Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Woodward
[I tried to make a digest but the case was too long, sorry]
FACTS:
Eleazar Wheelock set up an Indian charity school, with
the help of several established Americans, clothed,
maintained and educated a number of children of the
Indian natives, with a view of carrying the Gospel and
spreading the word of God. The school became reputable
among Indians in such a way that a vast number of
Indians would want their children to study in his institution
although his personal finances and estate could no
longer handle the same. Wheelock thought that the
undertaking should be accomplished by collecting funds
from well-off individuals from England. Wheelock
requested Reverend Nathaniel Whitacker for that purpose
and gave him a special power of attorney to solicit from
the worthy and generous contributors for the cause.
Eventually, Whitacker appointed several persons to be
trustees for the funds collected through a deed of trust
ratified and executed by Whitacker. Through the efforts of
the trustees alongside Wheelock and Whitacker,
Dartmouth College has been instituted with the Trustees
of Dartmouth College. Any heirs of the Trustees, as
granted by the courts, will be part of the body politic for
the furtherance of Darthmouth College.
seen more than once that the public welfare may call
upon the best citizens for their lives. It is better for all the
world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate
offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility,
society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from
continuing their kind.
FACTS:
the
population
control
program
of
the
day
10354 as unconstitutional
Factual Antecedents
December 21, 2012: Congress enacted RA No.
10354
also
known
as
the
Responsible
filed.
March 15, 2013: the RH-IRR or enforcement
implementation
of
the
legislation
Due to further arguments and debates from
Statute Involved:
Republic
Act
10354,
The
Responsible
the
on
halt
Position of Petitioner:
o Petitioners claim that the provisions of RA
10354 are unconstitutional as they violate
the rights to life, to health, to freedom of
expression and speech, to the privacy of
families, to academic freedom, to due
process of law, to equal protection, and
against involuntary servitude. They also
intrude
on
the
autonomy
of
local
Position of Respondent
judicial determination
Some petitioners lack standing to question
the RH Law
Due Process - NO
The definitions of several terms pinpointed by the
petitioners in the RH Law are not vague.
Private health care institution = private health care
service provider.
Issues:
(1) Whether or Not the enforcement of Ordinance no, 532
is an act beyond the scope of police power
(2) Whether or Not the enforcement of the same is a
class legislation that infringes property rights.
Yus defense:
Power of taxation
strongest of all the powers of government,
practically absolute and unlimited
It is a legislative power. All its incidents are within
the control of the legislature. It is the Legislature which
must questions of state necessarily involved in ordering a
tax, which must make all the necessary rules and
regulations which are to be observed in order to produce
the desired results, and which must decide upon the
agencies by means of which collections shall be made
CLAUDIO S. YAP,
Petitioner, vs.
THENAMARIS
SHIP'S
MANAGEMENT
INTERMARE MARITIME AGENCIES, INC.,
Respondents.
and
Facts:
Claudio S. Yap was employed as electrician of the vessel,
M/T SEASCOUT on 14 August 2001 by Intermare
Maritime Agencies, Inc. in behalf of its principal, Vulture
Shipping Limited. for a duration of 12 months. On 23
August 2001, Yap boarded M/T SEASCOUT and
commenced his job as electrician. However, on or about
08 November 2001, the vessel was sold. Yap, along with
the other crewmembers, was informed by the Master of
their vessel that the same was sold and will be scrapped.
Yap received his seniority bonus, vacation bonus, extra
bonus along with the scrapping bonus. However, with
respect to the payment of his wage, he refused to accept
the payment of one-month basic wage. He insisted that
he was entitled to the payment of the unexpired portion of
his contract since he was illegally dismissed from
employment. He alleged that he opted for immediate
transfer but none was made.
The Labor Arbiter
Thus, Claudio S. Yap (petitioner) filed a complaint for
Illegal Dismissal with Damages and Attorneys Fees
before the Labor Arbiter (LA). On July 26, 2004, the LA
rendered a decision in favor of petitioner, finding the latter
to have been constructively and illegally dismissed by
respondents.
LA opined that since the unexpired portion of petitioners
contract was less than one year, petitioner was entitled to
his salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract for a
period of nine months.
The NLRC
Aggrieved, respondents sought recourse from the NLRC.
The NLRC affirmed the LAs findings that petitioner was
Issue:
Whether or not Section 10 of R.A. [No.] 8042, to the
extent that it affords an illegally dismissed migrant worker
the lesser benefit of "salaries for [the] unexpired portion
of his employment contract or for three (3) months for
every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less" is
unconstitutional. - YES
Whether or not the Court of Appeals gravely erred in
granting petitioner only three (3) months backwages
when his unexpired term of 9 months is far short of the
"every year of the unexpired term" threshold. YES
Held:
The said provision of law has long been a source of
abuse by callous employers against migrant workers; and
that said provision violates the equal protection clause
under the Constitution because, while illegally dismissed
local workers are guaranteed under the Labor Code of
reinstatement with full backwages computed from the
time compensation was withheld from them up to their
actual reinstatement. It imposes a 3-month cap on the
claim of OFWs with an unexpired portion of one year or
more in their contracts, but none on the claims of other
OFWs or local workers with fixed-term employment.
FACTS:
On 3 Dec 1992, then Mayor Lim signed into law Ord 7774
entitled An Ordinance prohibiting short time admission
in hotels, motels, lodging houses, pension houses and
similar establishments in the City of Manila. White Light
Corp is an operator of mini hotels and motels who sought
to have the Ordinance be nullified as the said Ordinance
infringes on the private rights of their patrons. The RTC
ruled in favor of WLC. It ruled that the Ordinance strikes
at the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed by the
Constitution. The City maintains that the ordinance is
valid as it is a valid exercise of police power. Under the
LGC, the City is empowered to regulate the
establishment, operation and maintenance of cafes,
restaurants, beerhouses, hotels, motels, inns, pension
houses, lodging houses and other similar establishments,
including tourist guides and transports. The CA ruled in
favor of the City.
ISSUE: Whether or not Ord 7774 is valid.
HELD: The SC ruled that the said ordinance is null and
void as it indeed infringes upon individual liberty. It also
violates the due process clause which serves as a
Tanada v. Tuvera
GR L-63915, 29 December 1986 (146 SCRA 446)
Facts:
On 24 April 1985, the Court affirmed the necessity for the
publication to the Official Gazette all unpublished
HELD: YES.
Misconduct means intentional wrongdoing or
deliberate violation of a rule of law or standard of
behavior in connection with ones performance of official
functions and duties. For grave or gross misconduct to
exist, the judicial act complained of should be corrupt or
inspired by the intention to violate the law, or a persistent
F:
The petitioners were among 23 stevedoring and
arrastre operators at the Manila South Harbor. Their
licenses had expired but they were allowed to continue to
operate on the strength of temporary permits. On May 4,
1976, the Phil Ports Authority decided to allow only one
org. to operate the arrastre and stevedoring services. On
April 28, 1980, based on the report and recommendation
of an evaluation committee, the PPA awarded the
exclusive contract for stevedoring services to the Ocean
Notes:
The policy adopted by the Philippine Ports
Authority to allow only one organization to operate the
arrastre and stevedoring services of each port was
upheld by the SC as a valid exercise of police power. For
the "one port, one operator" rule makes possible the
better supervision, collection, efficiency and improvement
of services, and prevent cut-throat
competition and
non-maximal utilization of equipment and manpower.
However, in the awarding of contracts, the procedures
must allow only the capable operator to get the franchise.
on
the
Marcos v. Garchitorena
Facts: This is a petition for certiorari to set aside as
arbitrary and in grave abuse of discretion resolutions of
NO
REPUBLIC
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES
VS.
SANDIGANBAYAN DIGEST
NO PLDT VS. HPS SOFTWARE COMMUNICATIONS
CORPORATION DIGEST