Case
Pollution Ajudication Board
vs. CA
WASTEWATER
Tullahan- Tineros River
Laguna Lake Development
Authority vs. CA
OPEN DUMPSITE
Facts
Respondent
Solar
Textile
Finishing
Corporation involved in bleaching, rinsing
and dyeing textiles with waste water
Wastewater discharged into canal leading to
adjacent Tullahan-Tineros River.
PAB Gov agency charged with task of
determining won effluents of particular industrial
establishment comply with or violate antipollution statutory and regulatory provisions,
remarkably forebearing in its efforts to enforce
applicable standards
Solar continued casual discharge
PAB issued ex-parte order Solar cease and
desist from utilizing wastewater pollution source
violative of PD 984 (Pollution Control Law)
Solar motion for reconsideration granted
temporary operations
Solar Preliminary injunction with RTC on
certiorari but was dismissed upon 2 grounds:
o
Appeal from the questioned order of
the board as well as the writ of
execution is the proper remedy not
certiorari
o
Boards subsequent order allowing for
temporary operation action of solar
moot and academic
Solar appealed to CA reversed and
remanded to RTC and Writ of Execution null
and void
The LLDA Legal and Technical personnel found
that the City Govt of Caloocan was maintaining
an open dumpsite at the Camarin area
Without first securing an Environmental
Compliance Certificate from the Environmental
management bureau of the DENR
LLDA determined that the water collected from
the leachate and the receiving streams could
considerably affect the quality of the receiving
waters bacteria/contaminated
LLDA issued cease and desist order from
dumping any form or kind of garbage in the
dumpsite
City Govt of Calooca RTC action for
declaration of nullity of order
Issue
WON PAB has legal
authority to issue the order
and writ of execution
against
Solar
Textile
Finishing Corp
WON LLDA has the
authority
to
entertain
complaint against the open
dumpsite
in
Barangay
Camarin
WON LLDA hass power to
issue cesae and desist
order
Ruling
YES. Sec 7 of PD 984 authorized ptitioner to
issue exparte cease and desist orders under the
followi g circumstances
o
Public hearing --? Prima facie
evidence that discharge immediate
threat to life, health, safety, welfare,
exceeds allowable standards set by
the commossion
Writ of Execution entirely within its lawful
authority
Ex-parte cease and desist permitted by law
and regulations in situations like in this case
Provisions enacted police power
Procedural due process yileds to necessities
of protecting public interests
Hence, trial court did not err in dismissing
petition for certiorari
Orders of PAB reinstated without prejudice to
the right of Solar to contest the correctness of
the basis of the Boards Order and Writ of
Execution at a public hearing before the board
YES. RA 4850 promote and accelerate the
development and balanced growth of the Laguna
Lake are and surrounding provinces including
Caloocan with due regard and adequate
provisions for management and control and its
preservation
YES. EO 927 fundamental rule admin
agency ony has powers expressly granted to it
by law, it is likewise settled rule that an admin
agency has also such powers as are necessarily
implied in the exercise of its express powers
Authority to issue cease and desist order
implied
Tano vs. Socrates
SHIPMENT AND FISHING
BAN ORDINANCE AND
RESOLUTION
PUERTO
PALAWAN
PRINCESA
RP vs. City of Davao
ATTICA SPORTS DOME
DAVAO CITY
ENVIRONMENTALLY
CRITICAL PROJECT
City Govt of Caloocan sought to be declared
as the sole authority empowered to promote
health and safety of the right of the people in
Caloocan to a healthful and balance ecology
The Sanguniang Panglunsod ng Puerto
Princesa City enacted an ordinance (No. 1592)
banning the shipment of all live fish and lobster
outside Puerto Princesa City for a period of 5
years and providing exemptions and penalties
and for other purposes thereof.
A resolution was likewise enacted prohiting the
catching, gathering, buying, selling and
possessing of live marine coral dwelling aquatic
organisms for a period of 5 years within
Palawan waters
Petitioners Airline Shippers Association with
marine merchants were charged for violatins the
ordince and resolution
Petitioners alleged they had preferential
rights as marginal fishermen granted priviliges
in Sec 149 of the LGC invoking invalidity of the
ordinance and resolution
Respondent filed for application for a
Certificate of Non-Coverage for its propsed
project Davao City Attica Sports Dome with
the Environmental Management Bureau
EMB denied within an environmentally
critical area Davao should first obtain an
environment impact assessment process to
secure
the
Environmental
Compliance
Certificate
Respondent filed for mandamus with the
RTC
o
Not within environmentally critical
area
o
Duty of DENR
to issue CNC
ministerial
RTC granted mandamus to City of Davao
o
PD 1586 in rel to PD 1151 and LOI
1179 LGUs excluded from
agencies and instrumentalities of the
Govt or GOCCs, as well as private
corps which are mandated to go
through the EIA
o
DENR mandatory to approve
application
WON the ordinance is valid
and constitutional
WON LGUs are excluded
from the coverage of PD
1586 which requires an
Environmental
Impact
Assessment process to
secure an Environmental
Compliance Certificate
WON the project is entitled
to a Certificate of NonCoverage
YES. Enactment of law valid exercise of
police power
Rights and priviliges not absolute
General welfare clause of the LGC mandates
liberal interpretation in giving LGUs more power
to accelerate economic development and to
upgrade the life of the people in the community
which includes enactment of ordinances
No. It is ithin the coverage of PD 1586
o
Duty of LGUs to promote peoples
right to a balanced ecology
o
LGUs are juridical persons and PD
1586 requires no person, partnership
or corporation shall undertake or
operate an environmentally critical
project without frst securing
YES. Attica Sports Dome not close to any of
the said projects or areas enumerated as being a
critical project.
Evidence prove not falling within a critical area
nor being a critical project
Findings of the court binding upon the SC
Petitioner RP filed for motion for recon
denied
