FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
1987 Constitution ARTICLE II: State Principles and Policies
Section 15
“The state shall protect and promote the right to health of the
people and instill health consciousness among them.”
1. Oposa vs Factoran
Doctrine: ​The Supreme Court declared that this provision Sec. 15
is self-executing, meaning that the right to health of the people is
now demandable and enforceable where the violation of which is
justiciable.
Facts: 44 children who are minors, represented by their parents,
filed a suit against Fulgencio Factoran, Secretary of DENR, to stop
the issuance of licenses to cut timber. The petitioners invoke
their right to a healthful environment. Petitioner further asserts
that they “represent their generation as well as those that are
unborn”. They also claim that the Secretary committed grave
abuse of discretion in granting Timber license agreements.
Issue: ​Is there cause of action.
Held: ​Yes. There is a cause of action.
-The court held that the petitioners, although minors, have the
locus standi. With this, they have a cause to assert their right to a
sound environment which also constitutes the performance of
their obligation to ensure the protection of the right of the
generations to come. Such obligation is called the
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
intergenerational responsibility which the courts view as
something with transcendental importance. It also imposes the
correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment as
provided in Sections 15-16 Art II of the 1987 Constitution.
Vocabs:
Health​- state of being or having complete physical, mental, and
social well-being, and not merely an absence of a disease or
infirmity.
Transcendental Importance​- (Judicial Inquiry)- Courts will decide
when there is locus standi or when there is a grave violation of
the Constitution. Can be filed by any person or in a citizen’s suit.
Synonym: Paramount importance.
2. MMDA vs Manila Bay Concerned Residents
Nature:​ ​Environmental Law, Mandamus, PD1152
Facts: Respondents filed a complaint before the RTC against
several government agencies, among them the petitioners, for
the cleanup, rehabilitation, and protection of the Manila Bay. The
complaint alleged that the water quality of the Manila Bay had
fallen way below the allowable standards set by law, specifically
PD 1152. Respondents, as plaintiffs, prayed that petitioners be
ordered to clean the Manila Bay and submit to the RTC a
concerted concrete plan of action for the purpose.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
RTC rendered a Decision in favor of respondents, ordering the
defendant-government agencies to clean up and rehabilitate
Manila Bay.
Petitioners, before the CA, argued that PD 1152 relates only to
the cleaning of specific pollution incidents and do not cover
cleaning in general. Apart from raising concerns about the lack of
funds, petitioners also asserted that the cleaning of the Manila
Bay is not a ministerial act, which can be compelled by
mandamus.
The CA denied petitioners’ appeal and affirmed the Decision of
the RTC in toto. Hence, this petition.
Issues:
1. Does PD 1152 include a cleanup in general or is it limited
only to the cleanup of specific pollution incidents?
2. Whether or not petitioners may be compelled by
mandamus to clean up and rehabilitate the Manila Bay?
Held:
Issue 1:
PD 1152 does not in any way state that the government agencies
concerned ought to confine themselves to the containment,
removal, and cleaning operations when a specific pollution
incident occurs. The underlying duty to upgrade the quality of
water is not conditional on the occurrence of any pollution
incident.
Even assuming the absence of a categorical legal provision
specifically prodding petitioners to clean up the bay, they and the
men and women representing them cannot escape their
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
obligation to future generations of Filipinos to keep the waters of
the Manila Bay clean and clear as humanly as possible.
Issue 2:
Yes, petitioners may be compelled.
The MMDA’s duty in the area of solid waste disposal is set forth
not only in the Environment Code (PD 1152) and RA 9003, but in
its charter as well. This duty of putting up a proper waste
disposal system cannot be characterised as discretionary, for, as
earlier stated, discretion presupposes the power or right given by
law to public functionaries to act officially according to their
judgment or conscience.
A perusal of other petitioners’ respective charters would yield to
the conclusion that these government agencies are enjoined, as a
matter of statutory obligation, to perform certain functions
relating directly or indirectly to the cleanup, rehabilitation,
protection, and preservation of the Manila Bay. They are
precluded from choosing not to perform these duties. The
petition is DENIED.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
3. MMDA vs Jancom
Nature: ​Petition for review on certiorari
Facts: Jancom won a contract for the MMDA’s San Mateo waste
management project. A BOT contract for the waste to energy
project was signed on Dec 19, 1997, between Jancom and the
Philippine Government, represented by the Presidential Task
Force on Solid Waste Management through DENR Secretary
Victor Ramos, CORD-NCR chair Dionisio dela Serna, and MMDA
chair Prospero Oreta.
The contract, however, was never signed by President Ramos as
it was too close to the end of his term. He endorsed it to
President Estrada, but Estrada refused to sign it, for ​two reasons:
the passage of RA 8749, or the Clean Air Act of 1999 and the
clamor of San Mateo residents for the closure of the dumpsite.
When the MMDA published another call for proposals for solid
waste management projects for Metro Manila, Jancom filed a
petition with the Pasig RTC asking the court to declare as void the
resolution of the Greater Metropolitan Manila Solid Waste
Management Committee disregarding the BOT contract with
Jancom, and the call for bids for a new waste management
contract.
On May 29, 2000, the lower court decided in favor of Jancom.
Instead of appealing, the MMDA filed with the Court of Appeals a
petition for certiorari and a TRO. When the CA dismissed the
petition, the MMDA went to the Supreme Court, arguing that the
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
contract with Jancom was not binding because it was not signed
by the President, the conditions precedent to the contract were
not complied with, and there was no valid notice of award. The
Supreme Court ruled that MMDA should have filed a motion for
appeal instead of for certiorari, because a certiorari would only
apply in cases where there was grave abuse of jurisdiction,
something which the petition did not allege. Correction may be
obtained only by an appeal from the final decision. Since the
decision was not appealed, the Court said it has become final and
“gone beyond the reach of any court to modify in any
substantive aspect.”
Though saying it was unnecessary to discuss the substantive
issues, the court took it up just the same, “if only to put the
petitioner’s mind to rest.”
The Court said that the lack of notice was the government’s fault;
though the President did not sign, his alter-ego did; and anyway
his signature was only necessary for the effectivity of the
contract, not its perfection; and that the two-month period
within which Jancom should comply with the conditions had not
yet started to run because the contract had not yet taken effect,
precisely because of the absence of the President’s signature.
Issue: ​Did the court erred in declaring the agreement valid and
executory.
Held: ​The Court of Appeals did not err when it declared the
existence of a valid and perfected contract between the Republic
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

of the Philippines and Jancom. The MMDA cannot revoke or

renounce the same without the consent of the other. Although
the contract is a perfected one, it is still ineffective or
unimplementable until and unless it is approved by the
President.

Vocab:
Build–operate–transfer (BOT) Contract - is a form of ​project
delivery method​, usually for large-scale infrastructure projects,
wherein a private entity receives a ​concession from the ​public
sector (or the private sector on rare occasions) to finance,
design, construct, own, and operate a facility stated in the
concession contract.

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

4. Technology Developers vs Court of Appeals
Nature/ Topic:​ Right to clean environment
Facts: ​The petitioner was a private manufacturer and exporter of
charcoal briquettes. A letter was sent to them by the mayor of a
nearby town stating that the pollution emitted by the petitioner
negatively affected the local residents’ health. On these grounds,
the letter ordered the private corporation to shut down their
operations as well as requested the manager to present a
building permit, a mayor’s permit and an anti-pollution permit.
However, the corporation did not manage to secure a mayor’s
permit.
concerning the plant’s pollution. Another argument brought
forward in the decision was that the petitioner had made no
effort in mitigating the emissions coming from its plant despite
being made aware of the negative effects they have on the
residents. Furthermore, the Court noted that the health and lives
of citizens need to be protected from negative effects of
pollution and that this is more important than the need to
contribute to economic growth.

The petitioner’s plant was then shut down following an order to

the municipality’s station commander to padlock the premises.

The corporation filed a petition arguing that the shutting down of

their plant was unlawful. A lower court granted them a
preliminary injunction to prevent the closing of the plant.
However, this injunction was later dissolved again by the lower
court, because the petitioner was unsuccessful at trial and on
appeal. The petitioner then contested the order to dissolve the
preliminary injunction before the Supreme Court.

Issue:​ Is the court correct in dissolving such injunction.

The Court held that dissolving the injunction was the correct
course of action and that shutting down the plant’s operations
was lawful due to the lack of a permit and the investigation

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

5. AC Enterprises vs Frabelle discomfort and annoyance to a person of ordinary sensibilities

rendering adjacent property less comfortable and valuable.
Nature:​ Petition for review for certiorari

Facts: AC enterprises, petitioner herein, is a corporation who

owns a 10-storey building in Makati City. On the other hand,
Frabelle, respondent herein, is a condominium corporation who's
condominium development is located behind petitioner.
Respondents complained of the 'unbearable” noise emanating
from the blower of the air-conditioning units of the petitioner.

Issues: WON the “unbearable noise” in the case at bar is a

nuisance as to be resolved only by the courts in the due course of
proceedings

Held: Yes. It is a nuisance to be resolved only by the courts in the

due course of proceedings; the noise is not a nuisance per se.
Noise becomes actionable only when it passes the limits of
reasonable adjustment to the conditions of the locality and of
the needs of the maker to the needs of the listener. Injury to a
particular person in a peculiar position or of especially sensitive
characteristics will not render the house an actionable
nuisance–– in the conditions of present living, noise seems
inseparable from the conduct of many necessary occupations.
The determining factor is not its intensity or volume; it is that the
noise is of such character as to produce actual physical

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
6. Alexandra Condo vs LLDA
Philippine Realty and Holdings, Inc. (PhilRealty) developed,
established, and constructed The Alexandra Condominium
Complex from 1987 to 1993. On 2 September 1987, the Human
Settlements Regulatory Commission issued a Development
Permit to PhilRealty to develop its project. In the Development
Permit, PhilRealty was required to submit its condominium plans
to the Building Official of Pasig City. Architect Perez, then
Building Official of Pasig City, reviewed the Site Development and
Location Plan as well as the Sanitary/Plumbing Plans and
Specifications of the project. Architect Perez issued a Building
Permit and a Sanitary/Plumbing Permit acknowledging the
fixtures to be installed but without indicating the System of
Disposal including a Waste Water Treatment Plan. PhilRealty
turned over the project to TACC. On 24 June 1998, Laguna Lake
Development Authority (LLDA) advised TACC that its wastewater
did not meet government effluent standards provided in Sections
68 and 69 of the 1978 National Pollution Control Commission
Rules and Regulations (NPCC) as amended by DENR
Administrative Order No. 34. LLDA informed TACC that it must
put up its own Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) for its effluent
discharge to meet government standards. In a Notice of Violation
LLDA directed TACC to submit corrective measures to abate or
control its water effluents discharged into the Laguna de Bay.
LLDA likewise imposed upon TACC a daily fine of P1,000 from 26
March 1999 until full cessation of pollutive wastewater
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
discharge. TACC entered into an agreement with World Chem
Marketing for the construction of the STP for P7,550,000. In an
Order dated 19 July 1999, LLDA stated that the daily penalty was
imposed upon TACC for the pollutive wastewater discharge, and
to condone the penalty would be tantamount to tolerating the
pollution of the river bodies and the Laguna de Bay which is
contrary to LLDAs mandate. On 1 April 2002, TACC requested
LLDA to dismiss the water pollution case against it because of the
favorable analysis undertaken by the LLDAs Pollution Control
Division. TACC requested LLDA to condone the imposition of the
penalty of P1,000 per day since March 1999 in recognition of the
remedial and corrective measures it undertook to comply with
government standards. On 4 September 2003, LLDA issued an
order requiring TACC to pay a fine of P1,062,000 representing
the penalty from 26 March 1999 to 20 February 2002.
TACC filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals
with a prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order.
The CA ruled that the petition for certiorari was prematurely
filed. Pointed out that TACC failed to file a motion for
reconsideration of the 4 September 2003 order. Also the Court of
Appeals ruled that due to the transfer of LLDA to the DENR under
Executive Order No. 149 (EO 149), TACC should have first
resorted to an administrative remedy before the DENR Secretary
prior to filing a petition for certiorari hence the petition with the
Supreme Court.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
7. Universal Robina Corp vs LLDA
Nature:​ Right to clean environment
Facts: The City Government of Caloocan disposed of
approximately 350 tons of garbage daily in Tala Estate, Barangay
Camarin against the wishes of local residents, who were
concerned about the environmental and health impact of the
dumpsite. In March 1991, the Task Force Camarin Dumpsite of
Our Lady of Lourdes Parish filed a complaint with the Laguna
Lake Development Authority (LLDA). The complaint sought to
end the operation of the dumpsite, because of the dumpsite’s
“harmful effects on the health of the residents and the
possibility of pollution of the water content of the surrounding
area. An LLDA investigation found that the City Government of
Caloocan was maintaining the dumpsite without a legally
required Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC).
Subsequently, the LLDA issued a Cease and Desist Order to the
City Government of Caloocan, asking them, the Metropolitan
Manila Authority, and any contractors or other entities to stop
operating the Camarin dumpsite. The dumping stopped for a few
months, but resumed again in August 1992. The LLDA filed
another Cease and Desist Order that month, and in September
went so far as to prohibit entry of all garbage dump trucks into
Tala Estate. In September of 1992, The City Government of
Caloocan filed a petition seeking to be declared “the sole
authority empowered to promote the health and safety and
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
enhance the right of the people in Caloocan City to a balanced
ecology within its territorial jurisdiction. This order would render
any LLDA Cease and Desist Orders against the City Government
of Caloocan null and void. The trial court and the Court of Appeal
granted the City Government of Caloocan this order and ruled
that the Lake Laguna Development Authority had no power and
authority to issue a cease and desist order enjoining the dumping
of garbage. The LLDA appealed to the Supreme Court.
Held: ​The Court held that the LLDA had the authority to issue a
cease and desist order enjoining the dumping of garbage in Tala
Estate. Republic Act No. 4850 explicitly authorized the LLDA to
make, alter or modify order requiring the discontinuance or
pollution. While the LLDA was not expressly granted a power to
make ex parte Cease and Desist Orders, such a power was
necessarily implied from its broad powers to make orders
stopping pollution. Otherwise, the LLDA would “be reduced
to a paper agency.
The Court also emphasized that Article II, section16 of the
Constitution guaranteed a right to a balanced and healthful
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature,and
that there was a declared state policy to protect and promote
the right to health, which had been recognized as a fundamental
right in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the
Declaration of Alma-Ata.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
8. Ortigas and Co vs Feati Bank
Facts: Plaintiff is engaged in real estate business, developing and
selling lots to the public, particularly the Highway Hills
Subdivision along EDSA. On March 4, 1952, plaintiff, as vendor,
and Augusto Padilla and Natividad Angeles, as vendees, entered
into separate agreements of sale on installments over two
parcels of land of the Subdivision. On July 19, 1962, the said
vendees transferred their rights and interests over the aforesaid
lots in favor of one Emma Chavez. Upon completion of payment
of the purchase price, the plaintiff executed the corresponding
deeds of sale in favor of Emma Chavez. Both the agreements (of
sale on installment) and the deeds of sale contained the
stipulations or restrictions that:
1. The parcel of land shall be used exclusively for residential
purposes, and she shall not be entitled to take or remove soil,
stones or gravel from it or any other lots belonging to the Seller.
2. All buildings and other improvements (except the fence) which
may be constructed at any time in said lot must be, (a) of strong
materials and properly painted, (b) provided with modern
sanitary installations connected either to the public sewer or to
an approved septic tank, and (c) shall not be at a distance of less
than two (2) meters from its boundary lines.
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
Eventually said lots were bought by defendant. Lot 5 directly
from Chavez and Lot 6 from Republic Flour Mills by deed of
exchange, with same restrictions. Plaintiff claims that restriction
is for the beautification of the subdivision. Defendant claimed of
the commercialization of western part of EDSA. Defendant began
constructing a commercial bank building. Plaintiff demand to
stop it, which forced him to file a case, which was later
dismissed, upholding police power. Motion for recon was denied,
hence the appeal.
Issue: ​Whether or Not non-impairment clause violated.
Held: ​No. Resolution is a valid exercise of police power. EDSA, a
main traffic artery which runs through several cities and
municipalities in the Metro Manila area, supports an endless
stream of traffic and the resulting activity, noise and pollution
are hardly conducive to the health, safety or welfare of the
residents in its route. Health, safety, peace, good order and
general welfare of the people in the locality are justifications for
this. It should be stressed, that while non-impairment of
contracts is constitutionally guaranteed, the rule is not absolute,
since it has to be reconciled with the legitimate exercise of police
power.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
9. La Bugal B'laan Tribal Association vs DENR Sec Ramos
Take note:
R.A. No. 7942 ​- Philippine Mining Act of 1995
FTAA -​ Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement
WMCP - Western Mining Corporation PH (Listed as one of the
major mining and exploration companies of Australia)
Land covered in the case:
● 99, 387 hectares in total
● Includes South Cotabato, North Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat,
Davao del Sur
Capital alleged:
● 50 MILLION USD
Doctrine: ​Article 12 Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution “...natural
resources shall be under FULL CONTROL AND SUPERVISION of the
state”
Nature:​ Petition for mandamus and prohibition
Facts: ​The signing of DENR AO 96-40 implements the R.A. 7942
or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995. With the implementation of
the said act, an agreement was entered into by former President
Ramos and WMCP in the form of an FTAA. Allegedly there were
about 164 FTAA applications applied in lieu of the signing of the
act.
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
Issue:​ Is the agreement valid.
Held:​ No. SC voided the contract / FTAA
-In January 27, 2004, the Supreme Court voided the FTAA
entered into by PH and WMCP as it is deemed unconstitutional
on the grounds that “Service Contracts” are not allowed in the
1987 Constitution. The court further clarifies that the Act, which
gave rise to the contract, is in the nature of a service contract,
considered as concession or lease, both not allowed in the
Constitution.
-The purpose to deny service contracts is to uphold posterity, the
beginning of nationalizing and conserving national and natural
resources which was intended to be for the Filipino people and
to prevent foreign control through peaceful and subtle economic
intrusion.
-Court held that the ​WMCP is in its nature as SERVICE CONTRACT
although named as FTAA - which is an evil sought to be avoided
by the framers of our Constitution.
Vocabs:
Service contract ​- Grants beneficial ownership to foreign
contractors contrary to the fundamental law. The primary
feature of a service contract is one in which the management
and operation of contractors or companies like mining activities
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

by foreign companies are in their full control. Such gives them

exclusive rights to explore and exploit the resources - which is
the evil we sought to avoid.

Concession system​- direct equity investment for the purpose of

exploiting the natural resources of a particular area.

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
10. Metro Iloilo Water District vs Court of Appeals
Facts:
Petitioner is a water district organized under the provisions of
Presidential Decree No. 198 (P.D. 198), as amended. It was
granted by the Local Water Utilities Administration Conditional
Certificate of Conformance No. 71 on January 12, 1979. Its
service... areas encompass the entire territorial areas of Iloilo
City and the Municipalities of Ma-asin, Cabanatuan, Santa
Barbara and Pavia.
Sometime between April and May of 1993, petitioner filed nine
(9) individual yet identical petitions for injunction with prayer for
preliminary injunction and / or temporary restraining order
against herein private respondents the pertinent portions of...
which read:
“That pursuant to the provisions of section 31 (a) of P.D. 198, as
amended, the petitioner as a Water District was authorized to
adopt laws and regulations governing the drilling, maintenance
and operation of wells within its boundaries for purposes other
than single family... domestic use on overlying land, with then
provision that any well operated in violation of such regulations
shall be deemed an interference with the waters of the district;...
private respondents uniformly invoked the lack of jurisdiction of
the trial court, contending that the cases were within the original
and exclusive jurisdiction of the ​National Water Resources
Council (Water Council) under Presidential Decree No. 1067,
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
otherwise known as the Water Code of the Philippines (Water
Code).
In addition, private respondents Emma Nava and Rebecca
Berlindenied having extracted or withdrawn water from the
ground, much less sold the... same. Private respondent Carmen
Pangantihon likewise denied having constructed any waterworks
system in her area but admitted that she had constructed her
own deep well, unaware that she needed to get a permit to do
the same.
Private respondent Rufino Sitaca maintained the petitioner's
source of water are reservoirs from rivers and are thus not
affected by his well. Moreover, he claimed that his water permit
application was deemed approved, and thus he is entitled to use
the water from his... well.
Private respondent Benito Go admitted that he extracted water
from the ground, which he claimed to be his private property,
and used the water for his lumberyard and domestic purposes.
Additionally, he alleged the petitioner's rules and regulations
were... not published in the Official Gazette and hence petitioner
had no cause of action. Private respondent Charles Kana-an
asserted that he had complied with the requirements for the
approval of his water permit application. He claimed that he was
extracting... and selling water with petitioner's knowledge, and
without damage and injury to the latter.[14] Meanwhile, private
respondent Gerry Luzuriaga claimed that he was not the real
party in interest, but Shoemart, Inc. which has the control and
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
possession of the... property where the alleged withdrawal of
ground water was taking place Petitioner now contends that the
extraction or withdrawal of ground water as well as the sale
thereof within its territorial jurisdiction is a violation of its rights
as a water district.
Issues:
DID THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ILOILO HAVE JURISDICTION
OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PETITIONS?
Ruling:
We find merit in the petition.
The petitions file before the trial court were for the issuance of
an injunction order for respondents to cease and desist from
extracting or withdrawing water from petitioner's well and from
selling the same within its service areas.[34] The petitions...
contained factual allegations in support of the prayer for
injunction, to wit:... the grant to petitioner of a Conditional
Certificate of Conformance by the Local Water Utilities
Administration over areas from which water was allegedly
extracted or withdrawn by private respondents, by virtue of
which its Board of Directors promulgated rules governing...
ground water pumping within its service areas;... abstraction or
withdrawal of water within the territorial jurisdiction of
petitioner by private respondents without first securing a permit
from the Water Council, or registering their well drillers, and sale
of said water so extracted to commercial and other consumers...
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
within petitioner's service areas;... that the unauthorized
extraction or withdrawal of ground water by private respondents
without the necessary permit was in violation of petitioner's
prescribed rules, and constitutes interference for which
petitioner may commence, maintain, intervene in, defend and
compromise... actions or proceedings under Sec. 31 of P.D. No.
198;... that the extraction or withdrawal of ground water without
the corresponding permit was a violation of Art. 13 of the Water
Code; and... that great damage and prejudice will be suffered by
petitioner if private respondents' extraction and withdrawal of
ground water, as well as the selling thereof be allowed to
continue.
In essence, the petitions focus on the violations incurred by
private respondents by virtue of their alleged unauthorized
extraction and withdrawal of ground water within petitioner's
service area, visa-a-vis petitioner's vested rights as a water
district. At issue is whether or... not private respondents'
extraction and sale of ground water within petitioner's service
area violated petitioner's rights as a water district. It is at once
obvious that the petitions raise a judicial question.
The instant case certainly calls for the application and
interpretation of pertinent laws and jurisprudence in order to
determine whether private respondents' actions violate
petitioner's rights as a water district and justify an injunction.
This issue does not so much provide... occasion to invoke the
special knowledge and expertise of the Water Council as it
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

necessitates judicial intervention. While initially it may appear

that there is a dimension to the petitions which pertains to the
sphere of the Water Council, i.e., the appropriation of water...
which the Water Code defines as "the acquisition of rights over
the use of waters or the taking or diverting of waters from a
natural source in the manner and for any purpose allowed by
law," in reality the matter is at most merely collateral to the main
thrust of the... petitions.

Thus, we declared that the trial court's jurisdiction must be

upheld where the issue involved is not the settlement of a water
rights dispute, but the enjoyment of a right to water use for
which a permit was already... granted.

In like manner, the present petition calls for the issuance of an

injunction order to prevent private respondents from extracting
and selling ground water within petitioner's service area in
violation of the latter's water permit. There is no dispute
regarding petitioner's... right to ground water within its service
area. It is petitioner's enjoyment of its rights as a water district
which it seeks to assert against private respondents.

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

11. Montreal Protocol
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer (the Montreal Protocol) is an international agreement
made in 1987. It was designed to stop the production and import
of ozone depleting substances and reduce their concentration in
the atmosphere to help protect the earth's ozone layer.
The Montreal Protocol sits under the Vienna Convention for the
Protection of the Ozone Layer (the Vienna Convention). The
Vienna Convention was adopted in 1985 following international
discussion of scientific discoveries in the 1970s and 1980s
highlighting the adverse effect of human activity on ozone levels
in the stratosphere and the discovery of the ‘ozone hole’. Its
objectives are to promote cooperation on the adverse effects of
human activities on the ozone layer.
agreed individual targets. The Convention itself only asks those
countries to adopt policies and measures on mitigation and to
report periodically.
The Kyoto Protocol is based on the principles and provisions of
the Convention and follows its annex-based structure. It only
binds developed countries, and places a heavier burden on them
under the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility
and respective capabilities”, because it recognizes that they are
largely responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions
in the atmosphere.
The Kyoto Protocol sets binding emission reduction targets for 37
industrialized countries and economies in transition and the
European Union. Overall the targets add up to an average 5 per
cent emission reduction compared to 1990 levels over the five
year period 2008–2012 (the first commitment period).

12. Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol was adopted on 11 December 1997. Owing to

a complex ratification process, it entered into force on 16
February 2005. Currently, there are 192 Parties to the Kyoto
Protocol.
In short, the Kyoto Protocol operationalizes the ​United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change by committing
industrialized countries and economies in transition to limit and
reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions in accordance with

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

13. Paris Agreement

The ​Paris Agreement is a landmark international accord that was

adopted by nearly every nation in 2015 to address ​climate
change and its negative impacts. The agreement aims to
substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in an effort
to limit the ​global temperature increase in this century to 2
degrees Celsius above pre industrial levels, while pursuing means
to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees. The agreement includes
commitments from all major emitting countries to cut their
climate pollution and to strengthen those commitments over
time. The pact provides a pathway for developed nations to
assist developing nations in their climate mitigation and
adaptation efforts, and it creates a framework for the
transparent monitoring, reporting, and ratcheting up of
countries’ individual and collective climate goals.

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
14. IPRA law
R.A. No. 8371 or the Indigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997
Ancestral domain
● All areas belonging to Indegenous Cultural Community or
IPs, comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, natural
resources, and shall include ancestral lands, forests,
pasture, whether alienable or disposable or otherwise.
Note: Such lands cannot be exclusively occupied but used
for sustenance.
Ancestral lands
● Land occupied, possessed, and utilized by clans, families,
or individuals of ICCs / IPs since time immemorial by
themselves or predecessors in interest.
Note:​ ​ancestral domain > ancestral lands
Ecology
● From the word “OIKOS” which means place to live or
dwelling (Earnst Haeckel). Branch of Biology which deals
with the relations of organisms to one another and their
physical surroundings.
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
15. Phil Clean Air Act
The Philippines Clean Air Act of 1999 (​Republic Act No​. 8749)
outlines the government's measures to reduce air pollution and
incorporate environmental protection into its development
plans. Principle include: " the right of the people to a balanced
and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of
nature. The State shall promote and protect the global
environment to attain sustainable development while
recognizing the primary responsibility of local government units
to deal with environmental problems.”
What can you do to help clean the air?
1. Maintain your vehicle by changing oil regularly (every
5,000 kilometers).
2. Keep the engine well-tuned following the owner's
manual.
3. Keep tires properly inflated.
4. Plan trips and observe proper driving habits.
5. Remove unnecessary things from the trunk.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

What is covered by the Philippine Clean Air Act?
All potential sources of ​air pollution (mobile, point and area
sources) must comply with the provisions of the ​law​. All
emissions must be within the ​air quality standards. Mobile
sources refer to vehicles like cars, trucks, buses, jeepneys,
tricycles, motorcycles, and vans.
17. National Water Resources Board
The NWRB is the government agency which manages and
regulates all water resources and services in the Philippines. It
integrates and coordinates all water related activities that have
social, environmental and economic impacts in the country.

It has three mandated functions as follows:

16. Pollution Adjudication Board
The Board shall be composed of the Secretary as Chairman, two
(2) Undersecretaries as maybe designated by the Secretary, the
Director of the Environmental Management, and three (3) others
to be designated by the Secretary as members.
1. Policy formulation and coordination within the framework of
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM);
2. Water resource regulation through the issuance of Water
Permit (WP) and resolution of water use conflict; and

The board shall assume the powers and functions of the
Commission/Commissioners of the National Pollution Control
Commission with respect to the adjudication of pollution cases
under Republic Act 3931 and Presidential Decree 984,
particularly with respect to Section 6 letters e,f,g,j,k and p of P.D.
984. The Environmental Management Bureau shall serve as the
Secretariat of the Board. These powers and functions maybe
delegated to the regional officers of the Department in
accordance with rules and regulation to be formulated by the
Board
3. Regulation of water service providers through the issuance of
Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC)/Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity and setting ​of water tariffs.
18. Fisheries Code
Republic Act No. 8550 otherwise known as ​the ​Philippine
Fisheries Code of 1998 was enacted into law to achieve food
security; limit access to the fishery and aquatic resources of the
Philippines for the exclusive enjoyment of Filipino citizens;
ensure the rational and sustainable development, management
and conservation of the fishery and aquatic resources in
Philippine waters including the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ); to
protect the rights of fisher folk, especially of the local

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration

FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
communities with priority to municipal fisher folk, in the
preferential use of the municipal waters; to provide support to
the fishery sector, primarily to the municipal fisher folk, including
women and youth sectors, through appropriate technology and
research, adequate financial, production, construction of
post-harvest facilities, marketing assistance, and other services;
to manage fishery and aquatic resources, in a manner consistent
with the concept of an integrated coastal area management in
specific natural fishery management areas, appropriately
supported by research, technical services and guidance provided
by the State; and to grant the private sector the privilege to
utilize fishery resources under the basic concept that the
grantee, licensee or permittee thereof shall not only be a
privileged beneficiary of the State but also active participant and
partner of the Government in the sustainable development,
management, conservation and protection of the fishery and
aquatic resources of the country.
The following are the Prohibitions:
1. Unauthorized Fishing or Engaging in Other Unauthorized
Fisheries Activities.
2. Poaching in Philippine Waters
3. Fishing Through Explosives, Noxious or Poisonous
Substance, and/or Electricity.
4. Use of Fine Mesh Net
5. Use of Active Gear in the Municipal Waters and Bays and
Other Fishery Management Areas
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
6. Ban on Coral Exploitation and Exportation. - It
7. Ban on Muro-Ami Other Methods and Gear Destructive to
Coral Reefs and Other Marine Habitat.
8. llegal Use of Superlights.
9. Conversion of Mangroves
10. Fishing in Overfished Area and During Closed Season.
11. Fishing in Fishery Reserves, Refuge and Sanctuaries.
12. Fishing Or Taking of Rare, Threatened or Endangered
Species.
13. Capture of Sabalo and Other Breeders/Spawners.
14. Exportation of Breeders, Spawners, Eggs or Fry.
15. Importation or Exportation of Fish or Fishery Species.
16. Violation of Catch Ceilings.
17. 17. Aquatic Pollution. - Aquatic pollution, as defined in
this Code shall be unlawful.
18. Violation of the provision of this section shall be punished
by imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve
(12) years and/or a fine of Eighty thousand pesos
(P80,000.00) plus an additional fine of Eight thousand
pesos (P8,000.00) per day until such violation ceases and
the fines paid.
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C
19. Section 2, Article XII, 1987 Constitution
ARTICLE XII
NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY
Section 2. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal,
petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy,
fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other
natural resources ​are owned by the State. With the exception of
agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be
alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of
natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision
of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or
it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or
production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or
corporations or associations at least sixty ​per centum ​of whose
capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a
period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more
than twenty-five years, and under such terms and conditions as
may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for irrigation,
water supply fisheries, or industrial uses other than the
development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure
and limit of the grant.
The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone,
and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.
Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration
The ​Congress may, by law, allow small-scale utilization of natural
resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming,
with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers,
lakes, bays, and lagoons.
The President may enter into agreements with foreign-owned
corporations involving either technical or financial assistance for
large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of minerals,
petroleum, and other mineral oils according to the general terms
and conditions provided by law, based on real contributions to
the economic growth and general welfare of the country. In such
agreements, the State shall promote the development and use of
local scientific and technical resources.
The President shall notify the Congress of every contract entered
into in accordance with this provision, within thirty days from its
execution.
Notes:
● Above provision embodies the concept of the Regalian
Doctrine.
● 60% of capital should be owned by Filipinos
● Period of an agreement under FTAA can only be up to 25
years, renewable for another 25 years.
● Cannot grant foreign contractors licenses, concessions,
lease for exploration, or exploitation of natural resources.
● Participation in Nation’s natural resources is exclusively
reserved to the Filipino people
FINALS REVIEWER NATRES - COMSOR
2C

g. Natural biotic areas; and

When can the state undertake exploration, development, and h. Other categories established by law, conventions or
international agreements which the Philippine Government is a
utilization of natural resources
signatory.
1. Directly entering into an agreement through:
i. Joint venture - equity shares
ii. Co- production - shared risk
Iii. production sharing
2. With Filipino Citizens or corporations
3. 60% of the capital is owned by the Filipino

20. NIPAS, R.A. 7586

National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992

NIPAS is the classification and administration of all designated

protected areas to maintain essential ecological processes and
life-support systems, to preserve genetic diversity, to ensure
sustainable use of resources found therein, and to maintain their
natural conditions to the greatest extent possible.

The following categories of protected areas are hereby

established:

a. Strict nature reserve;

b. Natural park;
c. Natural monument;
d. Wildlife sanctuary;
e. Protected landscapes and seascapes;
f. Resource reserve;

Topic​ ​laws​ ​Note ​definitions ​ ​enumeration