2010 CASES

POLICE POWER
SURIGAO DEL NORTE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. (SURNECO)
vs. ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION , G.R. No. 183626, October 4, 2010

It has long been settled that police power legislation, adopted by the State to
promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order, safety, and general
welfare of the people prevail not only over future contracts but even over those
already in existence, for all private contracts must yield to the superior and legitimate
measures taken by the State to promote public welfare.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/oct2010/gr_183626_2010.html
EMINENT DOMAIN
LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.ENRIQUE LIVIOCO, G.R. No.
170685 ,September 22, 2010
For purposes of just compensation, the fair market value of an expropriated
property is determined by its character and its price at the time of taking.68 There
are three important concepts in this definition – the character of the property, its
price, and the time of actual taking.
The potential use of a property should not be the principal criterion for
determining just compensation for this will be contrary to the well-settled doctrine
that the fair market value of an expropriated property is determined by its character
and its price at the time of taking, not its potential uses. If at all, the potential use of
the property or its "adaptability for conversion in the future is a factor, not the ultimate
in determining just compensation

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/sep2010/gr_170685_2010.html

TAXATION

PETRON CORPORATION vs.COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

G.R. No. 180385, July 28, 2010

The inescapable conclusion is that the TCCs are not subject to post-audit as a
suspensive condition and are thus valid and effective from their issuance. As such, in
the present case, if the TCCs have already been applied as partial payment for the
tax liability of PSPC, a post-audit of the TCCs cannot simply annul them and the tax
payment made through said TCCs. Payment has already been made and is as valid
and effective as the issued TCCs. The subsequent post-audit cannot void the TCCs
and allow the respondent to declare that utilizing canceled TCCs results in
nonpayment on the part of PSPC x x x."
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jul2010/gr_180385_2010.html
2011 CASES

POLICE POWER
TAWANG MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE vs.LA TRINIDAD WATER
DISTRICT, G.R. No. 166471, March 22, 2011
Police power does not include the power to violate the Constitution. Police
power is the plenary power vested in Congress to make laws not repugnant to the
Constitution. 
To say that a legal provision is unconstitutional simply because it enables a
grantee, a government instrumentality, to determine the soundness of granting a
subsequent franchise in its area is contrary to the government’s inherent right to
exercise police power in regulating public utilities for the protection of the public and
the utilities themselves.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/mar2011/gr_166471_2011.html
EMINENT DOMAIN
SPOUSES ANTONIO and FE YUSAY vs.
COURT OF APPEALS, CITY MAYOR and CITY COUNCIL OF MANDALUYONG
CITY, G.R. No. 156684,April 6, 2011
The power of eminent domain necessarily involves a derogation of a
fundamental or private right of the people. Accordingly, the manifest change in the
legislative language – from "resolution" under BP 337 to "ordinance" under RA 7160
– demands a strict construction. "No species of property is held by individuals with
greater tenacity, and is guarded by the Constitution and laws more sedulously, than
the right to the freehold of inhabitants. When the legislature interferes with that right
and, for greater public purposes, appropriates the land of an individual without his
consent, the plain meaning of the law should not be enlarged by doubtful
interpretation."

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/apr2011/gr_156684_2011.html

TAXATION
ENRIQUE U. BETOY, ,vs.THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NATIONAL POWER
CORPORATION, G.R. Nos. 156556-57, October 4, 2011
The Court ruled that the Universal Charge is not a tax but an exaction in the
exercise of the State's police power. The Universal Charge is imposed to ensure the
viability of the country's electric power industry. It is basic that the determination of
whether or not a tax is excessive oppressive or confiscatory is an issue which
essentially involves a question of fact and, thus, this Court is precluded from
reviewing the same.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/oct2011/gr_156556_2011.html
2012 CASES
POLICE POWER
Angeles University Foundation v. City of Angeles, G.R. No. 189999, June 27,
2012
" A fee is generally imposed to cover the cost of regulation as activity or
privilege and is essentially derived from the exercise of police power; on the other
hand, impositions for services rendered by the local government units or for
conveniences furnished, are referred to as "service charges".
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/jun2012/gr_187604_2012.html
EMINENT DOMAIN
CITY OF MANILA,vs.ALEGAR CORPORATION, TEROCEL REALTY
CORPORATION, and FILOMENA VDA. DE LEGARDA, G.R. No. 187604, June 25,
2012
The advance payment, a prerequisite for the issuance of a writ of possession,
should not be confused with payment of just compensation for the taking of property
even if it could be a factor in eventually determining just compensation.16 If the
proceedings fail, the money could be used to indemnify the owner for damages. The
owners’ withdrawal of the deposit that the City made does not amount to a waiver of
the defenses they raised against the expropriation. With the dismissal of the
complaint, the amount or a portion of it could be awarded to the owners as indemnity
to cover the expenses they incurred in defending their right.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/feb2020/gr_214310_2020.html
TAXATION
ANGELES UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION vs. CITY OF ANGELES, JULIET G.
QUINSAAT, et.al. G.R. No. 189999, June 27, 2012
Under the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions and Rep. Act No. 7160 in order to be
entitled to the exemption, the petitioner is burdened to prove, by clear and
unequivocal proof, that (a) it is a charitable institution; and (b) its real properties
are ACTUALLY, DIRECTLY and EXCLUSIVELY used for charitable purposes.
"Exclusive" is defined as possessed and enjoyed to the exclusion of others; debarred
from participation or enjoyment; and "exclusively" is defined, "in a manner to
exclude; as enjoying a privilege exclusively." If real property is used for one or more
commercial purposes, it is not exclusively used for the exempted purposes but is
subject to taxation.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/jun2012/gr_189999_2012.html
2013 CASES
POLICE POWER
MANILA MEMORIAL PARK, INC. AND LA FUNERARIA PAZ-SUCAT, INC., vs.
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND
DEVELOPMENT and THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE, G.R. No. 1753, 6December 3, 2013
It is within the bounds of the police power of the state to impose burden on
private entities, even if it may affect their profits, such as in the imposition of price
control measures. There is no compensable taking but only a recognition of the fact
that they are subject to the regulation of the State and that all personal or private
interests must bow down to the more paramount interest of the State.
This notwithstanding, the regulatory power of the State does not authorize the
destruction of the business. While a business may be regulated, such regulation
must be within the bounds of reason, i.e., the regulatory ordinance must be
reasonable, and its provision cannot be oppressive amounting to an arbitrary
interference with the business or calling subject of regulation

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/dec2013/gr_175356_2013.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
HON. MA. LOURDES C. FERNANDO, et.l vs.ST. SCHOLASTICA'S COLLEGE
and ST. SCHOLASTICA'S ACADEMY-MARIKINA, INC.,G.R. No. 161107, March
12, 2013
It is a settled rule that neither the acquisition of title nor the total destruction of
value is essential to taking. In fact, it is usually in cases where the title remains with
the private owner that inquiry should be made to determine whether the impairment
of a property is merely regulated or amounts to a compensable taking. The Court is
of the view that the implementation of the setback requirement would be tantamount
to a taking of a total of 3,762.36 square meters of the respondents’ private property
for public use without just compensation, in contravention to the Constitution.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/mar2013/gr_161107_2013.html

TAXATION

H. TAMBUNTING PAWNSHOP, INC.

vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, G.R. No. 173373, July 29, 2013

To be entitled to claim a tax deduction, the taxpayer must competently

establish the factual and documentary bases of its claim.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/jul2013/gr_173373_2013.html
2014 CASES

POLICE POWER
JAMES M. IMBONG, et.al vs. HON. PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., G.R. No. 204819,
April 8, 2014
Anent the requirement imposed under Section 15 as a condition for the
issuance of a marriage license, the Court finds the same to be a reasonable exercise
of police power by the government. A cursory reading of the assailed provision bares
that the religious freedom of the petitioners is not at all violated. As correctly noted
by the OSG, those who receive any information during their attendance in the
required seminars are not compelled to accept the information given to them, are
completely free to reject the information they find unacceptable and retain the
freedom to decide on matters of family life without the intervention of the State.

Source: https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/apr2014/gr_204819_2014.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. BENECIO EUSEBIO, JR.,  G.R. No.
160143, July 2, 2014
The determination of just compensation is essentially a judicial function that
the Courts exercise within the parameters of the law. Jurisprudence settles that the
determination of just compensation is fundamentally a function of the courts. Section
57 of R.A. No. 665732 explicitly vests in the RTC-SAC the original and exclusive
jurisdiction to determine just compensation for lands taken pursuant to the State’s
agrarian reform program.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jul2014/gr_160143_2014.html

TAXATION

NURSERY CARE CORPORATION; SHOEMART, INC.; STAR APPLIANCE

CENTER, INC.; H&B, INC.; SUPPLIES STATION, INC.; AND HARDWARE
WORKSHOP, INC., PETITIONERS, VS. ANTHONY ACEVEDO, IN HIS CAPACITY
AS THE TREASURER OF MANILA; AND THE CITY OF MANILA,
RESPONDENTS. G.R. No. 180651, July 30, 2014
Double taxation means taxing the same property twice when it should be
taxed only once; that is, “taxing the same person twice by the same jurisdiction for
the same thing.” It is obnoxious when the taxpayer is taxed twice, when it should be
but once. Otherwise described as “direct duplicate taxation,” the two taxes must be
imposed on the same subject matter, for the same purpose, by the same taxing
authority, within the same jurisdiction, during the same taxing period; and the taxes
must be of the same kind or character.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/jul2013/gr_181277_2013.html
2015 CASES

POLICE POWER
Jose J. Ferrer, Jr v. Quezon City Mayor, et al., G.R. No. 210551, June 30, 2015
The police power granted to local government units must always be exercised
with utmost observance of the rights of the people to due process and equal
protection of the law. Such power cannot be exercised whimsically, arbitrarily or
despotically as its exercise is subject to a qualification, limitation or restriction
demanded by the respect and regard due to the prescription of the fundamental law,
particularly those forming part of the Bill of Rights.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jun2015/gr_210551_2015.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by the NATIONAL POWER
CORPORATION vs.HEIRS OF SATURNINO Q. BORBON, AND COURT OF
APPEALS, G.R. No. 165354, January 12, 2015
Before anything more, we remind the parties about the nature of the power of
eminent domain. The right of eminent domain is "the ultimate right of the sovereign
power to appropriate, not only the public but the private property of all citizens within
the territorial sovereignty, to public purpose." But the exercise of such right is not
unlimited, for two mandatory requirements should underlie the Government’s
exercise of the power of eminent domain, namely: (1) that it is for a particular public
purpose; and (2) that just compensation be paid to the property owner. These
requirements partake the nature of implied conditions that should be complied with to
enable the condemnor to keep the property expropriated

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jan2015/gr_165354_2015.html

TAXATION

[ G.R. No. 165451, December 03, 2015 ]

LG ELECTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC., PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.
There are three reasons for the utilization of the withholding tax system: “first,
to provide the taxpayer a convenient manner to meet his probable income tax
liability; second, to ensure the collection of income tax which can otherwise be lost or
substantially reduced through failure to file the corresponding returns[;] and third, to
improve the government’s cash flow.
Source: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/59152
2016 CASES
POLICE POWER
NATIVIDAD C. CRUZ, et. al v. PANDACAN HIKER'S CLUB, INC. G.R. No.
188213, January 11, 2016
The general welfare clause provides for the exercise of police power for the
attainment or maintenance of the general welfare of the community. The power,
however, is exercised by the government through its legislative branch by the
enactment of laws regulating those and other constitutional and civil
rights.43 Jurisprudence defines police power as the plenary power vested in the
legislature to make statutes and ordinances to promote the health, morals, peace,
education, good order or safety and general welfare of the people.

Source: https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016januarydecisions

EMINENT DOMAIN
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY MACTAN-CEBU
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (MCIAA),v. LIMBONHAI AND SONS,
G.R. No. 217956, November 16, 2016
The exercise of the right of eminent domain, whether directly by the State or
by its authorized agents, is necessarily in derogation of private rights. It is one of the
harshest proceedings known to the law. Consequently, when the sovereign
delegates the power to a political unit or agency, a strict construction will be given
against the agency asserting the power. The authority to condemn is to be strictly
construed in favor of the owner and against the condemnor. When the power is
granted, the extent to which it may be exercised is limited to the express terms or
clear implication of the statute in which the grant is contained

Source: https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016novemberdecisions.php?id=914

TAXATION
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE VS. PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM
CORPORATION,G.R. No. 180402, February 10, 2016
With the prospect of declining sales of aviation jet fuel sales to international
carriers on account of major domestic oil companies' unwillingness to shoulder the
burden of excise tax, or of petroleum products being sold to said carriers by local
manufacturers or sellers at still high prices, the practice of "Hankering" would not be
discouraged. This scenario does not augur well for the Philippines-growing economy
and the booming tourism industry. Worse, our Government would be risking
retaliatory action under several bilateral agreements with various
countries. Evidently, construction of the tax exemption provision in question
should give primary consideration to its broad implications on our
commitment under international agreements.
Source: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/61667
2017 CASES

POLICE POWER
SOUTHERN LUZON DRUG CORPORATION vs.THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
WELFARE G.R. No. 199669 April 25, 2017

It is in the exercise of its police power that the Congress enacted R.A. Nos.
9257 and 9442, the laws mandating a 20% discount on purchases of medicines
made by senior citizens and PWDs. It is also in further exercise of this power that the
legislature opted that the said discount be claimed as tax deduction, rather than tax
credit, by covered establishments.
Unlike in the exercise of the power of eminent domain, just compensation is
not required in wielding police power. This is precisely because there is no taking
involved, but only an imposition of burden.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr_199669_2017.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
EVERGREEN MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. DPWH
G.R. No. 218628, September 06, 2017
Ideally, just compensation should be immediately made available to the
property owner so that he may derive income from this compensation, in the same
manner that he would have derived income from his expropriated property. However,
if full compensation is not paid for the property taken, then the State must pay for the
shortfall in the earning potential immediately lost due to the taking, and the absence
of replacement property from which income can be derived. Interest on the unpaid
compensation becomes due as compliance with the constitutional mandate on
eminent domain and as a basic measure of fairness.

Source: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63254

TAXATION
MEDICARD PHILIPPINES, INC.,vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
G.R. No. 222743, April 5, 2017
A tax cannot be imposed without clear and express words for that purpose.
Accordingly, the general rule of requiring adherence to the letter in construing
statutes applies with peculiar strictness to tax laws and the provisions of a taxing act
are not to be extended by implication. In answering the question of who is subject to
tax statutes, it is basic that in case of doubt, such statutes are to be construed most
strongly against the government and in favor of the subjects or citizens because
burdens are not to be imposed nor presumed to be imposed beyond what statutes
expressly and clearly import. As burdens, taxes should not be unduly exacted nor
assumed beyond the plain meaning of the tax laws

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/apr2017/gr_222743_2017.html
2018 CASES

POLICE POWER
LAGMAN, ET. AL VS. PIMENTEL III, G.R. No. 235935, February 06, 2018
This Court, however, has held that it is the legislature, not the executive,
which is the constitutional repository of police power, the existence of a national
emergency, such as a rebellion or invasion, notwithstanding. Accordingly, the power
to temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately-owned public utility or
business affected with public interest can only be done whenever there is a law
passed by Congress authorizing the same. Indeed, the military must still be guided
by law and jurisprudence and motivated by good faith in the exercise of the supreme
force of the State even during a Martial law. Thus, in its endeavor to restore peace
and preserve the state, the military must still make proper adjustments to the
safeguards of constitutional liberty.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/feb2018/gr_235935_2018.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
DPWH vs. ALFORTE, G.R. No. 217051 August 22, 2018
Settled is the rule that no person may be deprived of his property without due
process of law. The power of eminent domain therefore, whether exercised by the
State itself or by agencies to which it has delegated such power, can be exercised
only in accordance with the law of the land. There must be appropriate expropriation
proceedings and payment of indemnity. A statute authorizing a corporation to
exercise the power of eminent domain, being a derogation of general right and
conferring upon it exceptional privileges with regard to the property of others, should
be construed strictly in favor of landowners whose property is affected by its terms.
Hence, before any right to take possession of land under such statute can be fully
exercised by the corporation, the provisions of the statute must be fully and fairly
complied with.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/aug2018/gr_217051_2018.html

TAXATION

PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. (PAL), V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL

REVENUE, RESPONDENT. G.R. Nos. 206079-80, January 17, 2018
While tax exemptions are strictly construed against the taxpayer, the
government should not misuse technicalities to keep money it is not entitled to.
Substantial justice, equity and fair play are of great consideration. Technicalities and
legalisms, however exalted, should not be misused by the government to keep
money not belonging to it, thereby enriching itself at the expense of its law-abiding
citizens. 
Source: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63806
2019 CASES

POLICE POWER
ZABAL, et. Al vs. Department of Interior and Local Government , G.R. No.
238467, February 12, 2019
Expansive and extensive as its reach may be, police power is not a force
without limits. "It has to be exercised within bounds - lawful ends through lawful
means, i.e., that the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from that of a
particular class, require its exercise, and that the means employed are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose while not being unduly oppressive
upon individuals.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/feb2019/gr_238467_2019.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
CITY OF MANILA vs. PRIETO, et. al, G.R. No. 221366 July 8, 2019
In resolving expropriation cases, the Court has always been reminded that the
exercise of the power of eminent domain necessarily involves a derogation of
fundamental right. The exercise of the power of eminent domain drastically affects a
landowner's right to private property, which is as much a constitutionally-protected
right necessary for the preservation and enhancement of personal dignity and
intimately connected with the rights to life and liberty. Therefore, the exercise of such
power must undergo painstaking scrutiny.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/jul2019/gr_221366_2019.html

TAXATION

NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, vs.

THE PROVINCE OF PANGASINAN and THE PROVINCIAL ASSESSOR OF
PANGASINAN, G.R. No. 210191 March 04, 2019
The power to tax is the most potent instrument to raise the needed revenues
to finance and support myriad activities of local government units for the delivery of
basic services essential to the promotion of the general welfare and the
enhancement of peace, progress, and prosperity of the people. Thus, the right of
local government units to collect taxes due must always be upheld to avoid severe
tax erosion. This consideration is consistent with the State policy to guarantee the
autonomy of local governments and the objective of the Local Government Code that
they enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy to empower them to achieve their
fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them effective partners in
the attainment of national goals.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/mar2019/gr_210191_2019.html
2020 CASES

POLICE POWER
DELFIN R. PILAPIL, JR., VS. LYDIA Y. CU, G.R. No. 228608, August 27, 2020
Mining operations in the country are principally regulated by the Mining Act
and its RIRR. As part and parcel of their regulatory thrust, the said act and executive
rule did allow the government-through particular agencies or officials, for specific
purposes and subject to definite limitations or conditions-to enter and conduct
inspections in mining sites and areas. These administrative inspections, duly
authorized and reasonably limited by statute and regulation, are examples of
inspections sanctioned by the State in the exercise of its police power that, as
aforementioned, may be considered as among the instances of valid warrantless
searches.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/aug2020/gr_228608_2020.html

EMINENT DOMAIN
DPWH VS. Posadas, et. al, G.R. No. 214310, February 24, 2020
There are instances, however, where the expropriating agency takes over the
property prior to the expropriation suit, as in this case although, to repeat, the case at
bar is quite extraordinary in that possession was taken by the expropriator more than
40 years prior to suit. In these instances, this Court has ruled that the just
compensation shall be determined as of the time of taking, not as of the time of filing
of the action of eminent domain.
Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/feb2020/gr_214310_2020.html

TAXATION

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF CAVITE AND PROVINCIAL TREASURER OF

CAVITE, PETITIONERS, VS. CQM MANAGEMENT, INC., G.R. No. 248033, July
15, 2020
The liability for taxes generally rests on the owner of the real property at the
time the tax accrues as a necessary repercussion of exclusive dominion. However,
personal liability for real property taxes may also expressly rest on the entity with the
beneficial use of the real property. In either case, the unpaid tax attaches to the
property and is chargeable against the taxable person who had actual or beneficial
use and possession of it regardless of whether or not he is the owner.

Source: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/jul2020/gr_248033_2020.html