You are on page 1of 1

PVTA vs CIR

G.R. No. L-32052
65 SCRA 416
July 25, 1975

Petitioner: Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration
Respondent: Court of Industrial Relations

FACTS: Private respondents filed a petition seeking relief for their alleged overtime
services (in excess of their 8 regular hours a day) and the failure to pay for said
compensation in accordance with Commonwealth Act No. 444.

 Section 1: The legal working day for any person employed by another shall not be
of more than eight (8) hours daily.

Petitioner denies allegations for lack of a cause of action and jurisdiction.

Respondents filed a Petition for Certiorari on grounds that the corporation is exercising
governmental functions and is therefore exempt from CA No. 444 which was denied and
dismissed by RTC and CA. Motion for Reconsideration were also DENIED.

ISSUE: Whether or not PVTA discharges governmental and not proprietary functions
and is exempt from CA No. 444.

HELD: It is an inherent state function which makes government required to support its
people and promote their general welfare. This case explains and portrays the expanded
role of government necessitated by the increased responsibility to provide for the general
welfare.

The Court held that the distinction and between constituent and ministrant functions,
which the Chief Justice points out, is already irrelevant considering the needs of the
present time. He says that "The growing complexities of modern society have rendered
this traditional classification of the functions of government obsolete." The distinction
between constituent and ministrant functions is now considered obsolete.

The Court affirms that the Petition as well as the subsequent Motion for Reconsideration
beDENIED.