Grou

p#

Topic and Cases

Article VI: The Legislative Department
Section 1. Legislative Power; Non-Delegation
Who may exercise legislative power?
1. Congress
2. Regional/Local legislative power
3. Peoples initiative on statutes
a) Initiative and referendum
4. The President under a martial law rule or in a revolutionary government
General Rule: Non-Delegation of Legislative Power
Exception;
Delegation to local governments and administrative bodies
Grant of Quasi-Legislative Power; In general: LGU and Administrative Bodies
Rubi v.Provincial Board of Mindoro 39 Phil. 660
Antipolo Realty Corp. v. NHA 153 SCRA 399
PITC v. Angales, GR 108461
Atitiw v. Zamora 471 SCRA 329
SEC v. Interport 567 SCRA 354 // In instances allowed by the Constitution, e,g., Article VI, Section 23(2) and
28(2)
Issue on Delegation of Legislative Power
Valid delegation
Requisite of a valid delegation
Agustin v. Edu 88 SCRA 1
Free Telephone Workers v. Min. of Labor 108 SCRA 757
Guingona v. Carague 196 SCRA 221
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014
Complete in Itself
Arena v. Gatmaitan 101 Phil 328
Marcos v. CA 278 SCRA 696
Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drug Board 570 SCRA 410
Pacific Steam v. LLDA 608 SCRA 442

Topic Case
#
#
42

43

44
45
46
47
75
76
77
78
79
48
49
50
80
81
82
83
51
84
85
86
87

Fixes a Standard

52
People v. Rosenthal 68 Phil 628
Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA 166 SCRA 533
Tablarin v. Gutierez 152 SCRA 730
Conference v. POEA 243 SCRA 666
Osmea v. Orbos 220 SCRA 703
Viola v. Alunan 277 SCRA 409
Abakada v. Ermita 469 SCRA 1
Beltran v. Secretary of Health 476 SCRA 168
Bayan v. Ermita 488 SCRA 226
Abakada v. Purisima, 562 SCRA 251 (2008)

7
Filling in the Details

53
Fernandez v. Sto. Tomas, 242 SCRA 192
Chiongbian v. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253
Rodrigo v. Sandiganbayan, 309 SCRA 661
Tondo Medical v. CA, 527 SCRA 746 (2007)
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary, 677 SCRA 408 (2012)
Arroyo v. DOJ, 681 SCRA 181 (2012)

1
Undue Delegation

2
3

88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
54

People v. Vera, 65 PHIL 56

US v. Barrias, 11 SCRA 327 (1908)
US v. Panlilio, 28 PHIL 608 (1914)
People v. Maceren, 79 SCRA 450 (1977)
People v. Dacuycuy, 173 SCRA 90 (1989)
Cebu Oxygen v. Drilon, 176 SCRA 24 (1989)
Ynot v. IAC, 148 SCRA 659 (1987)
Pharmaceutical v. DOH (2007)
Abakada v. Purisima
Philippine Coconut v. Republic, GR 178193, January 24, 2012
Executive Misapplication

104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
55

Tatad v. Secretary DOE, 281 SCRA 330 (1997) and MR 282 SCRA 337 (1997)
Mere Directive

114
56

Dagan v. PRC, 578 SCRA 585 (2009)

5
6

Section 2. Senate Composition

Section 3. Qualifications of Senator
Section 4. Senator: Term of Office; Voluntary Renunciation
Section 5. Composition of the House of Representatives; Apportionment; Party List
Par. 2; Party-List Representation
Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC GR 147589
Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC GR 136781
AKLAT v. COMELEC 427 SCRA 712
Partido ng Manggagawa v. COMELEC 484 SCRA 671
Citizens v. COMELEC 521 SCRA 524
Bantay v. COMELEC 523 SCRA 1
Phil. Guardians v. COMELEC GR 190529
BANAT v. COMELEC 586 SCRA 210
Albayon v. COMELEC GR 189466
Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC GR 190582
Layug v. COMELEC 666 SCRA 321
Magdalo c. COMELEC 673 SCRA 651
Atong Paglaum et. al., GR 203766, April 12, 2013
Pars. 1,3, and 4; Rules on Apportionment
Reapportionment through Special Law
Tobias v. Abalos 239 SCRA 106
Mariano v. COMELEC 242 SCRA 211
Sema v. COMELEC 558 SCRA 700
Rules on Apportionment
(1) In accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and
progressive ratio
Montejo v. COMELEC 242 SCRA 415
Herrera v. COMELEC GR 131499, November 17, 1999
(2) Contiguous, compact and adjacent territory
(3) Population size
Samson v. Aguirre 315 SCRA 53

115
57
58
59
60
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
61
129
130
131
62
63
132
133
64
65
134

Herrera v. COMELEC GR 131499, November 17, 1999

Aldaba v. COMELEC GR 188078, January 25, 2010
Aquino v. COMELEC GR 189793, April 17, 2010
Navarro v. Ermita GR 180050, April 12, 2011
(4) Following the return of every census, Congress shall make a reapportionment
Bagabuyo v. COMELEC GR 176970
Section 6. Qualifications of Representatives
Citizenship
Bengzon v. Cruz, GR 142840, May 7, 2001

66

Domicile and Residence

69

139
67
68
140

Aquino v. COMELEC, 243 SCRA 400 (1995)

Marcos v. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 300 (1995)
Domino v. COMELEC, GR 134015 (July 19, 1999)
Perez v. COMELEC, GR 133944, October 28, 1999
Fernandez v. HRET, 608 SCRA 733 (2009)

7
Additional Qualifications

1
2

135
136
137
138

Maquera v. Borra, 15 SCRA 7

Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board, GR No. 157870, November 3, 2008
Section 7. Term of Representatives
Dimaporo v. Mitra, 202 SCRA 779
Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387 (Dec. 10, 2003)
Quinto v. COMELEC, GR No. 189698, December 1, 2009
Section 8.Regular Elections
Codilla v. De Venecia GR No. 150605, December 10, 2002
Section 9. Special Elections
Tolentino v. COMELEC, GR 148334, January 21, 2004
Section 10. Salaries
Philconsa v. Mathay, 18 SCRA 300 (1966)
Section 11. Privilege from Arrest; Parliamentary Freedom of Speech
Privilege from Arrest
People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689

141
142
143
144
145
70
146
147
71
148
149
150
72
151
73
152
74
153
75
154

3
4

Trillanes v. Pimentel, 556 SCRA 471

Belgica v. ES 2013: The Court agrees with petitioners that the phrase "and for such other purposes as may
be hereafter directed by the President" under Section 8 of PD 910 constitutes an undue delegation of
legislative power insofar as it does not lay down a sufficient standard to adequately determine the limits of
the Presidents authority with respect to the purpose for which the Malampaya Funds may be used. As it
reads, the said phrase gives the President wide latitude to use the Malampaya Funds for any other purpose
he may direct and, in effect, allows him to unilaterally appropriate public funds beyond the purview of the
law.
Parliamentary Freedom of Speech
Jimenez v. Cabangbang, 17 SCRA 876 (1966)
Antonino v. Valencia, 57 SCRA 70
Pobre v. Defensor Santiago, AC No. 7399, August 25, 2009
Section 12. Disclosure of Financial and Business Interests
Section 13. Prohibitions on Members of Congress
Liban v. Gordon, GR No. 175352, July 15, 2009
Section 14. Prohibitions Related to the Practice of Profession
Puyat v. De Guzman, 113 SCRA 31
Section 15. Regular Session; Special Session
Section 16. Officers of Congress; Quorom; Discipline; Journal/Records
Officers of Congress
Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona GR 134577 November 18, 1998
Meaning of a quorum to do business and compulsion to attend
Avelino v. Cuenco - 83 Phil. 17 [1949]
People v. Jalosjos - 324 SCRA 689
Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011
Internal Rules and Discipline
Arroyo v. De Venecia - 277 SCRA 268 [1997]
Osmea v. Pendatun- 109 Phil. 863 [1960]
Santiago v. Sandiganbayan 356 SCRA 636
Duty to Keep Journals and Records
US v. Pons 34 Phil. 729 [1916]
Casco Phil. Commercial Co. v. Gimenez - 7 SCRA 347 [1963]

155

156

76
157
158
159
77
78
160
79
161
80
81
82
162
83
163
164
165
84
166
167
168
85
169
170

Morales v. Subido 27 SCRA 131 [1969]

Astorga v. Villegas 56 SCRA 714 [1974]
Phil. Judges Assn. v. Prado -227 SCRA 703
Abakada v. Ermita 469 SCRA 1
Section 17. Electoral Tribunal
Jurisdiction of Electoral Tribunal
Nature and Power
5

7
1

Angara v. Electoral Commission 63 Phil. 134 [1936]

Pre-proclamation controversies v. Election Contests; Scope of inquiry ; When Proper Election Contest
Vera v. Avelino 77 Phil. 192 [1946]
Roces v. HRET 469 SCRA 681 [2005]
Seneres v. COMELEC 585 SCRA 557 [2009]
Limkaichong v. COMELEC 594 SCRA 434 [2009]
Aquino v. COMELEC -243 SCRA 400 [1995]
Perez v. COMELEC GR 133944, October 28, 1999
Aggabao v. COMELEC 449 SCRA 400 [2005]
Barbers v. COMELEC 460 SCRA 569 [2005]
Rasul v. COMELEC GR 134142, August 24, 1999
Guerero v. COMELEC GR 137004, July 26, 2000
Villarosa v. HRET GR 143351, September 14, 2000
Abayon v. HRET GR 189466, February 11, 2010
Garcia v. HRET GR 134792, August 12, 1999
Pre-proclamation controversy
Chavez v. COMELEC 211 SCRA 315 [1991]
Composition
Abbas v. SET 166 SCRA 651 [1988]
Pimentel v. HRET GR 141489, November 29, 2002
Independence
Bondoc v. Pineda 201 SCRA 792 [1991]
Action/Decision
Robles v. HRET 181 SCRA 780 [1990]
Arroyo v. HRET 246 SCRA 384 [1995]

171
172
173
174
86
87
88
175
89
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
90
189
91
190
191
92
192
93
193
194

Lerias v. HRET 202 SCRA 808 [1991]

Sandoval v. HRET GR 149380, July 3, 2002
Lokin v. COMELEC GR 179431-32
Sema v. HRET GR 190734, March 26, 2010
Duenas v. HRET 593 SCRA 316 [2010]
Section 18. Commission on Appointments

195
196
197
198
199
94

Daza v. Singson, 180 SCRA 496 (1989)

Coseteng v. Mitra, 187 SCRA 377 (1990)
Guingona v. Gonzales, 214 SCRA 789 (1992); MR, 219 SCRA 326 (1993)
Drilon, et al v. Speaker, GR No. 180055, July 31, 2009
Section 19. Constitutions of the Electoral Tribunal and the Commission on Appointments
Section 20. Records and Books of Accounts
Section 21. Inquiries in Aid of Legislation
Power of Inquiry
Senate v. Ermita- 488 SCRA 1 [2006]
Gudani v. Senga- 498 SCRA 671 [2006]
Nature and Essence
Neg. O. II Elec. Coop. v. Sangguniang Panlungsod- 155 SCRA 421 [1991]
Requisites
Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee- 203 SCRA 767

200
201
202
203
96
97
98
99
204
205
100
206
101
207

3
1. In aid of legislation

102
Standard v. Senate- 541 SCRA 456 [2007]
De la Paz v. Senate- 579 SCRA 521 [2009]
Romero v. Estrada- 583 SCRA 396 [2009]

4
5

2. In Accordance with Duly Published Rules of Procedure

Garcillano v. House- GR 170338, December 23, 2008
3. Respect for the Rights of Persons Appearing In or Affected by Such Inquires
Neri v. Senate- 564 SCRA 152 [2008]
Power to Punish a Person Under Investigation
Arnault v. Nazareno- 87 PHIL. 25 [1950]

208
209
210
103
211
104
212
105
213

Sabio v. Gordon- 504 SCRA 704 [2006]

Sec. 22 Appearance of Heads of Departments in Congress

214
106

Senate v. Ermita- 488 SCRA 1 [2006]

Belgica v. Executive Secretary 2013: (Quoting Abakada case) Any post-enactment congressional measure x
x x should be limited to scrutiny and investigation.1wphi1 In particular, congressional oversight must be
confined to the following:(1) scrutiny based primarily on Congress power of appropriation and the budget
hearings conducted in connection with it, its power to ask heads of departments to appear before and be
heard by either of its Houses on any matter pertaining to their departments and its power of confirmation;
and (2) investigation and monitoring of the implementation of laws pursuant to the power of Congress to
conduct inquiries in aid of legislation. Any action or step beyond that will undermine the separation of
powers guaranteed by the Constitution.
Sec. 23. Declaration of a State of War; Emergency Powers
Delegation of Emergency Powers
SANLAKAS v. Executive Secretary, 421 SCRA 656 [2004]
Ampatuan v. Hon. DILG Sec. Puno, GR 190259, June 7, 2011
Sec. 24. Bills Originating in the House of Representatives

215

216

107
108
217
218
109

Guingona v. Carague- 196 SCRA 221 [1991]

Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance- 235 SCRA 630 [1994]
Alvarez v. Guingona- 292 SCRA 695 [1998]
Southern Cross Cement v. Phil. Cement, GR 158540, July 8, 2004

219
220
221
222

6
Appropriation of Public Revenue for Public Purpose
Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works- 110 PHIL. 331 [1960-1961]

110

Sec. 25. Rules on Appropriation

111

Limits on Power to Appropriate

112

223

Brillantes v. Comelec, GR 163193, June 15, 2004

7
1

Prohibition of Increase
Prohibition on riders in appropriation bills

224
113
114

Garcia v. Mata- 65 SCRA [1975]

Atitiw v. Zamora, GR 143374, Sept. 30, 2005
Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387, Dec. 10, 2003
Transfer of Funds

225
226
227
115

Demetria v. Alba- 148 SCRA 208 [1987]

Liga v. COMELEC- 232 SCRA 219 [1994]
Nazareth v. Villar, G.R. No. 188635, 29 January 2013, 689 SCRA 385
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 196425, 24 July 2012, 677 SCRA 408
Philconsa v. Enriquez- 235 SCRA 506
Sanchez v. COA- 552 SCRA 471
Araullo v. President Aquino III, GR No. 209287, July 1, 2014

228
229
230
231
232
233
234

2
Sec. 26.Subject and Title of Bills; Three Readings
General Prohibition of Riders

3
4

Cordero v. Cabatuando- 6 SCRA 418 [1962]

Philconsa v. Gimenez- 15 SCRA 479 [1965]
Alalayan v. NPC- 24 SCRA 172 [1968]
Insular Lumber Company v. CTA- 104 SCRA 710 [1981]
Tio v. Vediogram Regulatory Board- 151 SCRA 208 [1987]
Phil. Judges Assn. v. Prado- 227 SCRA 703 [1993]
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance- 235 SCRA 630 [1994]
Tobias v. Abalos- 239 SCRA 106 [1994]
Tatad v. Sec. of DOE- 281 SCRA 330 [1997]
De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 146319, October 26, 2001
Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1 and MR [Sept. 1, 2005 & Oct. 18, 2005]
BANAT v. COMELEC- 595 SCR 477 [2009]
Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014
Sec. 27. Procedure in Passage of Bills; Item Veto
Passage of Bills
Arroyo v. De Venecia, 277 SCRA 268 [1997]

116
117
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
118
119
249

Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1

Presidential Veto

120
CIR v .CTAGonzales v. MacaraigBengzon v. DrilonPhilconsa v. Enriquez-

5
6

250

185
191
208
235

SCRA
SCRA
SCRA
SCRA

329
452
133
506

[1990]
[1990]
[1992]
[1994]

Item Veto
Belgica v. ES, 2013: For the President to exercise his item-veto power, it necessarily follows that there
exists a proper "item" which may be the object of the veto. An item of appropriation must be an item
characterized by singular correspondence meaning an allocation of a specified singular amount for a
specified singular purpose, otherwise known as a "line-item." 211 This treatment not only allows the item to
be consistent with its definition as a "specific appropriation of money" but also ensures that the President
may discernibly veto the same. what beckons constitutional infirmity are appropriations which merely
provide for a singular lump-sum amount to be tapped as a source of funding for multiple purposes. Since
such appropriation type necessitates the further determination of both the actual amount to be expended
and the actual purpose of the appropriation which must still be chosen from the multiple purposes stated in
the law, it cannot be said that the appropriation law already indicates a "specific appropriation of money
and hence, without a proper line-item which the President may veto
Sec. 28. Taxation
Scope and Purpose
Planters v. Fertiphil- 548 SCRA 485
Limitations on the Power: Uniform and Equitable
CIR v. CA- 261 SCRA 236 [1996]
CIR v. Lingayen Gulf 164 SCRA 27
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance- 235 SCRA 506
Tan v. Del Rosario- 237 SCRA 324 [1994]
Progressive System
Delegated Tax Legislation
Southern Cross Cement v. Phil. Cement, GR 158540, July 8, 2004
Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1 [2005]
Spouses Constantino v. Cuisia, GR 106064, Oct. 13. 2005

251
252
253
254
121

255

122
123
256
124
257
258
259
260
125
261
262
263
264

Exemptions

126

Abra Valley College v. Aquino- 162 SCRA 106 [1988]

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10,2000
Republic v. City of Kidapawan- 477 SCRA 324 [2005]
John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR 119775, Oct. 24, 2003
Lung Center v. QC, GR 144104, June 29, 2004
Sec. 29. Fiscal Powers of Congress; Limitations; Special Funds

265
266
267
269
270
128

Fiscal Powers of Congress

129
Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works- 110 PHIL. 331 [1960-1961]
MIAA v. Mabunay- GR 126151, January 20, 2000
Guingona v. Carague- 169 SCRA 221 [1991]
COMELEC v. Hon. Quijano- GR 151992, September 18, 2002
Araullo v. President Aquino III, GR No. 209287, July 1, 2014

7
Special Funds

271
272
273
274
275
130

Gaston v. Republic Planters Bank- 158 SCRA 626 [1988]

Osmena v. Orbos- 220 SCRA 703 [1993]
Philippine Coconut v. Republic- 663 SCRA 514 [2012]
Sec. 30. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

131
First Lepanto Ceramics v. CA- 237 SCRA 519 [1994]
Diaz v. CA- 238 SCRA 785 [1994]
Fabian v. Desierto, GR 129742, September 16, 1998
Villavert v. Desierto, 326 SCRA 355 [2000]
Tirol v. COA, GR 133954, August 3, 2000
Cabrera v. Lapid- 510 SCRA 55 [2006]

1
Sec. 31. Titles of Royalty and Nobility
Sec. 32. Initiative and Referendum

276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
384
132
133

Garcia v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 279 (1994)

SBMA v. COMELEC- 262 SCRA 492 [1996]
Defensor- Santiago v. COMELEC- 270 SCRA 106 [1997]
Lambino v. COMELEC, GR 174153, GR 174299, October 25, 2006

385
386
387
388

xxxxx