Dominic Oswald C.

Halili
Recent Jurisprudence
CIVIL LAW CASE DIGEST

ELIZABETH DIAZ V. ENCANTO, ET AL.

G.R. NO. 171303
JANUARY 20, 2016

DOCTRINE: Good faith is always presumed. Bad faith is never presumed, for
whoever alleges bad faith has the burden of proving it.

FACTS: A professor at the University of the Philippines applied for a

sabbatical leave with pay, but it was denied. This issue was brought to court
where there was a finding that the grant or denial of such leave is not a
matter of right as it is subject to the exigencies of the service, like acute
shortage of teaching staff. Even the Office of the Ombudsman has similar
findings with the CA that the grant of leave is not a matter of right and that
there was no bad faith on the part of the officials of the UP in denying it. Yet,
before the SC, the applicant insisted that the concerned officials acted in bad
faith. Sustaining the findings of the CA and the Ombudsman, the SC.

ISSUES: Whether the denial of the sabbatical leave was attended by bad faith?

HELD: No. There are no traces of bad faith or malice in denying the
application for sabbatical leave. They processed the application in accordance
with their usual procedure. While the RTC declared that petitioner Diaz
should have been granted a sabbatical leave, it is important to note that the
RTC awarded damages to petitioner Diaz merely for the unreasonable and
unconscionable delay in the resolution of her sabbatical leave application. It
is an elementary rule in this jurisdiction that good faith is presumed and
that the burden of proving bad faith rests upon the party alleging the
same.