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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 33 views

    Case Digest: Liban vs. Gordon, 593 SCRA 68 (2009) and 639 SCRA 709 (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Tynny Roo Beldua
    The Supreme Court ruled that it was incorrect to decide on the constitutionality of the PNRC statute because that issue was not central to the case. The Court found that the PNRC is a unique entity that is neither strictly a government corporation nor a private corporation. It also determined that being chairman of the PNRC does not qualify as a government office and does not violate the prohibition on Senators holding other offices. As a general rule, the Court will not pass judgement on constitutional questions unless absolutely necessary to resolve the core issues of the case.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digest: Liban vs. Gordon, 593 SCRA 68 (2009) and 639 SCRA 709 (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Tynny Roo Beldua
    33 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that it was incorrect to decide on the constitutionality of the PNRC statute because that issue was not central to the case. The Court found that the PNRC is a unique entity that is neither strictly a government corporation nor a private corporation. It also determined that being chairman of the PNRC does not qualify as a government office and does not violate the prohibition on Senators holding other offices. As a general rule, the Court will not pass judgement on constitutional questions unless absolutely necessary to resolve the core issues of the case.

    Original Title

    Untitled

    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 Supreme Court ruled that it was incorrect to decide on the constitutionality of the PNRC statute because that issue was not central to the case. The Court found that the PNRC is a unique entity that is neither strictly a government corporation nor a private corporation. It also determined that being chairman of the PNRC does not qualify as a government office and does not violate the prohibition on Senators holding other offices. As a general rule, the Court will not pass judgement on constitutional questions unless absolutely necessary to resolve the core issues of the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    33 views2 pages

    Case Digest: Liban vs. Gordon, 593 SCRA 68 (2009) and 639 SCRA 709 (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Tynny Roo Beldua
    The Supreme Court ruled that it was incorrect to decide on the constitutionality of the PNRC statute because that issue was not central to the case. The Court found that the PNRC is a unique entity that is neither strictly a government corporation nor a private corporation. It also determined that being chairman of the PNRC does not qualify as a government office and does not violate the prohibition on Senators holding other offices. As a general rule, the Court will not pass judgement on constitutional questions unless absolutely necessary to resolve the core issues of the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Case Digest: Liban vs.

    Gordon, 593 SCRA


    68 (2009) and 639 SCRA 709 (2011)
    FACTS:  Petitioners Liban, et al., who were officers of the Board of Directors of the
    Quezon City Red Cross Chapter, filed with the Supreme Court what they styled as
    “Petition to Declare Richard J. Gordon as Having Forfeited His Seat in the Senate”
    against respondent Gordon, who was elected Chairman of the Philippine National Red
    Cross (PNRC) Board of Governors during his incumbency as Senator. Gordon filed a
    motion for partial reconsideration on a Supreme Court decision which ruled that being
    chairman of the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) did not disqualify him from being
    a Senator, and that the charter creating PNRC is unconstitutional as the PNRC is a
    private corporation and the Congress is precluded by the Constitution to create
    such.The Court then ordered the PNRC to incorporate itself with the SEC as a private
    corporation. Gordon takes exception to the second part of the ruling, which addressed
    the constitutionality of the statute creating the PNRC as a private corporation. Gordon
    avers that the issue of constitutionality was only touched upon in the issue of locus
    standi. It is a rule that the constitutionality will not be touched upon if it is not the lis mota
    of the case. 

    ISSUE:  Was it proper for the Court to have ruled on the constitutionality of the PNRC
    statute?  Whether respondent should be automatically removed as a Senator pursuant
    to Section 13, Article VI of the Philippine Constitution  
    DECISION:  No, it was not correct for the Court to have decided on the constitutional issue
    because it was not the very lis mota of the case. The PNRC is sui generis in nature; it is neither
    strictly a GOCC nor a private corporation. The office of the PNRC Chairman is not a government
    office or an office in a government-owned or controlled corporation for purposes of the
    prohibition in Section 13, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution. 

    RATIO DECIDENDI:  The Court will not touch the issue of unconstitutionality unless it is the
    very lis mota. It is a well-established rule that a court should not pass upon a constitutional
    question and decide a law to be unconstitutional or invalid, unless such question is raised by the
    parties and that when it is raised, if the record also presents some other ground upon which the
    court may [rest] its judgment, that course will be adopted and the constitutional question will be
    left for consideration until such question will be unavoidable. PNRC is a Private Organization
    Performing Public Functions the Philippine government does not own the PNRC. It does not
    have government assets and does not receive any appropriation from the Philippine Congress. It
    is financed primarily by contributions from private individuals and private entities obtained
    through solicitation campaigns organized by its Board of Governors. The PNRC is not
    government-owned but privately owned.  

    You might also like