CALTEX vs.

PALOMAR
G.R. No. L-19650 (September 29, 1966)

FACTS:

In the year 1960, Caltex Philippines conceived and laid the groundwork for a
promotional scheme calculated to drum up patronage for its oil products. The
contest was entitled “Caltex Hooded Pump Contest”, which calls for
participants to estimate the actual number of liters as hooded gas pump at
each Caltex station will dispense during a specific period. Foreseeing the
extensive use of the mails not only as amongst the media for publicizing the
contest but also for the transmission of communications, representations were
made by Caltex with the postal authorities for the contest to be cleared in
advance for mailing. This was formalized in a letter sent by Caltex to the
Postmaster General, dated October 31, 1960, in which Caltex, through its
counsel, enclosed a copy of the contest rules and endeavored to justify its
position that the contest does not violate the “The Anti‑Lottery Provisions of
the Postal Law”.

Unfortunately, Palomar, the acting Postmaster General denied Caltex’s request

stating that the contest scheme falls within the purview of the Anti‑lottery
Provision and ultimately, declined Caltex’s request for clearance.

Caltex sought reconsideration, stressing that there being no consideration

involved in part of the Caltex sought reconsideration, stressing that there
being no consideration involved in part of the contestant, the contest was
not commendable as a lottery. However, the Postmaster General maintained
his view that the contest involves consideration, or even it does not involve
any consideration it still falls as “Gift Enterprise”, which was equally
banned by the Postal Law.

ISSUE:

1. Whether the petition states a sufficient cause of action for declaratory

relief?

HELD:
By express mandate of Section 1 of Rule 66 of the old Rules of Court which
deals with the applicability to invoke declaratory relief which states:

“Declaratory relief is available to person whose rights are affected by a

statute, to determine any question of construction or validity arising under
the statute and for a declaration of
rights thereunder.

In amplification, conformably established jurisprudence on the matter, laid

down certain conditions:

1. There must be a justiciable controversy.

2. The controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse.
3. The party seeking declaratory relief must have a legal interest in the
controversy.
4. The issue involved must be ripe for judicial determination.