Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
RepublicofthePhilippines
SupremeCourt
Manila
ENBANC
INRE:EXEMPTIONOF
THE NATIONAL POWER
CORPORATION
FROM
PAYMENT
OF
FILING/
DOCKETFEES
A.M.NO.051020SC
Present:
PUNO,CJ.,
CARPIO,
CORONA,
CARPIOMORALES,
VELASCO,JR.,
NACHURA,
LEONARDODECASTRO,
BRION,
PERALTA,
BERSAMIN,
DELCASTILLO,
ABAD,
VILLARAMA,JR.,
PEREZ,and
MENDOZA,JJ.
Promulgated:
March10,2010
xx
RESOLUTION
MENDOZA,J.:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
1/7
8/9/2016
The National Power Corporation (NPC) seeks clarification from the Court on whether or not it is
exemptfromthepaymentoffilingfees,appealbondsandsupersedeasbonds.
On December 6, 2005, the Court issued A.M. No. 051020SC, In re: Exemption of the National
Power Corporation from the Payment of Filing/Docket Fees, on the basis of Section 13, Republic Act No.
6395(AnActRevisingtheCharteroftheNationalPowerCorporation).Itreads:
TheCourtResolved,upontherecommendationoftheOfficeoftheCourtAdministrator,toDECLARE
that the National Power Corporation (NPC) is still exempt from the payment of filing fees, appeals bond, and
supersedeasbonds.
OnOctober27,2009,however,theCourtissuedA.M.No.051020SCstatingthat:
TheCourtResolved,uponrecommendationoftheCommitteeontheRevisionoftheRulesofCourt,to
DENY the request of the National Power Corporation (NPC) for exemption from the payment of filing fees
pursuanttoSection10ofRepublicActNo.6395,asamendedbySection13ofPresidentialDecreeNo.938.The
requestappearstoruncountertoSection5(5),ArticleVIIIoftheConstitution,intherulemakingpowerofthe
SupremeCourtovertherulesonpleading,practiceandprocedureinallcourts,whichincludesthesolepowerto
fixthefilingfeesofcasesincourts.
Hence,thesubjectletterofNPCforclarificationastoitsexemptionfromthepaymentoffilingfeesand
courtfees.
Section22ofRule141reads:
Sec. 22. Government exempt. The Republic of the Philippines, its agencies and instrumentalities are
exempt from paying the legal fees provided in this rule. Local government units and governmentowned or
controlledcorporationswithorwithoutindependentchartersarenotexempt from paying such fees. (emphasis
supplied)
Section70ofRepublicActNo.9136(ElectricPowerIndustryReformActof2001),onprivatizationofNPC
assets,expresslystatesthattheNPCshallremainasanationalgovernmentownedandcontrolledcorporation.
Thus,NPCisnotexemptfrompaymentoffilingfees.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
2/7
8/9/2016
ThenonexemptionofNPCisfurtherfortifiedbythepromulgationonFebruary11,2010ofA.M.No.
082010, In re: Petition for Recognition of the Exemption of the Government Service Insurance System
[1]
(GSIS) from Payment of Legal Fees. In said case, the Court, citing Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice,
stressed that the 1987 Constitution took away the power of Congress to repeal, alter or supplement rules
concerningpleading,practice,andprocedureandthatthepowertopromulgatetheserulesisnolongershared
bytheCourtwithCongressandtheExecutive,thus:
SincethepaymentoflegalfeesisavitalcomponentoftherulespromulgatedbythisCourtconcerningpleading,
practiceandprocedure,itcannotbevalidlyannulled,changedormodifiedbyCongress.Asoneofthesafeguards
of this Courts institutional independence, the power to promulgate rules of pleading, practice and procedure is
nowtheCourtsexclusivedomain.That power is no longer shared by this Court with Congress, much less the
Executive.
SpeakingfortheCourt,thenAssociateJustice(nowChiefJustice)ReynatoS.Punotracedthehistoryoftherule
makingpowerofthisCourtandhighlighteditsevolutionanddevelopmentinEchegarayv.SecretaryofJustice:
Under the 1935 Constitution, the power of this Court to promulgate rules concerning pleading,
practiceandprocedurewasgrantedbutitappearedtobecoexistentwithlegislativepowerforit
wassubjecttothepowerofCongresstorepeal,alterorsupplement.Thus,itsSection13,Article
VIIIprovides:
Sec.13. The Supreme Court shall have the power to promulgate rules concerning
pleading,practiceandprocedureinallcourts,andtheadmissiontothepracticeof
law. Said rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade and shall not
diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. The existing laws on pleading,
practice,andprocedureareherebyrepealedasstatutes,andaredeclaredRulesof
Court,subjecttothepoweroftheSupremeCourttoalterandmodifythesame.The
Congressshallhavethepowertorepeal,alterorsupplementtherulesconcerning
pleading, practice and procedure, and the admission to the practice of law in the
Philippines.
xxxxxxxxx
[T]he 1973 Constitution reiterated the power of this Court to promulgate rules concerning
pleading,practice,andprocedureinallcourts,xxxwhich,however,mayberepealed,alteredor
supplementedbytheBatasangPambansaxxx.Morecompletely,Section5(2)[sic]5ofitsArticle
Xprovided:
xxxxxxxxx
Sec.5.TheSupremeCourtshallhavethefollowingpowers.
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
The 1987 Constitution molded an even stronger and more independent judiciary.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
3/7
8/9/2016
Amongothers,itenhancedtherulemakingpowerofthisCourt.ItsSection5(5),ArticleVIII
provides:
xxxxxxxxx
Section5.TheSupremeCourtshallhavethefollowingpowers.
xxxxxxxxx
TherulemakingpowerofthisCourtwasexpanded.ThisCourtforthefirsttimewasgiventhepower
to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. The Court was
also granted for the firsttimethe power to disapprove rules of procedure of special courts and quasi
judicial bodies. But most importantly, the 1987 Constitution took away the power of Congress to
repeal,alter,orsupplementrulesconcerningpleading,practiceandprocedure.Infine,thepowerto
promulgate rules of pleading, practice and procedure is no longer shared by this Court with Congress,
moresowiththeExecutive.
The separation of powers among the three coequal branches of our government has erected an
impregnablewallthatkeepsthepowertopromulgaterulesofpleading,practiceandprocedurewithinthe
soleprovinceofthisCourt.Theotherbranchestrespassuponthisprerogativeiftheyenactlawsorissue
orders that effectively repeal, alter or modify any of the procedural rules promulgated by this Court.
Viewed from this perspective, the claim of a legislative grant of exemption from the payment of legal
feesunderSection39ofRA8291necessarilyfails.
WiththeforegoingcategoricalpronouncementoftheCourt,itisclearthatNPCcannolongerinvoke
RepublicActNo.6395(NPCCharter),asamendedbyPresidentialDecreeNo.938,asitsbasisforexemption
fromthepaymentoflegalfees.
WHEREFORE,itisherebyCLARIFIEDthattheNationalPowerCorporationisnotexemptfromthe
paymentoflegalfees.
SOORDERED.
JOSECATRALMENDOZA
AssociateJustice
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
4/7
8/9/2016
WECONCUR:
REYNATOS.PUNO
ChiefJustice
ANTONIOT.CARPIORENATOC.CORONA
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
CONCHITACARPIOMORALESPRESBITEROJ.VELASCO,JR.
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
5/7
8/9/2016
ANTONIOEDUARDOB.NACHURATERESITAJ.LEONARDODECASTRO
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
ARTUROD.BRIONDIOSDADOM.PERALTA
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
LUCASP.BERSAMINMARIANOC.DELCASTILLO
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
ROBERTOA.ABADMARTINS.VILLARAMA,JR.
AssociateJusticeAssociateJustice
JOSEPORTUGALPEREZ
AssociateJustice
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
6/7
8/9/2016
[1]
361Phil.76(1999).
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/05-10-20-SC.htm
7/7