the Supreme Court
ruled to deny the petitioner’s request to revoke the respondent’s certificate of registration
for it can be considered valid within the realm of comity under our laws.

Interpreting the law can be quite difficult and confusing. But apparently, as citizens
of this state we are under the obligation to know and understand such laws and
regulations that govern us. In this case, the petitioner failed to investigate further about
his claim. However, in my opinion the petitioner’s mistake was understandable as the Act
did not specify such circumstance wherein a foreign accountant can practice the
profession even if there exists no reciprocity as long as there is comity.

I am in the opinion that providing a more comprehensible and thorough discussion

about certain laws will surely be of great help in clearing out confusions to the public, I
also think that the Board of Accountancy should be firm in implementing the Accountancy
Act in order to avoid circumstances like this in the future.