Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
A. Police Power
Definition:
Police power is the inherent and plenary power of the state which enables it to prohibit
all that is hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of society. "Police power [...] has been
properly characterized as the most essential, insistent, and the least limitable of powers,
extending as it does to all the great public needs." [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel
Operators Association, Inc. v. Mayor of Manila (1967)]
"Police power, while incapable of an exact definition, has been purposely veiled general
terms to underscore its comprehensiveness to meet all exigencies and provide enough
room for an efficient and flexible response as the conditions warrant." [White Light
Corporation v. City of Manila (2009)]
“Most pervasive power”
Police Power is found in the General Welfare Clause
Cases:
Hermano Oil Manufacturing & Sugar Corporation v. Toll Regulatory Board, 742
SCRA395, G.R. No. 167290 November 26, 2014: In Mirasol v. Department of Public
Works and Highways, 490 SCRA 318 (2006), the Court has further noted that: A toll
way is not an ordinary road. As a facility designed to promote the fastest access to
certain destinations, its use, operation, and maintenance require close regulation.
Public interest and safety require the imposition of certain restrictions on toll ways that
do not apply to ordinary roads. As a special kind of road, it is but reasonable that not
all forms of transport could use it.
Carlos Superdrug Corp. v. Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD),526 SCRA 130 (2007): validity of the Senior Citizen's Act; it is a measure
under the general welfare clause.
Fernando v. St. Scholastica's College, 693 SCRA 141 (2013): the LGU cannot
compel or impose restrictions of the property rights of private persons under the guise
of exercise of police powers when it is actually taking private property without just
compensation and invades the right to privacy
Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, 737 SCRA 145 (2014): a Mayor may
exercise adjudicatory powers and order demolition of a structure, which contravenes
an ordinance in his jurisdiction.
Ferrer, Jr. v. Bautista, 760 SCRA 652 (2015): the Constitution allows local
governments to raise their own sources of revenue but the provision of a public service
is not subject to any form of tax imposition; taxes on idle lands and socialized housing
are valid but tax on garbage collection is invalid.
Expropriation Proceedings
Only the government can institute action;
Condemnation proceeding
NOTE that Expropriation is one of the harshest proceedings, which the state has
against a private party because it deprives the party of perpetual use of his property;
requisites, how just compensation is determined; relate to the Bill of Rights.
Cases:
Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, 670 SCRA 392
(2012): award of land under tenancy can be done through a natural person
orcollectively through a juridical person; a resolution of an administrative agency has
theeffect of a law and can be governed by the operative fact doctrine
Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways v. Tecson, 700SCRA
243 (2013) and Resolution dated 21 April 2015, — SCRA — (G.R.No. 179334, 21
April 2015): definition and extent of "just compensation"
Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Lozada, Sr., 613 SCRA
618(2010): limitation on the exercise of power; right of the private property owner
Republic v. Heirs of Saturnino Q. Borbon, 745 SCRA 40 (2015):the retirement of
the transmission lines necessarily stripped the expropriation proceedings of the
element of public use. To continue with the expropriation proceedings despite the
definite cessation of the public purpose of the project would result in the rendition of
an invalid judgment in favor of the expropriator due to the absence of the essential
element of public use.
Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Suntay, 662 SCRA 614, G.R. No. 188376
December 14, 2011: the enactments of the Legislature decreed that the money to be
paid to the landowner as just compensation for the taking of his land is to be taken
only from the Agrarian Reform Fund As such, the liability is not the personal liability
of Land Bank but its liability only as the administrator of the ARE In fact, Section 10,
Rule 19 of the 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure, reiterates that the satisfaction of a
judgment for just compensation by writ of execution should be from the ARF in the
custody of Land Bank
National Power Corporation v. Heirs of Macabangkit Sangkay, 656 SCRA 60
(2011): nature of public use; when is a party entitled to just compensation despite no
apparent physical taking
Export Processing Zone Authority (now Philippine Export Zone Authority) vs.
Pulido, 656 SCRA 315, G.R. No. 188995 August 24, 2011: compensation cannot be
just to the owner in the case of property that is immediately taken unless there is
prompt payment, considering that the owner thereby immediately suffers not only the
loss of his property but also the loss of its fruits or income. Thus, in addition, the
owner is entitled to legal interest from the time of the taking of the property until the
actual payment in order to place the owner in a position as good as, but not better than,
the position he was in before the taking occurred
NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. ELIZABETH MANALASTAS and
BEA CASTILLO (January 27, 2016, G.R. No. 196140): the effect of inflation in the
computation of just compensation.
vda De Ouano vs. Republic (G.R. No. 168770, 2011]: In expropriation, the private
owner is deprived of property against his will; due process ought to be strictly
followed. Public use as an eminent domain concept, has now acquired an expansive
meaning to include any use that is of "usefulness, utility or advantage or what is
productive of general benefit (of the public).
3. Power of Taxation
Definition:
Taxation is the power by which the State raises to defray the necessary expenses of the
Government. It is the enforced proportional contributions from persons and property,
levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty, for the support of the government and
for all public needs.
Not a contract between the government and its people, but an imposition.
General Rule: The power to tax operates with the same force and effect in every place where
the subject of it is found. This is known as geographical uniformity.
Exception: The rule on uniformity does not prohibit classification for purposes of taxation,
provided the requisites for valid classification are met.
[Ormoc Sugar v. Treasurer of Ormoc (1968)]
2. If statutory, it has to have been passed by majority of all the members of Congress.
[Sec.28 (4), Art. VI]
Cases:
1. Com. of Internal Revenue v. S. C Johnson & Son, Inc., 309 SCRA 87. In negotiating
tax treaties, the underlying rationale for reducing the tax rate is that the Philippines
will give up a part of the tar in the expectation that the tax given up for this particular
investment is not taxed by the other country.
In order to eliminate double taxation, a tax treaty resorts to several methods.
First, it sets out the respective rights to tax of the state of source or situs and of
the state of residence with regard to certain classes of income or capital.
The second method for the elimination of double taxation applies whenever the state of
source is given a full or limited right to tax together with the state of residence. In this
case, the treaties make it incumbent upon the state of residence to allow relief in order
to avoid double taxation
2. Philippine Health Care Providers, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 600
SCRA 413 (2009): payment of documentary taxes and VAT by way of deficiency
assessment by the BIR; contracts of HMO are not subject to DST and VAT since they
are insurance contracts and the companies issuing such policies are regulated by the
DOH
3. National Power Corporation v. City of Cabanatuan, 737 SCRA 305 (2014):
assessment of franchise tax on NAPOCOR; NAPOCOR is liable to pay franchise tax
to the LGU but LGU has the burden to specify the liability for a given period of time.
4. Nursery Care Corporation vs. Acevedo, 731 SCRA 280, G.R. No. 180651 July 30,
2014: There is double taxation when the same taxpayer is taxed twice when he should
be taxed only once for the same purpose by the same taxing authority within the same
jurisdiction during the same taxing period, and the taxes are of the same kind or
character.
Article III of the Constitution protects the following person's fundamental civil and
political rights.
(1) Civil rights - rights that belong to an individual by virtue of his citizenship in a state
or community.
(2) Political rights - rights that pertain to an individual's citizenship vis-à-vis the
management of the government.
(3) Social and economic rights - rights which are intended to insure the well-being and
economic security of the individual.
(4) Rights of the accused - civil rights intended for the protection of a person accused of
any crime.
Human rights have a primacy over property rights. The rights of free expression and of
assembly occupy a preferred position, as they are essential to the preservation and vitality of
civil institutions. The Bill of Rights is designed to preserve the ideals of liberty, equality and
security "against the assaults of opportunism, the expediency of the passing hour, the erosion
of small encroachments, and the scorn and derision of those who have no patience with
general principles."[Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine
Blooming Mills Co., Inc. (1973)]
General Rule: The Bill of Rights cannot be invoked against acts of private individuals. The
equal protection erects no shield against private conduct, however discriminatory or wrongful.
[Yrasuegui v. PAL (2008)]
Exception to the Rule: The Bill of Rights was invoked and applied by the Court against a
private party. (Zulueta v. C.A., 1996)
On the question of the constitutionality of the Anti-Terrorism Law and the creation of
the Anti-Terrorism Council:
A statute establishing a criminal offense must define the offense with sufficient
definiteness that persons of ordinary intelligence can understand what conduct
is prohibited by the statute. A statute or act may be said to be vague when it
lacks comprehensible standards that men of common intelligence must
necessarily guess at its meaning and differ in its application. The statute is
repugnant to the Constitution in two respects:
1. It violates due process for failure to accord persons, especially the parties targeted by
it, fair notice of what conduct to avoid;
2. It leaves law enforcers an unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and
becomes an arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle. [Southern Hemisphere v.
Anti-Terrorism Council (2010)]
On the question of the constitutionality of the Plunder Law:
"[This doctrine] can only be invoked against that species of legislation that is
utterly vague on its face, i.e., that which cannot be clarified either by a saving
clause or by construction. The test in determining whether a criminal statute is
void for uncertainty is whether the language conveys a sufficiently definite
warning as to the proscribed conduct. It must be stressed, however, that the
vagueness doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the
statute to be upheld — not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude."
[Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 369 SCRA 394 (2001)]
OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE:
The overbreadth doctrine decrees that "a governmental purpose may not be
achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the
area of protected freedoms." [Southern Hemisphere, supra]
Cases:
Board of Medicine v. Ota, 558 SCRA 234(2008), See Art. X.11. Sec. 14, para
2: reciprocity
Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC (2016): a foundling is a natural-born citizen;
citizenship as a qualification for government office.
People v. Marti, G.R. No. 81561, January 18, 1991: a foreigner may invoke the
right against unreasonable search and seizures.
E. Former natural born citizens as transferees of private lands, Art. XII, Sec. 8
F. Naturalized citizens: How aliens may acquire Philippine Citizenship
Judicial proceedings under Com. Act No. 473
1. Who are qualified to be naturalized? Sec. 2
2. When is the 10-year residence requirement reduced to 5 years? Sec. 3
3. Who are disqualified to be naturalized? Sec. 4
4. Declaration of Intention, Sec. 5
5. Procedure, Sections 7-8
6. When decision is executed, Sec. 1
7. Effect on wife and minor children, Sec. 15
8. Denaturalization, Sec. 18
Citizenship by legislative act: Loss and Reacquisition of Citizenship. Art. IV, Sec. 3,
Sec. 2
Citizenship through administrative process
1. Dual Citizenship: R.A. No. 9139 - The Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000
2. R.A. No. 9225 - Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003
CASES:
Notice of rules by publication as a prerequisite/ Notice to Party:
Tanada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27(Decision); 146 SCRA 446 (Resolution) &
Hon. Corona v. United Harbor Pilots, G.R. No. 111953 December 12, 1997
Procedural Due Process
o Due process in administrative proceedings
Requisites: Cases –
Mayor Abraham Tolentino v. COMELEC, et al., G.R. Nos. 187958,
187961 and187962, April 7, 2010: Pay attention to the cardinal rules of due
process in administrative proceedings.
SPO 1 Acuzar v. Jorolan and Hon. Apresa, PLEB, G.R. No. 177878, April
7, 2010: administrative proceedings require a different degree of evidence to
establish liability while a criminal case requires proof beyond reasonable doubt
Dr. Fernando A. Melendres, Executive Director of Lung Center of the
Philippines v. Presidential Anti- Graft Commission, et aL . G.R. No.
163859, August 15, 2012: administrative hearing does not require trial type
hearing; it is sufficient that the party has been notified of the complaint and
was accorded the opportunity to disprove the allegations
Agabon v. NLRC, G.R. No. 158693, November 17, 2004: in labor cases, the
two- notice rule must apply and actual notice must be proved
Effect of waiver/estoppel:
The Heirs of Jolly Bugarin v. Republic, G.R. No. 174431, August 6, 2012:
while death may extinguish criminal liability, the presentation of evidence
during the lifetime of the accused may allow government to seize properties
established to have been acquired until questionable circumstances.
Philippine Overseas Telecommunications Corporation (POTC), Philippine
Communications Satellite Corporation (PHILCOMSAT) v.
rd
Sandiganbayan (3 Division), Republic of the Philippines represented by
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), G.R. No. 174462,
February 10, 2016: effect of failure on the part of the state to implead parties
and constitutional limitation on actions involving ill-gotten wealth pursued by
the PCGG.
Right to Counsel:
1. Due process in judicial proceedings:
- Velasco v. Sandiganbayan and the People of the Philippines, a R. No. 169253,
February 20, 2013: accused cannot question the amendment of the information when
he was given the opportunity to be heard and was duly represented by counsel in the
proceedings before the Office of the Ombudsman.
2. Due process in academic and disciplinary proceedings:
- Cudia v. PMA Superintendent, G.R. No. 211362, February 24, 2015: right to
counsel is not mandatory in administrative proceedings.
3. Instances when no notice and hearing are required:
- Arroyo v. Rosal Homeowners Association, Inc., G.R. No. 175155, Oct. 22, 2012:
active participation in administrative proceedings prior to an adverse decision will
negate a claim of lack of due process; requirements for membership in an organization
must be observed
-Vivas, on his behalf and on behalf of the shareholders of EUROCREDIT
Community Bank v. The Monetary Board of the BSP and PDIC, G.R. No.
191424, August 7, 2013: notice is not required where there is a greater public interest
to protect.
4. Effect when due process is not observed:
- Winston F. Garcia v. Molina and Velasco, G.R. No. 157383, August 10, 2010:
where parties were not given the opportunity to oppose the grounds of their
suspension, the same must be declared void.
- Jardeleza v. Chief Justice Sereno and the JBC, G.R. No. 213181, August 19,
2014: due process requires the opportunity for a person to disprove the objection of
his lack of integrity to qualify as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY
All classifications made by law are generally presumed to be valid unless shown
otherwise by petitioner. [Lacson v. Executive Secretary (1999)]
BASIS FOR CLASSIFICATION:
Age,
Gender,
Religion,
Economic class,
Ethnicity,
Race,
Sexual orientation,
Residence, disability,
Date of filing/ effectivity of the law
Cases:
o Yrasuegui v. Philippine Airlines, Inc., 569 SCRA 467
(2008)
o Garcia v. Drilon, 699 SCRA 352 (2013)
o Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc., 582
SCRA 254 (2009)
o Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc. v. Cabiles,
732 SCRA 22 (2014)
o Economic Equality: Filipino First Policy: classification
based on alienage [Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil.
1165 (1957)]
o Political Equality: Dilution of voting rights based on
residence [Aquino and Robredo v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 189793, April 7, 2010]
o Exclusion based on sexual orientation: [Ang Ladlad v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 19058Z April 8, 2010]
o Social Equality: Forced resettlement based on ethnicity:
[Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, 39 Phil., 660]
o Privilege based on ethnicity: [Cruz v. NC1P, G.R. No.
135385, December 6, 2000]
Requisites
(1) When there is substantial impairment which
Changes the terms of legal contract either in time or mode of performance;
Imposes new conditions;
Dispenses with expressed conditions; or
Authorizes for its satisfaction something different from that provided in the terms.
(2) When a law affects the rights of parties with reference to each other, and not with respect
to non-parties. [Philippine Rural Electric Cooperatives Association v. Secretary, DILG,
G.R. No. 143076, June 10, 2003]
(3) EXCEPTIONS to the rule when the state may impair contracts:
a) Power of Taxation: government may increase taxes covering certain transactions
b) Regulation on loans: as a matter of public interest, the government may impose
restrictions on loans:
- Concept of Vested Right
- Waiver of Right
Cases:
Vigilar v. Aquino, G.R. No. 180388, January 18, 2011
Goldenway Merchandising Corporation v. Equitable PCI Bank, G.R. No. 195540, March
13, 2013