Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2. Law should define or fix the Marcos vs. CA Sec 34, CB Act provides, violation of this Act or any rule or regulation
penalty for the violation of the 278 SCRA 843 issued by MB, shall be punished by a fine not more than P20,000 and by
rules and regulations. imprisonment of not more than 5 years.
- Sec 34, Central Bank Act provides thus:
violation of this Act or any rule or regulation CB Circular 960 provides: Residents, firms, associations, or
issued by the Monetary Board, shall be corporations unless otherwise permitted under CB regulations are
punished by a fine of not more than twenty prohibited from maintaining foreign exchange accounts abroad.
thousand pesos and by imprisonment of not
more than five years. Imelda Marcos in 1991, was charged before RTC-Manila for allegedly
opening and maintaining foreign exchange accounts abroad from 1968-
1991 without prior authorization from CB. Her Motion to Quash was denied.
3. Rules and regulations must be People vs. Que Po Lay She went to CA, which likewise denied her petition. Thus, the appeal to
published in the Official Gazetter. 94 Phil 640 SC.
HELD:
HELD: a. Nowhere in Act No. 1760 is a violation of the Orders of the Bureau
of Agriculture made a penal offense, nor is such violation punished
a. Since electro fishing is not banned under the Fisheries Law, and in any way therein.
the Secretary is powerless to penalize it, AO 84 and AO 84-1 are
devoid of any legal basis. Had the law making body intended to b. What the act penalizes is the violation of any of its provisions, and
punish electro-fishing, a penal provision to that effect could have not the violation of any of the rules and regulations that may be
been easily embodied in the Old Fisheries Law. issued thereunder.
Facts: LPG Refillers Association filed for prohibition. RTC - Pasig nullified Circular 2000-03-010 on
the ground that it introduced new offenses (no price display board no weighing scale, etc) not
Section 28 of Administrative Order No. 2 issued by Secretary of included in the BP 33. With the denial of MR, petitioners went to SC.
Agriculture pursuant to Sec. 4 of Act No. 4003, prohibits fishing within 3
kilometers from the shoreline of islands and reservations and provided that
boats not subject to license may fish in said areas only upon the written
permission of the Secretary. BP 33 Illegal trading/ hoarding overpricing Under-filling/ Penalty
adulteration underdelivery P20, 000
Augustus Santos was charged with violation of said AO, in that within P50, 000
1,500 yards north of Cavalry Point, Corregidor Island, Cavite, he willfully
had his boat operated by a fisherman and ordered them to fish, loiter, and
anchor without permission from the Secretary of Agriculture. CFI- Cavite
dismissed the case. Hence, the appeal to SC. Circular 2000- No trade name;
hoarding No price No weighing Penalty
Unbranded cylinders;
06-010 display scale; no or P20,000 for
No seal; no serial no.
board incorrect tare retail outlets
weight
HELD:
b. The monetary penalty under BP 33 is limited to a minimum of P20, 000 and a minimum
of P50, 000. Under the Circular, the maximum pecuniary penalty for retail outlets is P20,
000, an amount within the range allowed by law. RA 7638 (Department of Energy Act of
1992) DOE is tasked with formulating and implementing policies and programs to ensure
sustainable, stable, sufficient, and accessible energy.
Central Bank (CB) Circular No. 20 required those who had foreign Tuvera sought clarification of the following questions:
currency to sell the same to the CB. 1. What is meant by law of public nature or general
applicability?
Que Po Lay has in his possession US $7,000 but failed to sell the same 2. Must distinction be made between laws of general applicability
to CB. and laws which are not?
3. What is meant by publication?
CFI- Manila found him guilty and meted the penalty of 6 months 4. Where is the publication to be made?
imprisonment and a fine of P1,000. In his appeal to SC, Que Po Lay 5. When is the publication to be made?
claimed that the said circular has not yet been published in the Official
Gazette before his alleged violation of the same and he should therefore
be acquitted.
HELD: