0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
499 vues1 page
Petitioner sought a permit to import cattle from foreign countries into the Philippines, which was denied under a law prohibiting such imports. Petitioner argued this law unlawfully delegated legislative powers to the Governor-General by allowing him discretion to suspend the prohibition. The court ruled there was no unlawful delegation because the Governor-General was not given the power to make the law, but rather discretion only as to its execution, which is permissible.
Petitioner sought a permit to import cattle from foreign countries into the Philippines, which was denied under a law prohibiting such imports. Petitioner argued this law unlawfully delegated legislative powers to the Governor-General by allowing him discretion to suspend the prohibition. The court ruled there was no unlawful delegation because the Governor-General was not given the power to make the law, but rather discretion only as to its execution, which is permissible.
Petitioner sought a permit to import cattle from foreign countries into the Philippines, which was denied under a law prohibiting such imports. Petitioner argued this law unlawfully delegated legislative powers to the Governor-General by allowing him discretion to suspend the prohibition. The court ruled there was no unlawful delegation because the Governor-General was not given the power to make the law, but rather discretion only as to its execution, which is permissible.
L-34674 October 26, 1931 BAR OPS, ADMIN LAW, CASE # 5
MAURICIO CRUZ, petitioner-appellant, vs. STANTON YOUNGBERG, Director of the Bureau of Animal Industry, respondent- appellee. FACTS: Petitioner sought for a permit for the landing of ten large cattle and for the slaughter thereof. This was denied by respondent pursuant to the prohibition of the importation of cattle from foreign countries to the Philippine Island as imposed by Act No. 3155. Petitioner assails the said act contending, inter alia, that the power given by Act No. 3155 to the Governor-General to suspend or not, at his discretion, the prohibition provided in the act constitutes an unlawful delegation of the legislative powers. ISSUE: Whether or not there is unlawful delegation of Legislative powers. RULING: NO. The true distinction, therefore, is between the delegation of power to make the law, which necessarily involves a discretion as to what it shall be, and conferring an authority or discretion as to its execution, to be exercised under and in pursuance of the law. The first cannot be done; to the latter no valid objection can be made. It clear in this case that the Gov. Gen. was conferred not the power to make the law, but only the authority or discretion as to its execution.
Digest - G.R. No. L-4043 Cervantes Vs Auditor General (Separation of Powers, Non-Delegability of Legislative Powers, Completeness and Sufficient Standard Tests) PDF