You are on page 1of 19

ARTICLE XIII: SOCIAL of the NLRC Resolution which likewise ordered unthinkable for one to refuse payroll

respondents reinstatement, petitioner still reinstatement. In the face of the grim

JUSTICE and HUMAN refused to reinstate them. Thus, respondents possibilities, the rise of concerned employees
prayed that in view of the orders of declining payroll reinstatement is on the horizon.
RIGHTS reinstatement, a computation of the award of Further, the Genuino ruling not only disregards
back wages be made. The office of the the social justice principles behind the rule, but
Section 2. Social Justice: Labor Arbiter issued an undated Computation of also institutes a scheme unduly favorable to
respondents accrued salaries. Upon appeal, CA management. Under such scheme, the salaries
Islriz Trading vs. Capada, G.R. No. dismissed the petition of the petitioners. dispensed pendente lite merely serve as a bond
168501, Jan. 31, 2011 posted in installment by the employer. For in
Issue: Do the social justice principles of labor the event of a reversal of the Labor Arbiter's
Facts: Respondents Efren Capada, Lauro Licup, law outweigh or render inapplicable the civil law decision ordering reinstatement, the employer
Norberto Nigos and Godofredo Magnaye were doctrine of unjust enrichment? gets back the same amount without having to
drivers while respondents Ronnie Abel, Arnel spend ordinarily for bond premiums. This
Siberre, Edmundo Capada, Nomerlito Magnaye Ruling: Yes. The Court then stressed that as circumvents, if not directly contradicts, the
and Alberto Dela Vega were helpers of Islriz opposed to Genuino v. National Labor Relations proscription that the "posting of a bond [even a
Trading, a gravel and sand business owned and Commission (It has thus been advanced that cash bond] by the employer shall not stay the
operated by petitioner Victor Hugo Lu. Claiming there is no point in releasing the wages to execution for reinstatement.
that they were illegally dismissed, respondents petitioners since their dismissal was found to be
filed a Complaint for illegal dismissal and non- valid, and to do so would constitute unjust Section 3. Labor:
payment of overtime pay, holiday pay, rest day enrichment.), the social justice principles of
pay, allowances and separation pay against labor law outweigh or render inapplicable the Yrasuegui vs. PAL, G.R. No. 168081, Oct.
petitioner before the Labor Arbiter. On his civil law doctrine of unjust enrichment. It then
17, 2008 569 SCRA 467
part, petitioner imputed abandonment of work went on to examine the precarious implication of
against respondents. Labor Arbiter Gan, the "refund doctrine" as enunciated in Genuino,
FACTS: This case portrays the peculiar story of
declared Islriz Trading guilty of illegal thus: The "refund doctrine" easily demonstrates
how a favorable decision by the Labor Arbiter an international flight steward who was
dismissal. Aggrieved, petitioner appealed to the
could harm, more than help, a dismissed dismissed because of his failure to adhere to the
NLRC which granted the appeal. The NLRC set
aside the Decision of Labor Arbiter employee. The employee, to make both ends weight standards of the airline company. It is
Gan. Finding that respondents failure to meet, would necessarily have to use up the now before this court via a review on certiorari
continue working for petitioner was neither salaries received during the pendency of the claiming that he was illegally dismissed. To
caused by termination nor abandonment of appeal, only to end up having to refund the sum buttress his stance, he argues that (1) his
work, the NLRC ordered respondents in case of a final unfavorable decision. It is
dismissal does not fall under 282(e) on the
reinstatement but without back wages. mirage of a stop-gap leading the employee to a
risky cliff of insolvency. Advisably, the sum is Labor Code; (2) continuing adherence to the
Respondents averred therein that since the
Decision of Labor Arbiter Gan ordered better left unspent. It becomes more logical and weight standards of the company is not a bona
their reinstatement, a Writ of Execution was practical for the employee to refuse payroll fide occupational qualification; and (3) he was
already issued for the enforcement of its reinstatement and simply find work elsewhere in discriminated against because other overweight
reinstatement aspect as same is immediately the interim, if any is available. Notably, the
employees were promoted instead of being
executory even pending appeal. But this option of payroll reinstatement belongs to the
employer, even if the employee is able and disciplined.
notwithstanding and despite the
issuance and subsequent finality raring to return to work. Prior to Genuino, it is
Issue: Will the obesity justify employment employment qualification is reasonably related ISSUE: Can an agricultural land conditionally
termination? What is Meiorin Test? Is it valid to the essential operation of the job involved; donated to the archbishop and held in trust and
and constitutional? and (2) that there is factual basis for believing in behalf of the millions of the Filipino faithful
be exempted from CARP?
that all or substantially all persons meeting the
Ruling: a reading of weight standards of PAL qualification would be unable to properly
would lead to no other conclusion than that they RULING: Archbishop cannot claim exemption
perform the duties of the job.** in behalf of the millions of Filipino faithful, as
constitute a continuing qualification of an
the lands are clearly not exempt under the law.
employee in order to keep the job. Tersely put, He should not fear that his followers are simply
an employee may be dismissed the moment he is 2011 BAR: being deprived of land, as under both PD 27 and
unable to comply with his ideal weight as In the valid exercise of management
RA 6657, he is entitled to just compensation,
prerogative consistent with the company's right
prescribed by the weight standards. The which he may then use for the benefit of his
to protect its economic interest, it may prohibit
dismissal of the employee would thus fall under followers. His situation is no different from
its employees from:
Article 282(e) of the Labor Code. The test of other landowners affected by agrarian reform
(A) joining rallies during their work shift.
they are somewhat deprived of their land, but it
reasonableness of the company policy is used (B) marrying employees of competitor
is all for a greater good. As religious leader,
because it is parallel to BFOQ. BFOQ is valid companies.
Archbishop can take solace in the fact that his
"provided it reflects an inherent quality (C) publicly converging with patrons of
lands are going to be awarded to those who need
competitor companies.
reasonably necessary for satisfactory job and can utilize them to the fullest.
(D) patronizing the product of competitor
performance. companies.
Apo Fruits vs. LBP, GR 164195, APRIL
** In British Columbia Public Service Employee
5, 2011
Commission (BSPSERC) v. The British Section 4. Agrarian Reform:
Columbia Government and Service Employee's FACTS: We resolve Land Bank of the
Union (BCGSEU), the Supreme Court of RC Archbishop of Caceres vs. DAR, G.R. Philippines (LBPs) 2nd motion for
Canada adopted the so-called "Meiorin Test" in 139285, Dec. 21, 2007 reconsideration of December 14, 2010 that
determining whether an employment policy is addresses one resolution of October 12, 2010
justified. Under this test, (1) the employer must Facts: Archbishop is the registered owner of and November 23, 2010. This motion prays as
several properties in Camarines Sur, with a total
show that it adopted the standard for a purpose well for the holding of oral arguments. We
area of 268.5668 hectares. Of that land,
rationally connected to the performance of the 249.0236 hectares are planted with rice and likewise resolve the office of the Solicitor
job; (2) the employer must establish that the corn, while the remaining 19.5432 hectares are Generals motion for leave to intervene and to
standard is reasonably necessary to the planted with coconut trees. In 1985, Archbishop admit motion for reconsideration-in-intervention
accomplishment of that work-related purpose; filed with the Municipal Agrarian Reform dated February 15, 2011 in behalf of the
and (3) the employer must establish that the District Office No. 19, Naga City, Camarines Republic of the Philippines.
standard is reasonably necessary in order to Sur several petitions for exemption of certain
properties located in various towns of Camarines Issue: Should just compensation under the
accomplish the legitimate work-related purpose.
Sur from the coverage of Operation Land agrarian reform program be differently from the
Similarly, in Star Paper Corporation v. Simbol, Transfer (OLT) under Presidential Decree No.
this Court held that in order to justify a BFOQ, just compensation in any other case of
(PD) 27.
the employer must prove that (1) the expropriation?
RULING: the constitutional basis of the RULING: Likewise, Sec4 of Art XIII of the
Agrarian Reform Program is Section 4, Article Constitution makes mention of a commitment on Issues: a.) Whether or not the provisions of
XIII of the constitution. This provision expressly the part of the site to pursue, by law, an agrarian DAR Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 13,
provides that the taking of the land for use in the reform program founded on the policy of land as amended are mandatory insofar as the
for the landless, but subject to such priorities as computation of interest for P.D. 27 acquired
governments agrarian reform program is
Congress may prescribe, taking into account
conditioned on the payment of just properties is concerned? b.) How should just
such abstract variable as equity
compensation. Nothing in the wording of this considerations. The textual reference to a law
compensation be treated viewed against the
provision even remotely suggests that the just and Congress necessarily implies that the above Bill of Rights and agrarian reform?
compensation required from the taking of land constitutional provision is not self-executory and
that legislation is needed to implement the Ruling:
for the agrarian reform program should be
urgently needed program of agrarian reform, and a.)Yes, they are mandatory. In their
treated any differently from the just petition, LBP does not contest the valuation of
RA 6657 has been enacted pursuant to and as a
compensation required in any other case of mechanism to carry out the constitutional the property and the amount to be paid as just
expropriation. The term "just compensation" is directives. compensation. It raised only the issue of
used in several parts of the Constitution, and, Whether or not the provisions of DAR
therefore, it must have a uniform meaning. Land Bank vs. Obias, G.R. 184406, Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 13, series of
1994, as amended by DAR A.O. No. 2, series of
March 14, 2012
Hda. Luisita vs. PARC, GR 171101, July 2004, as further amended by DAR A.O. No. 6,
series of 2008, are mandatory insofar as the
5, 2011 Facts: Before the Court is a Petition for Review computation of interest for P.D. 27-acquired
on Certiorari of the Decision dated 31 January properties is concerned.
FACTS: In 1957, the Spanish owners of 2008 and Resolution dated 8 September 2008 of
Tabacalera offered to sell Hacienda Luisita as the Ninth Division of the Court of Appeals b.) The landowner's right to just
well as their controlling interest in the sugar mill (CA), vacating the Decision of the Regional compensation should be balanced with agrarian
within the Hacienda, the central Azucarera de Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City. reform. The purpose of agrarian laws
Tarlac as an inadmissible transaction. The Tarlac Pursuant to the Operation Land Transfer (OLT) particularly P.D. No. 27, is to emancipate the
Development Corporation then owned and/or Program of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 27, tiller of the soil from his bondage; to be lord and
controlled by the Jose Cojuangco, Jr. Group, three parcels of agricultural land located at owner of the land he tills. Section 4, Article XIII
was willing to buy as agreed upon. Tadeco Himaao, Pili, Camarines Sur owned by Perfecto, of the 1987 Constitution provides that the State
undertook to pay the purchase price for Nellie, OFe, Gil, Edmundo and Nelly, all shall encourage and undertake the just
Hacienda Luisita in pesos, while that for the surnamed Obias, (landowners) were distributed distribution of all agricultural lands subject to
controlling interest in CAT, in US dollars. As of to farmers-beneficiaries (farmers). As a result, the payment of just compensation. Further, the
March 31, 1980, the Martial Law administration the owners had to be paid just compensation for deliberations of the 1986 Constitutional
filed a suit before Manila RTC against Tadeco, the property taken. The Department of Agrarian Commission on this subject reveal that just
et al, for them to surrender the Hacienda Luisita. Reform (DAR), using the formula under P.D. 27 compensation should not do violence to the Bill
and Executive Order (E.O.) 228, came up with a of Rights, but should also not make an
ISSUE: Is Sec 31 f RA 6657, which permits stock computation of the value of the acquired insurmountable obstacle to a successful agrarian
transfer in lieu of outright agricultural land property. However, the amount was contested reform program.
transfer inconsistent with the basic concept of by the landowners as an inadequate
agrarian reform ingrained in Sec4, Art XIII of compensation for the land. Thus they filed a
the Constitution? complaint for determination of just
Section 11 to 13. Health:
compensation before the RTC of Naga City.
2007 BAR: programs is discriminatory and creates Order? Explain.
suspect classification. It also goes against the
The City Mayor issues an Executive
demands of social justice as enshrined in the Alternative Answer:
Order declaring that the city promotes
responsible parenthood and upholds natural immediately preceding provision. No, the power of the Commission on Human
family planning. He prohibits all hospitals Rights (CHR) is limited to fact-finding
operated by the city from prescribing the use Alternative Answer: investigations. Thus, it cannot issue an order
of artificial methods of contraception, Yes. It constitutes an invalid exercise to desist against the mayor, inasmuch as the
including condoms, pills, intrauterine devices of police power and violates substantive due order prescinds from an adjudicatory power
and surgicalsterilization. As a result, poor process by depriving people of the means to
control their reproductive processes. that CHR does not possess. (Simon v.
women in his city lost their access to
Moreover, since the national government has Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No.
affordable family planning programs. Private
clinics, however, continue to render family not outlawed the use of artificial methods 100150, January 5, 1994; Cario v.
planning counsel and devices to paying of contraception, then it would be against Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No.
clients. national policies. In addition, the Mayor 96681, December 2, 1991.)
cannot issue such Executive Order without an
(a) Is the Executive Order in any way underlying ordinance. (Moday v, Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997) Section 17. Commission on Human
constitutionally infirm? Explain.
Besides, the action of the Mayor may be in Rights:
The Executive Order is violation of a persons right to privacy.
constitutionally infirm. Under the 1987 2005 BAR:
Constitution, the State shall defend the right (b) Is the Philippines in breach of any
of spouses to establish a family in accordance obligation under international law?
Explain. Squatters and vendors have put up
with their religious convictions and the
demands of responsible parenthood. (Art. XV, structures in an area intended for a Peoples
Sec. 3[1]). By upholding natural family The Philippines might be in breach of Park, which are impeding the flow of traffic in
planning and prohibiting city hospitals from its obligations under the Convention on the the adjoining highway. Mayor Cruz gave notice
prescribing artificial methods Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination for the structures to be removed, and the area
of contraception, the Mayor is imposing his Against Women (CEDAW) of which the vacated within a month, or else, face demolition
religious beliefs on spouses who rely on the country is a signatory. Under the CEDAW, and ejectment. The occupants filed a case with
services of city hospitals. This clearly violates State Parties shall take all appropriate
the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to
the above section of the Constitution. measures to eliminate discrimination against
women in the field of health care in order to stop the Mayors move. The CHR then issued an
ensure, on basis of equality of men and order to desist against Mayor Cruz with
Moreover, the 1987 Constitution states
women, access to health care services, warning that he would be held in contempt
that no person shall be denied the equal
protection of the laws. (Art. III, Sec. 1). The including those related to family planning should he fail to comply with the desistance
Constitution also provides that the state shall (Article 12, Section 1) Women shall likewise order. When the allotted time lapsed, Mayor
promote a just and dynamic social order that have access to adequate health care facilities, Cruz caused the demolition and removal of the
will ensure the prosperity and independence including information, counseling and structures. Accordingly, the CHR cited him for
of the nation and free the people from poverty services in family planning. (Article 14, contempt.
through policies that provide adequate social Section 2[b]).
services, promote full employment, a rising (a) What is your concept of Human
standard of living and an improved quality of (c.) May the Commission on Human Rights? Does this case involve violations
life for all. (Art. II, Section 9). The loss of Rights order the Mayor to stop the of human rights within the scope of the
access of poor city women to family planning implementation of the Executive
CHRs jurisdiction?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jurisdiction is conferred only by the A. No, since the position of Chairman of the
Constitution or by law. It is never derived by Commission was created by statute,
Under the Universal Declaration of Human implication. (Export Processing Zone Authority the appointment of its holder requires the
Rights, the International Covenant on v. Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. consent of Congress.
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and 101476, April 14, 1992) B. Yes, since the power to appoint in the
International Covenant on Civil and Political government, if not lodged elsewhere,
Rights, the scope of human rights includes (c) Is the CHR empowered to declare belongs to the President as Chief Executive.
those that relate to an individuals social, Mayor Cruz in contempt? Does it have C. Yes, since the power to fill up all
government positions mentioned in the
economic, cultural, political and civil relations contempt powers at all?
Constitution has been lodged in the President.
along with what is generally considered to be his
SUGGESTED ANSWER: D. No, because absent any express authority
inherent and inalienable rights, encompassing under the Constitution, the power
almost all aspects of life. to appoint does not exist.
The CHR does not possess adjudicative
In the case at bar, the land adjoins a busy functions and therefore, on its own, is not
national highway and the construction of the empowered to declare Mayor Cruz in contempt
squatter shanties impedes the flow of traffic. The for issuing the order to desist. However, under
consequent danger to life and limb cannot be the 1987 Constitution, the CHR is
ignored. It is paradoxical that a right which is constitutionally authorized, in the exercise of its
claimed to have been violated is one that cannot, investigative functions, to adopt its operational
in the first place, even be invoked, if it is, in fact, guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for
extant. Based on the circumstances obtaining in contempt for violations thereof in accordance
this instance, the CHR order for demolition do with the Rules of Court. Accordingly, the CHR, Article XIV. EDUCATION
not fall within the compartment of human rights in the course of an investigation, may only cite
violations involving civil and political rights or hold any person in contempt and impose the
appropriate penalties in accordance with the Section 2. Availability of Quality
intended by the Constitution. (Simon v.
Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. procedure and sanctions provided for in the Education:
100150, January 5, 1994) Rules of Court. (Carino v. Commission on
Human Rights, G.R. No. 96681, December 2, Superintendent vs Azarcon, G.R. No.
(b) Can the CHR issue an order to desist 1991). 166435, February 11, 2008
or restraining order?
2011 BAR: Facts: On September 20, 1990, then DECS
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Secretary Isidro Cario filed various charged
Since the Constitution is silent as to against those teachers who participated in the
The CHR may not issue an order to desist or
who can appoint the Chairman of the aforementioned mass action. The respondents
restraining order. The constitutional provision
Commission on Human Rights, the President were one of them and were later found guilty of
directing the CHR to provide for preventive conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the
appointed W to that position
measures to those whose human rights have
without submitting his appointment to the service and were consequently dismissed.
been violated or need protection may not be Commission on Appointments for Aggrieved, respondents appealed their dismissal
construed to confer jurisdiction on the confirmation. Is Ws appointment by the to the MSPB which, however, dismissed their
Commission to issue a restraining order or writ President valid? The answer is B. appeal for lack of merit. Respondents elevated
of injunction for, it that were the intention, the the MSPB decision to the CSC.
Constitution would have expressly said so.
Issue: Does the accessibility to quality Restraining Order against the respondent Bank fee increase. Under this regulation by the
education justify teachers re-assignment? and the Provincial Sheriff of Tarlac. DepEd, it will end up giving tuition
Issue: against whom is the constitutional scholarships to a total of 21 students next year.
Ruling: Yes. One of the requisites for a transfer mandate to protect and promote the right of all At a cost of P50,OOO per student, the school
or re-assignment of public school teacher to be citizens to quality education at all levels will lose a total of P1.05 million for next year.
valid, that the transfer or re-assignment has directed? Were petitioners right to quality
undertaken pursuant to the exigencies of service. education violated?
a.) Is this DepEd requirement valid?
With regard to this requisite, in Department of
No. It constitutes deprivation of property
Education vs. CA, we held that the appointment Ruling: The trial courts Order did not violate
of teachers does not refer to any particular the petitioner-students right to quality education without due process of law. The law is
station or school. They are not entitled to stay and academic freedom. The court disagrees with confiscatory as it unduly shifts the burden of
permanently in one station because their petitioners assertion that the students right to providing for the welfare of the poor to the
assignments are subject to the exigencies of the quality education and academic freedom was private sector. The objective may be laudable
service. The exigencies of the service, as violated. The constitutional mandate to protect but the means would be arbitrary and
mentioned in Section 6 of RA 4670 should be and promote the right of all citizens to quality unreasonable. (Quezon City v. Judge Ericta,
viewed in the light of Section 1, Article XIV of education at all levels is directed to the State and G.R. No. 34195, June 24, 1983).
the Constitution. The accessibility of quality not to the school. On this basis, the petitioner-
education determines the exigencies of the students cannot prevent the MBTC from b.) If instead the DepEd requires a full tuition
service. Thus, assignments undertaken for acquiring possession of the school premises by scholarship for the highest ranking students in
purposes of improving the educational system virtue of a validly issued writ of possession.
each grade, determined solely on the basis of
and/or making education more accessible are In this case, except for their bare
academic grades and rank, will the DepEd
valid. allegation that if the school will be ejected
because of the writ of possession, the students requirement be valid?
PTA of SMCA vs. MBTC, G.R. No. will necessarily be ejected also and thereby Alternative Answer:
176518, March 2, 2010 their learning process and other educational No. It would make a difference in my answer
activities shall have been disrupted, petitioners as this would still constitute a deprivation of
Facts: Sometime in 2001, the spouses Denivin miserably failed to show the relevance of the property without due process of law. (Balacuit
Ilagan and Josefina Ilagan (spouses Ilagan) right to quality education and academic freedom v. CFI, G.R. no. 38429, June 30, 1988).
applied for and were granted a loan by the to their case or how they were violated by the
[Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co.] in the Order granting the writ of possession to the Alternative Answer:
amount of (P4,790,000.00) secured by a Real winning bidder in the extrajudicial foreclosure Yes. Here, the matter may be considered as a
Estate Mortgage over the parcels of land. Upon sale. reasonable regulation exacted from those who
default, an extrajudicial foreclosure was 2007 BAR: seek some form of accommodation from the
conducted with [Metropolitan Bank and Trust government. (Telebap v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
Co.] being the highest bidder and for which a The Department of Education 132922, April 21, 1998). In exchange for what
Certificate of Sale was issued in its favor.
(DepEd) requires that any school applying for they get as a concession from the State, these
During the period of redemption, the respondent
a tuition fee increase must, as a condition for institutions may be required to shoulder part
Bank filed an Ex-Parte Petition for Issuance of a
Writ of Possession. On June 30, 2005, the St. the increase, offer full tuition scholarships to of the cost of promoting quality education for
Mathew Christian Academy of Tarlac, Inc. filed students from low-income families. The deserving citizens.
a Petition for Injunction with Prayer for Sagrada Familia Elementary School is a
Catholic school and has applied for a tuition
Section 3. Desired Educational Canto, Cyndy Apalisok, Clint Eduard Vargas, Ruling: Yes. Discipline in education is
and Nonell Gregory Duro (petitioner students), specifically mandated by the 1987 Constitution
were caught engaging in hazing outside the which provides that all educational institutions
school premises. During the 28 November 2002 shall "teach the rights and duties of citizenship,
2003 BAR: meeting, the parties agreed that after dialogues strengthen ethical and spiritual values, and
Children who are members of a and consultations among the school authorities, develop moral character and personal
religious sect have been expelled from their instead of the possibility of being charged and discipline." Schools and school administrators
respective public schools for refusing, on found guilty of hazing, the students who have the authority to maintain school discipline
account of their religious beliefs, to take part participated in the hazing incident as initiators, and the right to impose appropriate and
in the flag ceremony which includes playing including petitioner students, would just transfer reasonable disciplinary measures. On the other
by a band or singing the national anthem, to another school, while those who participated hand, students have the duty and the
saluting the Philippine flag and reciting the as neophytes would be suspended for one responsibility to promote and maintain the peace
patriotic pledge. The students and their month. The parents of the apprehended students and tranquility of the school by observing the
parents assail the expulsion on the ground including petitioners affixed their signatures to rules of discipline.
that the school authorities have acted in signify their conformity. In view of the
violation of their right to free public agreement, the University did not anymore 2008 BAR:
education, freedom of speech, and religious convene the Committee on Student Discipline
freedom and worship. Decide the case. (COSD) to investigate the hazing incident. The The principal of Jaena High School, a
petitioners sent a letter to the University urging public school wrote a letter to the parents and
it not to implement the agreement. Petitioners guardians of all the school's pupils, informing
The students cannot be expelled from school.
filed a complaint for injunction and damages them that the school was willing to provide
As held in Ebralinag v. The Division
religious instruction to its Catholic students
Superintendent of Schools of Cebu. 219 SCRA with the RTC, Branch 29, Iloilo City. Petitioners
during class hours, through a Catholic priest.
256 [1993], to compel students to take part in assailed the Principal's decision to order the
However, students who wished to avail of such
the flag ceremony when it is against their immediate transfer of petitioner students as a
religious instruction needed to secure the
religious beliefs will violate their religious violation of their right to due process because
consent of their parents and guardians in
freedom. Their expulsion also violates the the COSD was not convened. Respondents filed
duty of the State under Article XIV, Section 1 a motion to dismiss before the CA, which the
of the Constitution to protect and promote the latter granted the petition for lack of jurisdiction a.) Does the offer violate the constitutional
right of all citizens to quality education and over the subject matter because of petitioners' prohibition against the establishment of
make such education accessible to all. failure to exhaust administrative remedies or for religion? (3%)
being premature.
Jenosa vs U.S.A, G.R. No. 172138, b.) The parents of evangelical Christian
September 8, 2010 Issues: Is discipline in education specifically students, upon learning of the offer,
mandated by the 1987 Constitution? Can school demanded that they too be entitled to have
Facts: On 22 November 2002, some students of
authorities impose discipline on students? their children instructed in their own religious
the University of San Agustin (Iloilo), among faith during class hours. The principal, a
them petitioners Nio Carlo Jenosa, Patrick devout Catholic, rejected the request. As
counsel for the parents of the evangelical
students, how would you argue in support of year 2000-2001, AMACC implemented new has the inherent right to establish high standards
their position? (3%) faculty screening guidelines, on the of competency and efficiency for its faculty
Implementation of AMACC Faculty Plantilla. members in order to achieve and maintain
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Under the new screening guidelines, teachers academic excellence. The schools prerogative
were to be hired or maintained based on to provide standards for its teachers and to
a.) No. Optional religious instruction is one of extensive teaching experience, capability, determine whether or not these standards have
the exceptions to the non-establishment of potential, high academic qualifications and been met is in accordance with academic
religion recognized under the Constitution research background. The performance freedom that gives the educational institution the
itself. For this exception to be valid, the standards under the new screening guidelines right to choose who should teach.
following requisites must concur: (1) written were also used to determine the present faculty
2007 BAR:
consent of the parents or guardians must be members entitlement to salary increases. The
secured; (2) it must be done within school petitioners failed to obtain a passing rating based
True or False. Briefly explain your answer:
hours; and (3) it must be at no additional cost on the performance standards; as a result,
AMACC did not give them any salary increase. The 1987 Constitution has increased
to the Government. For as long as these
requisites are present, then it is valid (Sec. the scope of academic freedom recognized
Issue: Does institutional academic freedom
3(3), Art. XIV). includes the right of the school or college to under the previous Constitution.
decide and adopt screening guidelines for its
b.) As counsel for the parents of the
evangelical students, I would invoke the right Alternative Answer:
to equal protection under the laws. The act of Ruling: A school enjoys academic freedom a The statement is true. The 1987
the principal in rejecting the request is guarantee that enjoys protection from the Constitution provides that academic freedom
unreasonably discriminatory. He has no right Constitution. Section 5(2) Article XIV of the shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher
to draw a distinction between Catholics and Constitution guarantees all institutions of higher learning. This is more expansive in scope than
Evangelical Christians when it comes to learning academic freedom. The institutional the 1973 Constitution which stated that: All
granting optional religious instruction because academic freedom includes the right of the institutions of higher learning shall enjoy
the Constitution itself does not make such school or college to decide and adopt its aims academic freedom. While the 1973 Charter
classification. For as long as the requisites for and objectives, and to determine how these suggests that academic freedom was
optional religious instruction to be allowed are objections can best be attained, free from outside institutional in the sense that it belonged to
coercion or interference, save possibly when the the colleges and universities, the present
present, then there is no reason not to allow
overriding public welfare calls for some
the same, regardless of the particular religious Charter gives the guaranty to all other
restraint. The essential freedoms subsumed in
denomination involved. components of the institution, including
the term academic freedom encompass the
freedom of the school or college to determine faculty and possibly students.
Section 5. Academic Freedom: for itself: (1) who may teach; (2) who may be
taught; (3) how lessons shall be taught; and (4) Alternative Answer:
Mercado vs. AMA Computer College, who may be admitted to study. The statement is false. The scope of
G.R. No. 183572, April 13, 2010 AMACCs right to academic freedom is academic freedom remains the same. Article
particularly important in the present case, XIV, Section 5 (2) of the Constitution provides
Facts: Petitioners are professors of AMACC, an because of the new screening guidelines for that academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all
educational institution engaged in computer- AMACC faculty put in place for the school year institutions of higher learning. As held in U.P.
based education in the country, for the school 2000-2001. We agree with the CA that AMACC Board of Regents v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
134629, August 31, 1999, This (provision) is Section 6 & 7. Language:
nothing new. The 1935 and the 1973
Constitution likewise provided for academic
freedom or, more precisely, for the
2007 BAR:
institutional autonomy of universities and True or False. Briefly explain your answer:
institutions of higher learning.
For purposes of communication
2008 BAR: and instruction, the official languages of the
Philippines, until otherwise provided by law,
As a reaction to the rice shortage and are Filipino and English.
the dearth of mining engineers, Congress
passed a law requiring graduates of public
science high school henceforth to take up Alternative Answer:
agriculture or mining engineering as their The statement is false. Article XIV, Section 7
college course. Several students protested, of the 1987 Constitution provides that for
invoking their freedom to choose their purposes of communication and instruction,
profession. Is the law constitutional? the official languages of the Philippines are
Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: English. Thus, while Filipino will always be
an official language, Congress may, by law, Article XV. THE FAMILY
No. The law unreasonably restricts remove English as the other official language.
free access to education by all citizens. More Hence, the statement is false as the Section 1. Filipino Family:
specifically, it violates the right of the students continuation of English as an official language
to select a profession or course of study. The is subject to the control and discretion of Antionio vs Reyes, G.R. No. 155800,
only restriction to this right is fair, reasonable Congress. March 10, 2006
and equitable admission and academic
requirements. Such a restriction can only be Alternative Answer: Facts: Petitioner and respondent met in August
raised by the academe exercising its own right The statement is true. To be more precise, 1989 when petitioner was 26 years old and
to academic freedom, and not by the however, what is only to remain as official respondent was 36 years of age. Barely a year
government (Article XIV). until otherwise provided by law is English.
after their first meeting, they got married before
a minister of the Gospel at the Manila City Hall,
Filipino will always be an official language
NOTE: Are the provisions under this article and through a subsequent church wedding at the
under the Charter.
self-executing? As a rule, Constitutional Sta. Rosa de Lima Parish, Bagong Ilog, Pasig,
provisions are deemed self-executing, with Metro Manila on 6 December 1990.6 Out of
some exceptions like Article II which are mere their union, a child was born on 19 April 1991,
declaration of policies and principles. Is the who sadly died five (5) months later. On 8
March 1993, petitioner filed a petition to have
law a valid exercise of police power by the
his marriage to respondent declared null and
State? If so, was there proper observance of
void. He anchored his petition for nullity on
due process, both procedural and substantive? Article 36 of the Family Code alleging that
SEE ALSO: Education Act of 1989.
respondent was psychologically incapacitated to of the Family Code, which defines marriage and Ruling: Yes. There is a valid marriage that has
comply with the essential obligations of the family, spells out the corresponding legal been celebrated between a Filipino citizen and a
marriage. He asserted that respondents effects, imposes the limitations that affect foreigner; and a valid divorce is obtained abroad
incapacity existed at the time their marriage was married and family life, as well as prescribes the by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to
celebrated and still subsists up to the present. grounds for declaration of nullity and those for remarry. The reckoning point is not the
As manifestations of respondents alleged legal separation. While it may appear that the citizenship of the parties at the time of the
psychological incapacity, petitioner claimed that judicial denial of a petition for declaration of celebration of the marriage, but their citizenship
respondent persistently lied about herself, the nullity is reflective of the constitutional mandate at the time a valid divorce is obtained abroad by
people around her, her occupation, income, to protect marriage, such action in fact merely the alien spouse capacitating the latter to
educational attainment and other events or enforces a statutory definition of marriage, not a remarry. In this case, when Ciprianos wife was
things. The RTC gave credence to petitioners constitutionally ordained decree of what naturalized as an American citizen, there was
evidence and held that respondents propensity marriage is. Indeed, if circumstances warrant, still a valid marriage that has been celebrated
to lying about almost anythingher occupation, Sections 1 and 2 of Article XV need not be the between her and Cipriano. As fate would have it,
state of health, singing abilities and her income, only constitutional considerations to be taken the naturalized alien wife subsequently obtained
among othershad been duly established. into account in resolving a petition for a valid divorce capacitating her to remarry.
According to the trial court, respondents declaration of nullity. Cipriano, the
fantastic ability to invent and fabricate stories Divorced Filipino spouse should be allowed to
and personalities enabled her to live in a world Section 2. Marriage: remarry.
of make-believe. This made her psychologically
incapacitated as it rendered her incapable of Republic vs Orbecido, G.R. No. 154380, Rumbaua vs. Rumbaua, GR 166738,
giving meaning and significance to her marriage. October 5, 2005 August 14, 2009
The CA, however, reversed the decision.
Facts: On May 24, 1981, Cipriano Orbecido III FACTS: The present petition traces its roots to
Issue: Had the Constitution establish the
married Lady Myros Villanueva at the UCCP in the petitioners complaint for the declaration of
parameters of state protection to marriage , as a
Ozamis City. Their marriage was blessed with a nullity of marriage against the respondent before
social institution and the foundation of family?
son and a daughter. In 1986, Ciprianos wife left the RTC, docketed as civil case np. 767. The
for the US bringing along their son. A few years petitioner alleged that the respondent was
Ruling: No. The Constitution itself does not
later, Cipriano discovered that his wife had
establish the parameters of state protection to psychologically incapacitated to exercise the
obtained a divorce decree and then married a
marriage as a social institution and the essential obligations of marriage as shown by
certain innocent Stanley. Cipriano thereafter
foundation of the family. It remains the province the following circumstances: the respondent
filed with the trial court a petition for authority
of the legislature to define all legal aspects of
to remarry invoking paragraph 2 of Article 26 of reneged on his promise to be true with her under
marriage and prescribe the strategy and the
the Family Code. No opposition was filed. one roof after finding work; he failed to extend
modalities to protect it, based on whatever
socio-political influences it deems proper, and financial support to her; he blamed her for his
Issue: Given a valid marriage between two
subject of course to the qualification that such mothers death; he represented himself as single
Filipino citizens, where one party is later
legislative enactment itself adheres to the in his transactions; and he pretended to be
naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This being working in Davao, although he was cohabiting
valid divorce decree capacitating him or her to
the case, it also falls on the legislature to put into with another woman.
remarry, can the Filipino spouse likewise
operation the constitutional provisions that
remarry under Philippine law?
protect marriage and the family. This has been
accomplished at present through the enactment
ISSUE: What are the definitive guidelines in the 7.) Interpretations given by the national on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void
interpretation and application of Article 36 of appellate matrimonial tribunal of the Catholic Marriages and Annulment of Voidable
the Family Code? Church in the Philippines, while not controlling Marriages. On November 23, 2006, a motion to
reconsider the denial of Danilos appeal was
on decisive, should be given great respect by our
RULING: We laid down more definitive likewise denied. On January 16, 2007, the RTC
courts. issued the order declaring its August 2, 2006
guidelines in the interpretation and application
decision final and executory and granting the
of Article 36 of the Family Code in Republic v. 8.) The trial court must order the prosecuting
Motion for Entry of Judgment filed by Cynthia.
CA where said: attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to
appear as counsel for the State. No decision shall Issue: a.) Does A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC to
1.) The burden of proof to show the nullity of be handed down unless the Solicitor General marriages before the Family Code took effect?
the marriage belongs to the plaintiff. Any doubt issues a certification which will be quoted in the b.) Does the break-up of families consistent with
should be resolved in favor of the existence and decision, briefly stating therein his reasons for the inviolability of marriage?
continuation of the marriage and against its his agreement or opposition as the case may be
dissolution and nullity. Ruling: a.) The Rule on Declaration of Absolute
to the petition. Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of
2.) The root cause of the psychological Voidable Marriages as contained in A.M. No.
BOLOS VS. BOLOS, G.R. No. 186400, 02-11-10-SC which the Court promulgated on
incapacity must be medically or clinically October 20, 2010 March 15, 2003, is explicit in its scope. Section
identified, alleged in the complaint, sufficiently
1 of the Rule, in fact, reads:
proven by experts and clearly explained in the Facts: On July 10, 2003, petitioner Cynthia Section 1. Scope This Rule shall govern
decision. Bolos filed a petition for the declaration of petitions for declaration of absolute nullity of
nullity of her marriage to respondent Danilo void marriages and annulment of voidable
3.) The incapacity must be proven to be existing Bolos under Article 36 of the Family Code. marriages under the Family Code of the
at the time of the celebration of the marriage. After trial on the merits, the RTC granted the Philippines. The coverage extends only to those
petition for annulment in a Decision, dated marriages entered into during the effectivity of
4.) Such incapacity must also be shown to be August 2, 2006, with the following disposition: the Family Code which took effect on August 3,
medically or clinically permanent or incurable. WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby 1988. The rule sets a demarcation line between
rendered declaring the marriage between marriages covered by the Family Code and those
5.) Such illness must be grave enough to bring petitioner CYNTHIA S. BOLOS and respondent solemnized under the Civil Code.
about the disability of the party to assume the DANILO T. BOLOS celebrated on February 14,
1980 as null and void ab initio on the ground of
essential obligations of marriage. b.) The 1987 Constitution recognizes
psychological incapacity on the part of both
marriage as an inviolable social institution. This
petitioner and respondent under Article 36 of the
6.) The essential marital obligations must be constitutional policy is echoed in our Family
Family Code with all the legal consequences
those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Code. Article 1 thereof emphasizes its
provided by law.
Family Code as regards the husband and wife as permanence and inviolability, This Court is not
A copy of said decision was received by
unmindful of the constitutional policy to protect
well as Article 220, 221, and 225 of the same Danilo on August 25, 2006. He timely filed the
and strengthen the family as the basic
code in regard to parents and their children. Notice of Appeal on September 11, 2006. In an
autonomous social institution and marriage as
Such non-complied marital obligations must also order dated September 19, 2006, the RTC denied
the foundation of the family. Our family law is
be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and due course to the appeal for Danilos failure to
based on the policy that marriage is not a mere
file the required motion for reconsideration or
included in the text of the decision. contract, but a social institution in which the
new trial, in violation of Section 20 of the Rule
State is vitally interested. The State finds no care that evidence is not fabricated or
stronger anchor than on good, solid and happy suppressed.
families. The break - up of families weakens our
social and moral fabric and, hence, their
preservation is not the concern alone of the
family members.

Aurelio vs Aurelio, G. R. No. 175367,

June 6, 2011

Facts: Petitioner Danilo Aurelio and respondent

Vda. Ma. Corazon Aurelio were married on
March 23, 1988. They have two sons, namely:
Danilo Miguel and Danilo Gabriel. On May 9,
2002, respondent filed with the RTC of Quezon
City, Branch 94, a petition for Declaration of
Nullity of Marriage. In her petition, respondent
alleged that both she and petitioner were
psychologically incapacitated of performing and
Article XVI. General
complying with their respective essential marital Provisions:
obligations. In addition, respondent alleged that
such state of psychological incapacity was
present prior and even during the time of their
marriage ceremony. Hence, respondent prays
Section 1. The Philippine Flag:
that her marriage be declared null and void
under Article 36 of the Family Code. 2006 BAR:
Issue: May the appearance of the prosecuting State whether or not the following law is
attorney or fiscal assigned to be waived pursuant constitutional. Explain Briefly.
to Supreme Court Administrative Matter No. 02-
11-10? A law changing the design of the flag.

Ruling: This Court, pursuant to Supreme Court The law is invalid considering that
Administrative Matter No. 02-11-10 has Article XVI, section 1 of the 1987 Constitution,
modified the Molina guidelines, particularly the flag of the Philippines shall be red, white,
Section 2(d) thereof, stating that the certification and blue with a sun and three stars, as
of the Solicitor General required in the Molina consecrated and honored by the people and
case is dispensed with to avoid delay. Still, recognized by law. Since the Constitution itself
Article 48 of the Family Code mandates that the prescribes the design, it can also be changed
appearance of the prosecuting attorney or fiscal by constitutional amendment.
assigned on behalf of the State to take steps to
prevent collusion between the parties and to take Alternative Answer:
The law is valid, provided that the new reclassifying Champion, Hope, and more this contract agreement, PROVI was to provide
design does not change the elements and color as locally manufactured cigarettes bearing a TESDA with the system and equipment
scheme of the flag as stated in the foreign brand subject to the 55% ad valorem tax. compliant with the specifications defined in the
constitution, and the flag is consecrated and RMC 37.93 in effect subjected hope, more, and Technical Proposal. In return, TESDA would
honored by the people. Since the constitution champion cigarettes to the provisions of RA pay PROVI the amount of P39,475,000.00
itself states that the flag must be recognized by 7654 on locally manufacture cigarettes which within 15days after TESDAs acceptance of the
are currently classified and taxed at 55% and contracted goods and services. PPOVI alleged
law, it implies that certain aspects of the flag
which imposes an ad valorem tax of 55% that TESDA has still an outstanding balance and
are subject through legislative action.
provided that the minimum tax shall not be less still remains unpaid.
than 5 pesos per pack.
Section 2. State Symbols: ISSUE: Can TESDA be sued without its
ISSUE: May a public officer be validly sued in consent?
2009 BAR: A law making Bayan Ko the his/her private capacity for acts done in
connection with the discharge of the functions of RULING: TESDA is an unincorporated
new national anthem of the Philippines, in
his/her duties? instrumentality of the government, directly
lieu of Lupang Hinirang, is constitutional.
attached to the DOLE through the participation
RULING: On the first issue, the general rule is of the secretary of labor as its Chairman, for the
that a public officer is not liable for damages performance of governmental functions as an
TRUE. Art XVI Sec 2 of the 1987 Constitution which a person may suffer arising from the just unincorporated instrumentality operating under a
provides that the Congress may do so as long performance of his official duties and within the specific charter, it is equipped with both express
as the other conditions are met. The new scope of his assigned tasks. An officer who acts and implied power and all state immunities fully
national anthem shall be "truly reflective and within his authority to administer the affairs of apply to it. In the present case, the unit of
symbolic of the ideals, history, and the office which he/she heads is not liable for attachment was issued against a government
traditions of the people" and "shall take effect damages that may have been caused to another, agency carried by its own charter.
only upon its ratification by the people in as it would virtually be a charge against the
a national referendum" Republic, which is not amenable to judgment for Shell Philippines vs. Jalos, G.R. No.
monetary claims without its consent. However, a 179918, Sept. 8, 2010
public officer may be validly sued in his/her
private capacity for acts done in the cause of the FACTS: This case is about a question of
Section 3. Sovereign Immunity: performance of the functions of the office, jurisdiction over an action against a petroleum
where said public officer acted with malice, bad contractor (Shell Philippines), whose pipeline
Chato v. Fortune Tobacco, GR 141309, faith, or negligence or which the public officer operation has allegedly driven the fish away
June 19, 2007 violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff. from coastal areas, inflicting loss of earnings
among fishermen. On May 19, 2003,
FACTS: On June 10, 1993, the legislature Professional Video Inc. v. TESDA, GR respondents Efren Jalos, Joven Campang,
enacted RA 7654, which took effect on July 3, Arnaldo Mijares, and 75 other individuals (Jalos,
155504, June 26, 2009
1993. Prior to its effectivity, cigarette brands et al) filed a complaint for damages against Shell
champion, Hope, and More were FACTS: December 29, 1999, TESDA and before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch
considered local brands subjected to an ad PRDVI signed and executed the Contract 41, Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro. Jalos, et al
valorem tax at the rate of 20.45%. However, on Agreement Project PVC ID Card issuance for claimed that they were all subsistence fishermen
July 1, 1993, or two days before RA 7654 took the provision of goods and services in the from the coastal barangay of Bansud, Oriental
effect, petitioner issued RMC 37-93 printing and encoding of the PVC cards under Mindoro whose livelihood was adversely
affected by the construction and operation of government agency tasked to adjudicate perpetrating an injustice to a citizen. To our
Shells natural gas pipeline. Jalos, et al claimed pollution-related cases. Shell is not an agent of mind, it would be the apex of injustice and
that their fish catch became few after the the State and may thus be sued before that body highly inequitable to defeat respondent's right to
construction of the pipeline. They said that the for any damages caused by its operations. The
be duly compensated for actual work performed
pipeline greatly affected the coral reefs and led parties may appeal the PABs decision to the
to the stress of the marine life in the Mindoro CA. But pending prior determination by the and services rendered, where both the
Sea. Shell said that under Service Contract 38, PAB, courts cannot take cognizance of the government and the public have for years
it served merely as an agent of the Philippine complaint. received and accepted benefits from the project
government in the development of the and reaped the fruits of respondent's honest toil
Malampaya gas reserves. Moreover, said Shell, Vigilar vs. Aquino, G.R. 180388, January and labor.
the complaint failed to state a cause of action 18, 2011
since it did not specify any actionable wrong or
particular act or omission on Shells part that 1997 BAR:
FACTS: On June 19, 1992, petitioner sent an
could have caused the alleged injury to Jalos, et invitation to bid to respondent. The bidding was
al. It is said that waiver of immunity by
for the construction of a dike by bulldozing a
the State does not mean a concession of
part of the Porac River in Pampanga.
ISSUE: Can shell invoke State immunity, as its liability. What are the implications of
Subsequently, on 7 July 1992, the project was
agent of the Republic of the Philippines? awarded to respondent, and a "Contract of this phrase?
Agreement" was thereafter executed between
RULING: No. To begin with, Shell is not an SUGGESTED ANSWER:
him and concerned petitioners for the amount of
agent of the Republic of the Philippines. It is PhP1,873,790.69, to cover the project cost. By 9
but a service contractor for the exploration and The phrase that waiver of immunity
July 1992, the project was duly completed by
development of one of the countrys natural gas by the State does not mean a concession of
respondent, who was then issued a Certificate of
reserves. While the Republic appointed Shell as liability means that by consenting to be
Project Completion dated 16 July 1992.
the exclusive party to conduct petroleum Respondent Aquino, however, claimed that sued, the State does not necessarily admit
operations in the Camago-Malampayo area PhP1,262,696.20 was still due him, but it is liable. As stated in (Philippine Rock
under the States full control and supervision, it petitioners refused to pay the amount. He thus Industries, Inc. vs. Board of Liquidators, 180
does not follow that Shell has become the filed a Complaint for the collection of sum of SCRA 171), in such a case the State is merely
States agent within the meaning of the law. money. giving the plaintiff a chance to prove that
An agent is a person who binds himself to render the State is liable but the State retains the
some service or to do something in ISSUE: Was the doctrine of sovereign immunity right to raise all lawful defenses.
representation or on behalf of another, with the
properly invoked?
consent or authority of the latter. The essence of
an agency is the agents ability to represent his RULING: Neither can petitioners escape the
2009 BAR:
principal and bring about business relations
obligation to compensate respondent for services The Municipality of Pinatukdao is sued for
between the latter and third persons. An agents
ultimate undertaking is to execute juridical acts rendered and work done by invoking the state's damages arising from injuries sustained by
that would create, modify or extinguish relations immunity from suit. This Court has long a pedestrian who was hit by a glass pane that
between his principal and third persons. established in Ministerio v. CFI of Cebu, and fell from a dilapidated window frame of
In sum, while the complaint in this case recently reiterated in Heirs of Pidacan v. ATO, the municipal hall. The municipality files a
sufficiently alleges a cause of action, the same that the doctrine of governmental immunity motion to dismiss the complaint, invoking
must be filed with the PAB, which is the
from suit cannot serve as an instrument for
state immunity from suit. Resolve the motion the City of Cebu. Lauro was on his way to get a irregularities in the performance of duties and to
with reasons. load of sand for the repair of the suffer the penalty of three (3) months suspension
road along Fuente Street, Cebu City. As a from the police service without pay. Petitioner
ANSWER: result of the collision, 3 passengers of elevated the case to the NAPOLCOM National
the jeepney died. Their families filed a Appellate Board. His appeal, however, was
Motion to dismiss invoking state complaint for damages against Joseph
dismissed. Aggrieved, petitioner brought his
immunity fruit suit is hereby denied. Local who in turn filed a third party complaint
case to the Department of Interior and Local
government unit and their officials are not against the City of Cebu and Lauro. Is
the City of Cebu liable for the tort committed Government (DILG) where the SILG denied his
exempt from liability for death or injury to by its employee? (The answer is A.) appeal and affirmed his suspension for three
persons or damage to property (Sec. 24, RA months. Petitioner then appealed to the CSC.
7160) hence, liability of the municipality for A. The City of Cebu is not liable because its On April 3, 2002, the CSC issued Resolution
injuries due to dilapidated window frame of employee was engaged in the No. 020487 dismissing petitioners appeal,
the municipal hall attaches as the latter discharge of a governmental function. affirming the SILGs Order but modifying his
exercises control over said building. B. The City of Cebu is liable for the tort penalty of three months suspension to dismissal.
committed by its employee while in the Petitioner thus filed with the CA a Petition for
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: discharge of a non-governmental function. Review with an Urgent Motion for Issuance of
C. The City of Cebu is liable in accord with the Temporary Restraining Order and/or
The motion to dismiss should be precept of respondeat superior. Preliminary Injunction. The CA issued a TRO
D. The City of Cebu is not liable as a
granted...The Civil Code provision and Sec. 24 on September 4, 2002 and a writ of preliminary
consequence of its non-suitability. injunction on January 14, 2003. The CA,
of the LGC above-mentioned refers to the
liability of the State. It must be remembered however, dissolved the writ in its Decision
that liability is not the same as suability in the
dated April 27, 2007 affirming CSC Resolution
context that when the state gives its consent to
Section 6. One Police Force: No. 020487.
be sued, it does not mean that it admits Issue: Being civilian in character, is the
Gannapao vs. Civil Service Commission,
liability. Conversely, when the State can be Philippine National Police covered by the Civil
et al., G.R. No. 180141, May 31, 2011
held liable, it does not mean that it gives Service?
consent to be sued. The more pertinent Facts: On December 22, 1995, stockholders
provision in the LGC would be Sec. 22 which and board members of United Workers Ruling: Yes. Section 6, Article XVI of the
states: Transport Corp. (UWTC), filed a verified Philippine Constitution provides that the State
complaint before the PNP Inspectorate Division shall establish and maintain one police force
"SEC. 22. Corporate Powers. - (a) at Camp Crame, charging petitioner SPO1 which shall be civilian in character.
Every local government unit, as a corporation, Rimando A. Gannapao with Grave Misconduct Consequently, the PNP falls under the Civil
shall have the following powers:xxx(2) To sue and Moonlighting, for allegedly employed as Service Pursuant to Section 2(1), Article IX-B,
and be sued;" personal bodyguard of Atty. Roy G. Gironella, also of the Constitution. Section 91 of the DILG
the general manager appointed by the Board of Act of 1990 expressly declared that the Civil
Directors of UWTC, with compensation coming Service Law and its implementing rules and
2011 BAR: from UWTC. regulations shall apply to all personnel of the
Department. Pursuant to Section 6
A collision occurred involving a of Memorandum Circular No. 93-024, the
passenger jeepney driven by Leonardo, a On November 26, 1997, PNP Chief
Sarmiento rendered Decision finding respondent penalty of dismissal, which results in the
cargo truck driven by Joseph, and a dump
SPO1 Gannapao guilty of the charge of serious separation of the respondent from the service,
truck driven by Lauro but owned by
shall carry with it the cancellation of eligibility,
forfeiture of leave credits and retirement
benefits, and the disqualification from
reemployment in the police service. The CSC
thus correctly imposed on him the maximum
penalty of dismissal.

Section 11. Mass Media:

2011 BAR:
Mass media in the Philippines may be owned
and managed by: (answer is A)
Article XVIII. Transitory
A. corporations wholly owned and managed
by Filipinos. Provisions:
B. corporations 60% owned by Filipinos.
C. corporations wholly owned by Filipinos.
Section 2. Synchronization of

Kida vs. Senate, G.R. 196271 Oct. 18,


FACTS: In June 2011, RA 10153 entitled, An

Act Providing for the Synchronization of the
Elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao (ARMM) with the National and Local
Elections and for Other Purposes was enacted.
This law, together with the synchronization of
the elections of the ARMM with the national
and local elections, also authorized the President
to appoint Officers in Charge (OICs) for the
offices of Regional Governor, Regional Vice-
Governor, and Members of the Regional
Legislative Assembly. ARMM was originally
set to have their elections on August 2011;
however, due to the enactment of RA 10152,
COMELEC stopped their election preparations.
This led to various petitions assailing the
constitutionality of the new law. In the privileged writ of mandamus to compel the 1996 BAR:
meantime, the Court issued a TRO suspending DENR Secretary to sign, execute and deliver an
the implementation of RA 10153 and ordering IFMA to PICOP. The cause of action of PICOP Under the executive agreement
incumbent elective officials of ARMM to Resources, Inc. (PICOP) in its Petition for entered into between the Philippines and the
continue to perform their functions should these Mandamus with the trial court is clear: the other members of the ASEAN, the other
cases not be decided by the end of their term on government is bound by contract, a 1969 members will each send a battalion-size unit
September 30, 2011. Document signed by then President Ferdinand of their respective armed forces to conduct a
Marcos, to enter into an Integrated Forest combined military exercise in the Subic Bay
ISSUE: Does the Synchronization mandated by Management Agreement (IFMA) with PICOP. Area. A group of concerned citizens sought to
the constitution include the regional elections of enjoin the entry of foreign troops as violative
ARMM in relation to Article XVIII section 2? ISSUE: Is the presidential warranty, issued to of the 1987 Constitution that prohibited the
PICOP on 29 July 1969, beyond the reach of the stationing of foreign troops and the use by
RULING: YES, the 1987 Constitution 1987 constitution? them, of local facilities. As the Judge, decide
mandates the synchronization of elections of the the case. Explain.
ARMM. While the Constitution does not Ruling: No. A timber license is not a contract
expressly state that Congress has to synchronize within the purview of the non-impairment SUGGESTED ANSWER:
national and local elections, the clear intent clause. Our definitive ruling in Oposa v.
1) As a judge, I shall dismiss the case.
towards this objective can be gleaned from the Factoran that a timber license is not a contract
What Section 25, Article XVII of the
Transitory Provisions (Article XVIII) of the within the purview of the non-impairment clause
Constitution prohibits in the absence of a
Constitution, which show the extent to which the is edifying. We declared: Needless to say, all treaty is the stationing of troops and facilities
Constitutional Commission, by deliberately licenses may thus be revoked or rescinded by of foreign countries in the Philippines. It does
making adjustments to the terms of the executive action. It is not a contract, property or not include the temporary presence in the
incumbent officials, sought to attain a property right protected by the due process Philippines of foreign troops for the purpose
synchronization of elections. clause of the Constitution. Since timber licenses of a combined military exercise. Besides, the
are not contracts, the non-impairment clause, holding of the combined military exercise is
Section 3. Prior laws, Etc.: which reads: "SEC. 10. No law impairing the connected with defense, which is a sovereign
obligation of contracts shall be passed." cannot function. In accordance with the ruling in
Alvarez vs. PICOP, G.R. 162243, Dec. 3, be invoked. The Presidential Warranty cannot, Baer vs. Tizon, 57 SCRA 1, the filing of an
in any manner, be construed as a contractual action interfering with the defense of the State
2009 amounts to a suit against the State without its
undertaking assuring PICOP of exclusive
possession and enjoyment of its concession consent.
Facts: PICOP Resources, Inc. (PICOP) filed
with the Department of Environment and areas. Such an interpretation would result in the
complete abdication by the State in favor
Natural Resources (DENR) an application to
of PICOP of the sovereign power to control and
2003 BAR:
have its Timber License Agreement (TLA) No. An Executive Agreement was executed
supervise the exploration, development
43 converted into an IFMA. In the middle of the between the Philippines and a neighboring
processing of PICOPs application, it, however, and utilization of the natural resources in
State. The Senate of the Philippines took it
refused to attend further meetings with the the area. upon itself to procure a certified true copy of
DENR. On 2nd September 2002, instead, the Executive Agreement and, after
PICOP filed before the Regional Trial Court Section 25. Foreign Military Bases deliberating on it, declared, by a unanimous
(RTC) of Quezon City a Petition for Mandamus vote, that the agreement was both unwise and
and Treaties: against the best interest of the country. Is the
against then DENR Secretary Heherson T.
Alvarez. PICOP seeks the issuance of a Executive Agreement binding (a) from the
standpoint of Philippine law and (b) from the petitioner Philippine Coconut Producers Jr., And 59 individual defendants. On October 2,
standpoint of international law? Explain. Federations Inc. the conversion of the 1987, the Republic amended the complaint in
sequestered 753,848,312 class A and B common Civil Case no. 0033 to include 2 additional
SUGGESTED ANSWER: shares of San Miguel Corporation registered in individual defendants. On Dec. 8, 1987, the
the name of Coconut Industry Investment Fund, Republic further amended the complaint through
(a) From the standpoint of Philippine law, the holding Companies in the total number of its amended complaint albeit dated Oct. 2, 1987.
Executive Agreement is binding. According to 753,848,312 SMC Series 1 Preferred Shares. More than 3 years later, on august 23, 1991, the
Commissioner of Customs v. Eastern Sea
republic once more amended the complaint
Trading. 3 SCRA 351 [1961], the President can
ISSUES: Is the conversion of sequestered shares apparently to avert the nullification of the writs
enter into an Executive Agreement without
the necessity of concurrence by the Senate. from common shares to preferred shares valid of sequestration issued against properties of
and constitutional? Will the conversion remorse Cojuangco.
(b) The Executive Agreement is also binding the shares from PGCC sequestration and
from the standpoint of international law. As management? Issue: Were Cojuangcos SMC shares illegally
held in Bavan v. Zamora. 342 SCRA 449 acquired with coconut-levy funds?
[2000], in international law executive RULING: Moreover, our ruling in San Miguel
agreements are equally binding as treaties Corporation did not per se forbid the conversion Ruling: Republics burden to establish by
upon the States who are parties to them. of sequestered common shares into preponderance of evidence of evidences that
Additionally, under Article 2{1)(a) of the preferred/treasury shares as we heald threat, the respondents SMC shares had been illegally
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, changes that a are unacceptable are those of any acquired with coconut-levy funds was not
whatever may be the designation of a written permanent character that will alter their being discharged. The Sandiganbayan could not fairly
agreement between States, whether it is sequestered shares and, therefore, in custodia find that Cojuangco had committed breach of
indicated as a Treaty, Convention or Executive legis, that is to say under the control and any judiciary duties as an officer and member of
Agreement, is not legally significant. Still it is disposal of this court, since the subject the board of directors of the UCPB. For one, the
considered a treaty and governed by the sequestered some shares are under custodia amended complaint contained no clear factual
international law of treaties.
legis the court has certain control over them and allegation or which to predicate the application
their fruits. Nonetheless the PCGG, having of articles 1455 and 1456 of the civil code, and
administrative control over the subject section 31 of the corporation code. Although the
sequestered shows pending resolution of the trust relationship supposedly arose from
Section 26. PCGG: actual ownership, thereof, possesses discretion, Cojuangcos being and officer and member of
taking into account the greater interest of the the Board of Directors of the UCPB, the link
Cocofed vs. Republic G.R. 177857-58 government and the farmers, to decide on which between this alleged fact and the borrowings or
September 17, 2009 to deposit or escrow the net dividend earnings advances was not established. Nor was there
of, and/or redemption proceeds from, the series evidence on the loans or borrowings, their
1 preferred shares of SMC. amounts, the approving authority, etc. As trial
FACTS: Before us is the motion for court, the Sandiganbayan could not presume his
reconsideration of the resolution of the court Republic vs. Cojuangco, G.R. No. 166859, breach of fiduciary duties without evidence
dated September 17, 2009, interposed by April 12, 2011 showing so, for fraud or breach of trust is never
oppositors- intervenors Jovito R. Salonga, presumed, but must be alleged and proved.
Wigberto E. Tanada, Oscar F. Santos, Ana Facts: On July 31, 1987, the Republic
Theresia Hontiveros, and Teofisto L. Guingona commenced Civil Case no. 0033 in the Republic vs. Marcos, G.R. no. 155832,
III. As may be recalled, the court in its Sandiganbayan by complaint, impleading as December 7, 2010
resolution adverted to, approved upon motion of defendants respondent Eduardo M. Cojuangco,
Facts: on February 28, 1986, immediately after
assuming power, president Cory Aquino issued
E.O. 1, creating the PCGG. She empowered the
PCGG to recover all ill-gotten wealth allegedly
amassed by former President Ferdinand E.
Marcos, his family, and close associates during
his 20 year regime. PCGG commissioner Raul
Daza gave lawyers Jose Tan Ramirez and Ben
Abella, PCGG Region VIII task forces head and
co-deputy, respectively, written authority to
sequester any property documents, money, and
other assets in Leyte, belonging to former first
lady Imelda R. Marcos, Benjamin Romualdez,
Alfredo Romualdez and their agents.

Issue: is a sequestration order signed by PCGG

designated agents and issued prior to the
effectivity of the PCGG rules and regulations,

Ruling: Under Section 26, Article XVIII of the

constitution, an order of sequestration may only
issue upon a showing of a prima facie case
that the properties are ill-gotten wealth under
executive orders 1 and 2. When a court nullifies
an order of sequestration for having been issued
without a prima facie case, the court does not
substitute its judgement for that of the PCGG by
simply applies the law. Here, it is clear that the
PCGG did not make a prior determination of the
existence of a prima facie case that would
warrant the sequestration of the rest house. The
republic presented no evidence before the
Sandiganbayan that shows differently nor did
the republic demonstrate that the two PCGG
representatives were given the quasi-judicial
authority to receive and consider evidence that
would warrant such a prima facie finding.