Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ASSIGNED CASES
LAGUNA
LAKE
DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY vs COURT OF APPEALS
(231 SCRA 292)
FACTS: 1. The residents of Tala Estate,
Barangay Camarin, Caloocan City raised
a complaint with the Laguna Lake
Development Authority (LLDA), seeking
to stop the operation of the City
Government of Caloocan of an 8.6
hectare open garbage dumpsite in Tala
Estate, due to its harmful effects on the
health of the residents and the pollution
of the surrounding water.
2. LLDA discovered that the City
Government of Caloocan has been
maintaining the open dumpsite at the
Camarin Area without a requisite
Environmental Compliance Certificate
from the Environmental Management
Bureau of the DENR. They also found the
water
to
have
been
directly
contaminated by the operation of the
dumpsite.
3. LLDA issued a Cease and Desist Order
against the City Government and other
entities to completely halt, stop and
desist from dumping any form or kind of
garbage and other waste matter on the
Camarin dumpsite.
4. The City Government went to the
Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City to
file an action for the declaration of nullity
of the cease and desist order and sought
YES.
1.
LLDA is mandated by law to
manage the environment, preserve the
quality of human life and ecological
systems and prevent undue ecological
disturbances, deterioration and pollution
in the Laguna Lake area and surrounding
provinces and cities, including Caloocan.
While pollution cases are generally under
the Pollution Adjudication Board under
the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, it does not preclude
mandate from special laws that provide
another forum.
Thus,
the
voluntariness
of
the
employees entering into such a contract
of employmenthe has a free choice
between entering into it or notwith
such an implied condition, negatives the
possibility
of
involuntary
servitude
ensuing.
Issue: W/N the previous order of the CIR,
which ordered the union laborers to go
back to work, is unconstitutional for
being in violation of the organic
proscription of involuntary servitude.
Ruling:
NO. The order of the court
was for the striking workers to return to
their work. That order was made after
hearing, and Section 19 of CA 103
authorizes such order when the dispute
cannot in its opinion be promptly decided
or settled. The very impossibility of
prompt decision or settlement of the
dispute confers upon the CIR the power
to issue the order for the reason that the
public has an interest in preventing
undue stoppage or paralyzation of the
wheels of industry.
ASSOCIATION
OF
SMALL
LANDOWNERS V. SECRETARY OF
AGRARIAN REFORM (GR NOS. 78742,
79310, 79744, AND 79777, 14 JULY
1989)
Facts: Several
petitioners,
mostly
landowners and sugar planters, in these
consolidated
cases,
assail
the
constitutionality of PD 27, EOs 228 and
229, and PP 131 for allegedly being
violative of the constitutional provisions
on just compensation, due process, and
equal protection.
The Association of Small Landowners in
the Philippines, on the other hand,
invokes the right of retention granted by
PD 27 to owners of rice and corn lands
not exceeding 7 hectares as long as they
are cultivating or intend to cultivate the
same. Their respective lands do not
exceed the statutory limit but are
occupied by tenants who are actually
cultivating such lands. Because PD 316
provides that no tenant-farmer in
agricultural lands primarily devoted to
rice and corn shall be ejected or
removed from his farmholding until such
time as the respective rights of the
tenant-farmers and the landowner shall
Ruling:
NO. Petitioners have not
shown that they belong to a different
class and entitled to a different
treatment. The argument that not only
landowners but also owners of other
properties must be made to share the
burden of implementing land reform
must be rejected. There is a substantial
distinction between these two classes of
owners that is clearly visible except to
those who will not see.
Issue: W/N the assailed statutes are valid
exercises of police power.
Ruling:
YES.
The
subject
and
purpose of agrarian reform have been
laid down by the Constitution itself,
which satisfies the first requirement of a
lawful subject. However, objection is
raised to the manner of fixing the just
compensation, which it is claimed is
entrusted
to
the
administrative
authorities in violation of judicial
prerogatives. However, there is no
arbitrariness in the provision, as the
determination of just compensation by
the DAR is not by any means final and
conclusive upon the landowner or any
other interested party, because the law
Ruling:
NO. Although the traditional
medium
for
payment
of
just
compensation is money and no other,
what is being dealt with here is not the
traditional exercise of the power of
eminent domain. This is a revolutionary
kind of expropriation, which involves not
mere millions of pesos. The initially
intended amount of P50B may not be
enough, and is in fact not even fully
available at this time. The invalidation of
the said section will result in the
nullification of the entire program.
Issue: W/N the CARP and EO 228
contravene a well-accepted principle of
eminent domain by divesting the
landowner of his property even before
actual payment to him in full of just
compensation.
Ruling:
NO. EO 228 categorically
stated
that
all
qualified
farmerbeneficiaries were deemed full owners of
the land they acquired under PD 27,
after proof of full-fledged membership in
the farmers cooperatives and full
payment of just compensation. The CARP
Law, for its part, conditions the transfer
of possession and ownership of the land
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
(GR
NO.
Bolanos
confession
is
Ruling:
NO. Being already under
custodial investigation while on board
the police patrol jeep on the way to the
Police Station where formal investigation
19
20
Ruling:
YES. The confession, which
is
indisputably
an
uncounselled
confession or admission, is inadmissible
as evidence.
21
signature
thereto,
Catacutan
categorically declared that it was the
interpreter, one Pedro Rodriguez, who
translated it to Jaime.
22
23
24
25
was
Javier
denied
due
Ruling:
Commissioner Opinion, one
of the Second Division Commissioners,
ignored due process of law when he did
not inhibit himself from the proceedings
on the ground that he was formerly
Pacificadors law partner. For refusing to
do so, he divested the Second Division of
the necessary vote for the questioned
decision, assuming it could act, and
rendered the proceeding null and void.
Due process of law is intended to insure
confidence in the courts by requiring
compliance with what Justice Frankfurter
calls the rudiments of fair play. Fair play
calls for equal justice. There cannot be
equal justice where a suitor approaches
a court already committed to the other
party and with a judgment already made
and waiting only to be formalized after
the litigants shall have undergone the
charade of a formal hearing. Judicial (and
also extrajudicial) proceedings are not
orchestrated plays in which the parties
are supposed to make the motions and
reach the denouement according to a
prepared script. There is no writer to
foreordain the ending. The judge will
reach his conclusions only after all the
evidence is in and all the arguments are
filed, on the basis of the established
facts and the pertinent law.
The relationship of the judge with one of
the parties may color the facts and
distort the law to the prejudice of a just
decision. Where this is probable or even
only possible, due process demands that
the judge inhibit himself, if only out of a
sense of delicadeza.
26
27
non-
Ruling:
YES. The lower court erred
in admitting as evidence the written
sworn affidavit of Olevere, who executed
the written sworn statement declaring
that Ramos sold to him the marijuana
leaves for P10.00. This piece of evidence
is a mere scrap of paper because
Olevere was not produced in court for
cross-examination. An affidavit being
taken ex-parte is often incomplete and
inaccurate. Such kind of evidence is
considered hearsay. For the court to
admit the sworn statement of Olevere
without giving the adverse party the
right to cross-examine him would easily
facilitate the fabrication of evidence and
the
perpetration
of
fraud.
The
inadmissibility of this sort of evidence is
based, not only on the lack of
opportunity on the part of the adverse
party to cross-examine the affiant, but
also on the commonly known fact that,
generally, an affidavit is not prepared by
the affiant himself but by another who
uses his own language in writing the
affiants statements which may either be
omitted or misunderstood by the one
writing them.
Since Olevere was not presented as a
witness, the testimonies offered by the
witnesses for the prosecution are
regarded as hearsay, insofar as they
impute to Ramos the commission of the
offense charged.
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
(GR
NO.
L-
35
36
Ruling:
NO.
Although
Ernestos
defense is weak, still, he cannot be
convicted because the constitutional
presumption of innocence was not
overcome.
In this case, Hernandez and Perez saw
Ernesto having carnal knowledge with a
woman and they made no mention of the
fact that in doing so there was force and
intimidation. Neither did they testify that
the woman under him was fighting back
or was shouting for help. As the flashlight
was focused on Ernesto and the woman,
the latter must have been aware that
there were people around from whom
she could ask for help but which she did
not. Leonora made mention of the fact
that she was given blows to the chest,
but when she was examined by the
doctor, there was only an abrasion on
the right upper chest about the size of a
1-peso coin. Such abrasion would not
have been the effect of fist blows.
Moreover, while it is true that Leonora
reported the matter to her husband and
the authorities on the same night the
incident happened, her possible reason
for doing so was to save face with her
husband because there were witnesses
who saw them doing the sexual
intercourse. If she really was forced into
the act, why did she not run to the house
of Salome Perez after Ernesto had left?
This is not the normal behavior of a
woman who had just been violated if
indeed she had. Well-settled is the rule
that evidence to be believed must not
only proceed from the mouth of a
credible witness, but it must be credible
37
38
39
40
and
reputation
of
the
of
the
and
strength
(GR
NO.
L-
41
committed
with
lewd
42
43
44
Ruling:
NO.
The
questioned
provision is a valid limitation on the due
process, freedom of expression, freedom
of association, freedom of assembly, and
equal protection clauses. The same is
designed to prevent the clear and
present danger of the twin substantive
evils, namely, the prostitution of
electoral process and denial of the equal
protection of the laws. Moreover, under
the balancing-of-interests test, the
cleansing of the electoral process, the
guarantee of equal change for all
candidates, and the independence of the
delegates who must be beholden to no
one
but
to
God,
country,
and
conscience, are interests that should be
accorded primacy.
Issue: W/N RA 6132 is an ex post facto
law.
Ruling:
one which:
of
the
assailed
GUANZON V. DE VILLA
80508, 30 JANUARY 1990)
(GR
law
NO.
45
46
47
48
so
49
into
individual
rights
and
was
50
Ruling:
YES. The right to privacy is
a fundamental right guaranteed by the
Constitution, hence, it is the burden of
the Government to show that AO 308 is
justified by some compelling state
interest and that it is narrowly drawn. AO
308 is predicated on two considerations:
(1) the need to provide our citizens and
foreigners
with
the
facility
to
conveniently transact business with
basic services and social security
providers
and
other
government
instrumentalities and (2) the need to
reduce,
if
not
totally
eradicate,
fraudulent
transactions
and
misrepresentations by persons seeking
basic services. It is debatable whether
these interests are compelling enough to
warrant the issuance of AO 308. But
what is not arguable is the broadness,
the vagueness, the overbreadth of AO
308 which if implemented will put our
peoples right to privacy in clear and
present danger.
51
Issue: W/N
the
individual
has
a
reasonable expectation of privacy with
regard to the national ID and the use of
biometrics technology.
Ruling:
NO. The use of biometrics
and computer technology in AO 308 does
not assure the individual of a reasonable
expectation of privacy. As technology
advances, the level of reasonably
expected
privacy
decreases.
The
measure of protection granted by the
reasonable expectation diminishes as
relevant technology becomes more
widely accepted. The security of the
computer data file depends not only on
the physical inaccessibility of the file but
also on the advances in hardware and
software computer technology. AO 308 is
so widely drawn that a minimum
standard for a reasonable expectation of
privacy, regardless of technology used,
cannot be inferred from its provisions.
52
53
had
been
54
55
56
57
58
EBRALINAG
V.
DIVISION
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS OF
CEBU (GR NO. 95770, 1 MARCH
1993)
Facts: 68 high school and grade school
students from public schools in Cebu, all
of whom were members of a religious
sect known as the Jehovahs Witnesses,
were expelled from their classes by the
Cebu public school authorities for
refusing to salute the flag, sing the
national anthem, and recite the patriotic
pledge as required by Republic Act No.
1265 and by Department Order No. 8 of
the Department of Education, Culture
and Sports making the flag ceremony
compulsory
in
all
educational
institutions.
The Jehovahs Witnesses admittedly
teach their children not to salute the
flag, sing the national anthem, and recite
the patriotic pledge for they believe that
those are acts of worship or religious
devotion
which
they
cannot
conscientiously give to anyone or
anything except God. They feel bound
by the Bibles command to guard
themselves from idols. They consider
the flag as an image or idol representing
the State. They think the action of the
local authorities in compelling the flag
salute
and
pledge
transcends
constitutional limitations on the States
power and invades the sphere of the
intellect and spirit which the Constitution
protects against official control. They
claim that the childrens rights to free
public education, and their right to
freedom of speech, religion, and worship
59
60
61
62
63
Facts: The
radio
station
Eastern
Broadcasting Corporation (DYRE) was
closed
by
the
National
Telecommunications Commission (NTC)
under the general charge of inciting
people to commit acts of sedition when
the said radio station shifted towards
what it stated was the coverage of public
events and the airing of programs
geared towards public affairs. The radio
station, through its president, Mr. Rene
Espina, contended that it was denied due
process when it was closed on the mere
allegation that the radio station was
used to incite people to sedition, alleging
that no hearing was held and not a bit of
proof was submitted to establish a
factual basis for the closure. It also
raised the issue of freedom of speech.
64
65
66
67
68
69
NO.
70
is
Ruling:
YES. Neither Article IX-C of
the 1987 Constitution nor Section 11(b),
2nd paragraph of RA 6646 can be
construed to mean that the COMELEC
has been granted the right to supervise
and regulate the exercise by media
practitioners themselves of their right to
expression during plebiscite periods.
Media practitioners exercising their
freedom of expression during plebiscite
periods are neither the franchise holders
nor the candidates. In fact, there are no
candidates involved in a plebiscite.
Therefore, Section 19 of COMELEC
Resolution No. 2167 has no statutory
basis.
Moreover, while the limitation on the
media practitioners freedom to express
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
BALDOZA V. DIMAANO
1120-MJ, 5 MAY 1976)
(AM
NO.
79
Judge
Dimaano
80
81