Sitchon vs Aquino

Facs: This decisions came from 6 different cases. The city of Engineer of Manila (Aquino) has threatened
to demolish the houses of the petitioners Sitchon on the ground that said house constitute public
nuisances under Section 1112 of Ordinance No. 1600 of the City of Manila. The petitioners claimed the
land without without consent of the city, but all of them paid ​concession fees or damages for the use of
the land with the agreement that such payment and consent shall be without prejudice to an order to
vacate. Petitioners contend that according to Article 701 and 702 of the New Civil Code the District Health
Officer has the authority to remove public nuisances. However Sec. 31 of R.A. 409 specifically vests in
the City Engineer the power to “order the removal of buildings dangerous to the public”.

Issue WON the City Engineer has the authority to remove public nuisances

Held: Aquino, as City Engineer, is vested with authority to effect the abatement of the nuisances through
demolition. By virtue of the Revised Charter of Manila, such duty, among others, was placed upon him.
Arts. 700 and 702 must yield to this provision not only because it is later law but also because of the
principle that special provisions prevail over general ones. Moreover, an ordinance authorized the action
sought to be taken by respondent.

Doctrine: Special provisions prevail over general ones