EQUAL PROTECTION

CASE

CLASSIFICATION
MADE

Dumlao v. COMELEC
Disqualified 65 year-old
public officials from
running for the same
position wherein they
retired or served last

People v. Cayat
Prohibition on nonChristians from
possessing and drinking
alcoholic beverages

Ormoc Sugar v. Ormoc

Philippine Judges
Assoc. v Prado

Biraogo v. Truth
Commission

Tax imposition on
Ormoc Sugar, being the
only sugar miller in the
place
Removal of franking
privileges from the
Judiciary

Subjected the previous

Arroyo administration
under the scrutiny of the

STATE INTEREST

INVALID/VALID

To promote young
blood in government
service

VALID

To promote peace and

order in the nonChristian tribes so as to
hasten their intellectual
growth and assimilation
with the rest of the
Christians

VALID
A) real substantial
distinctions (civilized
and uncivilized),
B) germane to the
purposes of the law
(assimilation of tribes to
civilized life),
C) must not be limited
to existing condition
only (civilizing tribes =
long term since
assimilation os a slow
process/for as long as
conditions exist),
D) must apply equally
to all members of the
same class (law applies
to all tribes, no
distinction to degree of
culture)
INV
(X) C

Because they use it too

much

INV
(X)
Placed the courts in a
category where it
doesnt belong
INV
(X) C

-Info on past
administration most
readily available

Truth Commission

-Its impact most felt by

the current
administration
-President has the
discretion to subject
other admin.
-Similar to other factfinding bodies in the
past

Directed solely against

the corrupt and graft
practices during the
Arroyo administration.
E.O No.1 did not
include the cases of
other past
administrations which
can result to
arbitrariness and
violation of the class
(past administrations)
which the test of
reasonableness requires.

Serrano v. Gallant
Maritime Services

3 month cap for OFWs

with remaining
employment period of
more than a year;
Salary for the remaining
period for OFWs whose
remaining period of
employment is less than
a year

For the promotion of

placement agencies

ABAKADA Guro v.
Purisima

Incentives for BOC and

BIR officials for
reaching their target
revenue

To optimize the
revenue-generation
capability and collection
of the BIR and the
Bureau of Customs
(BOC

INVALID
-Suspect classification
-No compelling State
interest; property rights
cant rise above
compelling State
interest
-There are less
restrictive means
(POEA Rules and
Regulations)
VALID
- EP clause does not
forbid discrimination as
to things that are
different. It allows
classification.
- A) and B)
Both the BIR and the
BOC are under the
DOF. They perform the
special function of being
the instrumentalities
through which the State
exercises one of its
inherent functions
taxation

COMELEC v. Cruz

Distinguished barangay
officials from the rest of

VALID
-Constitution

the elective government

officials re the 3
consecutive term limits;

Quinto v. COMELEC

Garcia v. Drilon

Law considered
appointive officials to
have resigned upon the
filing of their COCs;
whereas elective
officials shall not be
considered resigned
upon filing

VAWCC as granting
special protection to
women in prejudice of
the men

Efficient civil service

faithful to the
government and the
people rather than to a
party

Avoidance of
the appearance of
political justice as to
policy

Avoidance of
the danger of a powerful
political machine

Ensuring that
employees achieve
advancement on their
merits and that they be
free from both coercion
and the prospect of
favor from political
activity

Laws purpose is to
criminalize acts of
violence against women
and children

distinguished them from

other elective officials.
-No differential
treatment because
proviso doesnt involve
retroactive application
-Previous laws already
set the same rule; not
new
VALID
- classification is
germane to the purposes
of the law.
A legislative measure
doesnt have to be a
panacea to all harm in
order for it to be valid.
The legislature may
proceed one-step or to
regulate one step at a
time at a time in
resolving societal
concern.
Not violative of the
EPC because they
substantially serve
governmental interest:
-Ones right to run for
office does not
constitute freedom of
expression of political
views. Hence,
RATIONAL BASIS test
and there was failure on
petitioners part to
prove.
VALID
A) Unequal power
relationship; gender bias
and prejudice = real
differences
B) Guaranteed by the

UDHR, etc.
C) by the use of any
person, a gender-neutral
word; nothing in the law
is vaguely defined so as
to turn every marriage
spats into spousal abuse;
VAGUE DOC. Only
requires reasonable
degree of certainty , not
precision