Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1. Police Power
It is in the above sense the greatest and most
powerful attribute of government. "the most
essential, insistent, and at least illimitable of
powers," (Justice Holmes) aptly pointed out "to
all the great public needs."
Its scope, ever-expanding to meet the
exigencies of the times, even to anticipate the
future where it could be done, provides enough
room for an efficient and flexible response to
conditions and circumstances thus assuring the
greatest benefits. In the language of Justice
Cardozo: "Needs that were narrow or parochial
in the past may be interwoven in the present
with the well-being of the nation.
2. Delegation of Legislative Power
It is a fundamental principle flowing from the
doctrine of separation of powers that Congress
may not delegate its legislative power to the
two other branches of the government, subject
to the exception that local governments may
over local affairs participate in its exercise.
What cannot be delegated is the authority
under the Constitution to make laws and to
alter and repeal them; the test is the
declared
the
ordinance
acted well
not commit
is because
the Labor
recruitment
JMM PROMOTIONS v CA
The Federation of Entertainment Talent
Managers of the Philippines (FETMOP for
brevity) filed a class suit on January 27, 1995
assailing that the Department Order No. 3
which establishes various procedures and
requirements for screening performing artists
under a new system of training, testing,
certification and deployment of the former and
other related issuance, principally contending
that
the
said
orders,
1.)violated
the
constitutional right to travel; 2.) abridged
existing contracts for employment; and 3.)
deprived individual artists of their licenses
without due process of law. FETMOP also
averred that the issuance of the Artist Record
Book (ARB) was discriminatory and illegal and
in gross violation of the constitutional right to
life liberty and property. FETMOP prayed for
the issuance of the writ of preliminary
injunction against the orders.
JMM Promotion and Management, Inc. (JMM
for brevity) and Kary International, Inc. (Kary
for brevity) filed a motion for intervention in
CHAVEZ v ROMULO
GMA delivered a speech to PNP directing PNP
Chief Hermogenes Ebdane to suspend the
issuance pf Permit to Carry Firearms Outside of
Residence PTCFOR). Ebdane issued guidelines
banning carrying firearms outside of residence.
Petitioner, Francisco Chaves requested DILG to
reconsider the implementation. The request
was denied. Hence the petition for prohibition
and injunction against Executive Secretary
Alberto Romulo and PNP Chief Ebdane.
Issue: Whether or not revocation of PTCFOR is
a violation of right to property? Whether or not
the banning of carrying firearms outside the
residence is a valid exercise of police power?
Decision: Petition dismissed. Just like ordinary
licenses in other regulated fields, PTCFOR may
be revoked any time. It does not confer an
absolute right, but only a personal privilege to
be exercised under existing restrictions. A
licensee takes his license subject to such
MMDA v GARIN
Respondent Garin was issued a traffic violation
receipt and his drivers license was confiscated
for parking illegally. Garin wrote MMDA
Chairman Prospero Oreta requesting the return
of his license and expressed his preference for
case to be filed in Court. Without an immediate
reply from the reply from the Chairman, Garin
filed a complaint for preliminary injunction
assailing among other that Sec 5(+) of
RA 7942 violates the constitutional prohibition
against
undue
delegation
of
legislative
authority, allowing MMDA to fix and impose
unspecified and unlimited fines and penalties.
RTC rules in his favor directing MMDA to
return Garins drivers license and for MMDA
to desist from confiscating drivers license
without first giving the driver to opportunity to
be heard in an appropriate proceeding.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Sec 5(+) of RA 7942 which
authorizes MMDA to confiscate and suspend or
revoke drivers license in the enforcement of
traffic constitutional.
RULING:
Issue:
Whether Ordinance No. 7774 is a valid exercise
of police power of the State.
Held:
No. Ordinance No. 7774 cannot be considered
as a valid exercise of police power, and as such,
it is unconstitutional.
The facts of this case will recall to mind not
only the recent City of Manila v Laguio Jr
ruling, but the 1967 decision in Ermita-Malate
Hotel and Motel Operations Association, Inc., v.
Hon. City Mayor of Manila. The common thread
FACTS:
The Sangguniang Panglunsod of Davao
City enacted Ordinance No. 0309 series of
2007. It was approved by city mayor Duterte
and took effect on March 23, 2007 after its
publication in Mindanao Power. Section 5 of the
Ordinance enforces a ban on aerial spraying 3
months thereafter (transition period).
The
Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters
Association
(PBGEA)
challenged
its
constitutionality before the RTC, alleging that
the ordinance is an unreasonable exercise of
police power, violated the equal protection
clause, amounted to the confiscation of
property without due process, and lacked
publication pursuant to S511 of the Local
Government Code (LGC).
No.
0309-07
is
HELD:
1. The Ordinance is a valid act of the
Sangguniang Bayan. To be considered as a
valid police power measure, an ordinance must
pass a two pronged test: It must be formal and
enacted within the powers of the LGU, and it
must be substantive and conforms with the
limitations under the constitution. The General
Welfare Clause of the LGC comprehends 2
branches of delegated powers: general
legislative power and police power proper.
Held:
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The
Decision of the Court of Appeals dated July 26,