AMORA, ERNESTO JR. A.

21-JD-009

THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LUIS TORIBIO, defendant-appellant.

G.R. No. L-5060 January 26, 1910

FACTS: Respondent Toribio is a carabao owner from Carmen, Bohol. On the other hand, the
respondent slaughtered or caused to be slaughtered a carabao without the permission of the
municipal treasurer of the municipality where the carabao was slaughtered, in violation of
Sections 30 and 33 of Act No. 1147. The act restricts the slaughter of huge cattle for human
consumption.

The municipal slaughter establishment cannot slaughter huge calves without a permit from the
municipal treasurer, says the respondent. The act constitutes a taking of property for public use
in exercise of the right of eminent domain without compensation to owners, and it is an undue
and unauthorized exercise of police power by the state because it deprives them of the enjoyment
of their private property.

ISSUE: Whether or not Act. No. 1147, regulating the registration, branding and slaughter of
large cattle, is an undue and unauthorized exercise of police power.

HELD: No. It is a valid exercise of police power of the state. Act No. 1147 is not a taking of
property for public use in the sense of the constitution, but it is a lawful and valid exercise of the
legislature's ability to control and restrain such specific uses of property that are incompatible
with the public's rights. All property is obtained and held with the understanding that it will not
be used in a way that harms the equal rights of others or jeopardizes the community's public
rights and interests.

The Supreme Court referenced instances in the Philippines, such as a carabao epidemic that
wiped out 70-100 percent of the population. The Supreme Court further stated that these animals
are of public interest because they are essential for crop production. These justifications meet the
requirements for a legal exercise of police power.

Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that article 1147 is not an exercise of eminent domain's
inherent power. The aforementioned statute does not entail the taking of caraboes for public use;
rather, it serves as a simple rule for the consumption of these private properties in the public
interest.