CASE FACTS ISSUE RULING STATCON

Nitafan vs CIR Petitioners (judges WON SC chief NO ON

presiding over Branch justice, associate CONSTRUCTION
52, 19 and 53 of RTC justice, and judges of True intent of 1987 OF STATUTES;
NCR). They were lower courts be ConComm: SC chief ascertainment of
seeking for the exempted on paying justice, associate intent;
prohibition against income tax justice, and judges of Construction in
deducting withholding lower courts income Relation to the
taxes from their are TAXABLE Constitution
salaries.
1987 ConComm
Contention: Any tax intent: delete
withheld is against Art proposed express
8 Sec 10 1987 PhilCon grant of income tax
(During their exemption among
continuance in office, members of judiciary
their salary shall not be for equal protection
decreased. of laws

1935con: SC Members Legis history:

and judges of lower 1987 concomm
courts shall receive initially included
such compensation as income tax
may be fixed by law, exemption of
which shall not be judiciary but was
diminished during their questioned. How
continuance in office. about equal
protection of laws?
1973con: The salary of
SC Members and During amendments,
judges of lower courts 14 July 1986, Comm
shall be fixed by law, Rigos proposed that
which shall not be diminished-
decreased during their decreased and
continuance in office. remove nor subject
to income tax
No salary shall be
exempt from payment
of income tax.

1987con: Shall not be

decreased, no
exemption mentioned
 CASE FACTS ISSUE RULING STATCON
Aglipay vs Ruiz Iglesia Filipina 1. WON the 1. YES. Construction in
Independiente leader issuance and Relation to the
Gregorio Aglipay selling of Act no 4052 has Constitution
sought the issuance of commemorative no religious
a writ of prohibition to stamps is purpose in view.
prevent Director of constitutional Commemorative
Posts from issuing and stamps were for
selling postage stamps 2. WON the the Governments
commemorative of the Preamble be advantage (33rd
33rd Intl Eucharistic referred to in the Intl Eucharistic
Congress (Roman construction of Congress was a
Catholic Church). Constitutional worldwide event;
Provisions more profit, intl
Contention: recognition);
Unconstitutionality. Art Roman Catholic
6 Sec 23 Subsec 3, 1935 Church had no
consti. No public benefit nor profit.
money or property
shall ever be 2. YES.
appropriated, applied When the Filipino
or used directly or people, in the
indirectly for the Preamble of their
benefit or support of Constitution,
any church except if implored the aid
assigned to armed of Divine
forces or any penal Providence, in
institution, orphanage order to establish
or leprosarium. a government
that shall embody
Also against the their ideals
separation of church they manifested
and state. Used their
intense religious
Rebuttal: PH will suffer nature and placed
losses if stamps wont unfaltering
be sold. Director of reliance upon Him
Posts only based on PL who
Act No. 4052 (60k guides the
Appropriation Bill for destinies of men
cost of Plates and and nations.
Printing of Postage
Stamps with New
Designs)
 CASE FACTS ISSUE RULING STATCON
Primicias vs Plaintiff-appellee WON Ordinance No. YES. Construction in
Urdaneta Primicias was 3, Series of 1964 is Relation to
apprehended by null and void by Ord #3 is patterned Ordinances:
Urdaneta local police virtue of its repeal by after Act No 3992
on 08 Feb 1965 for RA 4136 (Land (Revised Motor It is a fundamental
overtaking a truck. His Transportation and Vehicle Law. principle that
license was Traffic Code) municipal
confiscated, a However, there is ordinances are
inferior in status
temporary operators already an express
and subordinate to
permit was issued and repeal on Ord #3, as
the laws of the
a criminal complaint stated in Sec 63 RA State; the ordinance
was issued against him 4136. must give way
at the Municipal Court
of Urdaneta. Act numbered 3992
as amended, and all
Contention: Ord # 3, laws, Eos, ordinance,
Series of 1964 resolutions,
regulations or paints
CFI held that Ord # 3 thereof in conflict
was already repealed with the provisions of
by RA 4136. this Act are
repealed.

Express repeal + later

law supersedes
earlier law

any conflict between

a municipal order
and a national law
must be ruled in
favor of the statute.
 CASE FACTS ISSUE RULING STATCON
Almeda vs By virtue of RA 2709 WON RA 2709 No. Ut magis valeat
Florentino [amendment of Sec 12 repealed RA 183 re: quam pereat
of RA 183 Pasay City Appointment of VM power to that construction
Charter (est 6/8/1960)], Board Secretary appoint did not to be sought gives
Pasay VM appointed include Board effect to the
Almeda as Board Secretary whole of a statute
Secretary 1/1/1964. (RA 2709 only its every word
amended Sec
1/2/1964 = Board 12 (Municipal There is no
refused Almeda, Board Consti alternative but to
appointed Florentino and org; VM interpret the
by virtue of Sec 14 of appoints all charter as the
RA 183. employees of lower court has
Board). done.
RA 183 Sec 14 Board
Appointment, salary Secretary (on
and duties of Board Sec 14) was
Secretary separate, not
amended by Ra
Sec 12 Constitution 2709
and org of Municipal
board; VM has power Interpret the charter
to appoint all like this: VM power is
employees of the Board only by Sec 12, not
14.

Repeals by
implication are not
favored.
 CASE FACTS ISSUE RULING STATCON
City of Manila On 1/27/1958, while WON this case is This case is covered
vs Teotico Teotico was on the way covered by Manila by the Civil Code.
to board a jeepney Charter or by the
within a loading and Civil Code The issue was
unloading zone (corner about the
of Old Luneta and P. damages, not
Burgos Avenue), he fell about the
off an uncovered and territorial
unlighted manhole. application of the
Because of it, his head law.
hit the rim of the RA 409 only has
manhole and broke his general rule
eyeglasses. It caused Art 2189 of Civil
injury on his left eyelid. Code specified
He wasnt able to Provinces, cities
report to work for 20 and municipalities
days. shall be liable for
damages for the
Teotico filed for death of, or injuries
damages against City of suffered by, any
Manila. CFI and CA person by reason
ruled in favor of of defective
Teotico, ordering City conditions of road,
of Manila to pay the streets, bridges,
former for damages. public buildings,
and other public
City of Manila works under their
appealed, invoked that control or
case was covered by supervision.
City of Manila Charter The city admitted
(RA 409), not by the that the place was
Civil Code. City of under their
Manila Charter is a control/supervisio
special law. n.

RA 409 Sec 4
The city shall not be
liable or held for
damages or injuries to
persons or property
arising from the failure
of the Mayor, the
Municipal Board, or any
other city officer, to
enforce the provisions
of this chapter, or any
other law or ordinance,
or from negligence of
said Mayor, Municipal
Board, or other officers
while enforcing or
attempting to enforce
said provisions.

Article 2189 of the Civil

Code: Provinces, cities
and municipalities shall
be liable for damages
for the death of, or
injuries suffered by, any
person by reason of
defective conditions of
road, streets, bridges,
public buildings, and
other public works
under their control or
supervision.