Private Counsel/Lawyers for Elective Local Officials

SALALIMA VS. GUINGONA

Facts:
- NPC filed a case against the Province of Albay questioning the validity of the auction sale, which the
Province conducted because of NPC’s failure to pay real property taxes assessed.
- The Albay Sangguniang Panlalawigan, through a resolution, authorized respondent Governor to engage
the services of a Manila-based law firm (Cortes & Reyna Law Firm) to handle the case against NPC.
Later, the Province also engaged the services of Atty. Cornago. This is despite the availability of the
Provincial Legal Officer, Atty. Ricafort, who already filed the Province’s comment on the NPC petition.
- A retainer agreement was entered into which provided that Atty. Cornago and the law firm shall receive
P50,000 as acceptance fee and 18% of the value of the property subject matter of the case which is
P214 Million.
- The province had already paid P7,380,410.31 as attorney’s fees when the COA disallowed further
disbursements for lack of the requisite prior written conformity and acquiescence of the Sol Gen and the
written concurrence of the COA as required by COA Circular No. 86-255.
- An administrative complaint was then filed against Gov. Salalima, Vice Gov. Azaña, and other Albay
Sangguniang Panlalawigan Members relative to the questioned retainer contract and the disbursement
of public funds in payment thereof.

Issue: WON respondents have incurred administrative liability in entering into the retainer agreement
with Atty. Cornago and the Cortes & Reyna Law Firm and in making payments pursuant to said
agreement

Held: YES. In hiring private lawyers to represent the Province of Albay, respondents exceeded their
authority and violated a provision of the LGC and a Supreme Court doctrine. Moreover, the entire
transaction was attended by irregularities.

Ratio:
 Sec. 481 LGC: requires the appointment of a legal officer to represent the LGU in all civil
actions and specal proceedings wherein the LGU or any official thereof, in his official capacity
is a party
o EXCEPTION: In actions or proceedings where a component city or municipality is a party
adverse to the provincial government or to another component city or municipality, a special legal
officer may be employed to represent the adverse party
 Municipality of Bocaue, et al. v. Manotok: LGUs cannot be represented by private lawyers and
it is solely the Provincial Fiscal who can rightfully represent them
 Attendant Irregularities:
o No prior written approval of the Sol Gen and COA before the disbursements were made
o The resolution passed by the Sanggunian only authorized the Governor to sign a retainer contract
with the Cortes & Reyna Law Firm and yet he also signed with Atty. Cornago, a different entity
o The Province paid the Cortes & Reyna Law Firm despite the fact that it didn’t appear as counsel
for the Province in the SC case
o Considering the standing of both Atty. Cornago the Cortes & Reyna Law Firm, the P38.5 Million
attorney’s fees is unconscionable and violative of (a) COA Circular No. 85-55-A prohibiting
irregular, unnecessary, excessive or extravagant expenditures or uses of funds; and (b) Sec. 3
(e) and (g) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

*** However, it was held that respondents could no longer be subject to disciplinary action for such
administrative misconduct as it was committed during a prior term.