The case involved Batangas CATV, Inc. appealing a Court of Appeals ruling regarding the authority of the Sangguniang Panglungsod to regulate subscriber rates for CATV operators. The Sangguniang Panglungsod had granted Batangas CATV a permit to operate a CATV system in 1986, with provisions allowing rate increases subject to approval. In 1993, Batangas CATV raised rates without approval, prompting a letter threatening to cancel the permit. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Sangguniang Panglungsod does not have jurisdiction to regulate CATV franchises or rates, as Presidential Decree 1512 and Executive Order 436 withdrew local authorities' power to
The case involved Batangas CATV, Inc. appealing a Court of Appeals ruling regarding the authority of the Sangguniang Panglungsod to regulate subscriber rates for CATV operators. The Sangguniang Panglungsod had granted Batangas CATV a permit to operate a CATV system in 1986, with provisions allowing rate increases subject to approval. In 1993, Batangas CATV raised rates without approval, prompting a letter threatening to cancel the permit. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Sangguniang Panglungsod does not have jurisdiction to regulate CATV franchises or rates, as Presidential Decree 1512 and Executive Order 436 withdrew local authorities' power to
The case involved Batangas CATV, Inc. appealing a Court of Appeals ruling regarding the authority of the Sangguniang Panglungsod to regulate subscriber rates for CATV operators. The Sangguniang Panglungsod had granted Batangas CATV a permit to operate a CATV system in 1986, with provisions allowing rate increases subject to approval. In 1993, Batangas CATV raised rates without approval, prompting a letter threatening to cancel the permit. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Sangguniang Panglungsod does not have jurisdiction to regulate CATV franchises or rates, as Presidential Decree 1512 and Executive Order 436 withdrew local authorities' power to
Case Title: Batangas CATV, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
G.R. No.: 138810 Ponente: Sandoval-Guitierrez Date of Promulgation: September 29, 2004 FACTS: On July 28, 1986, Sangguniang Panglungsod enacted a Resolution No. 210 granting the Batangas CATV a permit to construct, install, and operate a CATV system in Batangas City. Section 8 if the resolution provides that the Sangguniang Panglungsod is authorized to charged its subscribers the maximum rates specified therein, “provided, however, that any increase of rates shall be subject to their approval of the Sangguniang Panglungsod”. Then sometime in 1993, Batangas CATV increased its subscriber rates from P88 per month to P180 per month. The mayor of Batangas then wrote a letter to Batangas CATV threatening to cancel its permit unless it secures the approval of the Sangguniang Panglungsod. Therefore, the Batangas CATV filed a petition for injunction alleging that Sangguniang Panglungsod has no authority to regulate the subscriber rates charge by CATV operators. On 1995 the RTC decided in favor of Batangas CATV and was later Reversed by the Court of Appeals on 1999, citing the powers of LGU vested upon the Local Government Code of 1983. ISSUES: Whether or not the Sangguniang Panglungsod has jurisdiction to regulate CATV franchise. RULING: No. The Sangguniang Panglungsod has no jurisdiction to regulate CATV franchise because in the first place there is no such law authorizing the LGUs ’to grant franchises to operate CATV. What ever authority the LGU had before, had been withdrawn when President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 1512. And it is clear in Executive Order No. 436 that in absence of constitutional or legislative authorization, municipalities has no power to grant franchises.