TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty.

Abano

A.M.+D.G.

KILOSANG MAYO UNO LABOR CENTER vs. GARCIA FACTS On June 26 1990, then Secretary of DOTC, Oscar Orbos, issued Memorandum Circular o! 90"#9$ to then %T&'( Chairman, 'emedios )!S! &ernando allo*in+ ,ro-incial bus o,erators to char+e ,assen+ers rates *ithin a ran+e of 1$. abo-e and 1$. belo* the %T&'( official rate for a ,eriod of one /10 year! On December $, 1990, ,ri-ate res,ondent 1ro-incial (us O,erators )ssociation of the 1hili,,ines, 2nc! /1(O)10 filed an a,,lication for fare rate increase! )n across"the"board increase of ei+ht and a half centa-os /1!003$0 ,er 4ilometre for all ty,es of ,ro-incial buses *ith a minimum" ma5imum fare ran+e of 1$. o-er and belo* the ,ro,osed basic ,er 4ilometre fare rate, *ith the said minimum"ma5imum fare ran+e a,,lyin+ only to ordinary, first class and ,remium class buses and a fifty"centa-o /10!$00 ,er 4ilometre fare for aircon buses *ere sou+ht! %ater on, 1(O)1 reduced its a,,lied ,ro,osed fare to an across"the"board increase of si5 and a half /10!06$0 centa-os ,er 4ilometre for ordinary buses! )lthou+h o,,osed, the %T'&( rendered a decision +rantin+ the fare rate increase! On March #0, 1992, then Secretary of the De,artment of Trans,ortation and Communications 1ete icomedes 1rado issued De,artment Order o! 92"$36 definin+ the ,olicy frame*or4 on the re+ulation of trans,ort ser-ices! 'ele-ant ,ortions to this case are7 In determining public need, the presumption of need for a service shall be deemed in favor of the applicant. The burden of proving that there is no need for a proposed service shall be with the oppositor(s)! Passenger fares shall also be deregulated, except for the lowest class of passenger service (normally third class passenger transport) for which the government will fix indicative or reference fares. Operators of particular services may fix their own fares within a range !" above and below the indicative or reference rate.

Sometime in March, 1998, ,ri-ate res,ondent 1(O)1, a-ailin+ itself of the dere+ulation ,olicy of the DOTC allo*in+ ,ro-incial bus o,erators to collect ,lus 20. and minus 2$. of the ,rescribed fare *ithout first ha-in+ filed a ,etition for the ,ur,ose and *ithout the benefit of a ,ublic hearin+, announced a fare increase of t*enty /20.0 ,ercent of the e5istin+ fares! Said increased fares *ere to be made effecti-e on March 16, 1998! On March 16, 1998, ,etitioner 9M: filed a ,etition before the %T&'( o,,osin+ the u,*ard ad;ustment of bus fares! On March 28, 1998, the %T&'( issued one of the assailed orders dismissin+ the ,etition for lac4 of merit! ISSUE 1! <= ,etitioner has locus standi >?S 2! <= the authority +i-en by res,ondent %T&'( to ,ro-incial bus o,erators to set a fare ran+e of ,lus or minus fifteen /1$.0 ,ercent, later increased to ,lus t*enty /20.0 and minus t*enty" fi-e /"2$.0 ,ercent, o-er and abo-e the e5istin+ authori@ed fare *ithout ha-in+ to file a ,etition for the ,ur,ose, is unconstitutional, in-alid and ille+al! >?S #! <= establishment of a ,resum,tion of ,ublic need in fa-or of an a,,licant for a ,ro,osed trans,ort ser-ice *ithout ha-in+ to ,ro-e ,ublic necessity, is ille+al for bein+ -iolati-e of the 1ublic Ser-ice )ct and the 'ules of Court! >?S RULING 1! 2n the case at bench, ,etitioner, *hose members had suffered and continue to suffer +ra-e and irre,arable in;ury and dama+e from the im,lementation of the Auestioned memoranda, circulars and=or orders, has sho*n that it has a clear le+al ri+ht that *as -iolated and continues to be -iolated *ith the enforcement of the challen+ed memoranda, circulars and=or orders! 9M: members, *ho a-ail of the use of buses, trains and ;ee,neys e-eryday, are directly affected by the burdensome cost of arbitrary increase in ,assen+er fares! They are ,art of the millions of commuters *ho com,rise the ridin+ ,ublic! Certainly, their ri+hts must be ,rotected, not ne+lected nor i+nored!

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

2!

The %e+islature dele+ated to the defunct 1ublic Ser-ice Commission the ,o*er of fi5in+ the rates of ,ublic ser-ices! 'es,ondent %T&'(, the e5istin+ re+ulatory body today, is li4e*ise -ested *ith the same under ?5ecuti-e Order o! 202 dated June 19, 1936! Section $/c0 of the said e5ecuti-e order authori@es %T&'( Bto determine, ,rescribe, a,,ro-e and ,eriodically re-ie* and ad;ust, reasonable fares, rates and other related char+es, relati-e to the o,eration of ,ublic land trans,ortation ser-ices ,ro-ided by motori@ed -ehicles! Such dele+ation of le+islati-e ,o*er to an administrati-e a+ency is ,ermitted in order to ada,t to the increasin+ com,le5ity of modern life! <ith this authority, an administrati-e body and in this case, the %T&'(, may im,lement broad ,olicies laid do*n in a statute by Bfillin+ inB the details *hich the %e+islature may neither ha-e time or com,etence to ,ro-ide! Co*e-er, no*here under the aforesaid ,ro-isions of la* are the re+ulatory bodies, the 1SC and %T&'( ali4e, authori@ed to dele+ate that ,o*er to a common carrier, a trans,ort o,erator, or other ,ublic ser-ice! 2n the case at bench, the authority +i-en by the %T&'( to the ,ro-incial bus o,erators to set a fare ran+e o-er and abo-e the authori@ed e5istin+ fare, is ille+al and in-alid as it is tantamount to an undue dele+ation of le+islati-e authority! Potestas delegata non delegari potest! <hat has been dele+ated cannot be dele+ated! ) further dele+ation of such ,o*er *ould indeed constitute a ne+ation of the duty in -iolation of the trust re,osed in the dele+ate mandated to dischar+e it directly! This *ould lea-e the ridin+ ,ublic at the mercy of trans,ort o,erators *ho may increase fares e-ery hour, e-ery day, e-ery month or e-ery year, *hene-er it ,leases them or *hene-er they deem it BnecessaryB to do so! One -eritable conseAuence of the dere+ulation of trans,ort fares is a compounded fare! 2f trans,ort o,erators *ill be authori@ed to im,ose and collect an additional amount eAui-alent to 20. o-er and abo-e the authori@ed fare o-er a ,eriod of time, this *ill unduly ,re;udice a commuter *ho *ill be made to ,ay a fare that

has been com,uted in a manner similar to those of com,ounded ban4 interest rates! The ,resent administrati-e ,rocedure, to our mind, already mirrors an orderly and satisfactory arran+ement for all ,arties in-ol-ed! To do a*ay *ith such a ,rocedure and allo* ;ust one ,arty, an interested ,arty at that, to determine *hat the rate should be, *ill undermine the ri+ht of the other ,arties to due ,rocess! The ,ur,ose of a hearin+ is ,recisely to determine *hat a ;ust and reasonable rate is! Discardin+ such ,rocedural and constitutional ri+ht is certainly inimical to our fundamental la* and to ,ublic interest! #! On the presumption of public need! ) certificate of ,ublic con-enience /C1C0 is an authori@ation +ranted by the %T&'( for the o,eration of land trans,ortation ser-ices for ,ublic use as reAuired by la*! One of its reAuirements is that the applicant must prove that the operation of the public service proposed and the authori#ation to do business will promote the public interest in a proper and suitable manner ! 2t is also understood that there must be ,ro,er notice and hearin+ before the 1SC can e5ercise its ,o*er to issue a C1C! The $presumption of a public need for a service% ,ro-ision is entirely incom,atible and inconsistent *ith Section 16/c0/iii0 of the 1ublic Ser-ice )ct *hich reAuires that before a C1C *ill be issued, the a,,licant must ,ro-e by ,ro,er notice and hearin+ that the o,eration of the ,ublic ser-ice ,ro,osed *ill ,romote ,ublic interest in a ,ro,er and suitable manner! The ,o*er of a re+ulatory body to issue a C1C is founded on the condition that after full"dress hearin+ and in-esti+ation, it shall find, as a fact, that the ,ro,osed o,eration is for the con-enience of the ,ublic! (asic con-enience is the ,rimary consideration for *hich a C1C is issued, and that fact alone must be consistently borne in mind! )lso, e5istin+ o,erators in sub;ect routes must be +i-en an o,,ortunity to offer ,roof and o,,ose the a,,lication! Therefore, an a,,licant must, at all times, be reAuired to ,ro-e his

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

ca,acity and ca,ability to furnish the ser-ice *hich he has underta4en to render! )nd all this *ill be ,ossible only if a ,ublic hearin+ *ere conducted for that ,ur,ose! OT?7 1ublic utilities are ,ri-ately o*ned and o,erated businesses *hose ser-ice are essential to the +eneral ,ublic! They are enter,rises *hich s,ecially cater to the needs of the ,ublic and conduce to their comfort and con-enience! )s such, ,ublic utility ser-ices are im,ressed *ith ,ublic interest and concern! The same is true *ith res,ect to the business of common carrier *hich holds such a ,eculiar relation to the ,ublic interest that there is su,erinduced u,on it the ri+ht of ,ublic re+ulation *hen ,ri-ate ,ro,erties are affected *ith ,ublic interest, hence, they cease to be &uris privati only! PAL vs. CAB FACTS Drand)ir a,,lied *ith the Ci-il )eronauti-cs (oard for a Certificate of 1ublic Con-enience and ecessity for the M%)"C?(: and M%)"D)E)O route! )ccordin+ly, the Chief Cearin+ Officer of the C)( issued a otice of Cearin+ settin+ the a,,lication for initial hearin+n and directin+ Drand)ir to ser-e a co,y of the a,,lication and corres,ondin+ notice to all scheduled 1hili,,ine Domestic o,erators! Drand)ir filed its Com,liance, and reAuested for the issuance of a Tem,orary O,eratin+ 1ermit! 1)%, itself the holder of a le+islati-e franchise to o,erate air trans,ort ser-ices, filed an o,,osition to the a,,lication on se-eral +rounds *hich include %)C9 O& J:'2SD2CT2O O TC? 1)'T O& TC? (O)'D to hear the a,,lication until Drand)ir has obtained a franchise to o,erate from Con+ress! /Other +rounds *ere deficient form and substance of the a,,licationF -iolation of the eAual ,rotection clause if a,,lication is +rantedF no ur+ent need for ne* ser-iceF +rantin+ of a,,lication *ould result in ruinous com,etition!0 The (oard ruled that it had ;urisdiction to hear the a,,lication! The (oard e-en +ranted Drand)ir a Tem,orary O,eratin+ %icense! 1)%Gs motion for reconsideration *as denied! The (oard e-en +ranted a 6"month e5tension to Drand)irGs tem,orary ,ermit!

1)% says7 Board acted beyo d !ts "o#ers a d $%r!sd!ct!o & /10 in ta4in+ co+ni@ance of Drand)irHs a,,lication for the issuance of a Certificate of 1ublic Con-enience and ecessity, and /20 in issuin+ a tem,orary o,eratin+ ,ermit in the meantime! 'easonin+ of 1)%7 Drand)ir has not been +ranted and does not ,ossess a le+islati-e franchise to en+a+e in scheduled domestic air trans,ortation! ) le+islati-e franchise is necessary before anyone may en+a+e in air trans,ort ser-ices, and a franchise may only be +ranted by Con+ress! This is the meanin+ +i-en by the 1)%u,on a readin+ of Section 11, )rticle I22, and Section 1, )rticle E2, of the Constitution! 2n su,,ort of this, 1)% ,resents a 1998 DOJ o,inion by Secretary Ordone@ *here a distinction *as made bet*een the franchise to o,erate and a ,ermit to commence o,eration! )ccordin+ to the o,inion, Jit is clear that a franchise is the le+islati-e authori@ation to en+a+e in a business acti-ity or enter,rise of a ,ublic nature, *hereas a certificate of ,ublic con-enience and necessity is a re+ulatory measure *hich constitutes the franchiseHs authority to commence o,erations! 2t is thus lo+ical that the +rant of the former should ,recede the latter!K Drand)ir ar+ues7 T'e Board 'as& ()* t'e a%t'or!ty to 'ear t'e a""+!cat!o a d, (-*ca .ra t te/"orary o"erat! . "er/!ts a d cert!0!cates o0 "%b+!c co ve !e ce a d ecess!ty. Drand)irGs reasonin+7 /10 Sect!o )1 (s"ec!0!ca++y )12C)* o0 RA 334 +rants it such authority Jto issue, deny, amend re-ise, alter, modify, cancel, sus,end or re-o4e, in *hole or in ,art, u,on ,etitioner"com,laint, or u,on its o*n initiati-e, any tem,orary o,eratin+ ,ermit or Certificate of 1ublic Con-enience and ecessityK! /20 5%r!s"r%de ce7 SC ruled in another PAL vs CAB case /19630 that C)( could, e-en on its o*n initiati-e, +rant a tem,orary o,eratin+ ,ermit /TO10 e-en before the ,resentation of e-idence! C) cases *hich held that C)( can +rant not only tem,orary o,eratin+ ,ermit /TO10 but also a Certificate of 1ublic Con-enience and ecessity /C1C 0

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

SC decision in A+ba o vs Reyes7 a0 &ranchises by Con+ress are not reAuired before each and e-ery ,ublic utility may o,erate *hen the la* has +ranted certain administrati-e a+encies the ,o*er to +rant licenses for or to authori@e the o,eration of certain ,ublic utilitiesF /b0 The Constitutional ,ro-ision in )rticle I22, Section 11 that the issuance of a franchise, certificate or other form of authori@ation for the o,eration of a ,ublic utility does not necessarily im,ly that only Con+ress has the ,o*er to +rant such authori@ation!!! /#0 EO -)67 a minimum of 2 o,erators in each route= lin4 shall be encoura+ed! ISSUE <= Con+ress, in enactin+ 'e,ublic )ct 666, has dele+ated the authority to authori@e the o,eration of domestic air trans,ort ser-ices to the res,ondent (oard, such that Con+ressional mandate for the a,,ro-al of such authority is no lon+er necessary RULING Yes. The (oard has the authority! The trend of modern le+islation is to -est the 1ublic Ser-ice Commissioner *ith the ,o*er to re+ulate and control the o,eration of ,ublic ser-ices under reasonable rules and re+ulations, and as a +eneral rule, courts *ill not interfere *ith the e5ercise of that discretion *hen it is ;ust and reasonable and founded u,on a le+al ri+ht! It !s t'!s "o+!cy #'!c' #as "%rs%ed by t'e Co%rt ! Albano vs. Reyes /cited abo-e0! There is nothin+ in the la* nor in the Constitution, *hich indicates that a le+islati-e franchise is an indis,ensable reAuirement for an entity to o,erate as a domestic air trans,ort o,erator! )lthou+h Section 11 of )rticle I22 reco+ni@es Con+ressH control o-er any franchise, certificate or authority to o,erate a ,ublic utility, it does not mean Con+ress has e5clusi-e authority to issue the same! &ranchises issued by Con+ress are not reAuired before each and e-ery ,ublic utility may o,erate! 2n many instances, Con+ress has seen it fit to dele+ate this function to +o-ernment a+encies, s,eciali@ed ,articularly in their res,ecti-e areas of ,ublic ser-ice! 'eadin+ Section 10 of ') 666 sho*s the clear intent of Con+ress to +rant C)( the authority to issue TO1 and C1C !

The SC did not a+ree *ith 1)%Gs ar+ument that +rantin+ of a franchise and +rantin+ a TO1 or C1C are t*o different thin+sF and that a +rant of franchise from Con+ress is necessary before the (oard can +rant either TO1 or C1C ! JCon+ress, by +i-in+ the res,ondent (oard the ,o*er to issue ,ermits for the o,eration of domestic trans,ort ser-ices, has dele+ated to the said body the authority to determine the ca,ability and com,etence of a ,ros,ecti-e domestic air trans,ort o,erator to en+a+e in such -enture! This is not an instance of transformin+ the res,ondent (oard into a mini"le+islati-e body, *ith unbridled authority to choose *ho should be +i-en authority to o,erate domestic air trans,ort ser-ices!K o Con+ress set s,ecific limitations on the (oards authority in Sec! 8 of the ')666 /Declaration of 1olicies0! o More im,ortantly, under Sec! 12"28 of ') 666, Con+ress has s,elled out the reAuirements for determinin+ the com,etency of a ,ros,ecti-e o,erator, as *ell as the ,rocedure for the ,rocessin+ of the a,,lications! SC dismissed 1)%Gs o,,osition to the hearin+s set by C)( for Drand)irGs a,,lication for C1C !

NPC vs. CA FACTS Ca+ayan ?lectric and ,o*er %i+ht Com,any /C?1)%CO0 *as enfranchised by 'e,ublic )ct o! #286 Bto construct, maintain and o,erate an electric li+ht, heat and ,o*er system for the ,ur,ose of +eneratin+ and=or distributin+ electric li+ht, heat and=or ,o*er for sale *ithin the City of Ca+ayan de Oro and its suburbsB for fifty /$00 years! 1residential Decree o! 28#, issued on July 12, 196#, created a Bbody cor,orate and ,oliticB to be 4no*n as the 1hili,,ine Eeterans 2n-estment De-elo,ment Cor,oration /1C2E2D?C0 -ested *ith authority to en+a+e in Bcommercial, industrial, minin+, a+ricultural and other enter,risesB amon+ other ,o*ers and Bto allo* the full and continued em,loyment of the ,roducti-e ca,abilities of and in-estment of the -eterans and retirees of the )rmed &orces of the 1hili,,ines!B On )u+ust 1#, 1968, 1residential Decree o! $#3 *as ,romul+ated to create the 1C2E2D?C 2ndustrial )uthority /12)0, a subsidiary of 1C2E2D?C, to carry out the +o-ernment

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

,olicy Bto encoura+e, ,romote and sustain the economic and social +ro*th of the country and that the establishment of ,rofessionali@ed mana+ement of *ell",lanned industrial areas shall further this ob;ecti-e!B :nder Sec! # of 1!D! o! $#3, the first area for de-elo,ment shall be located in the munici,alities of Ta+oloan and Eillanue-a! This area forms ,art of the 1C2E2D?C 2ndustrial ?state Misamis Oriental /12?"MO0! )s mana+er of 12?"MO, 12) +ranted the &errochrome 1hili,,ines, 2nc! /&120 and Metal )lloys Cor,oration /M)C0 authority to o,erate in its area of de-elo,ment! On July 6, 1969, 12) +ranted C?1)%CO a tem,orary authority to retail electric ,o*er to the industries o,eratin+ *ithin the 12?" MO! The )+reement e5ecuted by 12) and C?1)%CO authori@ed C?1)%CO Bto o,erate, administer, construct and distribute electric ,o*er *ithin the 1C2E2D?C 2ndustrial ?state, Misamis Oriental, such authority to be co" e5tensi-e *ith the territorial ;urisdiction of 1C2E2D?C 2ndustrial ?state, as defined in Sec! # of 1!D! o! $#3 and shall be for a ,eriod of fi-e /$0 years, rene*able for another fi-e /$0 years at the o,tion of C?1)%CO!B The ,arties ,ro-ided further that7 9! )t the end of the fifth year, or at the end of the 10th year, should this )+reement be thus rene*ed, 12) has the o,tion to ta4e o-er the o,eration of the electric ser-ice and acAuire by ,urchase C?1)%COHs assets *ithin 12?"MO! This o,tion shall be communicated to C?1)%CO in *ritin+ at least 28 months before the date of acAuisition of assets and ta4eo-er of o,eration by 12)! Should 12) e5ercise its o,tion to ,urchase the assets of C?1)%CO in 12?"MO, 12) shall res,ect the ri+ht of o*nershi, of and maintenance by C?1)%CO of those assets inside 12?"MO not co-ered by such ,urchase! ! ! ! )ccordin+ to 12), C?1)%CO ,ro-ed no match to the ,o*er demands of the industries in 12?"MO that most of these com,anies o,eratin+ therein closed sho,! 2m,elled by a Bdesire to ,ro-ide chea, ,o*er costs to ,o*er" intensi-e industries o,eratin+ *ithin the ?state,B 12) a,,lied *ith the ational 1o*er Cor,oration / 1C0 for direct ,o*er connection *hich the latter in due course a,,ro-ed! One of the com,anies *hich entered into an a+reement *ith the 1C for a direct sale and su,,ly of ,o*er *as the &errochrome 1hils!, 2nc! /&120!

Contendin+ that the said a+reement -iolated its ri+ht as the authori@ed o,erator of an electric li+ht and ,o*er system in the area and the national electrification ,olicy, C?1)%CO filed Ci-il Case o! L"#$98$, a ,etition for ,rohibition, mandamus and in;unction before the 'e+ional Trial Court of Lue@on City a+ainst the 1C! ot*ithstandin+ 1CHs claim that it *as authori@ed by its Charter to sell electric ,o*er Bin bul4B to industrial enter,rises, the lo*er court rendered a decision on May 2, 1938, restrainin+ the 1C from su,,lyin+ ,o*er directly to &12 u,on the +round that such direct sale, su,,ly and deli-ery of electric ,o*er by the 1C to &12 *as -iolati-e of the ri+hts of C?1)%CO under its le+islati-e franchise! Cence, the lo*er court ordered the 1C to B,ermanently desistB from effectin+ direct su,,ly of ,o*er to the &12 and Bfrom enterin+ into and=or im,lementin+ any a+reement or arran+ement for such direct ,o*er connection, unless coursed throu+h the ,o*er lineB of C?1)%CO! ISSUE <hether or not the 1C may su,,ly ,o*er directly to 12) in the 12?"MO area *here C?1)%CO has a directly franchise! RULING 1etitioner 12) asserts that it may recei-e ,o*er directly from the 1C because it is a ,ublic utility! 2t a-ers that 1!D! o! $#3, as amended, em,o*ers 12) Bas and to be a ,ublic utility to o,erate and ser-e the ,o*er needs *ithin 12?"MO, i!e!, a s,ecific area constitutin+ a small ,ortion of ,etitionerHs franchise co-era+e,B *ithout, ho*e-er, s,ecifyin+ the ,articular ,ro-ision *hich so em,o*er 12)! ) B,ublic utilityB is a business or ser-ice en+a+ed in re+ularly su,,lyin+ the ,ublic *ith some commodity or ser-ice of ,ublic conseAuence such as electricity, +as, *ater, trans,ortation, tele,hone or tele+ra,h ser-ice! The term im,lies public use and service! 1etitioner 12) is a subsidiary of the 1C2E2D?C *ith B+o-ernmental and ,ro,rietary functions!B Sec! 8 of 1!D! o! $#3 s,ecifically confers u,on it the follo*in+ ,o*ers7 a! To o,erate, administer and mana+e the 1C2E2D?C 2ndustrial )reas and other areas *hich shall hereafter be ,roclaimed, desi+nated and s,ecified in subseAuent 1residential 1roclamationF to construct acAuire, o*n, lease, operate and maintain

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

infrastructure facilities, factory buildin+s, *arehouses, dams, reser-oirs, *ater distribution, electric light and power systems, telecommunications and trans,ortation net*or4s, or such other facilities and ser-ices necessary or useful in the conduct of industry and commerce or in the attainment of the purposes and ob&ectives of this 'ecreeF /?m,hasis su,,lied!0 Clearly then, the 12) is authori@ed to render indirect service to the public by its administration of the 1C2E2D?C industrial areas li4e the 12?"MO and may, therefore, be considered a ,ublic utility! )s it is e5,ressly authori@ed by la* to ,erform the functions of a ,ublic utility, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience, as su++ested by the Court of ),,eals, is not necessary for it to a-ail of a direct ,o*er connection from the 1C! Co*e-er, such authority to be a ,ublic utility may not be e5ercised in such a manner as to ,re;udice the ri+hts of e5istin+ franchisees! 2n fact, by its actions, 12) reco+ni@ed the ri+hts of the franchisees in the area! )ccordin+ly, in ,ursuit of its ,o*ers Bto +rant such franchise for and to o,erate and maintain *ithin the )reas electric li+ht, heat or ,o*er systems,B etc! under Sec! 8 /i0 of 1!D! o! $#3 and its rule"ma4in+ ,o*er under Sec! 8 /10 of the same la*, on July 20, 1969, the 12) (oard of Directors ,romul+ated the B'ules and 'e+ulations To 2m,lement the 2ntent and 1ro-isions of 1residential Decree o! $#3!B 78 'ule I2 thereof on B:tilities and Ser-icesB ,ro-ides as follo*s7 Sec! 1! :tilities M 2t is the res,onsibility of the )uthority to ,ro-ide all reAuired utilities and ser-ices inside the ?state7 555 555 555 a0 Contracts for the ,urchase of ,ublic utilities and=or ser-ices shall be sub;ect to the ,rior a,,ro-al of the )uthorityF Provided, however, that similar contract(s) existing prior to the effectivity of this (ules and (egulations shall continue to be in full force and effect! 555 555 555 /?m,hasis su,,lied!0

2t should be noted that the 'ules and 'e+ulations too4 effect thirty /#00 days after its ,ublication in the Official Da@ette on Se,tember 28, 1969 or more than three /#0 months after the July 6, 1969 contract bet*een 12) and C?1)%CO *as entered into! )s such, the 'ules and 'e+ulations itself allo*ed the continuance of the su,,ly of electric ,o*er to 12?"MO by C?1)%CO! That the contract of July 6, 1969 *as not rene*ed by the ,arties after the e5,iration of the fi-e"year ,eriod sti,ulated therein did not chan+e the fact that *ithin that fi-e"year ,eriod, in -iolation of both the contract and its 'ules and 'e+ulations, 12) a,,lied *ith the 1C for direct ,o*er connection! The matter *as a++ra-ated by 1CHs fa-orable action on the a,,lication, totally unmindful of the e5tent of its ,o*ers under the la* *hich, in )ational Power *orporation v! *ourt of +ppeals, 76 the Court delimits as follo*s7 ! ! ! ! 2t is immaterial *hether the direct connection is merely an im,ro-ement or an increase in e5istin+ -olta+e, as alle+ed by ,etitioner, or a totally ne* and se,arate electric ser-ice as claimed by ,ri-ate res,ondent! The la* on the matter is clear! 1D 80 ,romul+ated on 6 o-ember 1962 e5,ressly ,ro-ides that the generation of electric power shall be underta,en solely by the )P* ! -owever .ection / of the same decree also provides that the distribution of electric power shall be underta,en by cooperatives, private utilities /such as the *0P+1*O0, local governments and other entities duly authori#ed, sub&ect to state regulation ! / ?m,hasis su,,lied!0 The same case ruled that B/i0t is only after a hearin+ /or an o,,ortunity for such a hearin+0 *here it is established that the affected private franchise holder is inca,able or un*illin+ to match the reliability and rates of 1C that a direct connection *ith 1C may be +ranted!B )s earlier stated, the Court arri-ed at the same rulin+ in the later cases of D!'! os! 6203$, 3869$ and 36696! 1etitioner 1C attem,ted to abide by these rulin+s *hen it conducted a hearin+ to determine *hether it may su,,ly ,o*er directly to 12)! <hile it notified C?1)%CO of the hearin+, the 1C is not the ,ro,er authority referred to by this Court in the aforementioned earlier decisions, not only because the sub;ect of the hearin+ is a matter in-ol-in+ the 1C itself, but

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

also because the la* has created the ,ro,er administrati-e body -ested *ith authority to conduct a hearin+! C?1)%CO shares the -ie* of the Court of ),,eals that the ?ner+y 'e+ulatory (oard /?'(0 is the ,ro,er administrati-e body for such hearin+s! Co*e-er, a recent le+islati-e de-elo,ment has o-erta4en said -ie*! The ?'(, *hich used to be the (oard of ?ner+y, by -irtue of ?O 162, *hre the ?'( is basically a ,rice or rate"fi5in+ a+ency! ),,arently reco+ni@in+ this basic function, 'e,ublic )ct o! 66#3 /)n )ct Creatin+ the De,artment of ?ner+y, 'ationali@in+ the Or+ani@ation and &unctions of Do-ernment )+encies 'elated to ?ner+y, and for Other 1ur,oses0 *as ,romul+ated! The determination of *hich of t*o ,ublic utilities has the ri+ht to su,,ly electric ,o*er to an area *hich is *ithin the co-era+e of both is certainly not a rate"fi5in+ function *hich should remain *ith the ?'(! 2t deals *ith the re+ulation of the distribution of ener+y resources *hich, under ?5ecuti-e Order o! 162, *as e5,ressly a function of ?'(! Co*e-er, *ith the enactment of 'e,ublic )ct o! 66#3, the De,artment of ?ner+y too4 o-er such function! Cence, it is this De,artment *hich shall then determine *hether C?1)%CO or 12) should su,,ly ,o*er to 12?"MO! Clearly, ,etitioner 1CHs assertion that its Bauthority to entertain and hear direct connection a,,lications is a necessary incident of its e5,ress authority to sell electric ,o*er in bul4B is no* baseless! ?-en *ithout the ne* le+islation affectin+ its ,o*er to conduct hearin+s, it is certainly irre+ular, if not do*nri+ht anomalous for the 1C itself to determine *hether it should su,,ly ,o*er directly to the 12) or the industries *ithin the 12?"MO! 2t sim,ly cannot arro+ate unto itself the authority to e5ercise non"rate fi5in+ ,o*ers *hich no* de-ol-es u,on the De,artment of ?ner+y and to hear and e-entually +rant itself the ri+ht to su,,ly ,o*er in bul4! 9UISUMBING vs. MERALCO FACTS 2ns,ectors from M?')%CO *ent to the furniture sho, of the Luisumbin+ S,ouses to conduct their routinary ins,ections *ith the ,ermission of the S,ouses and *itnessed by their secretary! The ins,ectors found the

electric meter tam,ered! (ecause of this, they disconnected the electric su,,ly of the furniture sho,! To ma4e sure of the accuracy of their findin+s, they sub;ected the electric meter to laboratory testin+! The tests sho* that the meter *as really tam,ered! )s a result, the ins,ectors billed the Luisumbin+ S,ouses the differential caused by the tam,erin+ and until they ,ay, their electric su,,ly *ill be disconnected! Co*e-er, on the same day the ins,ectorGs officer caused the reconnection of their electric su,,ly! (ut des,ite this, the S,ouses still filed a com,laint for dama+es a+ainst M?')%CO alle+in+ that they acted *ith *anton, ca,ricious, malicious, and male-olent manner in disconnectin+ their ,o*er su,,ly *hich *as done *ithout due ,rocess, and *ithout due re+ard to their ri+hts, feelin+s, ,eace of mind, social and business standin+! ISSUE 2s M?')%CO liable to the Luisumbin+ S,ouses because the ins,ectors disconnected their electric su,,ly immediatelyN RULING YES. Sec! 8 of ') 63#2 necessitates that immediate disconnection by M?')%CO of a consumerGs electric su,,ly can only be had 2& an officer of the la* or a duly authori@ed re,resentati-e of the ?ner+y 'e+ulatory (oard ,ersonally *itnessed and attested the disconnection! ?-en if the secretary of the com,any *itnessed the ins,ection and disconnection, M?')%CO cannot claim that they com,lied *ith the la* because the ,ro-isions cate+orically ,ro-ide for the ,eo,le reAuired to be ,resent durin+ ins,ection and disconnection and the secretary of the com,any of the Luisumbin+ S,ouses clearly does not fall under any of the enumerated ,ersons! Moreo-er, the ,resence of an ?'( officer durin+ the e5amination of the electric meter in the laboratory *ould not cure the defect in due ,rocess! The la* is C%?)' that the ?'( officer must ha-e attested to the disconnection (?&O'? its occurrence unli4e *hat ha,,ened in this case! The ,resence of +o-ernment a+ents *ho may authori@e immediate disconnection +o into the essence of due ,rocess! 2ndeed, the Court cannot allo* M?')%CO to act -irtually as ,rosecutor and ;ud+e in im,osin+ the ,enalty of disconnection due to alle+ed meter tam,erin+! That *ould not sit *ell in a democratic country! )fter all, M?')%CO is a mono,oly that deri-es its ,o*er from the +o-ernment! Clothin+ it *ith unilateral

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

authority to disconnect *ould be eAui-alent to +i-in+ it a license to tyranni@e its ha,less customers! COGEO2CUBAO vs. CA FACTS 2t a,,ears that a certificate of ,ublic con-enience to o,erate a ;ee,ney ser-ice *as ordered to be issued in fa-or of %un+sod Silan+an to ,ly the Co+eo"Cubao route! On the other hand, Co+eo"Cubao )ssociation *as re+istered as a non"stoc4, non",rofit or+ani@ation *ith the main ,ur,ose of re,resentin+ the a,,ellee for *hate-er contract and=or a+reement it *ill ha-e re+ardin+ the o*nershi, of units, and the li4e, of the members of the )ssociation! 1erturbed by a,,elleeGs (oard 'esolution o! 9 ado,tin+ a (anderaH System under *hich a member of the coo,erati-e is ,ermitted to Aueue for ,assen+er at the dis,uted ,ath*ay in e5chan+e for the tic4et *orth 20 ,esos the ,roceeds of *hich shall be utili@ed for Christmas ,ro+rams of the dri-ers and other benefits, the )ssociation decided to form a human barricade on and assumed the dis,atchin+ of ,assen+er ;ee,neys! This de-elo,ment as initiated by the )ssociation +a-e rise to the suit for dama+es! The )ssociationHs )ns*er contained -ehement denials to the insinuation of ta4e o-er and at the same time raised as a defense the circumstance that the or+ani@ation *as formed not to com,ete *ith ,laintiff"coo,erati-e! 2t, ho*e-er, admitted that it is not authori@ed to trans,ort ,assen+ers! The trial court rendered a decision in fa-or of res,ondent %un+sod Cor, and ordered! The C) affirmed the findin+s of the TC e5ce,t *ith re+ard to the a*ard of actual dama+es! ISSUE <= the ,etitioner usur,ed the ,ro,erty ri+ht of the res,ondent *hich shall entitle the latter to the a*ard of nominal dama+esN " >?S RULING :nder the 1ublic Ser-ice %a*, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience is an authori@ation issued by the 1ublic Ser-ice Commission for the o,eration of ,ublic ser-ices for *hich no franchise is reAuired by la*! 2n the instant

case, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience *as issued to res,ondent cor,oration on to o,erate a ,ublic utility ;ee,ney ser-ice on the Co+eo" Cubao route! ) certification of ,ublic con-enience is included in the term B,ro,ertyB in the broad sense of the term! :nder the 1ublic Ser-ice %a*, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience can be sold by the holder thereof because it has considerable material -alue and is considered as -aluable asset! )lthou+h there is no doubt that it is ,ri-ate ,ro,erty, it is affected *ith a ,ublic interest and must be submitted to the control of the +o-ernment for the common +ood! Cence, insofar as the interest of the State is in-ol-ed, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience does not confer u,on the holder any ,ro,rietary ri+ht or interest or franchise in the route co-ered thereby and in the ,ublic hi+h*ays! Co*e-er, *ith res,ect to other ,ersons and other ,ublic utilities, a certificate of ,ublic con-enience as ,ro,erty, *hich re,resents the ri+ht and authority to o,erate its facilities for ,ublic ser-ice, cannot be ta4en or interfered *ith *ithout due ,rocess of la*! ),,ro,riate actions may be maintained in courts by the holder of the certificate a+ainst those *ho ha-e not been authori@ed to o,erate in com,etition *ith the former and those *ho in-ade the ri+hts *hich the former has ,ursuant to the authority +ranted by the 1ublic Ser-ice Commission! 2n the case at bar, the trial court found that ,etitioner association forcibly too4 o-er the o,eration of the ;ee,ney ser-ice in the Co+eo"Cubao route *ithout any authori@ation from the 1ublic Ser-ice Commission and in -iolation of the ri+ht of res,ondent cor,oration to o,erate its ser-ices in the said route under its certificate of ,ublic con-enience! These *ere its findin+s *hich *ere affirmed by the a,,ellate court! 2t is clear form the facts of this case that ,etitioner formed a barricade and forcibly too4 o-er the motor units and ,ersonnel of the res,ondent cor,oration! This ,araly@ed the usual acti-ities and earnin+s of the latter durin+ the ,eriod of ten days and -iolated the ri+ht of res,ondent %un+sod Cor, to conduct its o,erations thru its authori@ed officers! o com,ellin+ reason e5ists to ;ustify the re-ersal of the rulin+ of the res,ondent a,,ellate court in the case at bar! Considerin+ the circumstances of the case, the res,ondent cor,oration is entitled to the a*ard of nominal dama+es!

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

P:ILCOMSAT vs. ALCUA; FACTS (y -irtue of 'e,ublic )ct o! $$18, 1C2%COMS)T *as +ranted Ba franchise to establish, construct, maintain and o,erate in the 1hili,,ines, at such ,laces as the +rantee may select, station or stations and associated eAui,ment and facilities for international satellite communications!B :nder this franchise, it *as li4e*ise +ranted the authority to Bconstruct and o,erate such +round facilities as needed to deli-er telecommunications ser-ices Section $ of 'e,ublic )ct o! $$18, ,etitioner *as e5em,t from the ;urisdiction of the then 1ublic Ser-ice Commission, no* res,ondent TC! Co*e-er, ,ursuant to ?5ecuti-e Order o! 196 issued on June 16, 1936, ,etitioner *as ,laced under the ;urisdiction, control and re+ulation of res,ondent TC, includin+ all its facilities and ser-ices and the fi5in+ of rates! 2m,lementin+ said ?5ecuti-e Order o! 196, res,ondents reAuired ,etitioner to a,,ly for the reAuisite certificate of ,ublic con-enience and necessity co-erin+ its facilities and the ser-ices it renders, 1etitioner sou+ht the e5tension for the o,eration of his facilities and the renderin+ of ser-ices! TC order no* in contro-ersy had further e5tended the ,ro-isional authority of the ,etitioner for another si5 /60 months, counted from Se,tember 16, 1933, but it directed the ,etitioner to char+e modified reduced rates throu+h a reduction of fifteen ,ercent /1$.0 on the ,resent authori@ed rates! 1C2%COMS)T assails the abo-esaid order!

20 Does ?5ecuti-e Order o! $86, *hich ,ro-ides for the creation of res,ondent TC, ha-e ,ro-isions that +rant its rate"fi5in+ ,o*ersN >?S #0 Does ?5ecuti-e Order o! 196, ,lacin+ ,etitioner under the ;urisdiction of res,ondent TC, ,ro-ide for any standard in the e5ercise of its rate"fi5in+ and ad;udicatory ,o*ersN >?S 80 <as there a -iolation of due ,rocess /1rocedural and Substanti-e0N >?S $0 2s the Order on the reduction of rates in-alidN >?S RULING 10 <hen the administrati-e a+ency concerned, res,ondent TC in this case, establishes a rate, its act must both be non" confiscatory and must ha-e been established in the manner ,rescribed by the le+islatureF other*ise, in the absence of a fi5ed standard, the dele+ation of ,o*er becomes unconstitutional! 2n case of a dele+ation of rate"fi5in+ ,o*er, the only standard *hich the le+islature is reAuired to ,rescribe for the +uidance of the administrati-e authority is that the rate be reasonable and ;ust! Co*e-er, it has been held that e-en in the absence of an e5,ress reAuirement as to reasonableness, this standard may be im,lied! 20 )nd #0 1ursuant to ?5ecuti-e Orders os! $86 and 196, res,ondent TC is em,o*ered, amon+ others, to determine and ,rescribe rates ,ertinent to the o,eration of ,ublic ser-ice communications *hich necessarily include the ,o*er to ,romul+ate rules and re+ulations in connection there*ith! )nd, under Section 1$/+0 of ?5ecuti-e Order o! $86, res,ondent TC should be +uided by the reAuirements of ,ublic safety, ,ublic interest and reasonable feasibility of maintainin+ effecti-e com,etition of ,ri-ate entities in communications and broadcastin+ facilities! %i4e*ise, in Section 6/d0 thereof, *hich ,ro-ides for the creation of the Ministry of Trans,ortation and Communications *ith control and su,er-ision o-er res,ondent TC, it is s,ecifically ,ro-ided that the national economic -iability of the entire net*or4 or com,onents of the communications systems contem,lated therein should be maintained at reasonable rates!

ISSUE 10 <as there an undue dele+ation of le+islati-e ,o*er because the TC is em,o*ered to fi5 rates for ,ublic ser-ice communications does not ,ro-ide the necessary standards constitutionally reAuiredN O

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

TC, in the e5ercise of its rate"fi5in+ ,o*er, is limited by the reAuirements of ,ublic safety, ,ublic interest, reasonable feasibility and reasonable rates, *hich con;ointly more than satisfy the reAuirements of a -alid dele+ation of le+islati-e ,o*er! 80PROCE<URAL <UE PROCESS7 <here the function of the administrati-e a+ency is le+islati-e, notice and hearin+ are not reAuired, but *here an order a,,lies to a named ,erson, as in the instant case, the function in-ol-ed is ad;udicatory and so notice and hearin+ is necessary! 2n The *entral 2an, of the Philippines vs. *loribel, et al. H2f the nature of the administrati-e a+ency is essentially le+islati-e, the reAuirements of notice and hearin+ are not necessary! The -alidity of a rule of future action *hich affects a +rou,, if -ested ri+hts of liberty or ,ro,erty are not in-ol-ed, is not determined accordin+ to the same rules *hich a,,ly in the case of the direct a,,lication of a ,olicy to a s,ecific indi-idual0IIIII J)side from statute, the necessity of notice and hearin+ in an administrati-e ,roceedin+ de,ends on the character of the ,roceedin+ and the circumstances in-ol-ed! 2n so far as +enerali@ation is ,ossible in -ie* of the +reat -ariety of administrati-e ,roceedin+s, it may be stated as a +eneral rule that notice and hearin+ are not essential to the -alidity of administrati-e action *here the administrati-e body acts in the e5ercise of e5ecuti-e, administrati-e, or le+islati-e functionsF but *here a ,ublic administrati-e body acts in a ;udicial or Auasi";udicial matter, and its acts are ,articular and immediate rather than +eneral and ,ros,ecti-e, the ,erson *hose ri+hts or ,ro,erty may be affected by the action is entitled to notice and hearin+K

he order in Auestion *hich *as issued by res,ondent )lcua@ no doubt contains all the attributes of a Auasi";udicial ad;udication! &oremost is the fact that said order ,ertains e5clusi-ely to ,etitioner and to no other! &urther, it is ,remised on a findin+ of fact, althou+h ,atently su,erficial, that there is merit in a reduction of some of the rates char+ed" based on an initial e-aluation of ,etitionerHs financial statements"*ithout affordin+ ,etitioner the benefit of an e5,lanation as to *hat ,articular as,ect or as,ects of the financial statements *arranted a corres,ondin+ rate reduction! There remains the cate+orical admission made by res,ondent TC that the Auestioned order *as issued ,ursuant to its Auasi";udicial functions! 2t, ho*e-er, insists that notice and hearin+ are not necessary since the assailed order is merely incidental to the entire ,roceedin+s and, therefore, tem,orary in nature! This ,ostulate is bereft of merit! <hile res,ondents may fi5 a tem,orary rate ,endin+ final determination of the a,,lication of ,etitioner, such rate"fi5in+ order, tem,orary thou+h it may be, is not e5em,t from the statutory ,rocedural reAuirements of notice and hearin+, as *ell as the reAuirement of reasonableness! )ssumin+ that such ,o*er is -ested in TC, it may not e5ercise the same in an arbitrary and confiscatory manner! Cate+ori@in+ such an order as tem,orary in nature does not ,erforce entail the a,,licability of a different rule of statutory ,rocedure than *ould other*ise be a,,lied to any other order on the same matter unless other*ise ,ro-ided by the a,,licable la*! 16/c0 of the 1ublic Ser-ice )ct *hich ,ro-ides7 Section 16! 1roceedin+s of the Commission, u,on notice and hearin+ the Commission shall ha-e ,o*er, u,on ,ro,er notice and hearin+ in accordance *ith the rules and ,ro-isions of this )ct, sub;ect to the limitations and e5ce,tions mentioned and sa-in+ ,ro-isions to the contrary7 555 555 555 /c0 To fi5 and determine indi-idual or ;oint rates, !!! *hich shall be im,osed, obser-ed and follo*ed thereafter by any ,ublic ser-iceF !!!

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

There is no reason to assume that the aforesaid ,ro-ision does not a,,ly to res,ondent TC, there bein+ no limitin+, e5ce,tin+, or sa-in+ ,ro-isions to the contrary in ?5ecuti-e Orders os! $86 and 196! 2t is thus clear that *ith re+ard to rate"fi5in+, res,ondent has no authority to ma4e such order *ithout first +i-in+ ,etitioner a hearin+, *hether the order be tem,orary or ,ermanent, and it is immaterial *hether the same is made u,on a com,laint, a summary in-esti+ation, or u,on the commissionHs o*n motion as in the ,resent case! TC should act solely on the basis of the e-idence before it and not on 4no*led+e or information other*ise acAuired by it but *hich is not offered in e-idence or, e-en if so adduced, ,etitioner *as +i-en no o,,ortunity to contro-ert! SUBSTANTI=E <UE PROCESS& There is no Auestion that ,etitioner is a mere +rantee of a le+islati-e franchise *hich is sub;ect to amendment, alteration, or re,eal by Con+ress *hen the common +ood so reAuires! ),,arently, therefore, such +rant cannot be unilaterally re-o4ed absent a sho*in+ that the termination of the o,eration of said utility is reAuired by the common +ood! The inherent ,o*er and authority of the State, or its authori@ed a+ent, to re+ulate the rates char+ed by ,ublic utilities should be sub;ect al*ays to the reAuirement that the rates so fi5ed shall be reasonable and ;ust! ) commission has no ,o*er to fi5 rates *hich are unreasonable or to re+ulate them arbitrarily! This basic reAuirement of reasonableness com,rehends such rates *hich must not be so lo* as to be confiscatory, or too hi+h as to be o,,ressi-e! ) cursory ,erusal of the assailed order re-eals that the rate reduction is solely and ,rimarily based on the initial e-aluation made on the financial statements of ,etitioner, contrary to res,ondent TCHs alle+ation that it has se-eral other sources of information *ithout, ho*e-er, di-ul+in+ such sources! &urthermore, it did not as much as ma4e an attem,t to elaborate on ho* it arri-ed at the ,rescribed rates! 2t ;ust ,erfunctorily declared that based on the financial statements, there is merit for a rate reduction *ithout any elucidation on *hat im,lications and conclusions *ere necessarily inferred by it from said statements! or did it dei+n to e5,lain ho* the data reflected in the financial statements influenced its decision to im,ose a rate reduction!

1etitioner is en+a+ed in se-eral ,ro;ects aimed at refurbishin+, rehabilitatin+, and rene*in+ its machinery and eAui,ment in order to 4ee, u, *ith the continuin+ char+es of the times and to maintain its facilities at a com,etiti-e le-el *ith the technolo+ical ad-ances abroad! There ,ro;ected underta4in+s *ere formulated on the ,remise that rates are maintained at their ,resent or at reasonable le-els! Cence, an undue reduction thereof may ,ractically lead to a cessation of its business! <hile *e concede the ,rimacy of the ,ublic interest in an adeAuate and efficient ser-ice, the same is not necessarily to be eAuated *ith reduced rates! 'easonableness in the rates assumes that the same is fair to both the ,ublic utility and the consumer! $0The challen+ed order, ,articularly on the issue of rates ,ro-ided therein, bein+ -iolati-e of the due ,rocess clause is -oid and should be nullified! 'es,ondents should no* ,roceed, as they should heretofore ha-e done, *ith the hearin+ and determination of ,etitionerHs ,endin+ a,,lication for a certificate of ,ublic con-enience and necessity! ENERGY REGULATORY BOAR< vs. CA FACTS 1etitioner 1ili,inas Shell 1etroleum Cor,oration /Shell0 is en+a+ed in the business of im,ortin+ crude oil, refinin+ the same and sellin+ -arious ,etroleum ,roducts throu+h a net*or4 of ser-ice stations throu+hout the country!! 1ri-ate res,ondent 1etroleum Distributors and Ser-ice Cor,oration /1DSC0 o*ns and o,erates a Calte5 ser-ice station at the corner of the M2) and Domestic 'oads in 1asay City! On June #0,193#, Shell filed *ith the Auondam (ureau of ?ner+y :tili@ation /(?:0 an a,,lication for authority to relocate its Shell Ser-ice Station at Tambo, 1araaAue, Metro Manila, to 2melda Marcos )-enue of the same munici,ality! The a,,lication, *hich *as doc4eted as (?: Case o! 3#"09"1#19, *as initially re;ected by the (?: because Shells old site had been closed for fi-e /$0 years such that the relocation of the same to a ne* site *ould amount to a ne* construction of a +asoline outlet, *hich construction *as then the sub;ect of a moratorium! SubseAuently, ho*e-er, (?: rela5ed its ,osition and +a-e due course to the a,,lication!

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

1DSC filed an o,,osition to the a,,lication on the +rounds that7 1!O there are adeAuate ser-ice stations attendin+ to the motorists reAuirements in the tradin+ area co-ered by the a,,licationF 2!O ruinous com,etition *ill result from the establishment of the ,ro,osed ne* ser-ice stationF and #!O there is a decline not an increase in the -olume of sales in the area! T*o other com,anies, namely 1etro,hil and Calte5, also o,,osed the a,,lication on the +round that Shell failed to com,ly *ith the ;urisdictional reAuirements! (?:7 denyin+ Shells a,,lication on a findin+ that there *as no necessity for an additional ,etroleum ,roducts retail outlet in 2melda Marcos )-enue, 1araaAue! Thus, Shell a,,ealed to the Office of ?ner+y )ffairs /O?)0! Mea #'!+e, o May 8, )683, E>ec%t!ve Order No. )3- #as !ss%ed creat! . t'e E er.y Re.%+atory Board (ERB* a d tra s0err! . to !t t'e re.%+atory a d ad$%d!catory 0% ct!o s o0 t'e BEU. O?)7 denied a,,eal Thus, Shell mo-ed for reconsideration and ,rayed for a ne* hearin+ or the remand of the case for further ,roceedin+s! 2t also submitted a ne* feasibility study to ;ustify its a,,lication!""P O?) remanded to ?'( ?'(7 decision allo*in+ Shell to establish the ser-ice station in (eni+no )Auino, Jr! )-enue! 1DSC filed a M' of the fore+oin+ Decisiondenied by ?'( Thus, 1DSC ele-ated Order of denial to C) C)7 re-ersed also denied ?'( and ShellGs M' C? C? TC2S 1?T2T2O ISSUE <= C) erredN >?S! Decision re-ersed! RULING 10 The ,olicy of the +o-ernment in this re+ard has been to allo* a free inter,lay of mar4et forces *ith minimal +o-ernment su,er-ision! The ,ur,ose of +o-ernin+ le+islation is to liberali@e the do*nstream oil industry

in order to ensure a truly com,etiti-e mar4et under a re+ime of fair ,rices, adeAuate and continuous su,,ly, en-ironmentally clean and hi+h"Auality ,etroleum ,roducts!Q$O 2ndeed, e5clusi-ity of any franchise has not been fa-ored by the Court,Q6O *hich is 4een on ,romotin+ free com,etition and the de-elo,ment of a free mar4et consistent *ith the le+islati-e ,olicy of dere+ulation as an ans*er to the ,roblems of the oil industry The inter,retation of an administrati-e +o-ernment a+ency li4e the ?'(, *hich is tas4ed to im,lement a statute, is accorded +reat res,ect and ordinarily controls the construction of the courts! ) lon+ line of cases establish the basic rule that the courts *ill not interfere in matters *hich are addressed to the sound discretion of +o-ernment a+encies entrusted *ith the re+ulation of acti-ities comin+ under the s,ecial technical 4no*led+e and trainin+ of such a+encies! The rationale for this rule relates not only to the emer+ence of the multifarious needs of a modern or moderni@in+ society and the establishment of di-erse administrati-e a+encies for addressin+ and satisfyin+ those needsF it also relates to the accumulation of e5,erience and +ro*th of s,eciali@ed ca,abilities by the administrati-e a+ency char+ed *ith im,lementin+ a ,articular statute! 2n +sturias .ugar *entral, Inc. v. *ommissioner of *ustoms the Court stressed that e5ecuti-e officials are ,resumed to ha-e familiari@ed themsel-es *ith all the considerations ,ertinent to the meanin+ and ,ur,ose of the la*, and to ha-e formed an inde,endent, conscientious and com,etent e5,ert o,inion thereon! The courts +i-e much *ei+ht to the +o-ernment a+ency or officials char+ed *ith the im,lementation of the la*, their com,etence, e5,ertness, e5,erience and informed ;ud+ment, and the fact that they freAuently are drafters of the la* they inter,ret! <hen an administrati-e a+ency renders an o,inion or issues a statement of ,olicy, it merely inter,rets a ,re"e5istin+ la* and the administrati-e inter,retation is at best ad-isory for it is the courts that finally determine *hat the la* means!Q Thus, an action by an administrati-e a+ency may be set aside by the ;udicial de,artment if there is an error of la*, abuse of ,o*er, lac4 of ;urisdiction or +ra-e abuse of discretion clearly conflictin+

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

*ith the letter and s,irit of the la*! /&O' '?&?'? C? sa4e7 ?'(Gs 1o*ers01 Time and a+ain this Court has ruled that in re-ie*in+ administrati-e decisions, the findin+s of fact made therein must be res,ected as lon+ as they are su,,orted by substantial e-idence, e-en if not o-er*helmin+ or ,re,onderantF that it is not for the re-ie*in+ court to *ei+h the conflictin+ e-idence, determine the credibility of the *itnesses or other*ise substitute its o*n ;ud+ment for that of the administrati-e a+ency on the sufficiency of e-idenceF that the administrati-e decision in matters *ithin the e5ecuti-e ;urisdiction can only be set aside on ,roof of +ra-e abuse of discretion, fraud or error of la*!Q26O 1etitioner ?'( is in a better ,osition to resol-e ,etitioner Shells a,,lication, bein+ ,rimarily the a+ency ,ossessin+ the necessary e5,ertise on the matter! The ,o*er to determine *hether the buildin+ of a +asoline retail outlet in a tradin+ area *ould benefit ,ublic interest and the oil industry lies *ith the ?'( not the a,,ellate courts!
1

&inally, *hile it is ,robable that the o,eration of the ,ro,osed Shell outlet may, to a certain e5tent, affect 1DSCs business, ,ri-ate res,ondent ne-ertheless failed to sho* that its business *ould not ha-e sufficient ,rofit to ha-e a fair return of its in-estment! The mere ,ossibility of reduction in the earnin+s of a business is not sufficient to ,ro-e ruinous com,etition! a climate of fear and ,essimism +enerated by unsubstantiated claims of ruinous com,etition already re;ected in the ,ast should not be made to retard free com,etition, consistently *ith le+islati-e ,olicy of dere+ulatin+ and liberali@in+ the oil industry to ensure a truly com,etiti-e mar4et under a re+ime of fair ,rices, adeAuate and continuous su,,ly, en-ironmentally clean and hi+h"Auality ,etroleum ,roducts! PA<UA vs. RANA<A FACTS On &ebruary 26, 2001 the Citra Metro Manila Toll*ays Cor,oration /C2T')0 filed *ith the T'( an a,,lication for an interim ad;ustment of the toll rates at the Metro Manila S4y*ay 1ro;ect R Sta+e 1C2T') moored its ,etition on the ,ro-isions of the BSu,,lemental Toll O,eration )+reementB /STO)authori@in+ it, to a,,ly for, and if *arranted be +ranted an interim ad;ustment of toll rates in the e-ent of a Bsi+nificant currency de-aluation!B Claimin+ that the ,eso e5chan+e rate to a :!S! dollar had de-aluated from 126!1661 in 199$ to 183!00 in 2000, C2T') alle+ed that there *as a com,ellin+ need for the increase of the toll rates to meet the loan obli+ations of the 1ro;ect and the substantial increase in debt"ser-ice burden! Due to hea-y o,,osition, C2T')Gs ,etition remained unresol-ed! This ,rom,ted C2T') to file on October 9, 2001 an B:r+ent Motion for 1ro-isional ),,ro-al,B On October #0, 2001, C2T') mo-ed to *ithdra* its B:r+ent Motion for 1ro-isional ),,ro-alB *ithout ,re;udice to its ri+ht to see4 or be +ranted ,ro-isional relief under the abo-e"Auoted ,ro-isions of the T'( 'ules of 1rocedure, ob-iously, referrin+ to the ,o*er of the (oard to act on its o*n initiati-e! On o-ember 6, 2001, C2T') *rote a letter to T'( e5,ressin+ its concern o-er the undue delay in the ,roceedin+, stressin+ that any further setbac4 *ould brin+ the 1ro;ectGs financial condition, as *ell as the 1hili,,ine

SEC. 3. Jurisdiction, Powers nd !unctions o" t#e Bo rd$ Wh n !a""ant # an# on$y !h n %&b$'( n ( ))'ty " *&'" )+ th Boa"# ,ay " -&$at th b&)'n )) o. ',%o"t'n-+ /%o"t'n-+ " 0 /%o"t'n-+ )h'%%'n-+ t"an)%o"t'n-+ %"o( ))'n-+ " .'n'n-+ ,a"1 t'n- an# #')t"'b&t'n- n "-y " )o&"( ). Th Boa"# )ha$$+ &%on %"'o" not'( an# h a"'n-+ / "(') th .o$$o!'n-+ a,on- oth " %o! ") an# .&n(t'on) 2a3 4'/ an# " -&$at th %"'( ) o. % t"o$ &, %"o#&(t) 2b3 4'/ an# " -&$at th "at )(h #&$ o" %"'( ) o. %'% # -a) to b (ha"- # by #&$y ."an(h') # -a) (o,%an' ) !h'(h #')t"'b&t -a) by , an) o. &n# "-"o&n# %'% )y)t ,)5 2(3 4'/ an# " -&$at th "at ) o. %'% $'n (on( ))'ona'" ) &n# " th %"o6')'on) o. R %&b$'( A(t No. 378+ a) a, n# #+ oth "!') 1no! a) th P t"o$ &, A(t o. 19:9+ a) a, n# # by P" )'# nt'a$ D (" No. 18;;5(han"ob$ )6'"t&a$$a!$'b"a"y 2#3 R -&$at th (a%a('t' ) o. n ! " .'n "' ) o" a##'t'ona$ (a%a('t' ) o. /')t'n- " .'n "' ) an# $'( n) " .'n "' ) that ,ay b o"-an'< # a.t " th '))&an( o. th') E/ (&t'6 O"# "+ &n# " )&(h t ",) an# (on#'t'on) a) a" (on)')t nt !'th th nat'ona$ 'nt " )t5 2 3 Wh n 6 " th Boa"# ha) # t ",'n # that th " ') a )ho"ta- o. any % t"o$ &, %"o#&(t+ o" !h n %&b$'( 'nt " )t )o " *&'" )+ 't ,ay ta1 )&(h )t %) a) 't ,ay (on)'# " n ( ))a"y+ 'n($&#'n- th t ,%o"a"y a#=&)t, nt o. th $ 6 $) o. %"'( ) o. % t"o$ &, %"o#&(t) an# th %ay, nt to th O'$ P"'( Stab'$'<at'on 4&n# (" at # &n# " P" )'# nt'a$ D (" No. 19>? by % ")on) o" nt't' ) n-a- # 'n th % t"o$ &, 'n#&)t"y o. )&(h a,o&nt) a) ,ay b # t ",'n # by th Boa"#+ !h'(h !'$$ nab$ th ',%o"t " to " (o6 " 't) (o)t) o. ',%o"tat'on.

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

ban4in+ system, to a total colla,se! C2T') recounted that out of the :SS#$8 million fundin+ from creditors! Thus, C2T') reAuested T'( to find a timely solution to its ,redicament! On o-ember 9, 2001, T'( +ranted C2T')Gs motion to *ithdra* the :r+ent Motion for 1ro-isional ),,ro-al ! T'(7 issued 'esolution o! 2001"39 authori@in+ ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustments at the Metro Manila S4y*ay, effecti-e January 1, 2002, 7 On December 16, 28 and #1, 2001, the abo-e 'esolution a,,ro-in+ ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustments *as ,ublished in the ne*s,a,ers of +eneral circulation! 1etitioner Ceferino 1adua, as a toll ,ayer, filed an B:r+ent Motion for a Tem,orary 'estrainin+ Order to Sto, )rbitrary Toll &ee 2ncreasesB Qin D!'! o! 181989a ,etition for mandamus earlier filed by him! 2n that ,etition, 1adua see4s to com,el res,ondent Jud+e Santia+o 'anada of the 'e+ional Trial Court, (ranch 1#6, Ma4ati City, to issue a *rit of e5ecution for the enforcement of the Court of ),,ealsG Decision dated )u+ust 8, 1939 in C)" D!'! S1 o! 1#2#$! 2n its Decision, the Court of ),,eals ordered the e5clusion of certain ,ortions of the e5,ress*ays /from Eillamor )ir (ase to )laban+ in the South, and from (alinta*a4 to Taban+ in the orth0 from the franchise of the 1 CC! On the other hand ,etitioner ?duardo Tialcita, as a ta5,ayer and as Con+ressman of 1araUaAue City, filed the ,resent ,etition for ,rohibition *ith ,rayer for a tem,orary restrainin+ order and=or *rit of ,reliminary in;unction a+ainst T'( and C2T'), doc4eted as D!'! o! 1$1103, im,u+nin+ the same 'esolution o! 2001"39! 1etitioner Tialcita asserts that the ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustments are e5orbitant and that the T'( -iolated its o*n Charter, 1residential Decree o! 1112 *hen it ,romul+ated 'esolution o! 2001"39 *ithout the benefit of any ,ublic hearin+! Ce also maintains that the T'( -iolated the Constitution *hen it did not e5,ress clearly and distinctly the facts and the la* on *hich 'esolution o! 2001"39 *as based! )nd lastly, he claims that Section #, 'ule 10 of the T'( 'ules of 1rocedure is not sanctioned by 1!D! o! 1112! C2T'), in its comment on Con+ressman TialcitaGs ,etition, counters that7 /10 the T'( has ,rimary administrati-e ;urisdiction o-er all matters relatin+ to toll ratesF /20 ,rohibition is an ina,,ro,riate remedy because its function is to restrain acts about to be done and not acts already

accom,lishedF /#0 'esolution o! 2001"39 *as issued in accordance *ith la*F /80 Section #, 'ule 10 of the T'( 'ules is constitutionalF and /$0 ,ri-ate res,ondent and the 'e,ublic of the 1hili,,ines *ould suffer more irre,arable dama+es than ,etitioner! The T'(, throu+h the OSD, filed a se,arate comment reiteratin+ the same ar+uments raised by ,ri-ate res,ondent C2T')! Thus, both petitions were consolidated. ISSUE 10 <as the resolution -oid for bein+ -iolati-e of due ,rocessN 20 2s hearin+ necessary to +rant ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustmentsN #0 Did C2T') ha-e locus standin+N RULING 10 'ecords sho* that they *ere ,ublished on December 16, 28 and #1, 2001 in # ne*s,a,ers of +eneral circulation, ,articularly the 1hili,,ine Star, 1hili,,ine Daily 2nAuirer and The Manila (ulletin! Surely, such ,ublications sufficiently com,lied *ith Section $ of 1!D! o! 1112 *hich mandates that Bno ne* rates shall be collected unless ,ublished in a ne*s,a,er of +eneral ,ublication at least once a *ee4 for three consecuti-e *ee4s!B )t any rate, it must be ,ointed out that under %etter of 2nstruction o! 1##8") the T'( may +rant and issue e5",arte to any ,etitioner, *ithout need of notice, ,ublication or hearin+, ,ro-isional authority to collect, ,endin+ hearin+ and decision on the merits of the ,etition, the increase in rates ,rayed for or such lesser amount as the T'( may in its discretion ,ro-isionally +rant! That %O2 o! 1##8") has the force and effect of la* finds su,,ort in a catena of cases decreein+ that Ball ,roclamations, orders, decrees, instructions, and acts ,romul+ated, issued, or done by the former 1resident /&erdinand ?! Marcos0 are ,art of the la* of the land, and shall remain -alid, le+al, bindin+, and effecti-e, unless modified, re-o4ed or su,erseded by subseAuent ,roclamations, orders, decrees, instructions, or other acts of the 1resident! 20 The SC stressed that the T'(Gs authority to +rant ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustments does not reAuire the conduct of a hearin+! 1ertinent la*s and ;uris,rudence su,,ort this conclusion! 2 &rom the fore+oin+, it is clear that
@

To ($a"'.y th 'nt nt o. P.D. No. 111@ a) to th /t nt o. th TRBA) %o! "+B3>C 4o", " P" )'# nt Ma"(o) .&"th " '))& # LOI No. 133:0A /%" ))$y a$$o!'n- th TRB to -"ant /0%a"t %"o6')'ona$ o" t ,%o"a"y 'n(" a) 'n to$$ "at )+ th&)D

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

a hearin+ is not necessary for the +rant of ,ro-isional toll rate ad;ustment! The lan+ua+e of %O2 o! 1##8") is not susce,tible of eAui-ocation! 2t Bdirects, orders and instructsB the T'( to issue ,ro-isional toll rates ad;ustment e5",arte *ithout the need of notice, hearin+ and ,ublication! )ll that is necessary is that it be issued u,on /10 a findin+ that the main ,etition is sufficient in form and substanceF /20 the submission of an affida-it sho*in+ that the increase in rates substantially conforms to the formula, if any is sti,ulated in the franchise or toll o,eration a+reement, and that failure to immediately im,ose and collect the increase in rates *ould result in +reat irre,arable in;ury to the ,etitionerF and /#0 the

submission of a bond! )+ain, *hether or not C2T') com,lied *ith these reAuirements is an issue that must be addressed to the T'(! The ,ractice is not somethin+ ,eculiar! <e ha-e ruled in a number of cases that an administrati-e a+ency may be em,o*ered to a,,ro-e ,ro-isionally, *hen demanded by ur+ent ,ublic need, rates of ,ublic utilities *ithout a hearin+! The reason is easily discerned from the fact that ,ro-isional rates are by their nature tem,orary and sub;ect to ad;ustment in conformity *ith the definiti-e rates a,,ro-ed after final hearin+ 2n the li+ht thereof, ,ublic res,ondent (oard need not e-en ha-e conducted formal hearin+s in these cases ,rior to issuance of its Order of 18 )u+ust 1936 +rantin+ a ,ro-isional increase of ,rices! The (oard, u,on its o*n discretion and on the basis of documents and e-idence submitted by ,ri-ate res,ondents, could ha-e issued an order +rantin+ ,ro-isional relief immediately u,on filin+ by ,ri-ate res,ondents of their res,ecti-e a,,lications! 2n this res,ect, the Court considers the e-idence ,resented by ,ri-ate res,ondents in su,,ort of their a,,lications "R!i!e!, e-idence sho*in+ that im,ortation costs of ,etroleum ,roducts had +one u,F that the ,eso had de,reciated in -alueF and that the Oil 1rice Stabili@ation &und /O1S&0 had been de,leted R as substantial and hence constituti-e of at least ,rima facie basis for issuance by the (oard of a ,ro-isional relief order +rantin+ an increase in the ,rices of ,etroleum ,roducts! #0 )nent ,etitioner 1aduaGs contention that C2T') has no standin+ to a,,ly for a toll fee increase, suffice it to say that C2T')Gs ri+ht stems from the STO) *hich *as entered into by no less than the 'e,ublic of the 1hili,,ines and by the 1 CC! Section 6!08 of the STO) ,ro-ides that the 2n-estor, C2T'), and=or the O,erator, 1 CC, shall be entitled to a,,ly for and if *arranted, to be +ranted an interim ad;ustment of toll rates in case of force ma;eure and a si+nificant currency -aluation! o*, unless set aside throu+h ,ro,er action, the STO) has the force and effect of la* bet*een the contractin+ ,arties, and is entitled to reco+nition by this Court! On the same breath, *e cannot sustain 1aduaGs contention that the
accordance with Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 2, Section 2 of Rule 3 and Section Rule hereof, the Board within a reasonable time after the filing of Petition, may in an en banc decision pro isionally appro e the initial rate or toll rate ad!ustment, without the necessity of any notice hearing"# 1 of the toll and

ENOW+ TFERE4ORE+ I, !ERDI%&%D E$ '&R(OS+ P" )'# nt o. th R %&b$'( o. th Ph'$'%%'n )+ by 6'"t& o. th %o! ") 6 )t # 'n , by th Con)t't&t'on+ do hereby direct, order and instruct the Toll Regulatory Board to grant and issue exparte to any petitioner, without need of notice, publication or hearing, pro isional authority to collect, pending hearing of and decision on the merits of such petition, the increase in rates prayed for or such lesser amount as the Board may in its discretion pro isionally grant, &%on 2a3 a .'n#'n- that th )a'# % t't'on ') )&..'(' nt 'n .o", an# )&b)tan( + 2b3 th )&b,'))'on o. an a..'#a6't by th % t't'on " )ho!'n- that th 'n(" a) 'n "at ) )&b)tant'a$$y (on.o",) to th .o",&$a+ '. any )t'%&$at # 'n th ."an(h') o" to$$ o% "at'on a-" , ntG( "t'.'(at o. th % t't'on " an# that .a'$&" to ',, #'at $y ',%o) an# (o$$ (t th 'n(" a) 'n "at ) !o&$# " )&$t 'n o&t"'-ht # $ay o" )to%%a- o. &"- nt$y n # # ',%"o6 , nt)+ /%an)'on o" " %a'") o. to$$ .a('$'t' ) an#Go" 'n -" at '"" %a"ab$ 'n=&"y to th % t't'on "+ an# 2(3 th )&b,'))'on by th % t't'on " to th Boa"# o. a bon#+ 'n )&(h a,o&nt an# ."o, )&(h )&" ty o" )&" t' ) an# &n# " )&(h t ",) an# (on#'t'on) a) th Boa"# )ha$$ .'/+ to -&a"ant th " .&n# o. th 'n(" a) 'n "at ) to th a.. (t # to$$ %ay ") 'n (a) 't ') .'na$$y # t ",'n #+ a.t " not'( an# h a"'n-+ that th % t't'on " ') not nt't$ #+ 'n !ho$ o" 'n %a"t+ to th )a, . Any %"o6')'ona$ to$$ "at 'n(" a) ) )ha$$ b .. (t'6 ',, #'at $y &%on a%%"o6a$ !'tho&t n # o. %&b$'(at'on.E

Th " a.t "+ th TRB %"o,&$-at # a) %a"t o. 't) R&$ ) o. P"o( #&" + th %"o6')'onD ERULE >D PROCEDURE 4OR APPROVAL O4 TOLL RATE

.o$$o!'n-

ES (t'on @. P"o6')'ona$ R $' . Upon initial findings of the Board that the Petition for the approval of initial toll rate or the petition for toll rate adjustment is in

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia

TRANSPORTATION DIGEST PUBLIC SERVICE TRANSPORTATION Atty. Abano

A.M.+D.G.

term BMetro Manila S4y*ayB 1ro;ect e5cludes the at"+rade ,ortions of the South %u@on ?5,ress*ay considerin+ that under the same STO) the BMetro Manila S4y*ayB includes7 B/a0 the South Metro Manila S4y*ay, cou,led *ith the rehabilitated at"+rade ,ortion of the South %u@on ?5,ress*ay, from )laban+ to Luirino )-enueF /b0 the Central Metro Manila S4y*ay, from Luirino )-enue to )! (onifacio )-enue!

3B DIGEST GROUP 2009-2010 Ad Deum Per Excellentia