UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

FINAL EXAMINATION
PUBLIC CORPORATIONS
UNDER ATTY. ISMAEL L. SARANGAYA JR.

INSTRUCTIONS

1. Read each question carefully.

2. Providing a “yes” or “no” answer (or any similar answer), without giving a
reason or justification, will not merit a point.

3. Strictly no cheating in any form. Violators will automatically receive a

failing mark.

4. Encode your answers in Microsoft Word. No need to copy-and-paste the

questions. Just provide the answers sequentially. Thereafter, upload your
answer sheet in Google Classroom where this questionnaire is posted.

5. You have exactly two (2) hours to accomplish this test. Late submission
will result in 1 point deduction for every minute of delay.

6. God bless and do your best.

QUESTIONS

1. A city ordinance was passed providing for the removal, at the owner’s
expense, of: (i) all outdoor advertising materials displayed or exposed to the
public in designated regulated areas such as residential zones, bridges, and
along main city streets; and (ii) billboards of substandard materials, or which
obstruct road signs and traffic signals. Failure to comply with said ordinance
authorizes the mayor, assisted by the police, to implement the removal of the
non-compliant materials. ABC Ad Agency, owner of the billboards removed by
the city, filed a complaint because, considering the nature of its business, the
removal of its billboards amounted to taking of private property without just
compensation.

Will the complaint prosper? Explain briefly. (10 points)1

2. Philippine Medical Center (PMC) is a government hospital created by law

to provide healthcare to the general public, especially the less fortunate. To
enable PMC to perform its mandate, the national government provided the initial
capital, land, buildings, and equipment to PMC. PMC’s charter also authorized

1 Question No. 3 of the 2022 Bar Examinations in Political Law and Public International Law.
it, acting through its Board of Trustees: to acquire property; to enter into
contracts; to mortgage, encumber, lease, sell, convey, or dispose of its
properties; and to do other acts necessary to accomplish its purposes and
objectives. Among the properties of PMC are five lands and buildings located in
Quezon City. The Quezon City assessor issued notices of assessment for real
property taxes (RPT) against PMC’s properties that are being leased to private
concessionaires. According to the city assessor, PMC’s properties leased to
private entities are subject to RPT because these properties are not being
exclusively used for charitable purposes. PMC, on the other hand, claims that,
as a government instrumentality imbued with corporate powers, it is exempt
from RPT.

(a) Is PMC liable for the assessed RPT over the leased properties? Explain
briefly. (10 points)

(b) Supposing PMC is correct that it is not liable for RPT, may the city
assessor assess the lessees for the RPT due on PMC’s leased properties? Explain
briefly. (10 points)2

3. A boundary dispute arose between the Municipality of Maligaya and the

City of Oro, an independent component city. By agreement, the parties
submitted the issue to amicable settlement by a joint session of the
Sangguniang Panlungsod of the City of Oro and the Sangguniang Bayan of
Maligaya.

No amicable settlement was reached. Instead, the members of the joint session
issued a Resolution declaring such failure to reach a settlement and authorizing
the parties to elevate the matter to the proper court for appropriate disposition
of the issue.

The City of Oro then filed a case with the RTC of Oro City. In response, the
Municipality of Maligaya filed a Motion to Dismiss, citing lack of jurisdiction
over the subject matter.

Rule on the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Municipality. (10 points)

4. Willy was elected councilor of Lucena City for three consecutive terms: for
the 1998-2001, 2001-2004, and 2004-2007 terms, respectively. During his 2004-
2007 term of office, the Sandiganbayan preventively suspended Willy for 90
days in relation with a criminal case he then faced. Upon the directive of the
Supreme Court, the Sandiganbayan lifted the preventive suspension.

In the 2007 elections, Willy filed his certificate of candidacy for the same
position. However, Simon, Danilo and Ferdinand filed a petition seeking to deny
due course to Willy’s certificate of candidacy or to cancel it for violating the three-
term limit rule.
2 Question No. 15 of the 2022 Bar Examinations in Political Law and Public International Law.
 Should the certificate of candidacy of Willy be cancelled and/or denied due
course? Explain your answer. (10 points)

5. For two consecutive terms, Julian had been elected and had served as a
member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan representing the Second District,
Province of Camarines Sur. As a result of the passage of a law reapportioning
the legislative districts in Camarines Sur, 8 out of 10 towns were taken from the
old Second District to form the present Third District.

Thereafter, Julian once again won as among the members of the

Sangguniang Panlalawigan representing the Third District. He was able to serve
his third term.

Subsequently, Julian ran anew as member of Sangguniang Panlalawigan

representing the Third District. Paula opposed the candidacy of Julian, claiming
that such candidacy violates the three-term limit rule.

Is Paula correct? Explain briefly. (10 points)

6. Edgar and Jess both ran for the position of Governor of the Province of
Bulaklakin. After the counting and canvassing of votes, Jess was proclaimed as
the winner. Edgar questioned Jess’s proclamation by filing with the COMELEC,
a petition for correction of a manifest error. The Petition was decided in Edgar’s
favor and he assumed the position of Governor for the remainder of the term.

Edgar ran and won the gubernatorial seat for two successive terms.
Thereafter, Edgar filed his certificate of candidacy as Governor for another term.

Sophie, a registered voter in the Province of Bulaklakin, opposed the

candidacy of Edgar, citing violation of the three-term limit rule.

Is Sophie correct? Explain your position. (10 points)

7. Distinguish a resolution from an ordinance. (10 points)

8. To ensure the safety and security of the residents of XYZ Subdivision, the
homeowners’ association implemented a "No Sticker, No ID, No Entry" Policy.
Under the Policy, visitors who sought to enter the premises must leave with the
subdivision guards their identification cards, which they may reclaim upon
leaving the subdivision.

William, a dissenting homeowner, questioned the legality of the Policy

because the subdivision roads were previously donated to the City of Angeles.
As such, William concluded that the local government unit has the exclusive
power to regulate the use of the subdivision roads.
 Is William correct? State your reason/s. (10 points)

9. The City of Manila passed an Ordinance declaring the hours from 10:00
P.M. to 4:00 A.M. of the following day as “Barangay Curfew Hours” for children
and youths below eighteen (18) years of age. The same Ordinance contains a
provision imposing a penalty of admonition, reprimand and/or imprisonment
upon minors who will violate the curfew hours, depending on the severity of such
violation.

An association of young adults and minors questioned the validity of the

said provision. Should the challenge prosper? Decide with reasons. (10 points)

-end-