5. Crusaders Broadcasting System, Inc. v. order, declaring Crusaders in default and the NTC from broadcasting.
e NTC from broadcasting. That the said
National Telecommunications Commission,
G.R. No. 139583, May 31, 2000
Facts: Petitioner Crusaders Broadcasting
System, Inc. was the grantee of a Temporary
Permit to operate DWCD-FM at a frequency of
97.9 Mhz. Its chairman sent a letter to the
National Telecommunications Commission
(NTC) requesting a permit to allow them to stop
their broadcasting for around a month in order to
renovate its broadcast booth and the entire
facilities of the station. The Temporary Permit to
operate of the Crusaders was renewed covering
the period from January 1, 1995 to December
31, 1996.
On December 12, 1996, Crusaders applied for
another renewal of its Temporary Permit. The
NTC conducted an ocular inspection and it
found out that the station is inoperative, thus, the
NTC denied the application for the renewal of its
Temporary Permit. Crusaders presented a
motion for reconsideration explaining that
Crusaders was not able to resume its operation
because of a case filed by Conamor
Broadcasting Corporation against Crusaders
and the subsequent issuance of an injunction
order by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 163,
Pasig City enjoining Crusaders from operating
its radio station. By reason thereof, on July 14,
1997, the NTC issued a show-cause order
directing Crusaders to explain why its
application for renewal of Temporary Permit for
the station should not be denied; why its station
should not be closed; and why the assigned
frequency of the station should not be recalled.
Crusaders failed to submit a responsive
pleading, consequently, the NTC issued an
thereafter, handed down its decision recalling
the assigned frequency. Later, the NTC granted
the motion for new trial filed by Crusaders. But
despite the evidence presented, NTC still denied
Crusaders' request for renewal of its Temporary
Permit to operate DWCD-FM. On appeal, the
Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the
NTC. Hence, this petition.
Issue: Whether or not the NTC properly denied
the application for renewal of Crusaders'
temporary permit to operate DWCD-FM, and
validly ordered the withdrawal of the latter's
assigned frequency. (YES)
Holding: ​It should be noted that by virtue of
Executive Order (E.O) No. 546, creating the
Ministry of Public Works and Ministry of
Transportation and Communications, the
regulation of radio communications is a function
assigned to, and being performed by, the NTC.
Petitioner does not deny and in fact, uses it as
the reason for the stoppage of its broadcast that
it was the filing of the aforementioned civil case
against it (petitioner) which grounded
DWCD-FM's broadcasting. It is not disputed,
either, that what prompted Conamor to bring a
complaint against petitioner was the latter's
rescission of a "Programming and Marketing
Agreement". In order to settle the civil case,
Crusaders and Conamor later entered into a
"Compromise Agreement" which superseded the
programming and marketing agreement.
Conamor has been given the right to operate
and manage a radio station despite the clear
mandate of the Radio Law that only holders of a
legislative franchise can do so. Even on this
ground alone, Crusaders can be prevented by
ground was not reflected in the show-cause
order does not mean that the same cannot be
raised thereafter by the NTC, as it has done in
the present case, when it gleaned a basis
therefor during the administrative proceedings,
from the evidence presented by the petitioner
itself the substance of the agreement between
petitioner and Conamor. The said findings were
not rebutted by petitioner which kept on harping
only on the alleged unfairness of NTC in the
application of its procedures as well as on the
existence of the said civil case against it and on
the refusal of NTC to approve its application for
the acquisition of a new transmitter. On the
matter of factual findings by the NTC as to the
inoperativeness of subject radio station, the
Court agrees with the Court of Appeals that the
said findings are supported by substantial
evidence. Substantial evidence is such relevant
evidence which a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to support a conclusion.
8. EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., vs.
POEA G.R. No. 76633, October 18, 1988
FACTS: In this case, there was a certain
Vitaliano Saco was Chief Officer of the M/V
Eastern Polaris when he was killed in an
accident in Tokyo, Japan on March 15, 1985.
His widow sued for damages under Executive
Order No. 797 and Memorandum Circular No. 2
of the POEA. The petitioner, as owner of the
vessel, argued that the complaint was
cognizable not by the POEA but by the Social
Security System and should have been filed
against the State Fund Insurance. The POEA
nevertheless assumed jurisdiction and after
considering the position papers of the parties
ruled in favor of the complainant. The petition is
dismissed with costs against the petitioner.
ISSUE: Whether or not the validity of
Memorandum Circular No. 2 is violative of the
principle of non-delegation of legislative power.
HELD: No. The High Court ruled that
Memorandum Circular No. 2 is an administrative
regulation. The model contract prescribed
thereby has been applied in a significant number
of the cases without challenge by the employer.
The power of the POEA (and before it the
National Seamen Board) in requiring the model
contract is not unlimited as there is a sufficient
standard guiding the delegate in the exercise of
the said authority. That standard is discoverable
in the executive order itself which, in creating the
Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration, mandated it to protect the rights
of overseas Filipino workers to "fair and
equitable employment practices." Further, the
Court said that it is true that legislative discretion
as to the substantive contents of the law cannot
be delegated. What can be delegated is the
discretion to determine how the law may be
enforced, not what the law shall be. The
ascertainment of the latter subject is a
prerogative of the legislature. This prerogative
cannot be abdicated or surrendered by the
legislature to the delegate.
14. NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY and
ROMEO G. DAVID vs. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. Nos. 115121-25, February 9, 1996,
PUNO, J.
FACTS: In 1990, the NFA, through then
Administrator Pelayo J. Gabaldon, conducted a
public bidding to award security contracts for the
protection of its properties and facilities all over
the country. Twelve security agencies were
awarded one-year contracts, among whom were
private respondents Col. Felix M. Manubay
(doing business under the name Greenview
Investigation and Security Agency), Continental
Watchman and Security Agency, Alberto T.
Lasala (doing business under the name PSF
Watchman and Investigation Agency) and
Norman D. Mapagay (doing business under the
name People's Protective and Security Agency).
In August 1992, petitioner Romeo G. David
became NFA Administrator. He caused a review
of all security service contracts, procedures on
the accreditation of private security agencies
and the bidding for security services. Pending
this review, Administrator David extended the
services of private respondents and the other
incumbent security agencies on a periodic
basis.The review was completed in March 1993
and new terms for accreditation, bidding and
hiring of security agencies were made. The
bidding areas were also reclassified and
reduced from fourteen NFA regions to only five
NFA areas nationwide. A special order was
thereafter issued for the implementation of the
new rules and procedure. On April 6, 1993,
Special Order No. 04-07 was issued under
which Administrator David created
Prequalification, Bids and Awards Committee
(PBAC) to undertake the prequalification of
prospective bidders, conduct the bidding,
evaluate the bids tendered and recommend to
the Administrator the bids accepted. Notices for
prequalification and bidding for security services
were published in a newspaper of national
circulation. All incumbent security contractors
were required to prequalify and only those
prequalified were to be allowed to participate in
the prebidding and bidding scheduled on June 4
and 18, 1993, respectively. The prebidding and
bidding dates were later reset to June 18 and
30, 1993 to give more time for the participants to
comply with documentary requirements.
Forty-one security agencies, composed of the
incumbents and new applicants, including
private respondent Masada Security Agency,
submitted the necessary documents for
prequalification. Upon a review of the
documents submitted, the PBAC disqualified
respondent Mapagay for failure to submit proof
of his financial capability to support his bid. It
also disqualified respondent Lasala for alleged
failure to meet the five-year service requirement.
Only respondents Manubay, Continental and
Masada participated in the prebidding and were
declared on June 17, 1993 prequalified to bid.
Meanwhile, however, two of the applicants who
failed to prequalify, namely Lanting Security and
Watchman Agency and respondent Lasala to
restrain Administrator David and the PBAC from
proceeding with the public bidding. As prayed
for, restraining orders were issued by the two
courts on June 29, 1993 which the NFA received
on June 30, 1993, the day of the scheduled
bidding. No bidding thus took place on said date.
On respondent Lasala's application, the trial
a court issued on July 20, 1993 a preliminary
injunction ordering the PBAC to refrain from
proceeding with the bidding until the merits of
the case shall have been heard and resolved.
During the effectivity of the writ of preliminary
injunction, Administrator David sent to all
incumbent security agencies, including four of Assuming arguendo that an emergency actually
herein private respondents, notices of existed and the negotiated contracts were
termination dated July 30, 1993. Private justified, petitioners' continued failure to conduct
respondents were informed that their services a public bidding and select the bidder within a
were to end on August 16, 1993 inasmuch as reasonable time casts doubts on the good faith
their respective contracts had expired and they behind the negotiated contracts. This Court, on
no longer enjoyed the trust and confidence of May 18, 1994, specifically ordered petitioners to
the NFA. They were thus instructed to withdraw conduct a public bidding and report the results
their security guards from all NFA installations. within thirty days from holding thereof. In
On August 4, 1993, Administrator David compliance, a public bidding was conducted on
contracted the services of seven new security June 21, 1994 but until now no bidder has been
agencies starting August 16, 1993 on a chosen and no contract has been awarded.
month-to-month basis pending resolution of the Petitioners' manifest reluctance to hold a public
injunction against the bidding. bidding and award a contract to the winning
bidder smacks of favoritism and partiality toward
ISSUES: ​Whether or not private respondents did the security agencies to whom it awarded the
not exhaust available administrative remedies negotiated contracts and cannot be
thereby rendering their complaint premature and countenanced. A competitive public bidding
legally deficient to merit the grant of judicial aims to protect the public interest by giving the
relief. public the best possible advantages thru open
competition.
HELD: No. The principle of exhaustion of
administrative remedies is not a hard and fast
rule. It is subject to some limitations and
exceptions. In this case, private respondents'
contracts were terminated in the midst of bidding
preparations and their replacements hired barely
five days after their termination. Indeed, an
appeal to the NFA Board or Council of Trustees
and the Secretary of Agriculture pursuant to the
provisions of the Administrative Code of 1987
was not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of the law. The urgency of
the situation compelled private respondents to
go to court to stop the implementation of these
negotiated security contracts. The Court is
neither impressed by petitioners' claim that the
subject contracts were negotiated as a necessity
to stave off a crisis that gripped the NFA.