You are on page 1of 4

07-1-00320

Assignment 6
Document 1
Republic of the Philippines
Region VII
Regional Trial Court
Branch 32, Dumaguete City


ASSOCIATION OF RETAILERS (AOR),
representing affected members,

Civil Case No. XXXXX
Plaintiff
-versus-


CITY COUNCIL OF DUMAGUETE,
HON. WOODY WOOD-PECKER, in his
official capacity as Vice-Mayor,
FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT., ARTHUR
MCARTHUR, FERLITA CORAZON,
BOBBY PROMETHEUS, RIDICULE
HERCULES, PETRA MAHALIMUYAK,
ISDA LAPU-LAPU, CARAMELA
LABLAB, TSOKOLATE PUTO,
MANGGA MATAMIS, in their official
capacity as City Councilors,
COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY RELIEF
AND INJUNCTION
Defendants
X-------------------------------------------------\

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
This case assails the constitutionality of an ordinance within this Courts
jurisdiction under Rule 63 of the Rules of Court.
This Court has the authority to grant declaratory relief pursuant to the same Rule.
PARTIES
Plaintiff ASSOCIATION OF RETAILERS (AOR) is a duly registered Filipino
association with place of business at Dumaguete City. It is represented by its President,
Wishing Well;
Defendant CITY COUNCIL OF DUMAGUETE is the legislative body of
Dumaguete City;
Defendant HON. WOODY WOOD-PECKER is the Vice-Mayor of Dumaguete
City and the ex-officio presiding officer of the City Council of Dumaguete;
Defendants FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT., ARTHUR MCARTHUR, FERLITA
CORAZON, BOBBY PROMETHEUS, RIDICULE HERCULES, PETRA
MAHALIMUYAK, ISDA LAPU-LAPU, CARAMELA LABLAB, TSOKOLATE PUTO,
MANGGA MATAMIS, are the members of the City Council of Dumaguete City.
07-1-00320
Assignment 6
Document 1
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
Plaintiff, thru counsel, respectfully states that:
1. Defendants City Council of Dumaguete City and its members has adopted Ordinance
No. XXXX (Ordinance) banning tobacco advertising on billboards, store windows,
any site within 1,000 feet of a school, and any other location where minors under the
age of 18 years traditionally gather;
2. The above-quoted portion is overbroad and ambiguous so that it violated the
plaintiffs and its members right to commercial speech;
3. The apparent purpose of the ordinance is to discourage school-age children from
smoking;
4. The Ordinance is unconstitutional for failing on three points:
a. While the Ordinance has a substantial purpose, however, such is not directly
advanced by the ordinance. The interest the law wishes to protect may be
advanced by other direct means such as education about smoking, rather than
a ban on billboards;
b. The Ordinance is overbroad because it failed to define the scope of the ban
narrowly. The ordinance sweeps within it a wide range of tobacco
advertising at bookstores, newspaper and magazine stands, restaurants, and
theaters, where adults are reading or hearing both commercial and non-
commercial speech which is constitutionally protected speech;
c. The Ordinance is ambiguous because it uses ambiguous terms, such as any
other location where minors . . . traditionally gather. This provision fails to
notify commercial speakers what venues are within the ordinances purview.
Moreover, such a provision gives city officials wide discretion to favour or
disfavour speech content depending on what venues they decide are included
within the ordinance. There has been no standard of construction in
Dumaguete City of the phrase traditionally gather, thus, such a phrase fails
to pass constitutionality.
5. The petitioner has a clear legal right to commercial speech which is protected by
Article III, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution and recognized in Pharmaceutical and
Health Care Association of the Philippines vs. Duque III, 535 SCRA 265. It is also
clear that petitioners tobacco advertising is a lawful activity and not misleading.
6. Unless declaratory relief and/or restraint is granted, plaintiff and its members will
suffer grave and irreparable injury because the Ordinance deprives plaintiff and its
07-1-00320
Assignment 6
Document 1
members needed advertising revenue.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that this Honorable Court annul the
Ordinance for being unconstitutional and grant the declaratory relief and/or injunction.
Other just and equitable relief under the foregoing are likewise being prayed for.
Respectfully submitted.
Dumaguete City, Philippines. March 3, 2014.

Sgd.
Procopio Magsaltamingan
Counsel for Plaintiff
Dumaguete City

07-1-00320
Assignment 6
Document 1
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
I, Wishing Well, of legal age, President of Association of Retailers do hereby state
that: I am representing the plaintiff in the pleading entitled COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY RELIEF AND INJUNCTION and in such capacity, caused this
Complaint to be prepared; I have read its contents and affirm that they are true and
correct to the best of my own personal knowledge; I hereby certify that there is no other
case commenced or pending before any court involving the same parties and the same
issue and that, should I learn of such a case, I shall notify the court within five (5) days
from my notice.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument on March 3, 2014.

Sgd.
Hantok Dekalar

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me in Dumaguete City on March 3 2014,
affiant exhibiting before me his Government Issued ID no. G02-1-1234 issued on March
25, 2013 at the Land Transportation Office, Dumaguete City.