TOLENTINO V. BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY, G.R. NO.

L-3062, SEPTEMBER 28, 1951

FACTS

An action for declaratory relief was filed in the CFI by X, a Filipino CPA against the Board
of Accountancy and two foreign nationals A and B, also CPAs practicing the profession
under a trade name AB, and that the provision in the Philippine Accountancy Law as
amended authorizing accountants to practice their profession under a trade name is
unconstitutional on the ground that it excludes persons engaged in other professions from
adopting or using a trade name, hence it is a class legislation. In the defendants’ answer,
they allege that the plaintiff has no right or interest adversely affected by the said
Accountancy Law and that he is entitled to the benefits and may use a trade name or
firm name in the practice of his profession as accountant.

The defendant Board of Accountancy did not appear or answer notwithstanding service
of summons upon it and upon the Solicitor General. By agreement of the parties, the case
was submitted for decision upon the pleadings presented and the memoranda filed by
the parties. The CFI dismissed the complaint holding that the disputed law is not
unconstitutional. From that decision the plaintiff appealed to this Court.

Is the CFI correct in dismissing the complaint?

Answer:

Yes.

The law provides under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court which authorizes the institution of an
action for declaratory relief, enumerates the requisite facts or conditions for an Action for
Declaratory Relief; (1) there must be a justiciable controversy; (2) the controversy must
be between persons whose interests are adverse; (3) the party seeking declaratory relief
must have a legal interest in the controversy; and (4) the issue involved must be ripe for
judicial determination.

In this case, X has no actual justiciable controversy against the Board which may give
him the right to secure relief by asserting the unconstitutionality of the law in question. He
does not claim having suffered any prejudice or damage to him or to his rights or
prerogatives as an accountant by the use of the disputed firm name by the defendants.
Requisite facts or conditions for an Action for Declaratory Relief is lacking.

Therefore, the complaint must fail for lack of sufficient cause of action.