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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 34 views

    Oposa vs. Factoran GR No. 101083 July 30, 1993: Facts

    Uploaded by

    Fatima Fatemeh
    The minor plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to cancel all existing timber licenses and cease granting new ones. They argued they have a constitutional right to a balanced ecology and the state has a duty to protect this right. The defendant claimed the plaintiffs had no cause of action and the issue was a political question. The Supreme Court ruled the minor plaintiffs could file suit on behalf of themselves, their generation, and future generations, based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility regarding the right to a balanced ecology. It held that cancelling the timber licenses would preserve the country's natural resources for both present and future generations.

    Copyright:

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

    Oposa vs. Factoran GR No. 101083 July 30, 1993: Facts

    Uploaded by

    Fatima Fatemeh
    34 views1 page
    The minor plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to cancel all existing timber licenses and cease granting new ones. They argued they have a constitutional right to a balanced ecology and the state has a duty to protect this right. The defendant claimed the plaintiffs had no cause of action and the issue was a political question. The Supreme Court ruled the minor plaintiffs could file suit on behalf of themselves, their generation, and future generations, based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility regarding the right to a balanced ecology. It held that cancelling the timber licenses would preserve the country's natural resources for both present and future generations.

    Original Title

    HR case

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The minor plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to cancel all existing timber licenses and cease granting new ones. They argued they have a constitutional right to a balanced ecology and the state has a duty to protect this right. The defendant claimed the plaintiffs had no cause of action and the issue was a political question. The Supreme Court ruled the minor plaintiffs could file suit on behalf of themselves, their generation, and future generations, based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility regarding the right to a balanced ecology. It held that cancelling the timber licenses would preserve the country's natural resources for both present and future generations.

    Copyright:

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

    Oposa vs. Factoran GR No. 101083 July 30, 1993: Facts

    Uploaded by

    Fatima Fatemeh
    The minor plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to cancel all existing timber licenses and cease granting new ones. They argued they have a constitutional right to a balanced ecology and the state has a duty to protect this right. The defendant claimed the plaintiffs had no cause of action and the issue was a political question. The Supreme Court ruled the minor plaintiffs could file suit on behalf of themselves, their generation, and future generations, based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility regarding the right to a balanced ecology. It held that cancelling the timber licenses would preserve the country's natural resources for both present and future generations.

    Copyright:

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

    Oposa vs.

    Factoran
    GR No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    FACTS:

    A taxpayer’s class suit was filed by minors Juan Antonio Oposa, and others
    representing their generation and generations yet unborn, and represented by their
    parents against Fulgencio Factoran Jr., Secretary of DENR. They prayed that judgement
    be rendered ordering the defendant, his agents, representatives and other persons
    acting in his behalf to:
    1. Cancel all existing Timber Licensing Agreements (TLA) in the country;
    2. Cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing, or
    appraising new TLAs’
    and granting the plaintiffs “such other reliefs just and equitable under the premises.”
    They alleged that they have a clear and constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
    ecology and are entitled to protection by the State in its capacity as parens patriae.
    Furthermore, they claim that the act of the defendant in allowing TLA holders to cut and
    deforest the remaining forests constitutes a misappropriation and/or impairment of the
    natural resources property he holds in trust for the benefit of the plaintiff minors and
    succeeding generations.

    The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the following grounds:
    1. Plaintiffs have no cause of action against him
    2. The issues raised by the plaintiffs is a political question which properly
    pertains to the legislative or executive branches of the government.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the minor petitioners have a cause of action in filing a class suit to “prevent the
    misappropriation or impairment of Philippine rainforests.

    HELD:

    Yes. The minor assert that they represent their generation as well as generations
    to come. The Supreme Court ruled that they can, for themselves, for others of their
    generation, and for the succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their personality to sue
    in behalf of succeeding generations is based on the concept of intergenerational
    responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is concerned. Such
    a right considers the “rhythm and harmony of nature” which indispensably include, inter
    alia, the judicious disposition, utilization, management, renewal and conversation of the
    country’s forest, mineral, land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other natural
    resources to the end that their explanation, development, and utilization be equitably
    accessible to the present as well as the future generations. Needless to say, every
    generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and harmony for the
    full enjoyment of a balance and healthful ecology. Finally, the minors’ assertion of their
    right to a sound environment constitutes at the same time, the performance of their
    obligation to ensure the protection of that right for the generations to come.

    You might also like