Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 31 views

    Taxicab Operators V BOT

    Uploaded by

    Di Can
    The Board of Transportation issued Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 phasing out and replacing old and dilapidated taxis. Taxicab operators challenged the circular, seeking to nullify it or stop its implementation. The Supreme Court ruled the circular was a valid exercise of police power, as the overriding consideration is public safety from dangers posed by old vehicles. The state can regulate to promote public welfare, health, and safety, even if it disregards some private interests.

    Copyright:

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

    Taxicab Operators V BOT

    Uploaded by

    Di Can
    31 views1 page
    The Board of Transportation issued Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 phasing out and replacing old and dilapidated taxis. Taxicab operators challenged the circular, seeking to nullify it or stop its implementation. The Supreme Court ruled the circular was a valid exercise of police power, as the overriding consideration is public safety from dangers posed by old vehicles. The state can regulate to promote public welfare, health, and safety, even if it disregards some private interests.

    Original Description:

    Constitutional Law digest

    Original Title

    Taxicab Operators v BOT

    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 Board of Transportation issued Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 phasing out and replacing old and dilapidated taxis. Taxicab operators challenged the circular, seeking to nullify it or stop its implementation. The Supreme Court ruled the circular was a valid exercise of police power, as the overriding consideration is public safety from dangers posed by old vehicles. The state can regulate to promote public welfare, health, and safety, even if it disregards some private interests.

    Copyright:

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

    Taxicab Operators V BOT

    Uploaded by

    Di Can
    The Board of Transportation issued Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 phasing out and replacing old and dilapidated taxis. Taxicab operators challenged the circular, seeking to nullify it or stop its implementation. The Supreme Court ruled the circular was a valid exercise of police power, as the overriding consideration is public safety from dangers posed by old vehicles. The state can regulate to promote public welfare, health, and safety, even if it disregards some private interests.

    Copyright:

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

    Taxicab Operators v.

    BOT, 119 SCRA 597 (On Lawful Subject)


    FACTS: Petitioner Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila, Inc. (TOMMI) is a domestic corporation composed of taxicab
    operators, who are grantees of Certificates of Public Convenience to operate taxicabs within the City of Manila and to any
    other place in Luzon accessible to vehicular traffic.
    On October 10, 1977, respondent Board of Transportation (BOT) issued Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 which reads:
    SUBJECT: Phasing out and Replacement of Old and Dilapidated Taxis
    On January 27, 1981, petitioners filed a Petition with the BOT, docketed as Case No. 80-7553, seeking to nullify MC No.
    77-42 or to stop its implementation; to allow the registration and operation in 1981 and subsequent years of taxicabs of
    model 1974, as well as those of earlier models which were phased-out, provided that, at the time of registration, they are
    roadworthy and fit for operation.
    ISSUE: Whether Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 is a valid exercise of police power.
    HELD: Yes, Memorandum Circular No. 77-42 is a valid exercise of police power. The overriding consideration is the
    safety and comfort of the riding public from the dangers posed by old and dilapidated taxis. The State, in the exercise of
    its police power, can prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, good order, safety and general
    welfare of the people. It can prohibit all things hurtful to comfort, safety and welfare of society. It may also regulate
    property rights. In the language of Chief Justice Enrique M. Fernando the necessities imposed by public welfare may
    justify the exercise of governmental authority to regulate even if thereby certain groups may plausibly assert that their
    interests are disregarded.

    You might also like