7/9/2019 G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS<br /><br />208 Phil.

08 Phil. 490 : JULY 1983 - PHILIPPIN…

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™

Like 0 Tweet Share Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1983 > July 1983 Decisions > G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25,
1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS

208 Phil. 490:

Custom Search
Search

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

EN BANC

[G.R. Nos. L-42571-72. July 25, 1983.]

VICENTE DE LA CRUZ, RENATO ALIPIO, JOSE TORRES III, LEONCIO CORPUZ, TERESITA CALOT,
ROSALIA FERNANDEZ, ELIZABETH VELASCO, NANETTE VILLANUEVA, HONORATO
BUENAVENTURA, RUBEN DE CASTRO, VICENTE ROXAS, RICARDO DAMIAN, DOMDINO
ROMDINA, ANGELINA OBLIGACION, CONRADO GREGORIO, TEODORO REYES, LYDIA
ATRACTIVO, NAPOLEON MENDOZA, PERFECTO GUMATAY, ANDRES SABANGAN, ROSITA
DURAN, SOCORRO BERNARDEZ, and PEDRO GABRIEL, Petitioners, v. THE HONORABLE
EDGARDO L. PARAS, MATIAS RAMIREZ as the Municipal Mayor, MARIO MENDOZA as the
Municipal Vice-Mayor, and THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF BOCAUE, BULACAN, Respondents.

Federico N. Alday, for Petitioners.

Dakila F. Castro for Respondents.

SYLLABUS

1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; POLICE POWER OF THE STATE; POWER OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS TO

DebtKollect Company, Inc.
ENACT LEGISLATION PURSUANT THERETO. — Police power is granted to municipal corporations in
general terms as follows: General power of council to enact ordinances and make regulations.— The
municipal council shall enact such ordinances and make such regulations, not repugnant to law, as may
be necessary to carry into effect and discharge the powers and duties conferred upon it by law and such
as shall seem necessary and proper to provide for the health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve
the morals, peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the municipality and the inhabitants thereof,
and for the protection of property therein." (Sec. 2238, Revised Administrative Code of the Philippines,
(1917).

2. ID; ID.; ID.; WHEN ORDINANCES MAY BE PRONOUNCED INVALID. — An ordinance enacted by virtue
thereof, according to Justice Moreland, speaking for the Court in the leading case of United States v Phil.
165 (1913) "is valid, unless contravenes the fundamental law of the Philippine Island, or an Act of the
Philippines Legislature, or unless it is against public policy, or is unreasonable, oppressive, partial,
discriminating, or in derogation of common right. Where the power to legislate upon a given subject, and
the mode of its exercise and the details of such legislation are not prescribed, the ordinance passed
pursuant thereto must be a reasonable exercise of the power, or it will be pronounced invalid." cralaw virtua1aw library

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; LEGISLATION BY VIRTUE OF THE GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE. — The general welfare
clause authorizes such ordinances "as shall seem necessary and proper to provide for the health and
safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the
municipality and the inhabitants thereof, and for the protection of property therein. "It is a general rule
that ordinances passed by virtue of the implied power found in the general welfare clause must be
reasonable, consonant with the general powers and purposes of the corporation, and not inconsistent
ChanRobles Intellectual Property with the laws or policy of the State.
Division
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE NO. 84 OF BOCAUE BULACAN; TEST OF REASONABLENESS TO
UPHOLD IT VALIDITY, NOT MET. — In two leading cases, this Court had stressed reasonableness,

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1983julydecisions.php?id=332 1/5
7/9/2019 G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS<br /><br />208 Phil. 490 : JULY 1983 - PHILIPPIN…
July-1983 Jurisprudence                  SUSTAINED. — It is clear that municipal corporations cannot prohibit the operation of night clubs. They
G.R. No. L-30063 July 2, 1983 - GOODYEAR TIRE
AND RUBBER CO. v. TEOFILO REYES, SR.
208 Phil. 249
G.R. No. L-45946 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. FRANCISCO BERNAT
208 Phil. 252
G.R. No. L-51182 July 5, 1983 - HELMUT DOSCH v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
208 Phil. 259
G.R. No. L-57875 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ERNESTO T. SUÑGA
208 Phil. 288
G.R. No. L-58199 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. FEDERICO B. BELMONTE
208 Phil. 296
G.R. No. L-58910 July 5, 1983 - ROBERT DOLLAR
COMPANY v. JUAN C. TUVERA
G.R. No. L-62114 July 5, 1983 - ISIDRO BERNARDO
v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
208 Phil. 314
G.R. No. L-32794 July 15, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. JUANITO B. CALIXTRO
208 Phil. 317
A.M. No. 779-Ret July 20, 1983 - IN RE:
APPLICATION FOR RETIREMENT OF ATTY. MARCELO
D. MENDIOLA
208 Phil. 338
G.R. No. L-28632 July 20, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. BANGON TANOG
208 Phil. 343
G.R. No. L-31103 July 20, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. ERNESTO Z. LAKANDULA
208 Phil. 350
G.R. No. L-34382 July 20, 1983 - THE HOME
INSURANCE COMPANY v. EASTERN SHIPPING LINES
208 Phil. 359
G.R. No. L-36847 July 20, 1983 - SERAFIN B.
YNGSON v. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
G.R. No. L-59611 July 20, 1983 - LOCAL CIVIL
REGISTRAR OF CEBU CITY v. RAFAEL T. MENDOZA
208 Phil. 382
A.C. No. 1700 July 25, 1983 - OSCAR R. MANAHAN
v. GREGORIO F. ORTEGA
208 Phil. 387
www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1983julydecisions.php?id=332
consonant with the general powers and purposes of municipal corporations, as well as consistency with
the laws or policy of the sate. It cannot be said that such a sweeping exercise of a lawmaking power by
Bocaue could qualify under the term reasonable. The objective of fostering public morals, a worthy and
desirable end can be attained by a measure that does not encompass too wide a field. Certainly the
ordinance on its face is characterized by overbreadth. The purpose sought to be achieved could have
been attained by reasonable restriction rather than by an absolute prohibition. The admonition in U.S. v.
Salavaria, 39 Phil. 102 (1918) should be heeded: "The Judiciary should not lightly set aside legislative
action when there is not a clear invasion of personal or property rights under the guise of police
regulation ." It is clear that in the guise of police regulation, there was in this instance a clear invasion of
personal or property rights, personal in the case of those individuals desirous of patronizing those night
clubs and property in terms of the investment made and salaries to be earned by those therein
employed.
5. ID.; ID.; ID.; REPUBLIC ACT NO. 938; POWER GRANTED TO MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS IS THAT OF
REGULATION, NOT PROHIBITION. — The first Section of R.A. No 938 was amended to include not merely
"the power of regulate, but likewise ‘prohibit . . ." The title, however, remained the same. It is worded
exactly as Republic Act No. 938. It is to be admitted that as thus amended, if only the above portion of
the Act were considered, a municipal council way go as far as to prohibit the operation of night clubs. If
that were all, then the appealed decision is not devoid if support in law. That is not all, however. The title
was not in any altered. It was not change one with. The exact wording was followed. The power granted
remains that or regulation, not prohibition. There is thus Act No. 938 as allowing the prohibition of the
operation of night clubs would give rise to a constitutional question.
6. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; STATUTE TO BE CONSTRUED TO FREE IT FROM CONSTITUTIONAL INFIRMITY.
— Since there is no dispute as the title limits the power to regulating, not prohibiting, it would result the
statute being invalid if, as was done by the Municipality of Bocaue, the operation of a night club was
prohibited. There is a wide gap between the exercise power "to provide for the health and safety,
promote the prosperity, improve the morals." in the language of the Administrative Code, such
competence extending to all "the great public needs." to quote from Holmes, and to interdict any calling,
occupation, or enterprise. In accordance with the well-settled principle of constitutional construction that
between two possible interpretations by one of which it will be free from constitutional infirmity and by
the other tainted by such grave defect, the former is to be preferred. A construction that would save
rather than one that would affix the seal of doom certainly commends itself.
7. ID.; ID.; ID.; JUDGMENT UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE NO. 84 CANNOT BE
may be regulated, but not prevented from carrying on their business. It would he, therefore, an exercise
in futility if the decision under review were sustained. All that petitioners would have to do so is to apply
once more for licenses to operate night clubs. A refusal to grant licenses, because no such businesses
could legally open. would he subject to judicial correction. That is to comply with the legislative will to
allow the operation and continued existence of night clubs subject to appropriate regulations. In the
meanwhile, to compel petitioners so close their establishments, the necessary, result of an affirmance,
would amount to no more than a temporary termination of their business. During such time, their
employees would undergo a period of deprivation. Certainly, if such an undesirable outcome can be
avoided. it should be. The law should not be susceptible to the reproach that it displays less than
sympathetic concern for the plight of those who, under a mistaken appreciation of a municipal power,
were thus left without employment. Such a deplorable consequence is to be avoided. If it were not thus,
then the element of arbitrariness enters the picture. That it to pay lets, very much less, than full
deference to the due process clause with its mandate of fairness and reasonableness.
DECISION
FERNANDO, J.:
The crucial question posed by this certiorari proceeding is whether or not a municipal corporation,
Bocaue, Bulacan, represented by respondents, 1 can, prohibit the exercise of a lawful trade, the
operation of night clubs, and the pursuit of a lawful occupation, such clubs employing hostesses. It is
contended that the ordinance assailed as invalid is tainted with nullity, the municipality being devoid of
power to prohibit a lawful business, occupation or calling, petitioners at the same time alleging that their
rights to due process and equal protection of the laws were violated as the licenses previously given to
them was in effect withdrawn without judicial hearing. 2
The assailed ordinance 3 is worded as follows: "Section 1.— Title of Ordinance. — This Ordinance shall be
known and may be cited as the [Prohibition and Closure Ordinance] of Bocaue, Bulacan. Section 2.—
Definitions of Terms — (a) ‘Night Club’ shall include any place or establishment selling to the public food
or drinks where customers are allowed to dance. (b) ‘Cabaret’ or ‘Dance Hall’ shall include any place or
establishment where dancing is permitted to the public and where professional hostesses or hospitality
girls and professional dancers are employed. (c) ‘Professional hostesses’ or ‘hospitality girls’ shall include
any woman employed by any of the establishments herein defined to entertain guests and customers at
their table or to dance with them. (d) ‘Professional dancer’ shall include any woman who dances at any of
the establishments herein defined for a fee or remuneration paid directly or indirectly by the operator or
by the persons she dances with. (e) ‘Operator’ shall include the owner, manager, administrator or any
person who operates and is responsible for the operation of any night club, cabaret or dance hall. Section
3.— Prohibition in the Issuance and Renewal of Licenses, Permits. — Being the principal cause in the
decadence of morality and because of their other adverse effects on this community as explained above,
no operator of night clubs, cabarets or dance halls shall henceforth be issued permits/licenses to operate
within the jurisdiction of the municipality and no license/permit shall be issued to any professional
hostess, hospitality girls and professional dancer for employment in any of the aforementioned
establishments. The prohibition in the issuance of licenses/permits to said persons and operators of said
establishments shall include prohibition in the renewal thereof. Section 4. — Revocation of Permits and
Licenses. — The licenses and permits issued to operators of night clubs, cabarets or dance halls which
are now in operation including permits issued to professional hostesses, hospitality girls and professional
dancers are hereby revoked upon the expiration of the thirty-day period given them as provided in
Section 8 hereof and thenceforth, the operation of these establishments within the jurisdiction of the
municipality shall be illegal. Section 5. — Penalty in case of violation.— Violation of any of the provisions
of this Ordinance shall be punishable by imprisonment not exceeding three (3) months or a fine not
exceeding P200.00 or both at the discretion of the Court. If the offense is committed by a juridical entity,
the person charged with the management and/or operation thereof shall be liable for the penalty
provided herein. Section 6. —Separability Clause.— If, for any reason, any section or provision of this
Ordinance is held unconstitutional or invalid, no other section or provision hereof shall be affected
thereby. Section 7.— Repealing Clause.— All ordinance, resolutions, circulars, memoranda or parts
thereof that are inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 8.—
Effectivity. — This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its approval; provided, however, that
operators of night clubs, cabarets and dance halls now in operation including professional hostesses,
hospitality girls and professional dancers are given a period of thirty days from the approval hereof within
which to wind up their businesses and comply with the provisions of this Ordinance." 4
On November 5, 1975, two cases for prohibition with preliminary injunction were filed with the Court of
First Instance of Bulacan. 5 The grounds alleged follow: "1. Ordinance No. 84 is null and void as a
municipality has no authority to prohibit a lawful business, occupation or calling. 2. Ordinance No. 84 is
2/5
7/9/2019 G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS<br /><br />208 Phil. 490 : JULY 1983 - PHILIPPIN…
violative of the petitioners’ right to due process and the equal protection of the law, as the license
A.C. No. 2311 July 25, 1983 - JAIME PELEJO v. previously given to petitioners was in effect withdrawn without judicial hearing. 3. That under Presidential
PATERNO C. ZABALLERO Decree No. 189, as amended, by Presidential Decree No. 259, the power to license and regulate tourist-
oriented businesses including night clubs, has been transferred to the Department of Tourism." 6 The
208 Phil. 390 cases were assigned to respondent Judge, now Associate Justice Paras of the Intermediate Appellate
Court, who issued a restraining order on November 7, 1975. The answers were thereafter filed. It was
A.C. No. 2315 July 25, 1983 - ROSELA C. LU v.
LAMBERTO LLAMERA therein alleged: "1. That the Municipal Council is authorized by law not only to regulate but to prohibit
the establishment, maintenance and operation of night clubs invoking Section 2243 of the RAC, CA 601,
208 Phil. 392 Republic Acts Nos. 938, 978 and 1224. 2. The Ordinance No. 84 is not violative of petitioners’ right to
due process and the equal protection of the law, since property rights are subordinate to public interests.
G.R. Nos. L-29182-83 July 25, 1983 - ESSO 3. That Presidential Decree No. 189, as amended, did not deprive Municipal Councils of their jurisdiction
STANDARD EASTERN INC. v. ALFONSO LIM to regulate or prohibit night clubs." 7 There was the admission of the following facts as having been
established: "1. That petitioners Vicente de la Cruz, Et. Al. in Civil Case No. 4755-M had been previously
208 Phil. 394 issued licenses by the Municipal Mayor of Bocaue — petitioner Jose Torres III, since 1958; petitioner
Vicente de la Cruz, since 1960; petitioner Renato Alipio, since 1961 and petitioner Leoncio Corpuz, since
G.R. No. L-29230 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE 1972; 2. That petitioners had invested large sums of money in their businesses; 3. That the night clubs
PHIL. v. DIOSDADO ALVARADO, JR. are well-lighted and have no partitions, the tables being near each other; 4. That the petitioners
owners/operators of these clubs do not allow the hospitality girls therein to engage in immoral acts and
208 Phil. 412
to go out with customers; 5. That these hospitality girls are made to go through periodic medical check-
G.R. No. L-32072 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE ups and not one of them is suffering from any venereal disease and that those who fail to submit to a
PHIL. v. ALFONSO AQUIATAN medical check-up or those who are found to be infected with venereal disease are not allowed to work; 6.
That the crime rate there is better than in other parts of Bocaue or in other towns of Bulacan." 8 Then
208 Phil. 427 came on January 15, 1976 the decision upholding the constitutionality and validity of Ordinance No. 84
and dismissing the cases. Hence this petition for certiorari by way of appeal. chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

G.R. No. L-35102 July 25, 1983 - ANTONIO

BORLONGAN v. COURT OF APPEALS In an exhaustive as well as scholarly opinion, the lower court dismissed the petitions. Its rationale is set
forth in the opening paragraph thus: "Those who lust cannot last. This in essence is why the Municipality
208 Phil. 437 of Bocaue, Province of Bulacan, stigmatized as it has been by innuendos of sexual titillation, and fearful
of what the awesome future holds for it, had no alternative except to order thru its legislative machinery,
G.R. No. L-35273 July 25, 1983 - IGLESIA NI
and even at the risk of partial economic dislocation, the closure of its night clubs and/or cabarets. This in
CRISTO v. HONORABLE JUDGE, BRANCH I CFI OF
NUEVA ECIJA essence is also why this Court, obedient to the mandates of good government, and cognizant of the
categorical imperatives of the current legal and social revolution, hereby [upholds] in the name of police
208 Phil. 441 power the validity and constitutionality of Ordinance No. 84, Series of 1975, of the Municipal Council of
Bocaue, Bulacan. The restraining orders heretofore issued in these two cases are therefore hereby lifted,
G.R. No. L-36488 July 25, 1983 - CAPITAL effective the first day of February, 1976, the purpose of the grace period being to enable the petitioners
INSURANCE SURETY CO., INC. v. RONQUILLO herein to apply to the proper appellate tribunals for any contemplated redress." 9 This Court is, however,
TRADING unable to agree with such a conclusion and for reasons herein set forth, holds that reliance on the police
power is insufficient to justify the enactment of the assailed ordinance. It must be declared null and void.
208 Phil. 451
1. Police power is granted to municipal corporations in general terms as follows: "General power of
G.R. No. L-36789 July 25, 1983 - FELIPA CORDERO council to enact ordinances and make regulations.— The municipal council shall enact such ordinances
v. VICTORIA P. CABRAL
and make such regulations, not repugnant to law, as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge
208 Phil. 456 the powers and duties conferred upon it by law and such as shall seem necessary and proper to provide
for the health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, peace, good order, comfort, and
G.R. No. L-38495 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE convenience of the municipality and the inhabitants thereof, and for the protection of property therein."
PHIL. v. WILFREDO TOLEDO 10 It is practically a reproduction of the former Section 39 of Municipal Code. 11 An ordinance enacted by
virtue thereof, according to Justice Moreland, speaking for the Court in the leading case of United States
208 Phil. 469 v. Abendan 12 "is valid, unless it contravenes the fundamental law of the Philippine Islands, or an Act of
the Philippine Legislature, or unless it is against public policy, or is unreasonable, oppressive, partial,
G.R. No. L-39235 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE discriminating, or in derogation of common right. Where the power to legislate upon a given subject, and
PHIL. v. JUANITO GALICIA the mode of its exercise and the details of such legislation are not prescribed, the ordinance passed
pursuant thereto must be a reasonable exercise of the power, or it will be pronounced invalid." 13 In
208 Phil. 472
another leading case, United States v. Salaveria, 14 the ponente this time being Justice Malcolm, where
the present Administrative Code provision was applied, it was stated by this Court: "The general welfare
G.R. No. L-40310 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. SERGIO R. POSPOS
clause has two branches: One branch attaches itself to the main trunk of municipal authority, and relates
to such ordinances and regulations as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge the powers
208 Phil. 479 and duties conferred upon the municipal council by law. With this class we are not here directly
concerned. The second branch of the clause is much more independent of the specific functions of the
G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE council which are enumerated by law. It authorizes such ordinances as shall seem necessary and proper
LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS to provide for the health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, peace, good order,
comfort, and convenience of the municipality and the inhabitants thereof, and for the protection of
208 Phil. 490 property therein.’ It is a general rule that ordinances passed by virtue of the implied power found in the
general welfare clause must be reasonable, consonant with the general powers and purposes of the
G.R. Nos. L-47136-39 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF corporation, and not inconsistent with the laws or policy of the State." 15 If night clubs were merely then
THE PHIL. v. ROMEO O. MANALANG regulated and not prohibited, certainly the assailed ordinance would pass the test of validity. In the two
leading cases above set forth, this Court had stressed reasonableness, consonant with the general
208 Phil. 504
powers and purposes of municipal corporations, as well as consistency with the laws or policy of the
G.R. No. L-48319 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE State. It cannot be said that such a sweeping exercise of a lawmaking power by Bocaue could qualify
PHIL. v. EFRENIANO BALANE under the term reasonable. The objective of fostering public morals, a worthy and desirable end can be
attained by a measure that does not encompass too wide a field. Certainly the ordinance on its face is
208 Phil. 537 characterized by overbreadth. The purpose sought to be achieved could have been attained by
reasonable restrictions rather than by an absolute prohibition. The admonition in Salaveria should be
G.R. No. L-50638 July 25, 1983 - LORETO J. heeded: "The Judiciary should not lightly set aside legislative action when there is not a clear invasion of
SOLINAP v. AMELIA K. DEL ROSARIO personal or property rights under the guise of police regulation." 16 It is clear that in the guise of a police
regulation, there was in this instance a clear invasion of personal or property rights, personal in the case
208 Phil. 561 of those individuals desirous of patronizing those night clubs and property in terms of the investments
made and salaries to be earned by those therein employed.
G.R. No. L-53741 July 25, 1983 - SAMAHAN NG
chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

MGA MANGGAGAWA SA FIRESTONE v. NATIONAL

LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION 2. The decision now under review refers to Republic Act No. 938 as amended. 17 It was originally
enacted on June 20, 1953. It is entitled: "AN ACT GRANTING MUNICIPAL OR CITY BOARDS AND
208 Phil. 566 COUNCILS THE POWER TO REGULATE THE ESTABLISHMENT, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF
CERTAIN PLACES OF AMUSEMENT WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTIONS." 18 Its
G.R. No. L-55373 July 25, 1983 - GLICERIA first section insofar as pertinent reads: "The municipal or city board or council of each chartered city shall
CARANDANG-COLLANTES v. FELIX CAPUNO have the power to regulate by ordinance the establishment, maintenance and operation of night clubs,
cabarets, dancing schools, pavilions, cockpits, bars, saloons, bowling alleys, billiard pools, and other
208 Phil. 572 similar places of amusement within its territorial jurisdiction: . . . 19 Then on May 21, 1954, the first
section was amended to include not merely "the power to regulate, but likewise "prohibit . . ." 20 The
G.R. No. L-55413 July 25, 1983 - DOLE title, however, remained the same. It is worded exactly as Republic Act No, 938. It is to be admitted that
PHILIPPINES, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS as thus amended, if only the above portion of the Act were considered, a municipal council may go as far
COMMISSION
as to prohibit the operation of night clubs. If that were all, then the appealed decision is not devoid of
208 Phil. 591 support in law. That is not all, however. The title was not in any way altered. It was not changed one
whit. The exact wording was followed. The power granted remains that of regulation, not prohibition.
G.R. No. L-55674 July 25, 1983 - LA SUERTE CIGAR There is thus support for the view advanced by petitioners that to construe Republic Act No. 938 as
AND CIGARETTE FACTORY v. DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF allowing the prohibition of the operation of night clubs would give rise to a constitutional question. The
LABOR RELATIONS Constitution mandates: "Every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title
thereof." 21 Since there is no dispute as the title limits the power to regulating, not prohibiting, it would
208 Phil. 597 result in the statute being invalid if, as was done by the Municipality of Bocaue, the operation of a night
club was prohibited. There is a wide gap between the exercise of a regulatory power "to provide for the
G.R. No. L-56441 July 25, 1983 - CLEMENCIO C. health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, "22 in the language of the Administrative
RAMIREZ v. SANDIGANBAYAN Code, such competence extending to all "the great public needs," 23 to quote from Holmes, and to
interdict any calling, occupation, or enterprise. In accordance with the well-settled principle of
208 Phil. 627
constitutional construction that between two possible interpretations by one of which it will be free from
constitutional infirmity and by the other tainted by such grave defect, the former is to be preferred. A

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1983julydecisions.php?id=332 3/5
7/9/2019 G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS<br /><br />208 Phil. 490 : JULY 1983 - PHILIPPIN…
G.R. No. L-56450 July 25, 1983 - RODOLFO T. construction that would save rather than one that would affix the seal of doom certainly commends itself.
GANZON v. SANCHO Y. INSERTO We have done so before We do so again. 24

208 Phil. 630 3. There is reinforcement to the conclusion reached by virtue of a specific provision of the recently-
enacted Local Government Code. 25 The general welfare clause, a reiteration of the Administrative Code
G.R. No. L-56655 July 25, 1983 - DATU
provision, is set forth in the first paragraph of Section 149 defining the powers and duties of the
TAGORANAO BENITO v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION sangguniang bayan. It read as follows:" (a) Enact such ordinances and issue such regulations as may be
necessary to carry out and discharge the responsibilities conferred upon it by law, and such as shall be
208 Phil. 638 necessary and proper to provide for the health, safety, comfort and convenience, maintain peace and
order, improve public morals, promote the prosperity and general welfare of the municipality and the
G.R. No. L-59546 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE inhabitants thereof, and insure the protection of property therein; . . . ." 26 There are in addition
PHIL. v. VICENTE CASAS provisions that may have a bearing on the question now before this Court. Thus the sangguniang bayan
shall" (rr) Regulate cafes, restaurants, beer-houses, hotels, motels, inns, pension houses and lodging
208 Phil. 645 houses, except travel agencies, tourist guides, tourist transports, hotels, resorts, de luxe restaurants, and
tourist inns of international standards which shall remain under the licensing and regulatory power of the
G.R. No. L-61349 July 25, 1983 - ANGELINA JAVIER Ministry of Tourism which shall exercise such authority without infringing on the taxing or regulatory
v. EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSION powers of the municipality; (ss) Regulate public dancing schools, public dance halls, and sauna baths or
massage parlors; (tt) Regulate the establishment and operation of billiard pools, theatrical performances,
208 Phil. 650
circuses and other forms of entertainment; . . . ." 27 It is clear that municipal corporations cannot
G.R. No. L-62097 July 25, 1983 - RODOLFO RIVERA prohibit the operation of might clubs. They may be regulated, but not prevented from carrying on their
v. WILLELMO C. FORTUN business. It would be, therefore, an exercise in futility if the decision under review were sustained. All
that petitioners would have to do is to apply once more for licenses to operate night clubs. A refusal to
208 Phil. 656 grant licenses, because no such businesses could legally open, would be subject to judicial correction.
That is to comply with the legislative will to allow the operation and continued existence of night clubs
G.R. No. L-62810 July 25, 1983 - EULALIA MARTIN subject to appropriate regulations. In the meanwhile, to compel petitioners to close their establishments,
v. FABIAN VER the necessary result of an affirmance, would amount to no more than a temporary termination of their
business. During such time, their employees would undergo a period of deprivation. Certainly, if such an
208 Phil. 658 undesirable outcome can be avoided, it should be. The law should not be susceptible to the reproach that
it displays less than sympathetic concern for the plight of those who, under a mistaken appreciation of a
G.R. No. L-63531 July 25, 1983 - HEIRS OF
municipal power, were thus left without employment. Such a deplorable consequence is to be avoided. If
FELICIANO NANTES v. COURT OF APPEALS
it were not thus, then the element of arbitrariness enters the picture. That is to pay less, very much less,
208 Phil. 665 than full deference to the due process clause with its mandate of fairness and reasonableness. cralawnad

G.R. No. L-64033 July 25, 1983 - PROCESO SIDRO 4. The conclusion reached by this Court is not to be interpreted as a retreat from its resolute stand
v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS sustaining police power legislation to promote public morals. The commitment to such an ideal forbids
such a backward step. Legislation of that character is deserving of the fullest sympathy from the
208 Phil. 671 judiciary. Accordingly, the judiciary has not been hesitant to lend the weight of its support to measures
that can be characterized as falling within that aspect of the police power. Reference is made by
A.C. No. 1251 July 29, 1983 - LILY LANGBID v. respondents to Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. City Mayor of Manila. 28
FELIX TIANGCO There is a misapprehension as to what was decided by this Court. That was a regulatory measure.
Necessarily, there was no valid objection on due process or equal protection grounds. It did not prohibit
208 Phil. 675
motels. It merely regulated the mode in which it may conduct business in order precisely to put an end
G.R. No. L-29407 July 29, 1983 - ESTATE OF
to practices which could encourage vice and immorality, This is an entirely different case. What was
AMADEO MATUTE OLAVE v. MANASES G. REYES involved is a measure not embraced within the regulatory power but an exercise of an assumed power to
prohibit. Moreover, while it was pointed out in the aforesaid Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators
208 Phil. 678 Association, Inc. decision that there must be a factual foundation of invalidity, it was likewise made clear
that there is no need to satisfy such a requirement if a statute were void on its face. That it certainly is if
G.R. No. L-31352 July 29, 1983 - JORGE DELECTOR the power to enact such ordinance is at the most dubious and under the present Local Government Code
v. ANTONIO M. OGAYAN non-existent.

208 Phil. 684
G.R. No. L-40504 July 29, 1983 - FORTUNATO
RECENTES v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
WHEREFORE, the writ of certiorari is granted and the decision of the lower court dated January 15, 1976
reversed, set aside, and nullied. Ordinance No. 84, Series of 1975 of the Municipality of Bocaue is
declared void and unconstitutional. The temporary restraining order issued by this Court is hereby made
permanent. No costs.

208 Phil. 688 Teehankee, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, Plana, Escolin, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ.,
concur.
G.R. No. L-47410 July 29, 1983 - POLICARPIO
CASTRO v. COURT OF APPEALS Makasiar, J., reserves his right to file a dissent.

208 Phil. 691 Melencio-Herrera and Vasquez, JJ., are on official leave.

G.R. No. L-52831 July 29, 1983 - MANUEL R. DULAY De Castro, J., is on sick leave.
v. GLICERIO V. CARRIAGA

208 Phil. 702 Endnotes:

G.R. No. L-60129 July 29, 1983 - LEONOR J. VDA.
DE JAVELLANA v. COURT OF APPEALS
1. Municipal Mayor Matias Ramirez and Municipal Vice-Mayor Mario Mendoza.
208 Phil. 706
2. Petition, 7. The other question raised was the jurisdiction of a municipal council to
prohibit the operation of nightclubs, it being alleged that the power of regulating tourist-
oriented businesses being granted to the then Department, now Ministry, of Tourism.

3. Ordinance No. 84, Series of 1975.

4. Ibid.

5. Vicente de la Cruz, Et. Al. v. Matias Ramirez, Et Al., and Teresita Calot, Et. Al. v. The
Municipal Mayor, docketed as Civil Cases Nos. 4755-M and 4756-M, respectively. On
November 21, 1975, the petition in one of the above cases was amended to raise the
further issue of lack of authority of respondent Municipal Officials to pass the ordinance in
question, since the power to license, supervise and regulate night clubs has been
transferred to the Department of Tourism by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 189, as
amended.

6. Petition, 7.

7. Ibid, 8.

8. Ibid, 8-9.

9. Decision, Annex A to Petition 1.

10. Section 2238, Revised Administrative Code of the Philippines (1917).

11. Act No. 82 (1901).

12. 24 Phil. 165 (1913). Abendan is followed in United States v. Tamparong, 31 Phil. 321
(1915); United States v. Gaspay, 33 Phil. 96 (1915) and Sarmiento v. Balderol, 112 Phil.
394 (1961).

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1983julydecisions.php?id=332 4/5
7/9/2019 G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS<br /><br />208 Phil. 490 : JULY 1983 - PHILIPPIN…
13. Ibid, 168. Cf. United States v. Ten Yu, 24 Phil. 1 (1912); Case v. Board of Health, 24
Phil. 250 (1913).

14. 39 Phil. 102 (1918).

15. Ibid, 109-110.

16. Ibid, 111. In Salaveria though the ordinance penalizing the playing of panguingue on
days not Sundays or legal holidays was declared as valid.

17. It was amended by Republic Act No. 979 and Republic Act No. 1224.

18. Title of Republic Act No. 938 as amended.

19. Republic Act No. 938, Section 1.

20. Republic Act No. 979, Section 1.

21. Article VIII, Section 19, par. 1 of the Constitution.

22. Section 2238.

23. Otis v. Parker, 187 US 606 (1902).

24. Cf. Nuñez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 50581-50617, January 30, 1982, 111 SCRA
433. Separate opinion of Justice Makasiar. De la Llana v. Alba, G.R. No. 57883, March 12,
1982, 112 SCRA 294.

25. Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 (1983). Under Section 234 of the Code it took effect one
month after its publication in the Official Gazette. It was published in the issue of February
14, 1983.

26. Ibid, Section 149 (1) (a).

27. Ibid, Section 149 (1) (rr, ss and tt).

28. L-24693, 20 SCRA 849, July 21, 1967.

Back to Home | Back to Main

QUICK SEARCH

1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908

1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!

 Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED

www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1983julydecisions.php?id=332 5/5