Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 279 views

    DECS Vs San Diego

    Uploaded by

    AlexandRheaVillahermosa
    Roberto Rey San Diego had failed the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) four times, violating the rule allowing only three attempts. He argued this deprived him of his right to pursue medical education. The court ruled that limiting attempts to the NMAT is reasonable to ensure only competent students enter medical schools. While the right to education is important, it is not absolute and standards can be imposed to uphold quality. Equal protection requires equal treatment for equally qualified applicants. The petition was granted, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    DECS Vs San Diego

    Uploaded by

    AlexandRheaVillahermosa
    279 views1 page
    Roberto Rey San Diego had failed the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) four times, violating the rule allowing only three attempts. He argued this deprived him of his right to pursue medical education. The court ruled that limiting attempts to the NMAT is reasonable to ensure only competent students enter medical schools. While the right to education is important, it is not absolute and standards can be imposed to uphold quality. Equal protection requires equal treatment for equally qualified applicants. The petition was granted, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Original Description:

    8. DECS vs San Diego

    Original Title

    8. DECS vs San Diego

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Roberto Rey San Diego had failed the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) four times, violating the rule allowing only three attempts. He argued this deprived him of his right to pursue medical education. The court ruled that limiting attempts to the NMAT is reasonable to ensure only competent students enter medical schools. While the right to education is important, it is not absolute and standards can be imposed to uphold quality. Equal protection requires equal treatment for equally qualified applicants. The petition was granted, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    279 views1 page

    DECS Vs San Diego

    Uploaded by

    AlexandRheaVillahermosa
    Roberto Rey San Diego had failed the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) four times, violating the rule allowing only three attempts. He argued this deprived him of his right to pursue medical education. The court ruled that limiting attempts to the NMAT is reasonable to ensure only competent students enter medical schools. While the right to education is important, it is not absolute and standards can be imposed to uphold quality. Equal protection requires equal treatment for equally qualified applicants. The petition was granted, overturning the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    DECS vs SAN DIEGO

    FACTS: Roberto Rey San Diego, a graduate of the University of the East
    with a degree of B.S. Zoology, had taken and flunked 4 National Medical
    Admission Tests and was applying to take another test. NMAT Rule provides
    that a student shall be allowed only three (3) chances to take the test. After
    three successive failures, a student shall not be allowed to take the NMAT for
    the fourth time. The Regional Trial Court held that the petitioner had been
    deprived of his right to pursue a medical education through an arbitrary
    exercise of the police power.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent has been deprived of his right to
    quality education.

    RULING: NMAT is a measure intended to limit the admission to medical


    schools to those who have initially proved their competence and preparation
    for a medical education. The regulation of practice of medicine is a
    reasonable method of protecting the health and safety of the public. This
    regulation includes the power to regulate admission to the ranks of those
    authorized to practice medicine. NMAT is a means of achieving the country’s
    objective of “upgrading the selection of applicants into medical schools” and
    of “improving the quality of medical education in the country” It is the
    responsibility of the State to insure that the medical profession is not
    infiltrated by incompetents to whom patients may unwarily entrust their lives
    and health.
    The right to quality education is not absolute. The Constitution provides that
    every citizen has the right to choose a profession or course of study, subject
    to fair, reasonable, and equitable admission and academic requirement.
    The equal protection requires equality among equals. There would be
    unequal protection if some applicants who have passed the tests are
    admitted and others who have also qualified are denied entrance.
    The petition has been granted and the decision of the respondent court has
    been reversed.

    You might also like