CASE DIGEST FACTS Endencia vs.

David

FACTS:

The Court of First Instance of Manila declared Section 13 of RA 590 which stated that “No salary
wherever received by any public officer of the Republic of the Philippines shall be considered as exempt
from the income tax, payment of which is hereby declared not to be dimunition of his compensation
fixed by the Constitution or by law” as unconstitutional.

It held, consistent with Perfecto vs. Meer, that the collection of income taxes from the salaries of Justice
Jugo and Justice Endencia was a diminution of their compensation, and therefore was in violation of the
Constitution of the Philippines which says “The Members of the Supreme Court and all judges of inferior
courts shall… receive such compensation as may be fixed by law, which shall not be diminished during
their continuance in office.”

The CFI ordered defendant-appellant Saturnino David, Collector of Internal Revenue, to refund the
income taxes collected on the salaries of Justice Pastor M. Endencia and Justice Fernando Jugo.

The Solicitor General on the side of the Collector of Internal Revenue stated that the Congress was not
in favor of the Court’s decision in Perfecto vs. Meer and immediately enacted R.A. 590 after the ruling,
thereby imposing taxes to the Judicial Officers.