Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Facts: Fiscal Abundio R. Ello filed separate informations against sixteen people for
squatting which waspunishable under PD No. 772. FIve of the informations were
raffled to Judge Vicente Echavez, Jr. TheJudge dismissed the five informations before
the accused could be arraigned. One of the Judge'sgrounds for the dismissal was
that under the rule of ejusdem generis the decree does not apply to thecultivation
of a grazing land. The fiscal asked that the dismissal order be reconsidered.Issues:
Whether PD No. 772 which penalizes squatting and similar acts, applies to
agricultural lands.
Ruling/Held: No. The court ruled that PD No. 772 does not apply to pasture lands
because its preambleshows that it was intended to apply to squatting in urban
communities or more particularly to illegalconstructions in squatter areas made by
well-to-do individuals. The squatting complained of involvespasture lands in rural
areas
respondent ESSO which the latter had paid under protest. Statutes subject of
construction :a. R.A. NO. 387 (PETROLEUM ACT OF 1949) title, Art. 103, Art. 102,
Art. 104;b. R.A. NO. 1394 (SPECIAL TAX LAW), as amended by R.A. No. 2352 title
ISSUE: WON the exemption enjoyed by herein private respondent ESSO from custom
duties granted byR.A. NO. 387 (PETROLEUM ACT OF 1949) should embrace or
include the special import tax imposed by R.A. NO. 1394 (SPECIAL TAX LAW).
HELD: Yes. Petition denied
Vera v. Cuevas
Facts:
Private respondents herein, are engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribution of
filled milk products throughout the Philippines. The products of private respondent,
Consolidated Philippines Inc. are marketed and sold under the brand Darigold
whereas those of private respondent, General Milk Company (Phil.), Inc., under the
brand "Liberty;" and those of private respondent, Milk Industries Inc., under the
brand "Dutch Baby." Private respondent, Institute of Evaporated Filled Milk
Manufacturers of the Philippines, is a corporation organized for the principal purpose
of upholding and maintaining at its highest the standards of local filled milk
industry, of which all the other private respondents are members.
CIR required the respondents to withdraw from the market all of their filled milk
products which do not bear the inscription required by Section 169 of the Tax Code
within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the order. Failure to comply will result to
penalties. Section 169 talks of the inscription to be placed in skimmed milk wherein
all condensed skimmed milk and all milk in whatever form, from which the fatty part
has been removed totally or in part, sold or put on sale in the Philippines shall be
clearly and legibly marked on its immediate containers, and in all the language in
which such containers are marked, with the words, "This milk is not suitable for
nourishment for infants less than one year of age," or with other equivalent words.
The CFI Manila ordered the CIR to perpetually restrain from requiring the
respondents to print on the labels of their product the words "This milk is not
suitable for nourishment for infants less than one year of age.". Also, it ordered the
Fair Trade Board to perpetually restrain from investigating the respondents related
to the manufacture/sale of their filled milk products.
Issue:
Whether or not skimmed milk is included in the scope of Section 169 of the Tax
Code.
Held:
No, Section 169 of the Tax Code is not applicable to filled milk. The use of specific
and qualifying terms "skimmed milk" in the headnote and "condensed skimmed
milk" in the text of the cited section, would restrict the scope of the general clause
"all milk, in whatever form, from which the fatty pat has been removed totally or in
part." In other words, the general clause is restricted by the specific term "skimmed
milk" under the familiar rule of ejusdem generis that general and unlimited terms
are restrained and limited by the particular terms they follow in the statute.
The difference, therefore, between skimmed milk and filled milk is that in the
former, the fatty part has been removed while in the latter, the fatty part is likewise
removed but is substituted with refined coconut oil or corn oil or both. It cannot then
be readily or safely assumed that Section 169 applies both to skimmed milk and
filled milk. It cannot then be readily or safely assumed that Section 169 applies both
to skimmed milk and filled milk. Also, it has been found out that "the filled milk
products of the petitioners (now private respondents) are safe, nutritious,
wholesome and suitable for feeding infants of all ages" (p. 44, Rollo) and that "up to
the present, Filipino infants fed since birth with filled milk have not suffered any
defects, illness or disease attributable to their having been fed with filled milk."
Hence, applying Section 169 to it would cause a deprivation of property without due
process of law.
Facts:
Despite winning by a majority, which is what is required under the Rules and
Regulations implementing the Labor Code, to be the sole and exclusive bargaining
agent, PAFLU sought to invoke the doctrine in Allied Workers Association of the
Philippines vs. Court of Industrial Relations, wherein spoiled ballots should be
counted in determining the valid votes cast. As there were 17 spoiled ballots, PAFLU
argued that there was grave abuse of discretion by Director Noriel in certifying
NAFLU.
Issue: Whether or not the doctrine in Allied Workers Association of the Philippines
vs. Court of Industrial Relations should be applied in this case?
Ratio:
First off, only 10 of the spoiled ballots were for PAFLU, so even if they were all
counted, PAFLU would still lose with 424 votes to 429 for NAFLU.
The RTC has jurisdiction over the case. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
determined by the statute in force at the time of commencement of the action. The
Rules of Court provide that in all criminal prosecutions the action shall be
instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the offense
was committed or any of the essential ingredients thereof took place The court also
stated that jurisdiction or venue is determined by the allegations in the information.
In this particular case, the information filed against petitioner specifically alleged
that the offense was committed in Makati, and therefore, the same is controlling
and sufficient to vest jurisdiction upon the RTC of Makati. The Court acquires
jurisdiction over the case and over the person of the accused upon the filing of a
complaint or information in court which initiates a criminal action. Moreover, in the
case of Que v. People of the Philippines, the court held that the determinative factor
in determining venue is the place of the issuance of the check. On the matter of
venue for violation of BP 22, the Ministry of Justice laid down the following
guidelines the pertinent portion of which reads:
(1)
Venue of the offense lies at the place where the check was executed and delivered