Gaerlan vs Catubig

Facts:

In the 1963 elections, among the registered candidates for councilors in the eight-seat
City Council of Dagupan were Gregorio Gaerlan and Luis Catubig. The latter obtained the
third highest number of votes and was proclaimed one of the elected councilors while
the former lost his bid.

Gaerlan went to the Court to challenge Catubig’s eligibility for office on the averment of
non-age. Catubig was born in Dagupan City on May 19, 1939. At the time he presented
his certificate of candidacy on September 10, 1963, he was 24 years, 3 months and 22
days; on election day, November 12, 1963, he was 24 years, 5 months and 24 days; and
at the time he took his oath of office as councilor on January 1, 1964, 3 he was 24 years, 7
months and 13 days. Whether his age be reckoned as of the date of the filing of
certificate of candidacy, or the election date, or the date set by law for the assumption of
office — the result is the same. Whichever date is adopted, still, respondent was below
25 years of age. The judgment held Catubig ineligible and declared his seat vacant.

Catubig appealed and alleged that the question of age eligibility should be governed not
by R.A. 170, and not by R.A. 2259. Republic Act No. 484 amending, inter alia, Section 12
of the Dagupan City Charter, took effect on June 10, 1950; whereas, Republic Act No.
2259 became law on June 19, 1959 — nine years later.

R.A. 170, as amended R.A. 2259

Sec. 12 x x x the elective members of the
Municipality Board shall be qualified
electors of the city, residents therein for at
least one year, and not less than twenty-
three years of age. x x x"
Sec. 6. No person shall be a City Mayor,
Vice-Mayor, or Councilor unless he is at
least twenty-five years of age, resident of
the city for one year prior to his election
and is a qualified voter.

Issue:

WON Sec. 12 of R.A. 170 of the Dagupan City Charter, as amended, has been repealed by
Sec. 6 of R.A. 2259

Held:

Yes. The judgment appealed from was affirmed. No costs.

Ratio Decidendi:

The question of whether or not a special law has been repealed or amended by one
or more subsequent general laws is dependent mainly on the intent of the Congress
in enacting the latter. The discussions on the floor of Congress show beyond doubt that
its members intended to amend or repeal all provisions of special laws
inconsistent with the provisions of Republic Act No. 2259, except those which are
expressly excluded from the operation thereof. In fact, Section 9 of R.A. 2259 states that
“All Acts or parts of Acts, Executive Orders, rules and regulations inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act, are hereby repealed.”
Section 1 of R.A. 2259 makes reference to "all chartered cities in the Philippines",
whereas Section 8 excludes from the operation of the Act "the cities of Manila, Cavite,
Trece Martires and Tagaytay", and Section 4 contains a proviso exclusively for the City
of Baguio, thus showing clearly that all cities not particularly excepted from the
provisions of said Act are subject thereto. The only reference to Dagupan City in R.A.
2259 is found in Section 2 stating that voters in said city, and in the City of Iloilo, are
expressly precluded to vote for provincial officials.

Since Dagupan City is removed from the exceptions of R.A. 2259, it stands to reason
itself that its charter provision on the age limit is thereby repealed. Until Congress
decrees otherwise, we are not to tamper with the present statutory set-up. Rather, we
should go by what the legislative body has expressly ordained.

It is accordingly held that respondent is disqualified on the ground of non-age because

at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy, at the time of the election, and at the
time he took his oath of office, he was below the age of 25 years.