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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    PACU v. Secretary of Education

    Uploaded by

    Fidela Maglaya
    This case involved a petition by the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU) challenging the constitutionality of two statutes relating to the supervision of private schools and colleges by the Secretary of Education. The Supreme Court denied the petition for failing to present an actual case or controversy, as the petitioners' schools were still operating with permits and they did not assert any threat of permit revocation. The Court also found there was no unlawful delegation of legislative power, as the Secretary of Education's supervision through setting standards was constitutionally valid and the petitioners failed to show how any specific standards interfered with their operations.

    Copyright:

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

    PACU v. Secretary of Education

    Uploaded by

    Fidela Maglaya
    1K views3 pages
    This case involved a petition by the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU) challenging the constitutionality of two statutes relating to the supervision of private schools and colleges by the Secretary of Education. The Supreme Court denied the petition for failing to present an actual case or controversy, as the petitioners' schools were still operating with permits and they did not assert any threat of permit revocation. The Court also found there was no unlawful delegation of legislative power, as the Secretary of Education's supervision through setting standards was constitutionally valid and the petitioners failed to show how any specific standards interfered with their operations.

    Original Description:

    NA

    Original Title

    6. PACU v. Secretary of Education

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved a petition by the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU) challenging the constitutionality of two statutes relating to the supervision of private schools and colleges by the Secretary of Education. The Supreme Court denied the petition for failing to present an actual case or controversy, as the petitioners' schools were still operating with permits and they did not assert any threat of permit revocation. The Court also found there was no unlawful delegation of legislative power, as the Secretary of Education's supervision through setting standards was constitutionally valid and the petitioners failed to show how any specific standards interfered with their operations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    1K views3 pages

    PACU v. Secretary of Education

    Uploaded by

    Fidela Maglaya
    This case involved a petition by the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU) challenging the constitutionality of two statutes relating to the supervision of private schools and colleges by the Secretary of Education. The Supreme Court denied the petition for failing to present an actual case or controversy, as the petitioners' schools were still operating with permits and they did not assert any threat of permit revocation. The Court also found there was no unlawful delegation of legislative power, as the Secretary of Education's supervision through setting standards was constitutionally valid and the petitioners failed to show how any specific standards interfered with their operations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    CONSTI 1 Case Digest Prepared by: Poch Querijero

    PACU v. Secretary of Education, 97 Phil. 806 (1955)


    TOPIC: Requisites of Judicial Review: Actual Case or Controversy

    Court First Division

    Citation G.R. No. L-5279

    Date October 31, 1955

    Petitioners Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities, etc.

    Respondent Secretary of Education and the Board of Textbooks

    Ponente Bengzon

    Case Doctrine Related to Topic

    Act No. 2706


    - The inspection and recognition of private schools and colleges obligatory for the Secretary of Public
    Instruction.

    Art. XIV, sec. 5. of the 1935 Constitution


    - All educational institutions shall be under the supervision and subject to regulation by the State.

    Case Summary

    The petitioner, Philippine Associate of Colleges and Universities (PACU), assails the constitutionality of Act
    No. 2706 and Commonwealth Act No. 180, given the following reasons.
    1. They deprive owners of schools and colleges as well as teachers and parents of liberty and
    property without due process of law
    2. They deprive parents of their natural right and duty to rear their children for civic efficiency
    3. Their provisions conferring on the Secretary of Education unlimited power and discretion to
    prescribe rules and standards constitute an unlawful delegation of legislative power

    The Court denies the petition for failure of proving that there is justiciable controversy regarding the said
    statutes. In addition, based on Art. XIV, sec. 5. of the Constitution, it implies the power of the said Secretary
    to require a permit or license.

    FACTS

    Context
    - In March 1924, the Philippine Legislature approved Act No. 3162 creating a Board of Educational
    Survey to make a study and survey regarding the education in the Philippines,
    - Through the said survey, an examination of the local educational system was conducted, and thus
    submitting a report with recommendations.
    - One of which was for the legislation be enacted to prohibit the opening of any school without the
    permission of the Secretary of Public Instruction.
    - In the exercise of its power to correct a great evil, the said requirement was then introduced by
    Commonwealth Act No. 180 and approved in 1936.

    1
    CONSTI 1 Case Digest Prepared by: Poch Querijero
    PACU v. Secretary of Education, 97 Phil. 806 (1955)
    TOPIC: Requisites of Judicial Review: Actual Case or Controversy
    Actual Case
    - Petitioners request that Act No. 2706 as amended by Act No. 3075 and Commonwealth Act No. 180 be
    declared unconstitutional.
    - The Government's legal representative submitted a mimeographed memorandum contending mainly
    that the matter constitutes no justiciable controversy and the Acts in question are constitutionally valid.
    - Regarding the said memorandum, the petitioners then submitted a reply to the aforementioned
    memorandum.

    ISSUE # 1 [MAIN TOPIC] HELD

    WON the petition itself constitutes judiciable controversy (in regard to Act. No 2706) No.

    RATIO

    - The power of courts to declare a law unconstitutional arises only when the interests of litigants
    require the use of that judicial authority for their protection against actual interference,
    - However, all of them still had permits and are fully operating at the time of the petition.
    - They did not assert that they were threatened by the SoE regarding the revocation of their permits.
    - Court was also “doubly” reluctant to the petitioner’s request based on how the Department of
    Education has supervised the parties involved with no audible protest nor “general acquiescence” for
    the past 37 years.

    ISSUE # 2 HELD

    WON the statutes in question grant an unlawful delegation of legislative power to the No.
    the Secretary of Education?

    RATIO

    - Petitioners argue that Section 1 of Act 2706 is “extremely vague” and fails to establish what
    constitutes a “general standard of efficiency.” Thus, leaving its interpretation to the Secretary of
    Education or his department.
    - The attack is also extended to section 6 which allegedly leaves everything to the uncontrolled
    discretion of the Secretary of Education or his department.
    - In response, the court stated that the system of private education has been satisfactorily in operation
    for 37 years.
    - In response, however, such fixed standards are present through memoranda fixing or revising
    curricula, the school calendars, entrance and final examinations, admission and accreditation of
    students, etc.
    - It was also reiterated the system of private education has been satisfactorily in operation for 37 years.
    - The petitioners also failed to show how such standards interfered with their respective operations,
    giving them no reason to assail its validity.
    - The petitioners presented a list of circulars and memoranda issued by the said Department which
    allegedly transcended his power to delegate/supervise. However, they failed to indicate which of such
    official documents was constitutionally objectionable.
    - With that said, there has been no undue delegation of legislative power.

    2
    CONSTI 1 Case Digest Prepared by: Poch Querijero
    PACU v. Secretary of Education, 97 Phil. 806 (1955)
    TOPIC: Requisites of Judicial Review: Actual Case or Controversy
    RULING:

    For all the foregoing considerations, reserving to the petitioners the right to institute in the proper court, and
    at the proper time, such actions as may call for decision of the issues herein presented by them, this
    petition for prohibition will be denied. So ordered.

    You might also like