Practice question
A claim is governed by Administrative Code section 38(1), and no other special liability basis is asserted. The claimant alleges only that an officer’s official decision was later reversed, while the findings exclude bad faith, malice, and gross negligence. Is reversal alone enough under that stated provision?
- Every reversed official decision automatically creates personal liability.
- Good faith eliminates every claim under every possible statute.
- The reviewing court’s disagreement necessarily proves malice.
- No, section 38(1)’s specified showing is not established merely by reversal on these stipulated facts.
- The claimant automatically owns the officer’s salary.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html — Civil Code, articles 27 and32.
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/48330 — Vinzons-Chato v Fortune Tobacco, GR 141309, December 23 2008, main resolution: particular legal injury and public duty.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jun2024/gr_234680_2024.html — Supreme Court GR 234680, June 2024, main opinion: Administrative Code Book I section 38.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.