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

PASE Vs Torres

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

PASE vs Torres 4) No, there is no need for legislative delegation of power to

the President to revoke the LOI by way of an EO in view of the


Facts:
finding that LOI 1190 is a mere administrative directive,
On Jan. 1982, Pres. Marcos issued LOI 1190 withholding the hence, may be repealed, altered or modified by EO 450 and
grant of new licenses to operate agencies for overseas DO 9 must be consequently upheld.
employment effective Jan. 1, 1982 except as he may
The petition is DISMISSED.
otherwise direct. On Mar. 1991, Pres. Aquino issued EO 450
lifting the ban on new applications for licenses to operate Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. vs CA
recruitment agencies subject to guidelines and regulations the
Facts:
Sec. of Labor may promulgate.
Petitioner assails the constitutionality of EO 1088 alleging that
PASEI pray that the EO 450 be declared invalid for being
it is an unwarranted repeal or modification of the PPA Charter,
contrary to LOI 1190. The case before us appears
that the fees charged by plaintiff are arbitrary and
compounded by the circumstance that the LOI in question was
confiscatory and that the only agency vested by law to
issued by former Pres. Marcos when he was clothed with
prescribe such rates, charges and fees for services rendered
legislative power, while the EO revoking the LOI was issued by
by any private organization is governed by Sec 20 of 857.
the Pres. Aquino at a time when she had already lost her law-
making power after Congress convened on July 1987. Petitioner insist on paying pilotage fees prescribed under PPA
circulars because EO 1088 sets a higher rate.
Issue: WON LOI 1190 is a statute.
Petitioner contends that EO 1088 is unconstitutional, because
WON it was made in grave emergency.
(1) its interpretation and application are left to private
WON LOI has repealed Art 25 of the Labor Code. respondent, a private person, and (2) it constitutes an undue
delegation of powers.
WON there is a need for legislative delegation of power to the
President to repeal LOI 1190. Issue:

Held: WON EO 1088 is a statute.

1) Yes. The SC held that the LOI simply imposes a presidential Held: Yes, it is.
review of the authority of the Minister of Labor and
What determines whether an act is a law or an administrative
Employment to grant licenses, hence, directed to him alone.
issuance is not its form but its nature. Here, the power to fix
This is undoubtedly an administrative action, LOI 1190 should
the rates of charges for services, including pilotage service,
properly be treated as an administrative issuance.
has always been regarded as legislative in character.
LOI are presumed to be mere admin. Issuances except when
Eo 1088 provides for adjusted pilotage service rates without
the conditions set out in Garcia-Padilla vs Enrile exist. To be
withdrawing the power of the PPA to impose, prescribe,
considered part of the law of the land, petitioners must
increase or decrease rates, charges or fees. The reason is
establish that LOI 1190 was issued in response to “a grave
because EO 1088 is not meant simply to fix new pilotage rates.
emergency or a threat or imminence thereof, or whenever the
Its legislative purpose is the “rationalization of pilotage service
interim BP or the regular National Assembly fails or is unable
charges, through the imposition of uniform and adjusted rates
to act adequately on any matter.”
for foreign and coastwise vessels in all Philippines ports.
The conspicuous absence of any of these conditions fortifies
EO 1088 is a valid statute and that the PPA is duty bound to
the opinion that LOI 1190 cannot be any more than a mere
comply with tis provisions. The PPA may increase the rates but
administrative issuance.
it may not decrease them below those mandated by EO 1088.
2) No, even if we treat as emergency the “situation which has
Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall
seriously affected the integrity and viability of the overseas
be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the
employment industry,” there is no indication that in the
Constitution.
judgment of the President it is grave.
PPA circulars are inconsistent with EO 1088 thus they are void
3) No, the LOI does not repeal or run counter to Art 25 of LC.
and ineffective.
The LOI does not actually ban the grant of licenses nor bar the
entry of new licenses since anybody could still apply for An administrative agency, like the PPA, has no discretion
license with the Minister of Labor and Employment, although whether to implement the law or not. Its duty is to enforce it.
the grant thereof is subject to the prior authority of the If there is any conflict between the PPA circular and a law,
President. In fact, the LOI did not modify the rule-making such as EO 1088, the latter prevails.
power of the Minister of Labor and Employment under the
Labor Code, it only added another tier of review. The petition is DENIED.

This additional review by the President cannot be considered


as an amendment of Art 25, for this is withing the scope of the
exercise of his constitutionally sanctioned control over the
executive departments of government.
OPLE vs TORRES and PRCI its share in the “breakages” of mid-week races and
proof of remittances to other legal beneficiaries as provided
Facts:
under the franchise laws.
Administrative Order 308 entitled “Adoption of a National
Issue: WON the petitioners cannot be held retroactively liable
Computerized Identification Reference System,” was issued to PHILRACOM for breakages prior to the effectivity of E.O.
by the President on Dec. 1996. Petitioner challenges the No. 88 and 89
constitutionality of said AO on two grounds, 1) it is a
usurpation of the power of Congress to legislate; and 2) its
impermissibility intrudes on our citizenry’s protected zone of Held:
privacy. Petitioner contends that the AO is not a mere The holding of horse races on Wednesdays is in addition to the
administrative order but a law and, hence, beyond the power existing schedule of races authorized by law. Since this new
of the President to issue. He alleges that AO 308 establishes a schedule became part of R.A. 6631 and 6632 the set of
system of identification that is all-encompassing in scope, procedures in the franchise laws applicable to the conduct of
affects the life and liberty of every Filipino citizen and foreign horse racing business must likewise be applicable to
resident, and more particularly, violates their right to privacy. Wednesday or other mid-week races. Petitioners should
therefore remit the proceeds of breakages to those
Issue: WON the AO is a not a mere administrative order but a benefactors designated by the aforesaid laws.
law, and hence, beyond the power of the President to issue.
The petitioners contend that they cannot be held retroactively
Held:
liable to respondent PHILRACOM for breakages prior to the
Yes, the AO is not a mere administrative order but a law. effectivity of E.O. Nos. 88 and 89. They assert that the real
intent behind E.O. Nos. 88 and 89 was to favor the respondent
An administrative order is an ordinance issued by the PHILRACOM anew with the benefits which formerly had
President which relates to specific aspects in the accrued in favor of Philippine Amateur Athletic Federation
administrative operation of Government. It cannot be argued (PAAF). They opine that since laws operate prospectively
that AO 308 merely implements the Administrative Code of unless the legislator intends to give them retroactive effect,
1987. Such a national computerized identification reference the accrual of these breakages should start on December 16,
system requires a delicate adjustment of various contending 1986, the date of effectivity of E.O. Nos. 88 and 89.
State policies, the primacy of national security, the extent of
privacy against dossier-gathering by the Government, and the The petitioners should have properly set aside the amount for
the defunct PAAF, until an alternative beneficiary was
choice of policies. It deals with a subject which should be
designated, which as subsequently provided for by Executive
covered by a law, not just an administrative order.
Order Nos. 88 and 89, is PHILRACOM.
The petition is GRANTED.
Nor could we be oblivious to the reality that horse racing
although authorized by law is still a form of
MANILA JOCKEY CLUB INC. vs CA gambling. Gambling is essentially antagonistic to the aims of
enhancing national productivity and self-reliance. For this
Facts: reason, legislative franchises impose limitations on horse
Manila Jockey Club and Phil. Racing Club were granted racing and betting. Petitioners contention that a gambling
franchise is a public contract protected by the Constitutional
franchises to operate race tracks for horse racing by virtue of
provision on non-impairment of contract could not be left
RA 6631-32. They were allowed to hold horse races with bets
unqualified. For as well said in Lim vs. Pacquing:
on Sat, Sun, and some official holidays, and allocation of
“breakages” to specified beneficiaries were provided. Later, x x x it should be remembered that a franchise is not in the
the Phil. Racing Comm. was created and it was given exclusive strict sense a simple contract but rather it is, more
jurisdiction over every aspect of the conduct of horse racing importantly, a mere privilege specially in matters which are
including the scheduling of races. When races were scheduled within the governments power to regulate and even prohibit
on Wed, PHILRACOM opined that the “breakages” on said day through the exercise of the police power. Thus, a gambling
belonged to the racing clubs concerned. Later, PHILRACOM franchise is always subject to the exercise of police power for
also authorized the holding of races on Thursday and on the public welfare. X x x
Tuesdays. These mid-week races are in addition to those
mentioned RA 6631-32. Likewise, petitioners allocated the That is why we need to stress anew that a statute which
“breakages” from these races for their own uses. Later, EO 88 authorizes a gambling activity or business should be strictly
and 89 were issued amending percentage allocation of RA construed, and every reasonable doubt be resolved so as to
limit rather than expand the powers and rights claimed by
6631-32. PHILRACOM asked the Office of the Pres. which
franchise holders under its authority.
agency is entitled to dispose of the proceeds of the
“breakages” derived from the Tue and Wed races, to which it
Petition is DENIED
replied that it rightfully belongs to PHILRACOM, not only those
derived from Sat, Sun, and holiday races, but also from the Tue
and Wed races in accordance with the distribution scheme
prescribed in the EOs. PHILRACOM thus demanded from MJCI

You might also like