P. 1
TAXICAB OPERATORS OF METRO MANILA INC. vs. BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION

TAXICAB OPERATORS OF METRO MANILA INC. vs. BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION

|Views: 32|Likes:
Published by Adah Abubacar
political law case digest
political law case digest

More info:

Categories:Types, School Work
Published by: Adah Abubacar on Dec 08, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/24/2014

pdf

text

original

TAXICAB OPERATORS OF METRO MANILA INC. vs.

BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION 190 SCRA 597

FACTS: The petitioner Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila Inc. is a domestic corporation composed of taxicab operators, who are grantees of Certificates of Public Convenience to operate taxicabs within the City of Manila and to any other place in Luzon accessible to vehicular traffic. The petitioner filed a petition which seeks the nullity of the Memorandum Circular No. 77-42, an administrative regulation phasing out taxicabs more than six years old on the ground that it is violative of their constitutional right of equal protection of the law because it is only enforced in Manila and directed solely towards the taxi industry. The respondent Board of Transportation contend that the purpose of the regulation is the promotion of safety and comfort of the riding public from the dangers posed by old and dilapidated taxis. ISSUE: Whether or not there is a violation of the constitutional right of equal protection of the law by the implementation of the said circular. HELD: The Supreme Court held that there is no violation of constitutional rights. The State, in the exercise of its police power, can prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, good order, safety and general welfare of the people. It can prohibit all things hurtful to comfort, safety and welfare of society. Presidential Decree No. 101 granted the Board of Transportation the power to fix just and reasonable standards, classification, regulations, practices, measurements, or service to be furnished, imposed, observed, and followed by operators of public utility motor vehicles. The Board of Transportations reason for enforcing the Circular initially in Metro Manila is that taxicabs in this city, compared to those of other places, are subjected to heavier traffic pressure and more constant use and considering that traffic conditions are not the same in every city, a substantial distinction exists so that infringement of the equal protection clause can hardly be successfully claimed.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->