Title: Facts: Held: Doctrine/Notes:

GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Macariola v. Judge  Respondent Judge Asuncion was the ISSUE: W/N R Judge’s actions are in Political Law: Political Law has been defined
Asuncion contravention of the aforementioned statutes. as that branch of public law which deals with
judge in CFI Leyte who heard Civil Case
No. 3010, which was a complaint for No, they are not. the organization and operation of the
 When R Judge purchased a portion of Lot governmental organs of the State and define
partition filed by the Heirs of Francisco
1184-E, the decision which he rendered the relations of the state with the inhabitants
Reyes against P Bernardita Macariola, also
an heir of Reyes, concerning the was already final and hence, the lot in of its territory.
properties left by the aforementioned question was no longer subject of the
decedent. litigation * Article 14 — The following cannot engage in
o R Judge ordered the distribution o Additionally, R Judge did not buy commerce, either in person or by proxy, nor can
of the properties among the the lot in question on directly they hold any office or have any direct,
heirs of the decedent, and the from the plaintiffs but from Dr. administrative, or financial intervention in
decision became final and Galapon. commercial or industrial companies within the
executory. o However: “The conduct of [R limits of the districts, provinces, or towns in which
o One of the heirs sold her share Judge] gave cause for [people] to they discharge their duties:
in the property to one Dr. doubt the honesty and fairness of
Galapon. his actuations and the integrity of 1. Justices of the Supreme Court, judges and
 One year later, Dr. Galapon sold a our courts of justice" officials of the department of public prosecution
portion of this land to R Judge; The Anent the issue of Art. 14* of the Code in active service. This provision shall not be
following year R Judge conveyed the lot of Commerce, the Court opined that the applicable to mayors, municipal judges, and
to Traders, Inc., a corporation for whichstatute supposedly violated takes the municipal prosecuting attorneys nor to those who
R Judge served as president, and his wifenature of a political law, which is by chance are temporarily discharging the
served as secretary. abrogated upon the change of functions of judge or prosecuting attorney.
 P alleges that the actions of R Udge are insovereignty.
violation of the Civil Code & the Code of o Though part of a commercial law, Principle on the Change of Sovereignty:
Commerce, in addition to RA 3019 & the Art. 14 of the Code of  “Where there is change of sovereignty,
Canons of Judicial Ethics Commerce partakes of the the political laws of the former sovereign
nature of a political law as it are considered automatically abrogated,
regulates the relationship unless they are expressly re-enacted by
between the government and affirmative act of the new sovereign.”
certain public officers and
employees.
o Upon the transfer of sovereignty
from Spain to the United States
and later on from the United
States to the Republic of the
Philippines, Art. 14 of this Code
of Commerce must be deemed
to have been abrogated.
2. Republic v.  Under EO 1, s. 1986, the Presidential ISSUE: W/N the evidence sufficiently builds the case against Gen. Ramas & Dimaano.
Sandiganbayan Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) No, it does not.
 was created to recover wrongfully acquired  Some of the properties seized by the raiding team were considered by the R to
wealth/possessions during the Marcos regime. have been illegally seized.
o The AFP Board was created to o This is due to the fact that the search warrant that authorized the raid was
investigate reports of unexplained limited to “Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition.”
wealth and corrupt practices by AFP o Essentially, the raid team seized things that were not included in the search
personnel. warrant.
 The AFP Board reported “unexplained wealth”  Petitioner PCGG argues that, at the time of the interregnum, a revolutionary
from Major General Ramas government was active which suspended the 1973 Constitution.
o Pursuant to this, a raiding team o i.e. Since the exclusionary right protecting people from an illegal search
searched the premises of Dimaano, the applies only from the ratification of the 1987 Constitution, the acquired
supposed mistress of Ramas. possessions from the raid cannot be considered “illegally obtained.”
o This team confiscated various weapons,  However, this is only partially correct. Although the government proceeding the
ammunition, and communication EDSA revolution overshadowed the 1973 Constitution, the resulting revolutionary
equipment, along with cash in the government was bound by no constitution or legal limitations except treaty
millions of pesos and titles of land. obligations that the revolutionary government, as the de jure government, assumed
 The petitioner avers that it is impossible for under international law.
Dimaano to claim that she owns the large sums  The Court held that, although the Bill of Rights under the 1973 Constitution was
of money, as she was merely a secretary at not operative at the time, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Ramas’ office. (Covenant) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Declaration), both to
o Petitioner also alleges that Ramas which the Philippines is a signatory, remained in effect during the period.
acquired ill-gotten wealth by exploiting  Under Article 17(1) of the Covenant, the revolutionary government had the duty
his authoritative position and his ties to insure that [n]o one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with
with President Marcos. his privacy, family, home or correspondence.
 Three years later, in 1991, the respondent  Directives and orders issued by government officers were valid so long as these
Sandiganbayan dismissed the suit.The grounds officers did not exceed the authority granted them by the revolutionary
for such dismissal were: government.
o Lack of Jurisdiction of PCGG-AFP  Given how the raiding team confiscated items not included in the warrant, the said
Board items were considered “illegally obtained” and had to be promptly returned to its
o Illegal Search & Seizure owner
 For this reason PCGG filed the instant petition.
3. Santiago v.  Private respondent Atty. Jesus Delfin filed an “initiatory petition” with ISSUE: W/N the Delfin Petition can prosper under RA
COMELEC COMELEC to amend the constitution to lift the term limits of elective officials 6735 cf. the 1987 Constitution. No, it cannot.
by people’s initiative.  RA 6735 is inadequate, as its provisions cannot be
o According to Delfin, his petition would be first submitted to the people, construed as contemplating the application
and then formally filed with COMELEC and once it gets the 12 per People’s Initiative to Constitutional amendments.
centum of signatures of the total number of registered voters in the o Although the Constitution provided for
country that Art. XVII of the Constitution requires. the right, it cannot be implemented if the
o The Delfin Petition seeks to amend sections of the provisions congress fails to provide for its
concerning term limits for the executive & legislative departments, in implementation.
addition to local government officials.  RA 6735 being inadequate to allow People’s
Initiative, the ruling on w/n the proposition
  Prior to the COMELEC hearing on the petition, Senator Defensor-Santiago, constitutes a revision or an amendment is moot &
Alexander Padilla, and Maria Isabel Ongpin filed a special civil action for academic.
prohibition on the following arguments:
o The Constitutional provision of people’s initiative can only be
implemented by law to be passed by Congress. (P Senator’s SB No. 1290
is yet to be passed).
o R.A. 6735 is insufficient to enable People’s Initiative on the Constitution,
because it:
 Fails to provide subtitles on initiatives on the Constitution;
 Provides for the effectivity of the law after publication which
cannot cover constitutional amendments which take effect after
ratification.
 The Delfin Petition which extends or lifts term limits is a revision, not merely an
amendment.
4. Lambino v.  Raul Lambino, together with other groups and individuals, ISSUE: W/N the Lambino petition is sufficient to allow COMELEC to
COMELEC commenced to gather signatures for an initiative petition to submit it to the people for initiative. No, it is not.
change the 1987 Constitution.  The Lambino group failed to comply with the basic requirements
 In 2006, Raul Lambino and other groups and individuals, filed their for conducting a people’s initiative. Lambino himself admitted that
petition to the COMELEC to ratify their initiative petition under the revised text submitted to the COMELEC had never been
RA 6735 included in the document shown to the signatories to the petition.
o The petition’s goal was the change of the Bicameral- o The Constitution provides that the draft or proposal
Presidential system embodied in Arts. VI, VII, & VIII of should be ready and shown to the people before they
the Constitution to a Unicameral-Parliamentary form of sign it. In this case, the petitioners failed to prove that
government. they have fully shown the draft to the people.
o The group claimed support of their petition from 6.3 o It is basic that in consent, assent, or agreement may not
million people constituting the minimum least twelve per be given when the signatory has no way of knowing what
centum (12%) requirement in the Constitution. he or she is agreeing to.
o The group also claimed that the signatures of said voters o The Lambino group also averred that they only
had already been verified by COMELEC election distributed 100,000 copies of the petition. It is logistically
registrars. impossible, therefore that all of the 6.3 million signatories
 The Lambino group petitioned COMELEC to submit their petition of the petition were able to read the full draft.
for plebiscite after due publication.  The initiative power reserved to the people by the Constitution
 Later, the Lambino group submitted an Amended with the applies only to amendments to the Constitution, and not
COMELEC indicating modifications in the proposed revised text. constitutional revisions
 COMELEC then denied the group’s petition for lack of an enabling  If the scope of the proposed petition is broad enough as to
law governing initiative petitions to amend the Constitution, as constitute a substantial revision, then the change may not be made
per the decision of the SC in Santiago v. COMELEC. to the Constitution under the method of the People’s Initiative.
 The petitioners meanwhile averred that the Santiago ruling only  Revision implies a change that either alters a basic principle in the
binds the parties to that case and their petition deserves constitution or affects substantial provisions of the constitution.
cognizance as an expression of the “will of the sovereign people.” An amendment, meanwhile, refers to a change that adds, reduces,
or deletes without altering the basic principle involved.
 o The proposed amendments by the Lambino group would
change the present bicameral-presidential system to a
unicameral-parliamentary form of government, which
would constitute a radical change in the manner in which
the government is structured under the Constitution.
o Such amendments are therefore not subject to the
People’s Initiative method outlined in the Constitution.
5. Espina v. Zamora,  President Joseph E. Estrada signed into ISSUE: W/N the Retail Trade Liberalization Act is in contravention of the Constitution. No, it
Jr. law RA 8762 (Retail Trade Liberalization is not.
Act of 2000), repealing RA 1180, which  Section 19, Article II of the 1987 Constitution requires the development of a self -reliant
absolutely prohibited foreign nationals and independent national economy
from engaging in the retail trade business. o It does not impose a policy of Filipino monopoly of the economic environment.
o The new law allows foreign o The Constitution mandates a bias in favor of Filipino goods, services, labor and
nationals in the retail industry in enterprises, but it also recognizes the need for business exchange with the rest
businesses worth upwards of of the world.
$2.5 million  Under the new law, Filipinos continue to have the right to engage in the kinds of retail
 Petitioner-congressmen assail the business to which the law in question has permitted the entry of foreign investors.
constitutionality of the new law, averring  The law does not prejudice the rights of Filipino owned enterprises, and such does not
that it violates Secs. 9, 19, & 20 of Art. II propose an unfair situation between foreign Filipino businesses.
of the 1987 Constitution  Additionally, in general the provisions of Art. II are not self-executory, and merely provide
guiding principles for legislators to follow in creating laws.
6. TMC Employees v.
CA
7. TMPC v. LTWD  Petitioner Tawang Multi-Purpose Cooperative is a duly ISSUE: W/N the grant of franchise to R LTWD Doctrine of Constitutional
organized and registered cooperative organized to is repugnant to the Constitution. Yes, it is. Supremacy
provide domestic water services in Barangay Tawang,  The President, Congress and the Court “…if a law or contract violates
La Trinidad, Benguet. cannot create directly or indirectly any norm of the constitution
 Respondent La Trinidad Water District is a local water franchises for the operation of a public that law or contract whether
utility created under PD 198, as amended. utility that are exclusive in character. The promulgated by the legislative
o It is authorized to supply water for 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitutions* or by the executive branch or
domestic, industrial and commercial expressly and clearly prohibit the creation entered into by private
purposes within the municipality of La of exclusive franchises. persons for private purposes is
Trinidad, Benguet. o Verba legis Rule: Plain words do not null and void and without any
 P TMPC filed with the National Water Resources require explanation. force and effect.”
Board (NWRB) an application for a certificate of public o When the law is clear, there is
convenience (CPC) to operate and maintain a nothing for the courts to do but to *Section 8, Article XIII of the
waterworks system in Brgy. Tawang. apply it. 1935 Constitution: “No
o R LTWD opposed TMPC’s application on  In case of conflict between the Constitution franchise, certificate, or any
the ground that Section 47 of PD No. 198 and a statute, the Constitution always other form of authorization
grants it an exclusive franchise. prevails because the Constitution is the for the operation of a public
basic law to which all other laws must utility shall be … exclusive in
conform to.
  NWRB approved TMPC’s application for a CPC, ruling  Under the doctrine of constitutional character or for a longer
that LTWD’s franchise cannot be exclusive since supremacy, since the Constitution is the period than fifty years.
exclusive franchises are unconstitutional. fundamental, paramount and supreme law
 The RTC reversed this, interpreting the Constitutional of the nation, it is deemed written in every NOTE: This provision is
prohibition of exclusivity as meaning franchises which statute and contract, such that statutes and substantially recreated in the
the state has no power to control (i.e. state-granted contracts in contravention thereof are null 1973 & 1987 Constitutions
exclusivity is acceptable where the state can revoke and void.
such exclusivity)
 “… the Constitution does not necessarily prohibit a
franchise that is exclusive on its face… [as long as the
franchisee] cannot set up its exclusive franchise
against… the State.”
NATIONAL TERRITORY
8. Magallona v.  Petitioners assail the constitutionality of ISSUE: W/N R.A. 9522 is constitutional. Yes, it is.
Ermita RA 9522, which was passed in compliance  RA 9522 is a statutory tool to demarcate the country’s maritime zones and continental
with the new provisions laid out in shelf under UNCLOS III; it does not to delineate Philippine territory.
UNCLOS III, on two grounds: o UNCLOS III and RA 9522 have nothing to do with acquisition or loss of territory
o It reduces Philippine maritime o It is a multilateral treaty regulating sea-use rights over maritime zones
territory and the reach of the o UNCLOS III is a codification of norms regulating the conduct of states in the
Philippine state’s sovereign world’s oceans and submarine areas
power.  Baseline laws such as RA 9522 are merely statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS III
o Opens the country’s waters signatories to delimit the extent of their maritime zones and continental shelves
landward of the baselines to o Under customary int’l law, territory can only be acquired or lost through
maritime passage by all vessels occupation, cession, or prescription – not by executing multilateral treaties OR
and aircraft, under the right of enacting statutes to comply with them
innocent passage.  The assertion of loss of any territory under RA 9522 is unfounded, as RA 9522, by
 Respondents aver that RA 9522 forms optimizing location of basepoints, increased the Philippines’ total maritime space
the country’s compliance with UNCLOS  Whether referred to as internal waters or archipelagic waters, the Philippines exercises
III; It therefore operates to: sovereignty over the body of water lying landward of the baselines including airspace
o Secure our territorial interests o This does not preclude international law norms which require territorial seas to
by placing them more firmly allow for maintenance of unimpeded expeditions navigation (international law
under the bounds of principle of freedom of navigation)
international law. The right of innocent passage is a customary international law and is automatically
o Preserve Philippine territory incorporated in the body of Philippine law; no modern State can validly invoke sovereignty to
over the KIG or Scarborough absolutely forbid innocent passage
Shoal
THE PHILIPPINE STATE
9. Badillo v. Tayag  A parcel of land, claimed to be owned by the petitioners, was part of the ISSUE: W/N the failure of the NHA to pay the proper
Bagong Silang Resettlement Project (BSRP) of the NHA pursuant to fees in the MTC allows the staying of the motion for
Proclamation No. 843 execution. No, it is not.
 The NHA then developed and subdivided the land into smaller lots that were  In cases involving property, a supersedeas bond is
allocated, awarded and distributed to qualified beneficiaries. required to assure the payment of damages to the
  On petition of the plaintiffs, the MTC ordered the NHA to vacate the disputed winning party regardless of extraneous matters (e.g.
land and pay rentals therefor. banktruptcy of the of the parties).
 The MTC issued a writ of garnishment, but the NHA refused to recognize or  However, when the State litigates, it is not required
comply with this. to put up a bond for damages or even an appeal bond
 The RTC however reversed the MTC decision and annulled the writ. because it is presumed to be always solvent.
Petitioners therefore filed a suit to have this decision overturned.
10. Reagan v. CIR  Petitioner William Reagan, an American ISSUE: W/N P is liable the pay Philippine Concept of Auto-limitation
citizen, was assigned to provide technical income tax though the sale took place in
assistance to the US Air Force in Clark “foreign” soil. Yes, he is. A state “is not precluded from allowing
Air Base, Philippines.  The Philippines is independent and another power to participate in the exercise
 In April of 1960, Reagan imported a tax- sovereign over its entire domain of [jurisdiction] over… portions of its
free 1960 Cadillac car valued at $6,443.83 o Though it may intentionally limit territory… [but] it by no means follows that
 Three months later, P sold the car to PFC the scope of action it exercises such areas become impressed with alien
Willie Johnson, J.R., of the U.S. Marine over a part of the land, this in no character… they are not and cannot be
Corps for $6,600. way equates to a diminution of its foreign territory
 As a result of the sale, Respondent sovereignty over that land.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue  CJ Marshall: “"The jurisdiction of the
assessed P for income tax worth P2,979. nation within its own territory is
 After paying the tax, he sought for a necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is
refund from respondent claiming that he susceptible of no limitation not imposed
was exempt. by itself.
 He therefore filed a case with the Court  Nothing in the Military Bases Agreement
of Tax Appeals seeking to recover the provides absolute exemption to American
sum of P2,979 plus the legal rate of citizens working therein.
interest. o The base has not become foreign
soil or territory. The Philippines’
jurisdictional rights therein,
certainly not excluding the
power to tax, have been
preserved
o Therefore, he is exempted for his
income tax as being employed by
the United States Air Force, but
is not exempted from income tax
derived from the sale of the
automobile.
11. ACCFA v.  Petitioner ACCFA was created by RA ISSUE: W/N R Unions allowed to strike & Functions of Government (President W.
CUGCO 821 to provide credit and financial aid to negotiate for CBAs. No, they are not. Wilson)
agricultural enterprises.  Under the new law, ACA is granted  "Constituent" – “exercised by the State
 Respondent Unions (ASA & ACA) are substantial independence in the pursuit of as attributes of sovereignty”; Relating to:
organizations of supervisors & rank-and- the state policy of land reform. o Maintenance of peace
file employees of the organization.
  For non-compliance with the CBA, R o This is a necessarily o Regulating property and
Unions went on strike from Oct-Nov., governmental (i.e. ministerial) property rights,
1963. function of the state. o Administration of justice and the
o CIR ordered P to comply with  RA 875 (Industrial Peace Act) bars strikes determination of political duties
the CBA. by employees of the government “or any of citizens
o P filed herein action for political subdivision or instrumentality o National defense and foreign
certiorari, alleging that it was not thereof.” relations
required to comply.  Therefore, R. Unions are a.) not entitled  “Ministrant” – Functions whose exercise
 During the pendency of the suit, RA 3844 to strike, & b.) not entitled to conduct is optional on the part of the
(Agricultural Land Reform Code) CBA negotiations government.
reorganized ACCFA into ACA. o However, fringe benefits under
the (invalid) CBA were awarded
after being approved by the
President
STATE IMMUNITY
12. Merritt v. Gov’t.  Merritt got into an accident when his ISSUE: W/N the State has conceded liability Definition of Special Agent
of the Philippine motorcycle collided with a Philippine for the injury done to E. Merritt. No, it has not. One who is “duly empowered by a definite
Islands General Hospital Ambulance, resulting in order or commission to perform some act or
serious injury and eventually actual  The basic rule is that state is not liable for charged with some definite purpose.”
physical handicap. the torts committed by its officers or
 Following this, The Philippine Legislature agents except when expressly made so by
enacted Act No. 2457, authorizing E. the legislature.
Merritt to bring suit against the  By consenting to be sued a state simply
Government of the Philippine Islands waives its immunity from suit.
 The government in enacting Act No. o It does not, however, concede its
2457 expressed its consent to be sued, liability to plaintiff. It merely gives
however it is not clear whether the same a remedy to enforce a preexisting
act also enabled any new cause of action liability and submits itself to the
in favor of Merritt. jurisdiction of the court.
 Act No. 2457 does not extend the Gov’t
liability to any cause.
 Additionally, according to the 1903 Civil
Code the state is only liable for the acts
of its agents, officers, and employees
when they act as special agents and the
driver of the ambulance was not such
agent.
13. Republic v.  Private Respondent Roberto S. Benedicto was under investigation for ISSUE: W/N PCGG liable to PR for the loss of the shares. Yes,
Sandiganbayan (2nd ill-gotten wealth by Petitioner PCGG it is.
Division) o Pursuant to this, PCGG sequestered 227 shares of stock of  As the sequestrator of the shares of stock, P PCGG is
NOGCCI belonging to PR. responsible for their safekeeping & management
 o Members of the PCGG, sitting as the board of NOGCCI, o Additionally, the liabilities which caused the
assessed certain dues on all shares of stock. abovementioned shares to go into default were laid
o These dues were not paid by PCGG, and therefore the upon them by PCGG officers themselves
abovementioned shares were auctioned to cover the deficiency.  State immunity cannot lie where the state is the body
 Later, PR & P entered into a compromise agreement to lift sequestration initiating the suit.
of the shares. o This initiation of a suit brought the state down to
o Pursuant to this, R Sandiganbayan ordered P to deposit the the level of PR.
shares or their value with the court. o Having brought such suit, the state cannot claim
o P invoked state immunity from suit. immunity from the consequences thereof.
14. Mobil Philippines  A portion of Petitioner Mobil Exploration ISSUE: W/N the non-suability of the  Arrastre – “The operation of receiving,
v. Customs Philippines’ shipment was never delivered government extend to entities performing conveying, and loading or unloading
Arrastre Service & to it. non-governmental functions. Yes, when the merchandise on piers or wharves.”
Bureau of o P filed against Respondent same is a necessary incident of governmental  Doctrine of Necessary Incident – “If said
Customs Customs Arrastre Service in the functions. nongovernmental function is undertaken
CFI to recover the value of the  The collection of taxes, tariffs & duties is as an incident to its governmental
undelivered items. unquestionably governmental in function, there is no waiver thereby of
 In Union v. BoC, the SC ruled that “right character. the sovereign immunity from suit
to render said arrastre services … is o For practical reasons, revenues extended to such government entity.”
deemed by Congress to be proprietary or and customs duties cannot be
nongovernmental function." assessed and collected simply on
the basis of the importer’s
declaration.
o Customs authorities and officers
must see to it that the
declaration tallies with the
merchandise actually landed,
which requires arrastre
operations.
 Therefore, P must be regarded as being
immune from suit.
15. ATO v. Spouses  A portion of the land of Respondents ISSUE: W/N ATO is immune from the  On Unincorporated Gov’t. Agencies:
Ramos Spouses Ramos was being used as part of consequences of the RTC judgement. No, it is “An unincorporated government agency
the Loakan Airport runway not. without any separate juridical personality
o For this reason Petitioner Air  The management & maintenance of of its own enjoys immunity from suit
Transportation Office agreed to Loakan Airport is not the exclusive because it is invested with an inherent
pay them PhP 778, 150.00. prerogative of the State in its sovereign power of sovereignty.” (e.g. Executive
o However, they failed to pay the capacity. Departments)
same, for which reason R filed a  “Immunity from suits is determined by the
collection suit, which was character of the objects for which the
granted by the RTC, who entity was organized.”
ordered P to pay R.  Additionally, the doctrine of sovereign
immunity cannot be invoked to defeat a
  P averred that it was immune from suit, valid claim for compensation arising from
as the sale of land was entered into in the taking of property without just
exercise of governmental functions. compensation or due process of law.
16. DOH v.  The Secretary of Health, Alberto Romualdez, Jr. issued AO 27 &10, s. 1998, which ISSUE: W/N State Immunity applies to DOH
Philpharmawealth outlined the guidelines on the accreditation of government suppliers of officials in this case. No, it does not.
(2007) pharmaceutical products, and ensuring that only qualified bidders can transact  As a rule, unauthorized acts of government
business with petitioner DOH. officials or officers are not acts of the State.
 Respondent Phil. Pharmawealth Inc. then submitted to DOH a request for the  Hence, the rule does not apply where the
inclusion of additional items in its list of accredited drug products. public official is charged in his official capacity
 Prior to the release of the result of such request for accreditation, the DOH issued for acts that are unauthorized or unlawful and
an invitation for bids for suppliers. injurious to the rights of others.
o Despite the lack of response from the DOH regarding its accreditation,  The court also stated that an officer who
respondent submitted its bid for the contract, where it submitted the exceeds the power conferred on him by law
lowest bid. cannot hide behind the plea of sovereign
o In spite of this, the contract was awarded to another company due to the immunity and must bear the liability personally.
non-accreditation of the respondent’s Penicillin G Benzathine product.
 Respondent then filed the instant complaint for mandamus to require the DOH to
award the contract to Phil. Pharmawealth.
 The petitioners subsequently filed a motion to dismiss based on the doctrine of state
immunity. Respondent, however, argued that the doctrine of state immunity is not
applicable when the petitioners are being sued both in their official and personal
capacities.
17. DOH v.  The DOH issued Memorandum 171-C which provided for ISSUE: W/N the dismissal of the instant case is merited. Yes, it is.
Philpharmawealth sanctions to be imposed on government suppliers of  The DOH can validly invoke state immunity. The DOH is an
(2013) pharmaceutical products in case of adverse findings unincorporated agency, which performs sovereign or governmental
regarding their products. functions. It has not consented, either expressly or impliedly, to be sued.
 In line with this memo, the DOH gave notice to PPI (among  Additionally, the doctrine of state immunity extends to complaints filed
others) of a BFAD report finding that PPI products which against state officials for acts done in the discharge and performance of
were being sold to the public were unfit for human their duties.
consumption. o However, "public officials can be held personally accountable
 For failure to submit its explanation as required, the DOH for acts claimed to have been performed in connection with
suspended its accreditation for two years pursuant to AO official duties where they have acted ultra vires or where there
10 and Memorandum 171-C. is showing of bad faith."
 PPI filed before a complaint with the RTC to have its order  Logically, “there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes
of suspension and Memorandum 171-C declared null and the law on which the right depends.”
void for violating its right to substantive due process.  However, the doctrine only conveys, the state may not be sued without
 The trial court dismissed the case, declaring the case to be its consent; its clear import then is that the State may at times be sued.
one instituted against the State. The State consent may be given either expressly or impliedly.
18. Torio v. Heirs of  The Municipal Council of Malasiqui, Pangasinan, organized the building of a stage ISSUE: W/N the holding of a town fiesta is a
Fontanilla for a sarsuela during the fiesta. governmental function such as would exempt P from
 During the fiesta, the stage collapsed, killing Vicente Fontanilla. liability. No, it is not.
 o For this, his heirs filed suit against the municipal council, herein 
Sec. 2282 of the Revised Administrative Code does
petitioners, for damages. not command the organization of fiestas, but
o The CFI denied this, but the CA reversed, hence the instant petition. merely allows it.
  Therefore, it is a mere proprietary function.
P aver that the holding of a fiesta is part of the function of the municipality and
that it is therefore exempt from suit on the basis of its dispensing governmental The municipality is liable, but the individual
functions. councilors are not, as there is no evidence of their
actual involvement/negligence in the building of the
stage.
19. Hagonoy v.  Respondent Emily Rose Go Ko Lim Chao ISSUE: W/N Petitioner can be made liable for the contract entered into by Mayor Ople
Dumdum, Jr. entered into an agreement with petitioner with Emily Rose Go Ko Lim Chao. No, he may not.
municipality through Ople for the delivery of
motor vehicles for use by the municipality.  As a general rule, the state and its political subdivisions may not be sued without
 Despite having made several deliveries, Ople their consent.
allegedly did not heed respondents claim for o Consent is considered to be implied when the government enters into
payment. a business contract, as it then descends to the level of the other
 Respondent therefore filed a petition for contracting party; or it may be embodied in a general or special law
collection of the amount, with interest at, plus o The Local Government Code of 1991 also local government units with
business damages, exemplary damages, and the power to sue and be sued.
attorney’s fees.  However, there is a difference between suability and liability. Where the suability of
o Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss on the state is conceded and by which liability is ascertained judicially, the state is at
the ground that the supposed contract liberty to determine for itself whether to satisfy the judgment or not.
was unenforceable under the statute of o The State may limit claimants’ action only up to the completion of
frauds. litigation anterior to execution based on obvious considerations of
 They also averred that the supposed contract public policy.
hardly smacks of the character of a transaction o Disbursements of public funds must be covered by the corresponding
with the government, there being no public appropriations as required by law.
bidding or allocations process.  The functions and public services rendered by the State cannot be allowed to be
paralyzed or disrupted by the diversion of public funds from their legitimate and
specific objects.
20. Lockheed Agency  Lockheed was engaged with UP in a contract for security services, when ISSUE: W/N the money claim against UP can be made
v. UP several security guards assigned to UP filed complaints for payment of without resort to COA. No, it cannot.
underpaid wages.
 The LA & NLRC held UP & Lockheed to be solidarily liable to complainants  The court held that UP is a juridical personality
for their wage claims which the LA found meritorious. separate and distinct from the government and has
 On the basis of UP’s MR, the NLRC modified its judgement, stating that the the capacity to sue and be sued.
satisfaction of the judgment award will be only against the funds of UP which  Therefore, it cannot evade execution, and its funds
are not identified as public funds. may be subject to garnishment or levy.
 UP filed a Motion to Quash Garnishment, contending that the funds being  However, before execution may be had, a claim for
subjected to garnishment at the PNB are government/public funds. payment of the judgment award must first be filed
 Lockheed contends that because UP possesses its own charter, it is distinct with the COA.
from the state and thus, can be sued and be held liable.  It is the COA which has primary jurisdiction to
examine, audit and settle all debts and claims of any
  Lockheed moreover submits that UP cannot invoke state immunity to justify sort due from or owing the Government or any of its
and perpetrate an injustice. subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, including
 UP contends that while it gave consent to suit, that suability does not government-owned or controlled corporations and
necessarily mean liability. their subsidiaries.
 It asseverated that all money claims against the government must first be filed
with the Commission on Audit (COA).
21. Spouses Ortega v.  Respondent City of Cebu engaged in an expropriation proceeding over land ISSUE: W/N City of Cebu’s other bank accounts may be
Cebu owned by the petitioners. subjected to garnishment. No, they may not.
 While the amount was pending litigation, the respondent provided the court  The determination of just compensation in eminent
with an account number of the Philippine Postal Bank. domain cases is a judicial function, and no legislative
 Upon the declaration of the amount due, the RTC issued a writ of garnishment or executive act can be controlling over a judicial
& execution upon the aforementioned account. mandate.
Respondents, baulking at the amount the land was valued at, filed an appeal on the  However, as held in Makati v. CA, Courts have no
ground that the account number provided was for an account which did not exist, authority to garnish any other bank accounts by
and averred that the claim under law must be made with COA first. reason of public policy.
 Petitioner’s remedy, therefore, lies with the COA.
22. Heirs of Rallos v.  Two lots owned by the father of the Petitioner (P) were W/N judgement may in this case be levied against the City of Cebu.
Cebu expropriated by Public Respondent (PR); No, it may not.
 P filed a complaint with the RTC for Forfeiture or the Payment of  Based on considerations of public policy, no public funds may
Fair Market Value (FMV), plus damages. be seized by writs of execution based on judgements rendered
o PR averred that subject lots were road lots, which are in courts; Public funds may only be disbursed on the basis of
not residential in character, and were occupied by it w/o appropriation ordinances
expropriation pursuant to Ord. No. 416 (1963) o In this case, no appropriation ordinance was passed to
 RTC found for Heirs, awarding them the sum of PhP 34.9 million fulfill the claims of the Heirs
o The RTC then issued a writ of execution in favor of Heirs, o In connection with this, filing of any money claims with
additionally ordering for several Cebu banks to provide the COA is a sine qua non requirement for the validation
sheriffs with lists of accounts held by them belonging to of those claims, as per Sec. 26 of P.D. No. 14452
PR.  In the case of U.P. v. Dizon, the SC held that COA validation
 The same order also ordered the Sangguniang Panlungsod to was necessary even in the face of a final and executory
draft an appropriation ordinance relative to the money decision of a court.
judgement.
23. Holy See v.  A lot registered in the name of the Holy ISSUE: W/N the Holy See can invoke sovereign Acts of a State may be:
Rosario See was donated by the Archdiocese of immunity. Yes, it can. 1. Jure imperii – This refers to the
Manila to the Papal Nuncio, which public acts of a state.
represents the Holy See, who exercises  The Court held that Holy See may properly 2. Jure gestionis – This refers to acts
sovereignty over the Vatican City, Rome, invoke sovereign immunity for its non-suability. which are merely private in
Italy, for his residence.  International law recognizes the non-suability of character.
 Respondents purchased the land through diplomatic envoys, which is a generally accepted
an agent, but when conflict arose over the principle which we adopt under the Article 31(A) of the 1961 Vienna
eviction of squatters on the land, the Constitution. Convention on Diplomatic Relations
Msgr. Cirilios, petitioners’ representative, provide that diplomatic envoy shall be
granted immunity from civil and
 backed out of the agreement and later
sold the lot to a third party.
 Respondent then commenced a suit for
annulment of the sale.
 The Holy See and Msgr. Cirilos moved to
dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction
based on sovereign immunity from suit.
3. ChinaMEG v.
Santamaria
4. Indonesia v.  Petitioner, Republic of Indonesia, entered
Vinzon into a Maintenance Agreement with
respondent James Vinzon for a
consideration the maintenance of
equipment at the Embassy Main Building,
Embassy Annex Building and the the
official diplomatic residence.
 Following the expiry of the old
agreement, a new minister assumed the
position of Chief of Administration, who
allegedly found respondents work and
services unsatisfactory and therefore
terminated the agreement.
 Respondent claims that the aforesaid
termination was arbitrary and unlawful,
on the basis of his interactions with
members of the petitioner’s staff (albeit
not in relation to his obligations under
the agreement).
 The RTC denied petitioner’s motion to
dismiss on the basis of the agreement
between the parties, which provides that
legal actions arising therefrom “[would]
be settled according to the laws of the
Philippines and by the proper court of
Makati City, Philippines.”
 The CA denied petitioner’s appeal, hence
the instant petition.
5. Liang v. People
6. Arigo v. Swift
 Because the Holy See is not an ordinary state, administrative jurisdiction of the
its “governmental” functions (jure imperii) are receiving state over any real action
substantially different than other states. relating to private immovable property.
o Significantly, the Holy See received
the property for the site of its
mission or the Apostolic
Nunciature in the Philippines.
 This is necessarily an act jure imperii, which
renders the petitioner in this case immune
from suit.
W/N Petitioners enjoy immunity from suit. Yes, they do. Par in parem non habet imperium:
 International law is founded largely upon the “Equals do not have authority
principles of reciprocity, comity, independence, and over one another.”
equality of States.
o The rule that a State may not be sued Theory of Sovereign Immunity
without its consent is a necessary 2. Restrictive Theory –
consequence of the principles of States are immune in
independence and equality of States. their actions jure imperii,
o In the case of foreign States, the rule is but not in regards actions
derived from the principle of the jure gestionis.
sovereign equality of States, as expressed 3. Absolute Theory – States
in the maxim par in parem non habet are absolutely immune in
imperium. their actions.
 The Philippines adopts a restrictive theory of
sovereign immunity, in response to the increasing
interrelations of sovereign states with private
enterprise.
o Therefore, the mere entering into a
contract by a foreign State with a private
party cannot be construed as the
ultimate test of whether or not it is an
act jure imperii or jure gestionis.
 The Maintenance Agreement was entered into by the
Republic of Indonesia in the discharge of its
governmental functions.
1. Regardless of contractual stipulations which seem
to imply otherwise, it cannot be deemed to have
waived its immunity from suit.
PRINCIPLES & STATE POLICIES
7. Naval v.  Angel Naval served as a member of the ISSUE: W/N a provincial board member's Sec. 8 Art. 10 of the 1987 Constitution:
COMELEC Sangguniang Bayan of the 2nd district of election for the 4th time in a renamed district "…the term of office of local elective officials
Camarines Sur from 2004-2007 and constitutes a violation of the three-term limit shall be three years and no such official shall
2007-2010. rule. Yes, it does. serve for more than three consecutive
 On Oct 12, 2009, RA 9716 went into  The 3rd district was merely renamed and terms..."
effect, reapportioning the legislative consists of municipalities from the former
districts in Camarines Sur 2nd district whom Naval had already  One term gap or rest after three
o This law created a new 2nd served as SB member for two terms. consecutive terms is a compromise
district and renamed the other  Sustaining petitioners arguments would among members of the Constitutional
four districts. practically allow him to hold the same Committee.
 In 2010 he won as SB member of 3 rd office for 15 years.  Framers recognized the propensity of
district and was re-elected in 2013.  The Constitution mandates the strict public officers to perpetuate themselves
 He again seeks to run for the same implementation of the three-term limit while in power
position contending that he has only rule. o Hence the adoption of
served the 3rd district twice. provisions on term limits and a
 Julia filed a petition with the COMELEC guarantee of every citizen’s
to assail his candidacy equal access to public service.
8. Maquera v. Borra RA 4421 requires a candidate to post a ISSUE: WON RA 4421 is unconstitutional as Bengzon, concurring: Among the political
surety bond equivalent to one-year salary it provides for property requirements for rights of a Filipino is the right to vote and
of position to which he is a candidate, bond candidates to public offices. - Yes. be voted for public office. RA 4421 provides
shall be forfeited in favor of government if Imposition of property qualifications is a barrier that would stop suitable men and
the candidate, except when declared inconsistent with the nature and essence of women from presenting themselves as
winner fails to obtain at least 10% of the the republican system ordained in the prospective candidates. In fact it enables
votes cast for the office, there being not Constitution and the principle of social rich candidates, whether nuisance or not to
more than four candidates for the office. - justice underlying the same. - Therefore RA present themselves for election.
Explanatory note to said law provides that 4421 is unconstitutional as it provides for
it aims to curb the practice of socalled property qualifications which is not among
nuisance candidates. the requirements set by the Constitution for
candidates to public offices.
9. Manalo v. Sistoza  Petitioner Jesulito Manola questions the legality of ISSUE: W?N the aforementioned appointments require CA concurrence. No, they
Pres. Aquino’s appointments of Respondent PNP do not.
officers w/o confirmation of the Commission on  Under Sec. 16, Art. VII of the 1987 Constitution, the president has the power
Appointments to make four kinds of appointments:
 He contends that Secs. 26 & 31 of RA 6975 require o Heads of Executive Depts., Ambassadors, Public Ministers &
the confirmation of the CA for appointments for the Consuls, Officers of the AFP, with the concurrence of CA.
“Chief of the PNP… to the rank of the chief o All other officers whose appointment is not provided for by law.
superintendent.” o All those whose appointment is vested in the President by law.
o He also contends that the constitution o All those whose appointment is vested in the President by Congress.
requires consent of CA for appointments to  It is clear therefore that “only presidential appointments belonging to the
first group require the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments”
 the AFP, and that the PNP, being akin to the o Secs. 26 & 31 of RA 6975 are therefore unconstitutional.
AFP, requires similar concurrence.  Section 6 of Article XVI of the 1987 Constitution explicitly provides that the
PNP is separate and distinct from the AFP, and is civilian in character.
o Sec. 2 of RA 6975 also provides that “No element of the police force
shall be military…”
o The police force is clearly not intended to be akin to the AFP.
10. Garcia v.  Petitioner was issued a Restriction to Quarters under ISSUE: W/N the Office of the President acted with grave NOTE: The power of
Executive guard pending investigation of his case. He was abuse of discretion in confirming the sentence of the a (civilian) president
Secretary charged for failure to disclose all his existing assets in petitioner. No, it did not. to confirm, mitigate,
his SALN and for acquiring the status of an immigrant/  The power of the President to approve or disapprove and remit a sentence
permanent resident of the US while in active military the entire or any part of the sentence given by the of erring military
service. court martial is provided in Art. 48 of the Articles of personnel is a clear
 He was found guilty by the General Court Martial and War. recognition of the
sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment and  The Articles of War is silent however as to the superiority of civilian
dishonorable discharge from military service. deduction of the period of preventive confinement to authority over the
 After 6 years and 2 months of preventive confinement the penalty imposed. As the General Court Martial is military
petitioner was released from Camp Crame. a court within the strictest sense of the word and acts
 The Office of the President then confirmed the as a criminal court, certain provisions of the RPC
sentence imposed and provided that the sentence insofar as those which are not provided in the Articles
shall not be mitigated by any previous confinement. of War can be supplementary.
 Petitioner was therefore arrested and detained he  Petition is dismissed but Art. 29 of the RPC applies,
filed a petition with the SC seeking to annul and set the time within which the petitioner was under
aside the confirmation of sentence promulgated by preventive confinement should be credited to the
the Office of the President. sentence confirmed by the President
11. DBM v. Manila’s  In 1975, P.D. 765 was issued constituting ISSUE: W/N the INP retirees are entitled to The rationale behind the passage of RA 6975
Finest the Integrated National Police (INP) to be the same retirement benefits as PNP retirees. was to restore and underscore the civilian
composed of the Philippine Constabulary Yes, they are. character of police work which was muddled
(PC) as the nucleus and the various  Contrary to the position of the in the martial law years.
integrated police forces as component petitioners, the INP was never, as posited
thereof. by petitioners, abolished or terminated
 In 1990, RA 6975 known as the PNP Law out of existence by RA 6975. The INP was
was enacted, Sec. 23 of said law provides absorbed by the PNP.
that the PNP would initially consist of the  INP retirees are therefore entitled to the
members of the INP as well as officers same retirement benefits as PNP retirees.
and personnel of the PC. Sec. 38 of said law provides for its
 RA 6975 was amended by RA 8551 which retroactivity in
reengineered the retirement scheme in  favor of PNP members and officers
the police organization. retired or separated from the time
 INP retirees recognized the disparity in specified in the law.
the retirement benefits between them
and PNP retirees hence they filed a
petition for declaratory relief, alleging
 that they were entitled to the same
retirement benefits as PNP retirees.
12. Carpio v.  Petitioner assails the constitutionality ofISSUE: WON RA 6975 which restructures the Doctrine of qualified political agency
Executive RA 6975: An Act Establishing the PNP under the DILG detracts the mandate of  The President cannot be expected to
Secretary Philippine National Police Under a the Constitution that the PNP shall be exercise his control powers all at the
Reorganized Department of the Interior controlled by the NAPOLCOM. No, it does same time and in person, he will have to
and Local Government, and for Other not. delegate some of them to his Cabinet
Purposes  The President has control over all members.
 Petitioner avers that this is executive departments, bureaus, and  Under this doctrine, all executive and
unconstitutional as it limits the power of offices. The circumstance that the administrative organizations are
the National Police Commission NAPOLCOM and the PNP are placed adjuncts of the Executive Department,
(NAPOLCOM) to administrative control under the DILG is merely an the heads of various executive
over the PNP, which is provided for in the administrative realignment that would departments are assistants and agents of
Constitution. bolster coordination between said offices the Chief Executive, and except in cases
and LGUs. where the Chief Executive is required by
 The police force is not being integrated law to act in person, the administrative
with the military and is not part of the functions are performed by and through
AFP. the executive departments, and the acts
 Sec. 12 of RA 6975 enforces the of the secretaries of such departments
proposition that the national police force performed in the regular course of
does not fall under the Commander-in- business, unless disapproved by the Chief
Chief powers of the President. As a Executive, are acts of the Chief
civilian agency, it properly comes within Executive.
the exercise by the President of the
power of executive control.
 Petition is therefore dismissed for lack of
merit
13. Villavicencio v.  Lukban, the mayor of the city of Manila ordered the ISSUE: WON the City Mayor had the authority to order the deportation of
Lukban segregated district for “women of ill repute.” City the women to Davao. No, he did not.
authorities then arranged for them to be brought to Davao  We are a government of laws and not of men. There is no law which
as laborers. provides the mayor with the authority to force said women to change
 170 women were received as laborers by Francisco Sales, their domicile from Manila to Davao against their will.
and by Feliciano Yñigo and Rafael Castillo, who had no  Despite their being in a sense lepers of society they are Philippine
information that the women were prostitutes who had been citizens protected by the same constitutional guaranties as other
expelled from the city of Manila. citizens. His intentions to suppress the social evil was commendable
 Relatives of the women filed a petition for habeas corpus however his methods were unlawful.
with the SC.  Lukban was found to be in contempt of court for not immediately
bringing the women back to Manila.
14. PHAP v. Duque III  Petitioner as representative for ISSUE: WON the provisions of the  Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can
manufacturers of breastmilk WHA Resolutions can be validly become part of the sphere of domestic law either by
substitutes seek to nullify A.O. implemented by the DOH through the transformation or incorporation.
2006-0012 entitled Revised Rules RIRR. No, it cannot.
 and Regulations of E.O. 51  WHA Resolutions only constitute o Transformation requires that an
Otherwise Known as the Milk soft laws, which is a term for non- international law be transformed into a
Code, Relevant International binding norms, principles, and domestic law through a constitutional
Agreements, Penalizing Violations practices that influence state mechanism such as local legislation.
Thereof and Other Purposes behavior, as opposed to hard laws o Incorporation applies when by mere
(RIRR) issued by the DOH. which are binding rules of constitutional declaration, international law
 The Milk Code was issued by Pres. international law. is deemed to have the force of domestic law.
Aquino on Oct 28, 1986 to give  Respondents failed to establish that  Sec. 2 Art. 2 of the 1987 Constitution embodies the
effect to the International Code of the provisions of WHA Resolutions incorporation method: "The Philippines...adopts the
Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes are customary international law generally accepted principles of international law as
(ICMBS), a code adopted by the which may be part of the law of the land..."
World Health Assembly (WHA) in  deemed part of the law of the land.  Fr. Bernas defines customary international law as "a
1981.  Legislation is needed to transform general and consistent practice of states followed by
 Petitioners posit that the RIRR is the WHA Resolutions as part of the them from a sense of legal obligation (opinio juris).
not valid as it contains provisions law of the land which can be  The statement contains the two basic elements of
that are not constitutional and goes implemented by executive custom:
beyond the law it is supposed to  agencies. 1. Material Factor: How states behave, which
implement.  Thus only the provisions of the IRR includes several elements such as duration,
 DOH argues on the other hand in consonance with the Milk Code consistency, and generality of the practice of
that the RIRR implements not only (but not those of subsequent WHA states.
the Milk Code but also various Resolutions) can be validly 2. 2) Psychological or Subjective factor: Why
international instruments. They implemented by the DOH through states behave the way they do. Opinio juris,
contend that said international the RIRR. or the belief that a certain form of behavior
instruments are deemed part of the  Secs. 4(f), 11, and 46 of A.O. 2006- is obligatory is what makes a practice an
law of the land and therefore they 0012 (RIRR) are declared null and international rule. Without it, practice is not
may implement them with the void for being ultra vires. a law
RIRR.
15. Tanada v. Angara  PH joined the WTO with the goal of ISSUE: W/N the WTO agreement violates  The Senate after deliberation gave its
improving access to foreign markets Constitution mandating economic nationalism consent to the WTO thereby making it
through the reduction of tariffs on its as provided in Sec. 19 Art. 2 and Secs. 10 & 12 "a part of the law of the land" is a
exports particularly agricultural and Art. 12 all of the 1987 Constitution. No, it does legitimate exercise of its sovereign duty
industrial products. not. and power.
 Petitioner argues that the WTO  Art. 2 and some articles of Art. 12 are not  While sovereignty has traditionally been
agreement violates the mandate of the self- executing provisions; i.e. they do not deemed absolute on the domestic level,
1987 Constitution to "develop a self- embody enforceable constitutional rights it is however subject to restrictions and
reliant and independent national but guidelines for legislation. limitations voluntarily agreed to by the
economy effectively controlled by  The Constitution does not intend the Philippines as a member of the family of
Filipinos" state to pursue an isolationist policy. It did nations.
not shut out foreign investments, goods,  The Constitution did not envision a
and services in the development of the hermit-type isolation from the rest of the
Philippine economy. While the world.
Constitution does not encourage the
 unlimited entry of foreign goods, it does
not prohibit them either. In fact, it allows
an exchange on the basis of equality and
reciprocity, frowning only on foreign
competition that is unfair.
 Petition is dismissed for lack of merit.
16. Taruc v. de la  Petitioners were lay members of the ISSUE: WON the courts have jurisdiction to Sec. 6 Art. 2 of the 1987 CONSTITUTION
Cruz Philippine Independent Church (PIC) hear cases involving the excommunication of The separation of the Church and State shall
while the respondents were the bishop members of a religious institution. No, it does be inviolable.
and parish priest of said church. not.
 Fr. Florano's wife belonged to a political  In our jurisdiction, we hold the Church Sec. 5 Art. 3 of the 1987 CONSTITUTION
party opposed by Taruc's thus the and the State to be separate and distinct No law shall be made respecting an
animosity between the two. from one another. establishment of religion or prohibiting the
 Hostility worsened when Taruc  In a form of government where the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and
organized an open mass to be celebrated complete separation of civil and enjoyment of religious profession and
by a different priest, Fr. Ambong during ecclesiastical authority worship, without discrimination or
the town fiesta.  is insisted upon, the civil courts must not preference, shall forever be allowed. No
 Thus Bishop Dela Cruz excommunicated allow themselves to intrude unduly in religious tests shall be required for the
petitioners from PIC. matters of an ecclesiastical nature. exercise of civil or political rights.
 Petitioners filed a complaint for damages  In Fonacier v CA it was held that in
contending that their expulsion was illegal disputes involving religious institutions
because it was done without trial and thus there is one area which the Court should
violates their right to due process. not touch doctrinal and disciplinary
differences.
 Petition denied for lack of merit.
17. Calalang v.  Commonwealth Act 548 was ISSUE: WON Commonwealth Act 548 which “Social Justice is neither communism nor
Williams passed by the National Assembly in prohibits animal-drawn vehicles to pass through despotism nor atomism nor anarchy, but the
the exercise of police power of the certain streets is constitutional. Yes, it is. humanization of laws and the equalization of
state. It aims to promote safe  Public welfare lies at the bottom of enactment social and economic forces by the state so
transit upon and avoid obstructions of the said law, the state in order to promote that justice, in its rational and objectively
on national roads, in the interest the general welfare may interfere with personal secular sense, may at least be approximated.
and convenience of the public. liberty, with property and with business and Social justice means the promotion of the
 Petitioner assails the occupations. welfare of all the people, the adoption by the
constitutionality of Commonwealth  Persons and property may be subjected to all Government of measures calculated to insure
Act 548 which prohibits animal- kinds of restraints and burdens, in order to economic stability of all the competent
drawn vehicles to pass and pick up secure the general comfort, health, and elements of society, through the maintenance
passengers in certain places to the prosperity of the state. of a proper economic and social equilibrium
detriment not only of their owners  To this fundamental aim of the government the in the interrelations of the members of the
but to the riding public as well. rights of an individual are subordinated. community, constitutionally, through the
 Petition denied. adoption of measures legally justifiable, or
extra-constitutionally, through the exercise
of powers underlying the existence of all
 governments on the time-honored principle
of salus populi est suprema lex.”
18. Oposa v. Factoran  Minors represented by their parents ISSUE: WON petitioners have locus standi to  The right to a balanced and healthful
instituted the complaint alleging that all file the case for future generations. Yes, they ecology (Sec. 16 Art. 2 of the 1987
citizens are entitled to the full benefit, use do. Constitution), was for the first time
and enjoyment of the country's virgin  Petitioners' personality to sue in behalf of incorporated in the fundamental law.
tropical rainforests. the succeeding generations can only be  The said right carries with it the
 They asseverate that they represent their based on the concept of intergenerational correlative duty to refrain from impairing
generation as well as generations yet responsibility insofar as the right to a the environment.
unborn and pray that timber licenses be balanced and healthful ecology is
cancelled and for the DENR to cease and concerned.
desist from receiving applications for new  The minors' assertion of their right to a
timber license agreements. sound environment constitutes the
performance of their obligation to ensure
the protection of that right for the
generations yet to come.
 Petition is granted.
19. Imbong v. Ochoa  RA 10354 the Responsible ISSUE: WON the RH Law is unconstitutional for violating the Sec. 5 Art. III of the 1987
Parenthood and constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. No, it is not. Constitution
Reproductive Health Act of  The constitutional assurance of religious freedom provides two (1. Establishment Clause) No law
2012 (RH Law) was enacted guarantees: shall be made respecting an
by Congress on Dec. 21, 1. The Establishment Clause which prohibits the state from establishment of religion or
2012. sponsoring any religion or favoring any religion against prohibiting the free exercise
 14 petitions and 2 petitions- other groups, thereof.
in-intervention were 2. The Free Exercise Clause which prohibits the state from (2. Free Exercise Clause) The
submitted to the SC to assail unduly interfering with the outside manifestations of one's free exercise and enjoyment of
the constitutionality of said belief and faith. religious profession and worship,
law.  As the establishment clause limits what government can do with without discrimination or
religion, it also limits what the religious sects can or cannot do preference, shall forever be
with allowed.
 the government. Petitioners are misguided in their supposition No religious tests shall be
that the government cannot enhance its population control required for the exercise of civil
program through the RH Law simply because the use of or political rights.
contraception is against their religious beliefs.
 The duty to refer imposed by the RH Law violates the religious
belief of the medical practitioner as he is immediately burdened to
perform an act against his belief. The same holds true for hospitals
operated by religious groups and healthcare providers. However,
while generally healthcare service providers cannot be forced to
render reproductive healthcare procedures if doing so would
contravene their religious beliefs, an exception must be made in
 life-threatening cases that require the performance of emergency
procedures.
 The court declared RA 10354 as constitutional except with
respect to certain provisions declared to be unconstitutional.
20. MMDA v. Initially, respondents filed a complaint against ISSUE: WON petitioners may be directed by the court to In Oposa v Factoran the court
Concerned petitioners for the cleanup, rehabilitation, and clean up Manila Bay. Yes, they may. stated that the right to a balanced
Citizens of Manila protection of the Manila Bay alleging that the  The MMDA's duty to put up an adequate and and healthful ecology need not
Bay water quality of Manila Bay had fallen far appropriate sanitary landfill and solid waste and liquid even be written in the
below the allowable standards set by P.D. disposal as well as other alternative garbage disposal Constitution for it is assumed,
1152 or the Philippine Environment Code. system is ministerial, its duty being a statutory like other civil and political rights
Petitioners argued that provisions of P.D. imposition and thus cannot be characterized as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, to
1152 relate only to cleaning of specific discretionary. exist from the inception of
pollution incidents and not to cleaning in  P.D. 1152 requires them to take such measures as mankind and it is an issue of
general, and that the cleaning of Manila Bay is may be necessary to meet the prescribed water transcendental importance with
not a ministerial act which can be compelled quality standards. intergenerational implications.
by a mandamus.  Even assuming the absence of a categorical provision
specifically mandating petitioners to clean up the bay,
they and the men and women representing them
cannot escape their obligation to future generations
of Filipino to keep the waters of Manila Bay as clean
and clear as humanly possible.
21. Espina v. Zamora,  Petitioners assail the constitutionality of ISSUE: WON Secs. 9, 19 & 20 of Art. 2 of the
Jr. the Retail Trade Liberalization Act of 1987 Constitution are self-executing. No, they
2000 (RA 8762) which is said to be in are not.
breach of the constitutional mandate for  Said provisions are not self-executing
development of a self-reliant and policies and legislative failure to pursue
independent national economy effectively such cannot give rise to a cause of action
controlled by Filipinos. (Sec. 19 Art. II, in the courts.
1987 Constitution)  Sec. 19 Art. II does not impose a policy of
 RA 8762 expressly repealed RA 1180 Filipino monopoly of the economic
which absolutely prohibited foreign environment.
nationals from engaging in the retail trade  RA 8762 has provided strict standards
business in the country. and safeguards in foreign participation in
 Respondents argue that the provisions of the retail business.
the Constitution invoked by petitioners  While the Constitution mandates a bias in
are not self-executing thus they are not favor of Filipino goods, services, labor,
judicially demandable. and enterprises, it also recognizes the
need for business exchange with the rest
of the world, it does not rule out the
entry of foreign investments, goods, and
services but it does not encourage their
unlimited entry into the country.
22. Pamatong v.  Petitioner filed his COC for President ISSUE: WON the equal access provision in Sec. 26 Art. 2 Sec. 26 Art. 2 of the 1987
COMELEC and respondent refused to give due of the Constitution is self-executing. No, it does not. Constitution
course to his COC.  Provisions under Art. 2 are generally considered not The State shall guarantee equal
 He then moved for reconsideration self-executing including the equal access provision access to opportunities for public
however respondent declared him and invoked by petitioner. Thus, they do not contain any service, and prohibit political
other 35 candidates as nuisance judicially enforceable constitutional right but merely dynasties as may be defined by
candidates who could not wage a specifies a guideline for legislative or executive action. law.
nationwide campaign.  There is no constitutional right to run for or hold a
 Petitioner filed a writ of certiorari seeking public office and particularly to seek the presidency.
to reverse the resolutions which were What is recognized is merely a subject to limitations
allegedly in violation of his right to "equal imposed by law.
access to opportunities for public  Owing to the superior interest in ensuring a credible
service" under Sec. 26 Art. 2 of the and orderly election, the state could exclude nuisance
Constitution. candidates. The determination of bona fide candidates
is governed by statutes, and the concept is
satisfactorily embodied in the Omnibus Election
Code.
 Case was remanded to the COMELEC to determine
whether petitioner is a nuisance candidate as
contemplated in Sec. 69 of the Omnibus Election
Code.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
23. Endencia v. David
24. Abakada Guro v.
Purisima
25. Senate Blue
Ribbon v.
Majaducon
26. In Re: Exemption
from Court Fees
of Cooperatives
27. Ople v. Torres
28. KMU v. NEDA
Director-General
29. Silverio v.
Republic
30. In Re: Judge
Rodolfo U.
Manzano
31. Osmena, Jr. v.
Pendatun
32. Mendoza v. People
33. Corpuz v. People
CHECKS & BALANCES
34. Angara v. Electoral  Angara's election to the National ISSUE: WON the confirmation of the National Concept of Check and Balance:
Commission Assembly was confirmed in Dec. 3, 1935. Assembly of any member deprives the The purpose in creating the Electoral
The National Assembly passed a Electoral Commission of its incidental power Commission was to have an independent
to prescribe the time within which protests
resolution stating that no further protests constitutional organ pass upon all contests
regarding the election shall be against the election of any member should be relating to elections, returns, and
entertained. filed. Yes, it does. qualifications of the National Assembly,
 On Dec. 8, Pedro Ynsua filed a Motion of  The Electoral Commission is the sole devoid of partisan influence and
Protest against Angara with the Electoral judge of all contests relating to the consideration, which would be frustrated if
Commission. election, return, and qualifications of the National Assembly were to retain the
 Dec. 9: The Electoral Commission members of the National Assembly. power to prescribe rules and regulations
announced that it would be the last day  The present (i.e. 1935) Constitution has regarding the manner of conducting said
for the filing of protests. transformed all powers previously protests.
 Angara then filed a Motion to Dismiss the exercised by legislature with respect to
protest alleging that it was filed beyond contests relating to elections.
the timeline set for protests by the  Such transfer was full, clear, and complete
National Assembly. and carried with it the implied power to
 Electoral Commission took cognizance of prescribe the rules and regulations as to
the the time and filing of protests.
 protest and thus Angara filed a motion  Electoral Commission was acting within
 for prohibition with the SC. the legitimate exercise of its
constitutional prerogative in assuming to
take cognizance of the protest filed by
Ynsua, resolution by the National
Assembly cannot toll the time for filing
protests.
35. Gonzales III v.  This is a consolidated case regarding the ISSUE: WON RA 6770 is unconstitutional Office of the Ombudsman was created to
Office of the removal from office of Deputy insofar as it grants disciplinary jurisdiction to serve as a check and balance to the executive
President Ombudsman Gonzales III and Special the President over a Deputy Ombudsman and department. Subjecting the Deputy
Prosecutor Sulit. a Special Prosecutor. Yes, it is. Ombudsman to discipline and removal by the
 The two were under investigation for  Deputy Ombudsman: RA 6770 is President whose own alter egos and officials
supposed “gross negligence and grave unconstitutional for granting disciplinary in the executive department are subject to
misconduct” in the investigation as to powers to the President over a Deputy the Ombudsman's disciplinary authority risks
allegations of robbery, grave threat, Ombudsman, in violation of the the independence of the Office of the
robbery extortion and physical injury independence of the Office of the Ombudsman itself.
made against Senior Inspector Rolando Ombudsman.
Mendoza.  Special Prosecutor: However the court
 Ostensibly as a result of their did not consider the Office of the Special
“misconduct,” SI Mendoza took a tourist Prosector to be within the Office of the
bus in Rizal Park hostage, and the Ombudsman and thus is not entitled to
 resulting stand-off and gun battle left 9 the independence the latter enjoys under
dead and 9 injured. the Constitution
 As a result, President Aquino constituted
an Investigation and Review Committee,
whose findings led to petitioner’s
dismissal.
36. SB of Don  Martinez filed a case with the court to ISSUE: WON the Sangguniang Bayan may  The rule which confers to the proper
Mariano Marcos v. assail the Sangguniang Bayan's decision to remove an elective local official from office. courts the power to remove an elective
Martinez remove him as Punong Barangay of Brgy. No, it may not. official from office is intended as a check
Don Mariano Marcos.  Sec. 60 of the LGC conferred upon the against any capriciousness or partisan
 This was as a result of charges of courts the power to remove elective activity by the disciplinary authority.
misappropriation of funds for Martinez’ officials from office.  This is because courts are expected to be
failure to properly report expenses and  LGUs may impose penalties or suspend to non-partisan, and are subject to review
revenues from activities under his erring officials however it may not go by higher courts in cases of grave abuse
purview. beyond mere suspension. of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction.
37. Aguilar v. DOJ  Tetet Aguilar was arrested on charges of extortion ISSUE: WON the judiciary can reexamine a public prosecutor's determination of
and on suspicion of being a member of the CPP-NPA; probable cause which is an executive function. Yes, it can.
He was later killed by respondent military personnel,  Determination of probable cause by public prosecutor is essentially an
who alleged that he had attempted to take a grenade executive function; however, the judiciary, through a special civil action of
from one of them. certiorari, may determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of
 His father filed a case alleging that he was deliberately discretion amounting to a lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
murdered despite his peaceful surrender. branch or instrumentality of the government.
 The DOJ acquitted the military personnel present  Dangupon admitted that he shot Tetet; Fortuno and Abordo were with
during Tetet's arrest stating their actions were merely Dangupon during the time Tetet was killed thus an existence of probable
in self-defense and in performance of their duty. cause on the part of the 3 officials.
 The rule is that where a killing is admitted, the burden of proof of justification
for such a killing shifts to the one who has admitted it.
DELEGATION OF POWERS
38. Araneta v.  These are consolidated cases assailing the ISSUE: WON executive orders of the President issued in virtue of Commonwealth Act No.
Dinglasan validity of executive orders issued by the 671 are valid. No, they are not valid.
President in virtue of Commonwealth  CA 671 was issued specifically by reason of a total emergency, for which reason
Act 671 (An Act Declaring Total Congress could no longer regularly meet and pass laws, which made it necessary to
Emergency as a Result of War Involving confer upon the president the power to pass laws.
the Philippines and Authorizing the  CA 671 therefore must be considered as inoperative from the time when Congress
President to Promulgate Rules and met in regular session on May 25, 1946
Regulations to Meet Such Emergency.)  It must be therefore that EOs 62, 192, 225, and 226 were issued without authority of
 These petitions aver that as the “total law.
emergency” (i.e. the Japanese invasion &  The National Assembly restricted the life of the emergency powers of the President
occupation) has since ceased, the law to the time the legislative was prevented from holding sessions due to enemy action
granting the President such emergency or other causes brought by war.
powers is necessarily inoperative.
  Congress delegated its power by simple majority; any law repealing it would have to
go through the regular process, which would involve the presidential veto which may
only be overcome by a two-thirds vote of Congress
 The scenario that Congress it might not be able to regain its powers except by a two-
third vote is not in harmony with the Constitution.
39. Rodriguez v. Gella  Rodriguez seek to invalidate EOs 545 and ISSUE: WON EO 545 and 546 are valid. No, If the President had ceased to have powers
546 issued in 1952 pursuant to CA 671. they are not. with regards to general appropriations none
o EO 545: appropriating 37M for  As held in Araneta v Dinglasan, executive can remain in respect of special
urgent and essential public works orders issued in pursuant to CA 671 are appropriations: otherwise he may accomplish
o EO 546: appropriating 11M for to be considered ineffective. indirectly what he cannot do directly.
relief in provinces and cities  The President did not invoke any actual
ravaged by calamities emergencies emanating from the Second
 HB 727 intending to revoke CA 671 was World War for which CA 671 was
vetoed by the President due to Korean intended.
war and his perception that war subsists.  EOs 545 and 546 are declared null and
 CA 671 was already declared inoperative void.
by SC in Araneta v Dinglasan.
40. Pelaez v. Auditor  In 1964, Pres. Marcos issued EOs creating ISSUE: WON Congress has delegated the Tests for valid delegation:
General 33 municipalities purportedly pursuant to power to create municipalities to the 1. Completeness test: the law must be
Sec. 68 of the Revised Administrative President by virtue of Sec. 68 of the Revised complete in all its essential terms and
Code Admin Code. No, it has not. conditions when it leaves the
 Then-VP Pelaez filed a special civil action  No such delegation was made. Although legislature so that there will be
to prohibit the auditor general from Congress may delegate powers to nothing left for the delegate to do
disbursing funds to be appropriated for another branch, it is essential that the law when it reaches him except to
said municipalities. is: enforce it.
 He claims that the EOs were 1. complete in itself; 2. Sufficient standard test: it must fix a
unconstitutional and Sec. 68 of the RAC 2. fix a standard. standard (the limits of which are
had been impliedly repealed by Sec. 3 of  Set forth a policy to be executed by the sufficiently determinate) to which
RA 2370 which provides that barrios may delegate and the limits of which are the delegate must conform in the
not be created or their boundaries sufficiently determinate to which the performance of his functions.
altered nor their names changed except delegate must conform in the
by act of Congress. performance of such function. Sec. 68 Sec. 68, RAC: “…the President may by
 If the President under this new law lacked such standards without such there executive order define the boundary of any
cannot even create a barrio more so a would be no means to determine whether municipality and may change the seat of
municipality which is composed of several the delegate has acted within the scope of government within any subdivision to such
barrios. his authority. place therein as the public welfare may
 Auditor General countered that  Sec. 68 provides the qualifying clause "as require.”
municipalities are exempt from the bar the public welfare may require" proper
and that municipalities may be created interpretation for this is that the
without creating barrios and that the President may change the seat of power
power to create a municipality has been within any subdivision as public welfare
delegated by Congress to the President.
 may NOT require the creation of
municipalities.
 The SC declared that the power to create
municipalities is essentially legislative in
character and not administrative.
41. Gerochi v. DOE  Katulong ng Bayan and Environmentalist ISSUE: WON the universal charge is a form of  If the generation of revenue is the
Consumer's Network prays that Sec. 34 tax and that the delegated power to the ERC primary purpose and regulation is merely
of RA 9136 Electric Power Industry is thus unconstitutional. No, it is not. incidental, then the imposition is a tax.
Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA) imposing a  Universal charge is not a form of taxation  However, if the primary purpose is
universal charge be declared but is incidental to the state's police regulation and revenue generation is
unconstitutional. power. merely incidental, it does not make the
 These groups allege that the universal  The valid exercise of the power of imposition a tax.
charge imposed under Sec. 34 of EPIRA is subordinate legislation is subject to the  Universal charge is not a tax but an
a tax and there is undue delegation of statute’s compliance with the a.) exaction in the exercise of State's police
legislative power to tax on the part of the Completeness Test, and b) the Sufficient power.
Energy Regulatory Commission. Standard Test.  Primary rule: potestas delegata non
 EPIRA in its entirety is complete in that all delegari potes (what has been delegated
its essential terms and conditions and cannot further be delegated)
sufficient standards.  However, given the volume of and
 Petition is dismissed for lack of merit. variety of interaction in today's society, it
is doubtful if the legislature can
promulgate laws that will deal adequately
with and respond promptly to the
minutiae of everyday life. Hence, there is
a need to delegate to administrative
bodies the authority to promulgate rules
and regulations to implement a given
statute and effectuate its policies.
42. Dagan v.
Philracom
43. PAL v. CAB
44. Marc Donnely &
Associates v.
Agregado
45. Southern Cross v.
CeMAP & DTI
46. Quezon City v.
Bayantel