15) Continental Oil Co. v.

Santa Fe
Facts: Chapter 159, Laws 1931, attempts to authorize a municipal excise on sales of gasoline,
not to exceed one cent per gallon. Its text will be essential to an understanding of the
controverted questions, and of our conclusion as to its meaning. Inserting it here, we omit
section 2, which merely defines terms. "An Act Relating to the Assessments and Collection of
License Tax Upon Gasoline and Oils Sold Within Municipalities. "Section 1. That the governing
bodies of certain towns and villages, whether incorporated under general or special act, shall
have the power to fix and have collected a license tax upon gasoline and motor fuel sold within
the limits of such municipalities and shall have the power to fix the amount of the license tax to
be paid thereon; Provided, that no such license tax shall exceed the sum of one cent per gallon
upon such gasoline and motor fuel sold within such municipality.
Issues: WON the city ordinance exacting excise on gasoline sales held void because of its
construction
Ruling: No. By exceptional construction, "certain towns and villages" held to mean "cities,
towns and villages" in Laws 1931, c. 159, § 1. When an entire act unerringly discloses that
"certain" was inadvertently used for "cities," canons of strict construction of tax statutes and of
powers of municipalities held not to prevent construction effecting true intent.
19. )Librares v. Executive Secretary; 9 SCRA 2616 (1963
Facts: The president of the Philippines nominated Lucio Lebarnes for the position of Chief of
Police in Zamboanga City on January 29, 1959. On February 25, 1959, the Commission on
Appointments approved his nomination; he began serving on March 11, 1959. Miguel Apostol
was named the new chief of police of Zamboanga City on May 16, 1963, and he took the oath
on May 18, 1963. According to the terms of Section 34 of the Zamboanga City Charter, Libarnes'
duties and responsibilities as Chief of Police in that city were terminated on May 23, 1963, with
immediate effect. In response to Libarnes' refusal to cede his position to Apostol, on July 5,
1963, he filed a lawsuit to revoke Apostol's appointment as chief of police, as well as that of the
city's mayor, the executive secretary, and any assistants or anyone operating on their behalf.
Libarnes claims that he is entitled to keep office under RA No. 2259 and the Civil Service Law
(RA No. 2260) until he is removed for reason, which he claims didn't apply in his instance, and
"after Due Process," which he claims he hasn't received.
Issues: Whether or not Section 5 of Republic Act No. 2259 is constitutional and valid
Ruling: YES. We hold that said provision in Section 5 of Republic Act No. 2259 is constitutional
and valid; that as Chief of Police of Zamboanga City, plaintiff Libarnes is entitled to the benefits
of the aforementioned provision; and that, pursuant thereto and to Section 32 of Republic Act
No. 2260, he no longer holds the office at the pleasure of the Executive, and may be removed
therefrom only "for cause as provided by law and after due process", and, accordingly,
judgment is hereby rendered declaring that plaintiff Lucio C. Libarnes is still the de jure Chief of
Police of Zamboanga City, and that, as such, he is entitled to continue holding said office and
discharging the powers and duties thereof, and, consequently, enjoining the defendants herein,
as well as their subordinates or persons acting in their behalf, to refrain from molesting the
plaintiff, or otherwise interfering in the possession of said office, and in the discharge of the
powers and duties attached thereto, with costs against said defendants.

22.) ALALAYAN vs.NPC G.R. No. L-24396/ July 29, 1968

Facts: This issue began when National Power Corporation (NPC)'s charter was modified by RA
3043, also known as "An Act to Further Amend Commonwealth Act No. 121," and Alalayan and
the Philippine Power and Development Company (PPDC) challenged this law. In particular, they
criticized Section 3 of the law. In accordance with Section 3 of RA 3043, NPC-provided
contractors are permitted to realize a net profit of no more than twelve percent (12%) annually
on its investments plus two months' worth of operating expenses in any franchise contract for
the supply of electricity that accounts for fifty percent (50%) of the franchisee's electricity and
energy. In order to put the terms of the law into practice, NPC is also allowed to franchise
contracts.
Issues: WON is sufficient when it comes to its title
Ruling: NO. The constitutional provision Article VI, Sec. 21, par. 1 that "no bill which may be
enacted into law shall embrace more than one subject which shall be expressed in its title" is
aimed at evils of the so- called omnibus bills and log-rolling legislation as well as surreptitious or
unconsidered enactments. Where the subject of a bill is limited to a particular matter,
lawmakers and the people should be informed of the subject of the proposed legislative
measures. This provision thus precludes the insertion of riders in legislation, a rider being a
provision not germane to the subject matter of the bill.)
23.) BENJAMIN E. CAWALING, JR., petitioner, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, and
Rep. Francis Joseph G. Escudero, respondents
Facts: On August 16, 2000, former President Joseph E. Estrada signed R.A. No. 8806, creating
the City of Sorsogon by merging Bacon and Sorsogon. The Commission on Elections conducted
a plebiscite in Bacon and Sorsogon, and the majority of votes were cast. Benjamin E. Cawaling
filed a petition for certiorari in 2001, arguing that the plebiscite was conducted beyond the 120-
day period and that COMELEC failed to conduct a 20-day extensive information campaign. Two
days after filing said action, on January 4, 2001, petitioner filed another petition for prohibition
against the implementation of R.A. No. 8806, arguing that it was unconstitutional. The
petitioner argued that the creation of Sorsogon City by merging two municipalities violated
Section 450(a) of the Local Government Code of 1991 and violated the "one subject-one bill"
rule prescribed by Article VI.
Issue: WON RA No. 8806 contravenes the "one subject-one bill" rule enunciated in Section
26(1), Article VI of the Constitution.
Ruling: No. The argument is far from persuasive. Contrary to petitioner's assertion, there is only
one subject embraced in the title of the law, that is, the creation of the City of Sorsogon. The
abolition/cessation of the corporate existence of the Municipalities of Bacon and Sorsogon due
to their merger is not a subject separate and distinct from the creation of Sorsogon City. Such
abolition/cessation was but the logical, natural and inevitable consequence of the merger.
Otherwise put, it is the necessary means by which the City of Sorsogon was created. Hence, the
title of the law, "An Act Creating the City of Sorsogon by Merging the Municipalities of Bacon
and Sorsogon in the Province of Sorsogon, and Appropriating Funds Therefor," cannot be said
to exclude the incidental effect of abolishing the two municipalities, nor can it be considered to
have deprived the public of fair information on this consequence. Consequently, we hold that
petitioner has failed to present clear and convincing proof to defeat the presumption of
constitutionality of R.A. No. 8806.
36. LA SAGRADA ORDEN DE PREDICADORES DE LA PROVINCIA DEL SANTISIMO ROSARIO DE
FILIPINAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT, Defendant-
Appellee. G.R. No. 18715. January 8, 1923
FACTS : The plaintiff, "Sagrada Orden de Predicadores," ceded some properties of its ownership
located in San Juan del Monte to the municipality of Manila upon the building of the Carriedo
water supply for the City of Manila. These lands were necessary for getting the water to the
city. The Dominican Fathers of the Province of the Holy Rosary resolved on October 20, 1886,
to pay them back for their kindness and charity. The plaintiff corporation is decided to furnish,
free of charge, the necessary water from the Carriedo waterworks for the use of the convent of
Sto. Domingo, of this city. From the year 1886-July 1920, the convent of Sto. Domingo has been
enjoying the free use of the carriedo waters when the defendant, in its capacity as
administrator and trustee of the present water supply system in the City of Manila, required
the plaintiff to pay for the water consumed during the months of July to September, 1920. The
plaintiff paid the amount of P52.24 under protest, and this action followed. As a counterclaim,
the defendant requests that the plaintiff be ordered to pay P1,404.44, plus interest, for water
consumed between September 1, 1916, and the third quarter of 1920. The defendant's answer
includes a number of unique defenses that we will discuss later. In its ruling, the lower court
states that the Dominican Fathers convent of the City of Manila is no longer permitted to
remain in the free enjoyment of the use of the water supplied by the City of Manila due to
section 3 of the Act of Congress on August 29, 1916, known as the Jones Law.
ISSUE: WON the obligation contracted by the former municipal council of the City of Manila
was transmitted to the present municipal board of Manila upon the change of sovereignty
RULINGS: Yes. the obligations incurred by the old city council of Manila before the cession of
the Philippine Islands to the United States by virtue of the treaty of Paris of December 10, 1898,
were transmitted to the present City of Manila, and in as much as section 8 of Act No. 2832,
creating the Metropolitan Water District, directs its governing body to take charge of all the age
system of the City of Manila, the Metropolitan Water District is bound to respect the
obligations contracted by its predecessor, the old city council of Manila. The judgment
appealed from is reversed and the defendant is sentenced to supply gratuitously the water that
may be consumed in the said convent of Sto. Domingo and to refund the amount of P52.24 paid
by the appellant, without special