Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

Case List for Fundamental Principles and State Policies

1. Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association v. Health Secretary, G.R. No. 173034, 09 October 2007
Milk Code

2. Mijares v. Ranada, 12 April 2005


- other actions not involving property and not unable of pecuniary estimation
3. Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195
- 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals; the power to describe regulations to
promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order, and general welfare of the people object is
public safety
4. Ang LADLAD LGBT Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190582, 08 April 2010
- petitioner does not have a concrete and genuine national political agenda to benefit the nation
and that the petition was validly dismissed on moral grounds because it is moral disapproval; Article III,
Section 5 that no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof
- Ang Ladlad invoked Yogyakarta principles but the SC held that these principles are just soft law
since the 2 elements (see below) of generally accepted principles of customary law are lacking.
5.Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. Nos. 204819 204934, 204957,204988, 205003, 205043, 205138, 205478, 205491
, 205720, 206355, 207111,207172&207563, 08 April 2015
- No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any
person be denied the equal protection of the laws. There was no deprivation of life since contraceptives
are not abortifacient and therefore does not end life as it merely prevents the meeting of the ovum and
the sperm.

6. Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 1155

The equal protection of the law clause does not demand absolute equality amongst residents; it
merely requires that all persons shall be treated alike, under like circumstances and conditions both as to
privileges conferred and liabilities enforced; and, that the equal protection clause is not infringed by
legislation which applies only to those persons falling within a specified class, if it applies alike to all
persons within such class, and reasonable grounds exist for making a distinction between those who fall
within such class and those who do not.

For the sake of argument, even if it would be assumed that a treaty would be in conflict with a statute
then the statute must be upheld because it represented an exercise of the police power which, being
inherent could not be bargained away or surrendered through the medium of a treaty.

7. Bayan Muna v. Romulo, G.R. No. 159618, 01 February 2011


- exchange of notes is an internationally accepted form of international agreement; exchange of
notes = intergovernmental agreement.

8. The Province of North Cotabato v. The Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on
Ancestral Domains, G.R. No. 183591, 14 October 2008 see previous notes

9. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. v. NLRC, 247 Phil. 641


10. United Church of Christ in the Philippines v. Bradford United Church of Christ, Inc., G.R. No. 171905,
20 June 2012 - The issue is not a purely ecclesiastical affair. An ecclesiastical affair is one that concerns doctrine,
creed or form of worship of the church, or the adoption and enforcement within a religious association of
needful laws and regulations for the government of the membership, and the power of excluding from such
associations those deemed unworthy of membership. UCCP and BUCCI, being corporate entities and
grantees of primary franchises, are subject to the jurisdiction of the SEC

11. Espina v. Zamora, G.R. No. 143855, 21 September 2010

12. Gamboa v. Finance Secretary, G.R. No. 176579, 28 June 2011 - the term capital in Section 11,
Article XII of the 1987 Constitution refers only to shares of stock entitled to vote in the election
of directors, and thus in the present case only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding
capital stock (common and non-voting preferred shares).

13. Marynette R. Gamboa v. P/SSPT Marlou C. Chan and P/Supt. William O. Fang, G.R. No. 193636, 24 July
2012

14. Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, 30 July 1993 - The granting of license does not create
irrevocable rights, neither is it property or property rights. Moreover, the constitutional guaranty
of non-impairment of obligations of contract is limit by the exercise by the police power of the
State, in the interest of public health, safety, moral and general welfare. In short, the non-
impairment clause must yield to the police power of the State

15. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. Phil. Multi-Media Inc., G.R. Nos. 175769-70, 19 July 2009 - ,
radio and television waves are mere franchised which may be reasonably burdened with

16. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 - the State may regulate and even proscribe abortion, except where
necessary for the preservation of the mothers life, based upon the States interest in the potential
life of the unborn child.

17. Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)

18. Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS - in the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering
the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.
When the Constitution speaks of national patrimony, it refers not only to the natural resources of
the Philippines, as the Constitution could have very well used the term natural resources, but also
to the cultural heritage of the Filipinos. It also refers to Filipinos intelligence in arts, sciences and
letters

19. Pamatong v. COMELEC

20. Timbol v. COMELEC

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen