Case Facts Issues Held Ratio/Ruling

PHILIPPINE On August 30, 1989, the 1. Are SEE LOI No.

INTERNATIONAL administrative order no. administrative RULING 444 and P.D. No.
TRADING SOCPEC 89-08-01 was issued by orders subject 244 were not
CORPORATION, the Philippine International to Article 2 of repealed by E.O.
petitioner, vs. Coporation (PITC). The relevant the Civil No. 13 since the
ANGELES, provision therein was that Code? executive order
respondent organizations which wanted to 2. Has legal itself, as worded,
G.R. No. trade with the People’s authority of was silent as to
108461. Republic of China (PROC) had to PITC the abolition or
October do so under certain conditions: emanating limitation of the
Imports must be made with a from LOI No. powers granted
corresponding number or 444 and P.D. to the :PITC.
percentage or exports. Desiring No. 244 ben
to make importations form repealed by However, the
PROC, private respondents E.O. No. 133? Administrative
Remington and Firestone, both 3. Is the Order is not
domestic corporations, obligation still exempt from
individually applied for the deal subsisting, or Article 2 of
and executed respective are the regulations must
undertaking to balance their respondents also be published
imports and exports. After freed from it? if their purpose is
importation, both private to enforce or
respondents failed to comply in implement
submitting corresponding existing law
export credits. The PITC pursuant also to a
subsequently barred private valid delegation.
respondents from future
importation from PROC. The
Eventually, private administrative
respondents came together order issued by
came together in a petition PITC dated on
against PITC (petition for August 30, 1989
Prohibition and Mandamus, was not published
with prater for issuance of in the Official
Temporary Restraining Order). Gazette or in a
The regional trial court newspaper of
rendered its decision on general
January 4, 1992. the court sided circulation.
with herein private Hence, the law
respondents citing among a was invalid when
host of reasons that PITC’s obligations were
authority to create laws had supposed to take
already been repealed by E.O. effect.
No. 133, issued on February 27,
1987. Another considerable The Supreme
point was that the Court affirmed
administrative order was null the judgment of
and void since the same was the lower court,
not published as was required to the effect that
by Article 2 of the Civil Code. judgment was
hereby rendered
 Petitioner then came in favor of the
to the Supreme Court on private
petition for review on respondents.
certiorari. While the Supreme
Court was deliberating,
President Fidel V. Ramos came
to an agreement with PROC and
forged Executive Order No.
244. The executive order
essentially abrogated the
administrative order. There
however remained, the matter
of outstanding obligations of
the respondents for the
charges relating to the 0.5%.
Counter Export Development
Service in favor of PITC, for the
period when the questioned
Administrative Order was still in
effect.