Tio vs Videogram video industry, particularly because of the rampant film

Facts: piracy, the flagrant violation of intellectual property rights,
On October 5, 1985, Presidential Decree No. 1987 and the proliferation of pornographic video tapes. Therefore,
entitled "An Act Creating the Videogram Regulatory Board" the decree is constitutional.
with broad powers to regulate and supervise the videogram
industry was promulgated and later took effect on April 10,
1986. Such decree was enacted because it did not only Assoc. Small Landowners vs Sec. Agrarian Reform
greatly prejudiced the operations of moviehouses and Facts:
theaters, but also videogram(s) establishments collectively On August 8, 1963, Congress of the Philippines
earn around P600 Million per annum but such earnings have enacted R.A. No. 3844, otherwise known as the Agricultural
not been subjected to tax, thereby depriving the Land Reform Code. This was substantially superseded by P.D.
Government of approximately P180 Million in taxes each No. 27 on October 21, 1972, along with martial law, to
year. provide for the compulsory acquisition of private lands for
Under Section 10 of PD No. 1987, the province shall distribution among tenant-farmers and to specify maximum
collect a tax of thirty percent (30%) of the purchase price or retention limits for landowners. On July 17, 1987, President
rental rate, as the case may be, for every sale, lease or Corazon C. Aquino issued E.O. No. 228, declaring full land
disposition of a videogram containing a reproduction of any ownership in favor of the beneficiaries of P.D. No. 27. This
motion picture or audiovisual program. was followed on July 22, 1987 by Presidential Proclamation
Petitioners now contend that the decree is No. 131, instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform
unconstitutional because the tax imposed is harsh, program (CARP), and E.O. No. 229, providing the mechanics
confiscatory, oppressive and/or in unlawful restraint of trade for its implementation. When Congress of the Philippines
in violation of the due process clause of the Constitution. took over legislative power, it enacted R.A. No. 6657,
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
Issue: WON PD No. 1987 is unconstitutional because the tax of 1988, which President Aquino signed on June 10, 1988.
it imposes is an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of the A number of petitions were filed assailing the
due process clause constitutionality of P.D. No. 27, E.O. Nos. 228 and 229, and
Ruling: R.A. No. 6657. They contend that said laws violate
No, PD 1987 is constitutional and the tax it imposes is separation of powers, due process, equal protection and the
not an unlawful restraint of trade in violation of the due constitutional limitation that no private property shall be
process clause. According to the court, taxation has been taken for public use without just compensation.
made to implement the state's police power. The tax
imposed by the Decree is not only a revenue measure to Issue: Whether or not there is a valid exercise of Police Power
collect taxes from the earnings of videogram establishments or Power of Eminent domain in the case
which have not been subjected to tax, but also a regulatory Ruling:
measure. The levy of the 30% tax is for a public purpose. It YES. there is a valid exercise of power of eminent
was imposed primarily to answer the need for regulating the domain in the case, by utilizing police power. The taking

with the latter rights accruing to the owner in favor of the farmer. This is definitely an exercise not of the police taxation. Recent trends. being used as an implement of the former like the power of beneficiary. What is required is the surrender of the title to and the would indicate not a polarization but a mingling of the police physical possession of the said excess and all beneficial power and the power of eminent domain. .contemplated is not a mere limitation of the use of the land. power but of the power of eminent domain.