EDA MARIE L.

ENCLONAR

ENRIQUEZ VS. HON. GIMENEZ

107 Phil. 933

FACTS:
On 2 June 1956 the municipal mayor of Bauan, Batangas wrote a letter to Julio Enriquez, Sr.   (petitioner)
engaging his services as counsel for the municipality in its contemplated action against the  National
Waterworks and Sewerage Authority. This is after the fact that the provincial fiscal of the   municipality
declined to represent such in an action to be brought against NWSA to test the validity and   constitutionality
of the Act creating it. On 28 June 1956 the petitioner accepted the offer and filed the   necessary complaint in
the Court of First Instance of Batangas. Petitioner requested a reimbursement of  P40.00 for docket fee and
P500.00 as initial attorney’s fee. On 24 June 1957 the Auditor General, herein  respondent, disallowed in audit
the petitioner’s claim for initial attorney’s fee but offered no objection to  the refund of docket fee. 

ISSUE/S:
Whether of not the Auditor General erred in disallowing the reimbursement of the initial attorneys’  fee  

RULING:
No. Bias or prejudice and animosity or hostility on the part of a fiscal not based on any of the 
conditions enumerated in the law and the Rules of Court do not constitute a legal and valid excuse
for  inhibition or disqualification. And unlike a practicing lawyer who has the right to decline
employment, a  fiscal cannot refuse the performance of his action and functions on grounds not
provided for by law without  violating his oath of office, where he swore, among other, “that he will
well and faithfully discharge to the  best of his ability the duties of the office or position upon which
he is about to enter….”