PHILIPPINE INTERNATIONAL TRADING CORPORATION vs.

HON. PRESIDING JUDGE ZOSIMO Z. ANGELES et al.

G.R. No. 108461 ; 75 SCA 464
21 October 1996
Torres, Jr., J.

PARTIES:
 Petitioner: Philippine International Trading Corporation
 Respondents: Hon. Presiding Judge Zosimo Z. Angeles, Branch 58 RTC Makati,
Remington Industrial Sales Corporation and Firestone Ceramic, Inc.

FACTS:
1. The Philippine International Trading Corporation, a government owned and controlled
corporation issued Administrative Order No. SOCPEC 89-08-01, under which application
to the PITC for importation from the People’s Republic of China (PROC) must be
accompanied by a viable and confirmed Export Program of the Philippine Products to
China. This was to be carried out by the importer himself, or through a tie-up with a
legitimate importer, in an amount equivalent to the value of the importation from PROC
being applied for, or in a one-is-to-one ratio.
2. Remington Industrial Sales Corporation and Firestone Ceramics, Inc., both applied for
authority to import from PROC with PITC, both of which were granted, but were later on
withheld for failure to comply with the required one-is-to-one ratio of import and export.
3. Remington and Firestone filed a complaint asserting that the Administrative Order No.
SOCPEC 89-08-01 is unconstitutional. The RTC Makati Branch 58 ruled that the order
was a restraint of trade in violation of Sections 1 and 19 of Art. 12 of the 1987 Constitution.
a. The court declared the A.O. to be null and void, since it was not published, contrary
to Art. 2 of NCC.

ISSUES:
1. Whether or not Administrative Order No. SOCPEC 89-08-01 is valid.

RULING:
 The Administrative Order was not valid.
 The PITC, as an integral part of the DTI, was given the task of implementing the
department’s trading program. It has the authority to issue the questioned order and may
legally exercise that authority under DTI’s supervision.
o The grant of quasi-legislative powers in administrative bodies is not unconstitutional.
It has become necessary to create more administrative bodies to help in the regulation
of its activities.
 In summary, the PITC was legally empowered to issue the Administrative Order as a valid
exercise of power ancillary to legislation; however, it does not imply that the order was
valid.
o First, it was never published, thus it is not effective.
o Second, it is inconsistent with the declared policy of the government to the effect that
it will develop and strengthen trade relations with the PROC.
o Since the order was an unnecessary barrier to trade, the same is not a valid exercise
of its authority.
TERMS:
 Brevity – shortness, briefness

TOPICS:
 Effectivity Date of an Ordinary Law
 Publication Requirement