THE Court of Appeals has junked the petition of former Justice undersecretary Jose Vicente Salazar questioning a Manila court’s order that he stand trial for breach of contract and damages lodged by a private company in connection with the unpaid payments for the production of public awareness shows against human trafficking.
In a decision dated September 16, the appellate court’s Special Second Division said Branch 17 and Branch 20 of the Manila Regional Trial Court did not commit grave abuse of discretion when it denied Salazar’s motion to dismiss the complaint.
The complaint was filed by Wall City Entertainment, Incorporated against him and the Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking and IACAT-member agencies.
“The term grave abuse of discretion has a specific meaning. It means either that the judicial or quasi-judicial power was exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, or that the respondent judge, tribunal or board evaded a positive duty, or virtually refused to perform the duty enjoined or to act in contemplacion, such as when such judge, tribunal or board exercising judicial or quasi-judicial powers acted in a capricious or whimsical manner as to be equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. This is not the case here,” the decision penned by Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta said.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Pablito Perez and Roberto Quiroz.
“Wherefore, the petition is denied for lack of merit,” the CA added.
The decision stemmed from a complaint filed by Wall City, a company engaged in multi-media production and established by Intramuros-based JS Contractor, Inc., a company engaged in the recruitment and deployment of overseas Filipino workers, on December 6, 2017 accusing Salazar, IACAT and member-agencies of breach of contract after IACAT paid just P429,750 for expenses incurred in the production of shows for the IACAT TV operations.
In February 2017, then Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II refused to pay, arguing that under the memorandum of agreement, the implementation of IACAT TV would be at no cost to IACAT and the conduct of promotional activities was subject to prior approval of its member-agencies.
As DOJ undersecretary and undersecretary in-charge of IACAT, Salazar invited Wall City to present its concept on promotional shows against human trafficking and signed the MOA with Wall City.
Salazar, according to the complaint, also gave assurances that IACAT member-agencies would cooperate and fulfill their obligations under the MOA.
In defense, Salazar argued the complaint failed to state a cause of action against him, that he could not be held personally liable under the MOA since he acted in good faith and within the scope of his authority, and that he did not violate Wall City’s legal right nor did he fail to perform any correlative obligation.
Salazar, who left the DOJ on August 5, 2015, added he was not personally liable for the alleged breach of contract as he only acted within the scope of his authority as IACAT representative.
He said he never told Wall City that he could compel IACAT member-agencies to comply with the MOA nor did he commit any misrepresentation that would warrant the award of actual, moral, and exemplary damages to Wall City.
But Branch 17 of the Manila RTC denied Salazar’s motion to junk the complaint while Branch 10 later reaffirmed the finding that he is a real party-in-interest in the case.
This prompted the former DOJ official to elevate the case to the CA.
But the appellate court dismissed his arguments, saying that a perusal of the material allegations in the complaint readily shows the cause of action against him for breach of contract.
