GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Civil Rights
1. Expression
2. Assembly
3. Petition
Political Rights
1. Expression
2. Assembly
3. Petition
Socio-economic Rights
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Org. vs.
PBM Inc. (Doctrine of Preferred Freedom)
(Blooming)
1. PBMEO mass demonstration at Malacanang
on March 4, 1969 against abuses of the Pasig
Police
2. PBMCorp demonstration should not unduly
prejudice the normal operation of the company
3. First and Regular shift workers who fail to
report to work shall be dismissed violation of
CBA
4. COURT: Primacy of human rights is over
property rights is recognized
5. COURT: Rights of (1) free expression and (2)
assembly occupy a PREFERRED POSITION
The Fundamental Powers of the State

POLICE POWER
Balacuit v. CFI, G.R. No. L-38429 (Cinematograph)
1. Municipal Board of the City of Butuan passed
Ordinance no. 640 - regulation of price of
admission tickets for children between 7 and
12 years old
2. Maya and Dalisay Theaters, Crown Theater
and Diamond Theater
3. Municipal Board: General Welfare Clause
4. Theaters: Invalid Exercise of Police Power
oppressive, unfair, unjust, confiscatory, undue
restraint of trade and violative of the rights of
persons to enter into contracts
5. COURT: exercise of police power must be (1)
reasonable and (2) provisions must not be
oppressive amounting to arbitrary
interference with the business or calling
subject of regulation
6. COURT: cinematographs and other exhibitions
cannot be considered public utilities
7. COURT: Ordinance 640 is invalid and
unconstitutional
Lozano vs. Martinez (BP 22)
1. Assailment of the constitutionality of of BP 22
(Bouncing Checks Law)
2. Grounds for assailment: (1) imprisonment for
debt; (2) impairs freedom of contract; (3)
contravenes the equal protection clause; (4)
unduly delegates legislative and executive
powers; and (5) Interim Batasan violated the
constitutional provision prohibiting
amendments to a bill on Third Reading.
3. COURT: Putting of worthless checks in
circulation is an offense against public order
4. POLICE POWER - most essential, insistent and
illimitable of powers" which enables it to
prohibit all things hurtful to the comfort,
safety and welfare of society
5. POLICE POWER - power not emanating from
or conferred by the constitution; inherent in
the state; rooted in the conception that man
in organizing the state and imposing upon the
government limitations to safeguard
constitutional rights did not intend thereby to
enable individual citizens or group of citizens
to obstruct unreasonably the enactment of
such salutary measures to ensure communal
peace, safety, good order and welfare."
6. COURT: Issuance of worthless check is
deemed as public nuisance
Del Rosario vs. Bengzon (Del Rosario in Doctor
Costume Bangs Son Generics Act. Wow Im a perv)
1. Generics Act of 1988 use of generic
terminology or generic names in prescription
of medicines
2. Philippine Medical Association assails
constitutionality of GA 1988: (1) unequal
treatment of government and private
practitioners (2) prescribing of correct
medicine now becomes the act of the sales
girl not the doctor (3) impairment of
obligation of contract between doctor and
patient
3. COURT: (1) refers to private and public (2)
salesgirl merely informs (3) no contract exists
between patient and doctor no one has
been sued for not taking doctors prescription
4. COURT: Police power used to benefit the
impoverished
Tablarin vs. Judge Gutierrez (Gutierrez Doctor -
NMAT)
1. Medical Act of 1959 requiring the taking and
passing of the National Medical Admission
Test (NMAT)
2. Assailment of Medical Act of1959: (1) unfair,
unreasonable and inequitable requirement
denial of due process (2) infringement of
equal protection clause
3. COURT: (1) valid exercise of POLICE POWER
pervasive and non-waivable power of the
State to promote public order; public health is
a component of public order
4. COURT: (2) Circumstantial avoidance of
undue rigidity

Zoning and Regulatory Ordinances
RA 7160, Sec. 16.General Welfare -- Every local
government unit shall exercise the powers expressly
granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well
as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its
efficient and effective governance, and those which
are essential to the promotion of the general welfare.
Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local
government units shall ensure and support, among
other things, the preservation and enrichment of
culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right
of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and
support the development of appropriate and self-
reliant scientific and technological capabilities,
improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity
and social justice, promote full employment among
their residents, maintain peace and order, and
preserve the comfort and convenience of their
inhabitants.

ErmitaMalate Hotel & Motel Ops. v. City Mayor
(Motels Valid Regulation)
1. Ordinance No. 4760 of the City of Manila:
a. 6K/annum fee - first class motels;
4.5k/annum fee 2
nd
class motels
b. Prescribed form publicly seen at the
lobby
c. Open for inspection by Mayor, COP
2. Ermita-Malate Hotel & Motel Operators
Association Inc, Hotel Del Mar, Inc. assails:
Arbitrary, unreasonable and oppressive
3. COURT: POLICE POWER - that inherent and
plenary power in the State which enables it
to prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort,
safety, and welfare of society
4. COURT: POLICE POWER - power to prescribe
regulations to promote the health, morals,
peace, good order, safety and general welfare
of the people: SUBSTANTIAL and
PROCEDURAL
5. COURT: Ordinance is valid in light of the
curtailment of the immorality brought about
by motel establishments
Cruz vs. Paras (Donna Cruz vs Benjie Paras dancing in
a Nightclub - Prohibition)
1. Ordinance No 84 of Bocaue, Bulacan
Prohibition of nightclubs
2. Assailed: (1) Municipal board has no authority
to regulate profession (2) due process and
equal protection and (3) tourist oriented
business licensing was transferred to DOT
3. COURT: Police power of municipal
corporations -- ordinance is valid in light of the
curtailment of the immorality brought about
by motel establishments 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 with the laws or policy of the
State
4. COURT: Regulation is different from
prohibition ordinance is null and void
Velasco vs. Villegas (Barber Shops Massage)
1. Ordinance No 4964 of City of Manila
Prohibition massaging of customers of barber
shops in adjacent rooms
2. Assailed: Deprivation of property of their
means of livelihood without due process of
law
3. COURT: Valid exercise of police power
licensing fee for massage clinics (oo nga
namannn!) (Also a relatively short case)
Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties (SUGAL has a Pryce!
Pricey case to Remember test or validity of
ordinance)
1. Cagayan de Oro Ordinance 3353 and 3375-93
prohibition issuance of business permit for
the operation of a casino and prohibition of
the operation of a Casino
2. Assailed by Pryce (leasing property to
PAGCOR) for its casino: (1) no power and
authority (2) discriminatory (3) not
reasonable, consonant with the general
powers and purposes of the instrumentality
concerned
3. Ordinance does not and cannot repeal statute.
Local Government Code did not repeal statute
divesting powers to PAGCOR
4. COURT: Ordinances are invalid. Test of validity
of ordinances: (CODRtPupoUn)(or
UnPupoRtCOD)
a. It must not contravene the constitution or
any statute.
b. It must not be unfair or oppressive.
c. It must not be partial or discriminatory.
d. It must not prohibit but may regulate
trade.
e. It must be general and consistent with
public policy.
f. It must not be unreasonable.
Tano v. Socrates, G.R. 110249 (Palawan Fishies! Tano
smells like fish)
1. Puerto Princesa City Council Ordinance No 15-
92 Prohibition of shipment of all live fish and
lobster outside Puerto Princesa City
2. Office Order No 23 Permit In business and
trade
3. Ordnance No. 2 Prohibition of catching etc.
of coral dwelling aquatic animals
4. Assailed: (1) Due process of law livelihood
(2) Mayor had absolute authority to grant
permit (3) Undue prevention from pursuing
their vocation and enter into contracts
5. COURT: Ordinances and Orders are VALID
6. COURT: LGC Provision on GENERAL WELFARE
(Sec. 16) applies to a balanced and healthful
ecology
City of Manila v. Judge Laguio, G. R. No. 118127
(Motels! Invalid Prohibition)
1. Manila City Ordinance No. 7783 Prohibition
of the establishment of sauna parlors,
massage parlors, motels, etc. in the Ermita-
Malate area; also providing for a period of
time for the conversion of aforementioned
establishments into one prescribed by said
ordinances
2. Assailed: (1) due process, not valid exercise of
police power no reasonable relation to the
legitimate municipal interests sought to be
protected (2) equal protection why is
Ermita-Malate area different?
3. COURT: INVALID, reiteration of test of
validity of ordinances in relation to Sec.16 of
Local Government Code General Welfare
Clause

Administrative Rules and Regulations
Bautista vs. Junio, 127 SCRA 329 (1984) (Batista =
Heavy)
1. Letter of Instruction 869 Prohibition of
private motor vehicles with H and EH plates
on weekends and holidays at a particular
period; purpose is energy conservation
2. Assailed: (1) discriminatory and arbitrary
classification (2) denial of due process (3)
undue delegation of legislative powers
3. COURT: POLICE POWER inherent and
plenary power in the State which enables it to
prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort,
safety and welfare of society
Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila vs. BOT (Taxi!
Duh?!)
1. Bureau of Transportation MC 77-42 and
Bureau of Land Transportation MC 52
Prohibiting the use of cars beyond 6 years to
be operated as taxis
2. Assailed: (1) Procedural due process (2) Equal
Protection only in Metro Manila and only
taxi industry (3) Substantive due process (4)
Protection against arbitrary and unreasonable
classification and standard
3. COURT: POLICE POWER inherent and
plenary power in the State which enables it to
prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort,
safety and welfare of society
Mirasol v. DPWH (Ate Sol on a Motorcycles)
1. DPWH AO 1 prohibiting the motorcycles in
using tollways
2. COURT: AO 1 is (1) reasonable and (2) non-
oppressive
3. COURT: What is reasonable is circumstantial
4. COURT: The mode by which petitioners wish
to travel pertains to the manner of using the
toll way, a subject that can be validly limited
by regulation.
Anglo-Fil Trading vs. Lazaro (Jessie on a port)
1. Philippine Ports Authority awarded exclusive
contract for stevedoring services to engage in
cargo-handling services in the Manila South
Harbor to Ocean Terminal Services
2. COURT: Stevedoring services are subject to
regulation and control for the public good and
in the interest of the general welfare
contract clause cannot override police power
of the state
PPA v. Cipres Stevedoring
1. Bid out cargo holding services in the ports
around the country
2. COURT: Police power overrides non-
impairment of contract clause
Chavez v. Romulo (Kyt)
1. PGMA and Ebdane gun ban - PTCFOR
2. COURT: VALID. Reasonable and non-
oppressive