You are on page 1of 10

Luis ARANETA v. HON.

CONCEPCION and Emma Araneta

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

Action for legal separation on the ground of adultery Omnibus petition of wife o Custody of 3 kids o Support of 5000/month o Return of passport o Stop husbands hirelings from harassing and molesting o Pay for attorneys fees Husbands response o Wife abandoned kids therefore not entitled to custody of kids o Conjugal properties only worth 80,000 o Denied taking of passport and harassment o Wife committed adultery o No conjugal assets = not entitled to support RTC and judges decision o Custody of kids to wife o Monthly allowance of 2300; 2000 for attorneys fees Judge denied submission of evidence based on Art. 103 of CC no trial of case w/in 6 mos. after filing of petition for legal separation o Submission of evidence will deter cool-off period/chance for reconciliation bet. Spouses o Court must act as if nothing happened Give custody to traditional holder wife Disregard adultery and harassment issues

ISSUE: W/N Art. 103 can override other provisions of the CC. HELD: No. Rule: all provisions of law even if contradictory should be allowed to stand and given effect by reconciling with other provisions if necessary. statute is passed as a whole and interpretation should be done by construing one section with every other part of section to produce a whole meaning not proper to confine interpretation to just 1 section Determination of other issues should be given effect so long as not affect the policy of cooling off period Evidence not affecting cause [legal sep] should be allowed Proceed with decision on custody and pendente lite

ABOITIZ SHIPPING CORP. v. CITY of CEBU

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

Ordinance No. 207 enacted by Municipal Board, Aug. 1956, approved by Mayor o Authority under Sec. 17(W) of charter of Cebu City Plaintiffs paid wharfage fees since Sept 1956 o Filed action against validity of ordinance May 1957 court a quo dismissed

ISSUE 1: W/N under CA 58, City of Cebu may provide ordinance to collect wharfage from public wharves of piers in city but owned by National Govt. Right to impose wharfage dues rests on ownership o Right to collect wharfage owned by National Govt didnt surrender ownership to city just because wharf is located in Cebu o Wharves owned by National Govt under exclusive control, direction and management of Bureau of Customs Wharfage charged against vessel, as rent or compensation, for being allowed to lie beside wharf for loading or unloading Sec. 17(W) in charter only authorizes collection of taxes from public wharves -- constructed and owned by City of Cebu as indicated in Sec. 17(V)

ISSUE 2: W/N public means wharf owned by National Govt or by province or municipality. legislative intent must be ascertained from the consideration of the statute as a whole and not by part word or phrase may convey a diff meaning from intended w/c is evident when it is considered alongside those w/ which it is associated general provision may have limited application if viewed alongside other provisions public refers to use rather than ownership Public wharves used generally by the public, free or charge or for compensation Private wharf owner or lessee has exclusive enjoyment or use of

ISSUE 3: W/N citys power to tax is inherent. NO. Power to tax an attribute of sovereignty To be exercised, needs express delegation by means of charter or general enabling statute o Even if Sec. 17(W) grants power to tax, must be public wharves or those owned by City NOT inherent in municipal corp.

Mayor MAGTAJAS and CDO v. PRYCE PROP. CORP. and PAGCOR

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

1992, PAGCOR wanted to expand operations to CDO o Leased property from Pryce Corp. and planned to open on Christmas 92 Ordinance No. 3353 by Sangguniang Panlungsod of CDO o Prohibiting issuance of business permit o Cancel permit of any that allows use of premises or portion for casino operations o Effective 10 days from publication Ord. No. 3375-93 o Prohibiting operation of casino and penalty for violation thereof o To protect moral values and general welfare of community Pryce brought to court WON o CA declared ordinance invalid o Writ prohibiting enforcement o Reconsideration denied

ISSUE 1: W/N gambling and other prohibited games of chance in RA 7160 only means illegal gambling Sec. 458 of LGC local govt units authorized to prevent and suppress gambling and other prohibited games of chance o Recall: noscitur a sociis interpret in relation to words it is associated o gambling associated with and other prohibited games of chance = only means illegal gambling

ISSUE 2: W/N Sangguniang Panlungsod of CDO has the power and authority to prohibit establishment and operation of PAGCOR CDO empowered to enact ordinances for purposes detailed in LGC Expressly vested in police power General Welfare Clause (Sec. 16) Sec. 458 of LGC: Sangguniang Panlungsod can enact ordinances and resolutions for general welfare of city and inhabitants o Authorizes LGUs to regulate properties and businesses w/in territory Art. 2 Sec. 25 and Art. 10 of Consti policy of local autonomy o Even if casinos permitted by PD 1869, govt of CDO still has authority to prohibit w/in territory as permitted by LGC

LGC recognizes competence to determine and adopt measures to secure general welfare of citizens

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

ISSUE 3: W/N ordinance in effect annul PD 1869 PAGCOR created directly by PD 1869 o To centralize and regulate all games of chance, casinos on land and sea w/in RP o Basco, et al. v PAGCOR benefits of PAGCOR and 3rd highest revenue-earner in govt PD 1869 not repealed by clause in Sec. 534 no sufficient indication of implied repeal implied repeals are not lightly presumed in the absence of clear and unmistakable showing of such intention intention to repeal a former law will not be imputed to Legislature when it appears that the statutes have the relation of general to special PAGCOR is mentioned as a source of funding charter not repealed by LGC instead of pitting two statutes against each other, courts must exert every effort to reconcile them o Both laws deserve respect as handiwork of coordinate branches of govt Harmonize PD 1869 and LGC local govt units may prevent and suppress all kinds of gambling w/in their territory except those allowed in statutes like PD 1869 Casino gambling is authorized by PD 1869 PD 1869 statute that cant be amended or nullified by a mere ordinance

ISSUE 4: W/N ordinances are valid Tests of valid ordinance: o Must not contravene constitution or any statute o Must not be unfair or oppressive o Not be partial or discriminatory o Not prohibit but regulate trade o General and consistent with public policy o Not be unreasonable Ordinance should not contravene a statute Ordinances 3353 and 3375-93 are contrary to PD 1869 Municipal govts are only agents of the national govt only exercise delegated legislatuve powers conferred on them by the Congress o Cannot be superior to the principal or exercise powers higher than those granted o National govt still the principal of the local govt units which cannot deft its will or modify or violate it

LAGUNA LAKE DEVT AUTHORITY v. CA Certiorari and prohibition with injunction

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

RA 4850 created Laguna Lake Development Authority o To moderate growth and development of Laguna Lake area and surroundings o Amended by PD 813 rapid expansion of MMs impact on Laguna Lake o EO No. 927 defined and enlarged functions and powers of LLA Enumerated towns and cities part of Laguna de Bay Region Sharing of fees Authority has jurisdiction over issuance of permit for use of surface water Sharing of fees with other govt agencies and political subdivisions, subject to approval of President upon recommendation of Board RA 7160, Local Govt Code of 1991, Sec. 149 o Municipalities have authority to grant fishery privileges and impose rental fees o Caused 1/3 of surface water to be occupied by unregulated fishpens and fish cages o Mayors permit to construct fish pens and cages in violation of policies of Authority Authority sent notice to fish pen owners to dismantle w/in 10 days from receipt o Owners - filed injunction cases o Authority- filed motions to dismiss denied CA dismissed Authoritys consolidated cases

ISSUE: W/N the LLA has jurisdiction over Laguna Lake and issuance of fishery privileges Sec. 4(k) of LLA charter; RA 4850, PD 813 and EO No. 927 Sec. 2 o Specifically provide that LLA has exclusive jurisdiction to issue permits for all use of surface water o Navigation, construction, operation of pens enclosures and others RA 7160, LGC o Granted to municipalities exclusive authority to grant fishery privileges in municipal waters o Only within definite zone of municipal waters o Sec. 149 issuance of permits only for revenue purposes Provisions of RA 7160 DO NOT necessarily repeal the laws creating LLA o No express repeal of charter of LLA o No intent on part of legislature to repeal RA 4850 and its amendments

Enactment of a later legislation which is a general law cannot be construed to have repealed a special law IMPLIED REPEAL NOT FAVOURED a special statute cant be MAR by a subsequent general law by mere implication even though terms in the general law are broad enough to include those in special statute When there is conflict between a special law and a general statute = SPECIAL STATUTE PREVAIL Reflects legislative intent clearer than the general statute Special law taken as exception to general law in absence of specified contrary Charter of LLA must prevail over LGC valid exercise of police power o Every indication that legislature intended for Authority to proceed with its purpose

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

ISSUE 2: W/N Laguna Lake Authority is a quasi-judicial agency YES. Authority has express powers as a regulatory and quasi-judicial body w/ respect to pollution cases o Authority to cease and desist in case re. illegal construction of structures in Laguna de Bay o Exclusive jurisdiction to issue permits for fishery privileges in Laguna de Bay Excludes municipalities around the area Authority is vested by its charter Removal of authority will render nugatory the purpose of LLA o Sec. 4 of RA 4850; Sec. 4 of EO No. 927

Administrative agency has powers expressly granted to it by law but also has powers as necessarily implied in the exercise of its express powers But NOT co-equal to the RTC such that all actions against it may only be instituted before the Court of Appeals o Resolution of legal issue in charter still under jurisdiction of RTC

NATIONAL TOBACCO ADMIN v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

UNABIA, M.| SBCM I-12/13

EO No. 116, amended by EO No. 245 National Tobacco Administration (NTA) o Govt-owned and controlled corporation to supervise and improve viability of tobacco industry Aug 1989 - RA 6758 Act Prescribing Revised Compensation And Position Classification In The Govt And For Other Purposes o Prior to effectivity, officials and employees of NTA already getting Mid-Year Social Amelioration Benefit 1 month of salary o Oct 1989 Dept of Budget and Management issued Corp. Compensation Circular No. 10 Implementing rules of RA 6758 1989 1993 : reduction of benefit to 1 month of basic salary due to financial constraints May 1993 : social amelioration benefit changed to educational assistance o Encourage to pursue graduate studies or finance schooling of kids Feb 1994 Ms. Aracan, Resident Auditor of NTA issued Notice of Disallowance of payment of educational assistance funds for 1993 o NTA has no statutory authority to grant the incentive Feb 1995 Commission on Audits decision o Disallowance is in order o Sec. 5.6 of CCC No. 10 allowances/fringe benefits granted on top of basic salary considered illegal disbursement of public funds o Read in conjunction with Sec. 12 all allowances not specified determined by DBM and deemed included in standardized salary rates Other addl compensation not integrated into standardized salary rates continue to be authorized

ISSUE 1: W/N social amelioration or educational assistance benefit given prior to enactment of RA 6758 is authorized. Issue in interpretation of Sec. 12 first sentence and Sec. 12 second sentence must be resolved o Sec. 12, 1st sen. all salaries deemed integrated except enumerated No. 7 is a Catch-all proviso all are allowances, usually granted to officials of govt to defray or reimburse expenses incurred in performance of duties Allowances supported in 5.4 and 5.5 of CCC No. 10 not integrated into basic salary and continued after June 1989 o Sec. 12, 2nd sen. addl compensation received as of July 1989 not integrated into standardized salary rates continue to be authorized

Challenged financial incentive is awarded by govt to encourage further studies or for education of their children o Considered as financial assistance [no reimbursement] and not allowance [reimbursement required] o An incentive wage bonus/payment on top of guaranteed hourly wages

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

particular words, clauses and phrases shouldnt be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce a harmonious whole. A statute must be so construed as to harmonize and give effect to all its provisions whenever possible. conflicting provisions should be reconciled and harmonized, if possible intent of legislature controlling factor in interpretation of the statute The catch-all proviso legislative intent to just include fringe benefits w/c are in nature of allowances o Benefit in question is NOT an allowance educational assistance NOT included in list of fringe benefits mentioned in 1st sentence of Sec. 12 o Part of 2nd sentence of Sec. 12 in relation to Sec. 17 of RA 6758 Recipients incumbents when RA was passed Receiving benefits at such time Benefit is different from specific allowances mentioned and NOT included in standardized salary rate Non-inclusion of educational assistance in 5.4 and 5.4 of CCC No. 10 expected because does not belong to genus allowance o CCC No. 10 cannot go beyond terms and provisions of statute to prohibit something already allowed by law (RA 6758) o CCC No. 10 cannot MAR a statute

ISSUE 2: W/N disallowance of benefit is tantamount to diminution of pay. NO 2nd sentence of Sec. 12 of RA 6758 intention of Congress to prevent any diminution of pay and benefits received by incumbents during effectivity of Salary Standardization Law Disallowing benefit would go against spirit of statute

ISSUE 3: W/N petitioners have acquired a vested right over receipt of benefit. NO. Not a vested right but must be given when available Disallowance of benefits even if there are funds available would go against principle of equity

Hubert Tan CO and Arlene Tan CO v. CIVIL REGISTER OF MANILA

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

Hubert Co (1974) and Arlene Co (1975) o Parents both Chinese citizens in birth certif o Earned degrees in Phil. Schools Co Boon Peng filed application for naturalization o Letter of Instruction No. 270 o Application granted naturalized under PD 1055 o Feb 1977 Certificate of Naturalization No. 020778 issued by Chairman o Took oath as Philippine citizen Feb 1977 Aug. 1998 Hubert and Arlene filed with RTC Manila petition o Rule 108 of RoC for correction of entries in birth certificate o Born in Phils. but became naturalized citizens o Naturalization Law, as amended by CA No. 473 minor children naturalized under law considered citizens o Naturalization of Co Boon Peng act/event concerning their civil status Must be recorded in the Civil Register Birth certificates must be corrected to reflect citizenship of Co Boon Peng as Filipino, not Chinese 1st Ruling: court a quo DENIED o Co Boon Peng naturalized under LOI No. 270 and PD 1055, not CA 473 2nd Ruling: RTC DENIED o CA 473 and LOI 250 relate to same subject, not same benefits o Sec. 25 of CA 473 effect of naturalization on wife and children of applicant o LOI No. 260 no proviso of effects; refers to qualified individuals only o Sec. 15 of CA 473 not be deemed incorporated in and applied to LOI No. 270 o Pari materia not apply; strict construction of legislative grants Legislative grants, whether property, rights or privileges, to corps or individuals, must be strictly construed against the grantee and in favor or grantor

ISSUE: W/N the petitioners should be granted the change in citizenship on account of CA No. 473. Trial court directed to reinstate petition and continue with proceedings In pari materia statutes should be read and construed together because enactments of the same legislature on the same subject are supposed to form part of 1 uniform system later statutes are supplementary or complimentary to earlier one passage of new statutes, legislature should have in mind existing statutes with same subject and enact new ones with reference thereto

in absence of any express repeal or amendment, new provision enacted in accord with the legislative policy embedded in prior statutes although in apparent conflict, are so far reasonably possible construed in harmony with other LOI 270 and CA 473 laws governing naturalization of qualified aliens o Different procedures, same purpose and objective grant citizenship to aliens permanently residing in Phils. o CA 473 naturalization by judicial decree o LOI 270 naturalization by presidential decree LOI 270 : quicker, easier, cheaper LOI 270 and CA 473 statutes in pari material o No express repeal of Sec. 15 of CA 473 in LOI, therefore provision should be read into latter law as integral part and consistent with its purpose o Sec. 15 of CA 473: extends grant of citizenship to minor children Should also be applied to minor children of those naturalized under LOI 270 Recourse to Rule 108 of RoC appropriate procedure to implement the law o Art. 412 of NCC, no entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected w/o judicial order o Covers not only status but also nationality o Art. 407 NCC include events occur after birth Entries in birth certificate not changed, decision of court annotated in the certif. TO CORRECT to make or set right, remove faults or errors TO CHANGE replace with something else or same kind or substitute Art. 412 of NCC not entry to be changed or corrected or distinguish on basis of effect of change or correction o Clerical errors or substantial errors

UNABIA, M. | SBCM I-12/13

Trial court erred in dismissing petition on ground on Rule 108 of RoC o Must follow procedure petition, trial, judges decision reflected in annotated copy of birth certif.