POLICE POWER The Chairman of the National Traffic ISSUES::

Commission on July 18, 1940 recommended

MAXIMO CALALANG vs A. D. WILLIAMS, to the Director of Public Works with the 1) Whether the rules and regulations
ET AL. approval of the Secretary of Public Works the promulgated by the respondents pursuant to
G.R. No. 47800 December 2, 1940 adoption of thethemeasure proposed in the the provisions of Commonwealth Act NO. 548
resolution aforementioned in pursuance of the constitute an unlawful inference with
Doctrine: Social Justice provisions of theCommonwealth Act No. 548 legitimate business or trade and abridged the
which authorizes said Director with the right to personal liberty and freedom of
Facts: approval from the Secretary of the Public locomotion?
Works and Communication to promulgate
The National Traffic Commission, in its rules and regulations to regulate and control 2) Whether the rules and regulations
resolution of July 17, 1940, resolved to the use of and traffic on national roads. complained of infringe upon the constitutional
recommend to the Director of the Public precept regarding the promotion of social
Works and to the Secretary of Public Works On August 2, 1940, the Director justice to insure the well-being and economic
and Communications that animal-drawn recommended to the Secretary the approval security of all the people?
vehicles be prohibited from passing along the of the recommendations made by the
following for a period of one year from the Chairman of the National Traffic Commission HELD:
date of the opening of the Colgante Bridge to with modifications. The Secretary of Public
traffic: Works approved the recommendations on 1) No. The promulgation of the Act aims to
August 10,1940. The Mayor of Manila and the promote safe transit upon and avoid
1) Rosario Street extending from Plaza Acting Chief of Police of Manila have enforced obstructions on national roads in the interest
Calderon de la Barca to Dasmariñas Street and caused to be enforced the rules and and convenience of the public. In enacting
from 7:30 am to 12:30 pm and from 1:30 pm regulation. As a consequence, all animal- said law, the National Assembly was
to 530 pm; and drawn vehicles are not allowed to pass and prompted by considerations of public
pick up passengers in the places above convenience and welfare. It was inspired by
2) along Rizal Avenue extending from the mentioned to the detriment not only of their the desire to relieve congestion of traffic,
railroad crossing at Antipolo Street to owners but of the riding public as well. which is a menace to the public safety. Public
Echague Street from 7 am to 11pm welfare lies at the bottom of the promulgation
of the said law and the state in order to
promote the general welfare may interfere was prompted by considerations of public the exercise of powers underlying the
with personal liberty, with property, and with convenience and welfare. existence of all governments on the time-
business and occupations. Persons and The Court reiterated that it previously ruled in honored principles of salus populi estsuprema
property may be subject to all kinds of U.S. v. Gomez Jesus, that public welfare, lex.
restraints and burdens in order to secure the then, lies at the bottom of the enactment of
general comfort, health, and prosperity of the said law, and the state in order to promote the Social justice must be founded on the
State. To this fundamental aims of the general welfare may interfere with personal recognition of the necessity of
government, the rights of the individual are liberty, with property, and with business and interdependence among divers and diverse
subordinated. Liberty is a blessing which occupations. Persons and property may be units of a society and of the protection that
should not be made to prevail over authority subjected to all kinds of restraints and should be equally and evenly extended to all
because society will fall into anarchy. Neither burdens, in order to secure the general groups as a combined force in our social and
should authority be made to prevail over comfort, health, and prosperity of the state economic life, consistent with the fundamental
liberty because then the individual will fall into and paramount objective of the state of
slavery. The paradox lies in the fact that the 2) No. Social justice is “neither communism, promoting health, comfort and quiet of all
apparent curtailment of liberty is precisely the nor despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy,” but persons, and of bringing about “the greatest
very means of insuring its preserving. the humanization of laws and the equalization good to the greatest number.”
of social and economic forces by the State so
Furthermore, Commonwealth Act No. 548 was that justice in its rational and objectively
passed by the National Assembly in the secular conception may at least be
exercise of the paramount police power of the approximated. Social justice means the
state. promotion of the welfare of all the people, the
adoption by the Government of measures
Said Act, by virtue of which the rules and calculated to insure economic stability of all
regulations complained of were promulgated, the competent elements of society, through
aims to promote safe transit upon and avoid the maintenance of a proper economic and
obstructions on national roads, in the interest social equilibrium in the interrelations of the
and convenience of the public. In enacting members of the community, constitutionally,
said law, therefore, the National Assembly through the adoption of measures legally
justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through
 The Court of First Instance perpetually which encroaches upon such territory is
restrains and prohibits the defendant and his amenable to the police power of the State.
No. 10572. December 21, 1915. deputies from collecting and enforcing against Hence, the judgment of the CFI is reversed.
the plaintiffs and their property the annual tax THE UNITED STATES vs. LUIS TORIBIO
FRANCIS A. CHURCHILL and STEWART mentioned and described in subsection (b) of
TAIT vs. JAMES J. RAFFERTY section 100 of Act No. 2339, effective July 1, G.R. No. L-5060 January 26, 1910
1914, and from destroying or removing any
FACTS: sign, signboard, or billboard, the property of FACTS:
the plaintiffs and decrees the cancellation of
Plaintiffs put up a billboard on a private land the bond given by the plaintiffs. Toribio was found by the trial court of Bohol
located in Rizal Province “quite distance from violating Sections 30 and 33 of Act No. 1147,
the road and strongly built, not dangerous to Hence, this petition. an Act regulating the registration, branding,
the safety of the people, and contained no and slaughter of Large Cattle. The act
advertising matter which is filthy, indecent, or ISSUE: prohibits the slaughter of large cattle fit for
deleterious to the morals of the community.” agricultural work or other draft purposes for
However, defendant Rafferty, Collector of WON Act No. 2339 was a legitimate exercise human consumption.
Internal Revenue, decided to remove the of the police power of the Government?
billboards after due investigation made upon Appellant Toribio slaughtered or caused to be
the complaints of the British and German HELD: slaughtered his carabao without a permit from
Consuls. the municipal treasurer of the municipality.
YES. Things offensive to the senses, such as
Act No. 2339 authorized the then Collector of sight, smell or hearing, may be suppressed by It appears that in the town of Carmen, in the
Internal Revenue to remove after due the State especially those situated in thickly Province of Bohol, wherein the animal was
investigation, any billboard exposed to the populated districts. Aesthetics may be slaughtered there is no municipal
public view if it decides that it is offensive to regulated by the police power of the state, as slaughterhouse, and counsel for appellant
the sight or is otherwise a nuisance. long as it is justified by public interest and contends that under such circumstances the
safety. provisions of Act No. 1147 do not prohibit nor
In the agreed statement of facts submitted by penalize the slaughter of large cattle without a
the parties, the plaintiffs "admit that the Moreover, if the police power may be permit of the municipal treasure.
billboards mentioned were and still are exercised to encourage a healthy social and
offensive to the sight." economic condition in the country, and if the Appellant contends that he applied for a
comfort and convenience of the people are permit to slaughter the animal but was not
included within those subjects, everything given one because the carabao was not found
to be “unfit for agricultural work” which 1. NO. The prohibition and penalty imposed in and held under the tacit condition that it shall
resulted to appellant to slaughter said carabao Act No. 1147 applies generally to the not be so used as to injure the equal rights of
in a place other than the municipal slaughter of large cattle for human others or greatly impair the public rights and
slaughterhouse. consumption, anywhere, without a permit duly interests of the community.
secured from the municipal treasurer, and
Appellant then assails the validity of a specifically to the killing for food of large cattle The Supreme Court cited events that happen
provision under Act No. 1147 which states at a municipal slaughterhouse without such in the Philippines like an epidemic that wiped
that only carabaos unfit for agricultural work permit. 70-100% of the population of carabaos.. The
can be slaughtered. Supreme Court also said that these animals
Where the language of a statute is fairly are vested with public interest for they are
Appellant also contended that the act susceptible of two or more constructions, that fundamental use for the production of crops.
constitutes a taking of property for public use construction should be adopted which will These reasons satisfy the requisites of a valid
in the exercise of the right of eminent domain most tend to give effect to the manifest intent exercise of police power
without providing for the compensation of of the lawmaker and promote the object for
owners, and it is an undue and unauthorized which the statute was enacted, and a Finally, SC said that article 1147 is not an
exercise of police power of the state for it construction should be rejected which would exercise of the inherent power of eminent
deprives them of the enjoyment of their private tend to render abortive other provisions of the domain. The said law does not constitute the
property. statute and to defeat the object which the taking of carabaos for public purpose; it just
legislator sought to attain by its enactment. serve as a mere regulation for the
ISSUES: consumption of these private properties for
Therefore, sections 30 and 33 of the Act the protection of general welfare and public
1. WON the prohibition and the penalty prohibit and penalize the slaughtering or interest.
imposed in Act No. 1147 is limited only causing to be slaughtered for human
to the slaughter of large cattle at the consumption of large cattle at any place
municipal slaughterhouse. without the permit provided for in section 30.

2. WON Act. No. 1147, regulating the 2. NO. Act no. 1147 is not a taking of the
registration, branding and slaughter of property for public use, within the meaning of
large cattle, is an undue and the constitution, but is a just and legitimate
unauthorized exercise of police power. exercise of the power of the legislature to
regulate and restrain such particular use of
HELD: the property as would be inconsistent with the
rights of the publics. All property is acquired
 case of natural persons, and for ten
years after the approval of the Act (7) a provision allowing the heirs of
or until the expiration of term in case aliens now engaged in the retail
of juridical persons; business who die, to continue such
business for a period of six months for
purposes of liquidation.
ICHONG v HERNANDEZ (3) an exception therefrom in favor of
G.R. NO. L-7995 May 31, 1957 citizens and juridical entities of the Petitioner Inchong, for and in his own behalf
United States; and on behalf of other alien resident
FACTS: corporations and partnerships adversely
(4) a provision for the forfeiture of affected by the provisions of Republic Act. No.
A law, RA No. 1180 entitled "An Act to licenses (to engage in the retail 1180, brought this action to obtain a judicial
Regulate the Retail Business" was enacted business) for violation of the laws on declaration that said Act is unconstitutional,
with an effect of nationalizing the retail trade nationalization, control weights and and to enjoin the Secretary of Finance and all
business. The main provisions of the Act are: measures and labor and other laws other persons acting under him, particularly
relating to trade, commerce and city and municipal treasurers, from enforcing
(1) a prohibition against persons, not industry; its provisions. Inchong attacks the
citizens of the Philippines, and constitutionality of the Act, contending that: (1)
against associations, partnerships, (5) a prohibition against the it denies to alien residents the equal
or corporations the capital of which establishment or opening by aliens protection of the laws and deprives of their
are not wholly owned by citizens of actually engaged in the retail business liberty and property without due process of
the Philippines, from engaging of additional stores or branches of retail law ; (2) the subject of the Act is not
directly or indirectly in the retail business; expressed or comprehended in the title
trade; thereof; (3) the Act violates international and
(6) a provision requiring aliens actually treaty obligations of the Republic of the
(2) an exception from the above engaged in the retail business to present Philippines; (4) the provisions of the Act
prohibition in favor of aliens actually for registration with the proper against the transmission by aliens of their
engaged in said business on May authorities a verified statement retail business thru hereditary succession, and
15, 1954, who are allowed to concerning their businesses, giving, those requiring 100% Filipino capitalization for
continue to engaged therein, unless among other matters, the nature of the a corporation or entity to entitle it to engage in
their licenses are forfeited in business, their assets and liabilities and the retail business, violate the spirit of
accordance with the law, until their their offices and principal offices of Sections 1 and 5, Article XIII and Section 8 of
death or voluntary retirement in judicial entities; and Article XIV of the Constitution.
 It has been said the police power is so far - Yet there can neither be absolute liberty, for
In answer, the Solicitor-General and the Fiscal reaching in scope, that it has become almost that would mean license and anarchy. So the
of the City of Manila contend that: (1) the Act impossible to limit its sweep. As it derives its State can deprive persons of life, liberty and
was passed in the valid exercise of the police existence from the very existence of the State property, provided there is due process of law;
power of the State, which exercise is itself, it does not need to be expressed or and persons may be classified into classes
authorized in the Constitution in the interest of defined in its scope; it is said to be co- and groups, provided everyone is given the
national economic survival; (2) the Act has extensive with self-protection and survival, equal protection of the law. The test or
only one subject embraced in the title; (3) no and as such it is the most positive and active standard, as always, is reason. The police
treaty or international obligations are infringed; of all governmental processes, the most power legislation must be firmly grounded on
(4) as regards hereditary succession, only the essential, insistent and illimitable. Especially is public interest and welfare, and a reasonable
form is affected but the value of the property is it so under a modern democratic framework relation must exist between purposes and
not impaired, and the institution of inheritance where the demands of society and of nations means. And if distinction and classification
is only of statutory origin. have multiplied to almost unimaginable has been made, there must be a reasonable
proportions; the field and scope of police basis for said distinction.
ISSUE: power has become almost boundless, just as
the fields of public interest and public welfare The best evidence to determine the alien
WON RA 1180 is unconstitutional since its have become almost all-embracing and have dominance in retail business are the statistics
exercise violates one’s right to due process transcended human foresight. However, the on the retail trade, which put down the figures
and equal protection as guaranteed by the Constitution has set forth limitations thereof in black and white. Between the constitutional
Constitution and the most important of these are: the due convention year (1935), when the fear of alien
process clause and the equal protection domination and control of the retail trade
HELD: clause. already filled the minds of our leaders with
fears and misgivings, and the year of the
NO. The Court finds the enactment of RA The conflict, therefore, between police power enactment of the nationalization of the retail
1180 to clearly fall within the scope of police and the guarantees of due process and equal trade act (1954), official statistics
power of the State. It is clear that the law in protection of the laws is more apparent than unmistakably point out to the ever-increasing
question was enacted to remedy a real and real. Properly related, the power and the dominance and control by the alien of the
actual threat and danger to the national guarantees are supposed to coexist. The retail trade. Statistical figures reveal that in
economy posed by alien dominance and balancing is the essence or, shall it be said, percentage distribution of assets and gross
control of retail business and free citizens and the indispensable means for the attainment of sales, alien participation has steadily
country from the said dominance and control. legitimate aspirations of any democratic increased during the years. It is true, of
society. There can be no absolute power, course, that Filipinos have the edge in the
whoever exercise it, for that would be tyranny. number of retailers, but aliens more than
make up for the numerical gap through their section 3 levies on the owners or persons in
assets and gross sales which average control of the land devoted tot he cultivation of
between six and seven times those of the very sugarcane and ceded to others for
many Filipino retailers. consideration, on lease or otherwise - "a tax
The Court finds that law does not also violate equivalent to the difference between the
the equal protection clause of the Constitution money value of the rental or consideration
because sufficient grounds exist for the collected and the amount representing 12 per
distinction between alien and citizen in the centum of the assessed value of such land.
exercise of the occupation regulated, nor the
due process of law clause, because the law is It was alleged that such tax is unconstitutional
prospective in operation and recognizes the and void, being levied for the aid and support
privilege of aliens already engaged in the WALTER LUTZ, vs. J. ANTONIO ARANETA of the sugar industry exclusively, which in
occupation and reasonably protects their plaintiff's opinion is not a public purpose for
privilege. The wisdom and efficacy of the law G.R. No. L-7859 December 22, 1955 which a tax may be constitutionally levied. The
to carry out its objectives appear to us to be action was dismissed by the CFI thus the
plainly evident — as a matter of fact it seems FACTS: plaintiff appealed directly to the Supreme
not only appropriate but actually necessary — Court.
and that in any case such matter falls within Appelant in this case Walter Lutz in his
the prerogative of the Legislature, with whose capacity as the Judicial Administrator of the ISSUE:
power and discretion the Judicial department intestate of the deceased Antonio Jayme
of the Government may not interfere. Ledesma, seeks to recover from the Collector Whether or not the tax imposition in the
of the Internal Revenue the total sum of Commonwealth Act No. 567 are
Therefore, petition is denied. fourteen thousand six hundred sixty six and unconstitutional.
forty cents (P 14, 666.40) paid by the estate
as taxes, under section 3 of Commonwealth HELD:
Act No. 567, also known as the Sugar
Adjustment Act, for the crop years 1948-1949 Yes, the Supreme Court held that the fact that
and 1949-1950. sugar production is one of the greatest
industry of our nation, sugar occupying a
Commonwealth Act. 567 Section 2 provides leading position among its export products;
for an increase of the existing tax on the that it gives employment to thousands of
manufacture of sugar on a graduated basis, laborers in the fields and factories; that it is a
on each picul of sugar manufacturer; while great source of the state's wealth, is one of
the important source of foreign exchange implementation of the program. However, the
needed by our government and is thus pivotal Commission on Audit disapproved said
in the plans of a regime committed to a policy resolution and the disbursement of funds for
of currency stability. Its promotion, protection the implementation thereof for the following
and advancement, therefore redounds greatly reasons: (1) the resolution has no connection
to the general welfare. to alleged public safety, general welfare,
safety, etc. of the inhabitants of Makati; (2)
Hence it was competent for the legislature to government funds must be disbursed for
find that the general welfare demanded that public purposes only; and, (3) it violates the
the sugar industry be stabilized in turn; and in equal protection clause since it will only
the wide field of its police power, the law- benefit a few individuals.
making body could provide that the
distribution of benefits therefrom be
readjusted among its components to enable it HON. JEJOMAR C. BINAY and the ISSUES:
to resist the added strain of the increase in MUNICIPALITY OF MAKATI vs. HON.
taxes that it had to sustain. EUFEMIO DOMINGO and the COMMISSION 1. Whether Resolution No. 60 is a valid
ON AUDIT exercise of the police power under the
The subject tax is levied with a regulatory general welfare clause;
purpose, to provide means for the G.R. No. 92389 September 11, 1991
rehabilitation and stabilization of the 2. Whether the questioned resolution is for
threatened sugar industry. In other words, the FACTS: a public purpose; and
act is primarily a valid exercise of police
power. Petitioner Municipality of Makati, through its 3. Whether the resolution violates the
Council, approved Resolution No. 60 which equal protection clause
extends P500 burial assistance to bereaved
families whose gross family income does not HELD:
exceed P2,000.00 a month. The funds are to
be taken out of the unappropriated available 1. The police power is a governmental
funds in the municipal treasury. The Metro function, an inherent attribute of sovereignty,
Manila Commission approved the resolution. which was born with civilized government. It is
founded largely on the maxims, "Sic utere tuo
Thereafter, the municipal secretary certified a et ahenum non laedas and "Salus populi est
disbursement of P400,000.00 for the suprema lex. Its fundamental purpose is
securing the general welfare, comfort and and circumstances thus assuring the greatest social services, the promotion of the general
convenience of the people. benefits. welfare, social justice as well as human
dignity and respect for human rights." The
Police power is inherent in the state but not in The police power of a municipal corporation is care for the poor is generally recognized as a
municipal corporations. Before a municipal broad, and has been said to be public duty. The support for the poor has long
corporation may exercise such power, there commensurate with, but not to exceed, the been an accepted exercise of police power in
must be a valid delegation of such power by duty to provide for the real needs of the the promotion of the common good.
the legislature which is the repository of the people in their health, safety, comfort, and
inherent powers of the State. convenience as consistently as may be with 3. There is no violation of the equal protection
private rights. It extends to all the great public clause. Paupers may be reasonably classified.
Municipal governments exercise this power needs, and, in a broad sense includes all Different groups may receive varying
under the general welfare clause. Pursuant legislation and almost every function of the treatment. Precious to the hearts of our
thereto they are clothed with authority to municipal government. It covers a wide scope legislators, down to our local councilors, is the
"enact such ordinances and issue such of subjects, and, while it is especially occupied welfare of the paupers. Thus, statutes have
regulations as may be necessary to carry out with whatever affects the peace, security, been passed giving rights and benefits to the
and discharge the responsibilities conferred health, morals, and general welfare of the disabled, emancipating the tenant-farmer from
upon it by law, and such as shall be community, it is not limited thereto, but is the bondage of the soil, housing the urban
necessary and proper to provide for the broadened to deal with conditions which exists poor, etc. Resolution No. 60, re-enacted under
health, safety, comfort and convenience, so as to bring out of them the greatest welfare Resolution No. 243, of the Municipality of
maintain peace and order, improve public of the people by promoting public Makati is a paragon of the continuing program
morals, promote the prosperity and general convenience or general prosperity, and to of our government towards social justice. The
welfare of the municipality and the inhabitants everything worthwhile for the preservation of Burial Assistance Program is a relief of
thereof, and insure the protection of property comfort of the inhabitants of the corporation. pauperism, though not complete. The loss of a
therein. Thus, it is deemed inadvisable to attempt to member of a family is a painful experience,
frame any definition which shall absolutely and it is more painful for the poor to be
2. Police power is not capable of an exact indicate the limits of police power. financially burdened by such death.
definition but has been, purposely, veiled in Resolution No. 60 vivifies the very words of
general terms to underscore its all Public purpose is not unconstitutional merely the late President Ramon Magsaysay 'those
comprehensiveness. Its scope, over- because it incidentally benefits a limited who have less in life, should have more in
expanding to meet the exigencies of the number of persons. As correctly pointed out law." This decision, however must not be
times, even to anticipate the future where it by the Office of the Solicitor General, "the drift taken as a precedent, or as an official go-
could be done, provides enough room for an is towards social welfare legislation geared signal for municipal governments to embark
efficient and flexible response to conditions towards state policies to provide adequate
on a philanthropic orgy of inordinate dole-outs specifically intended to have retroactive effect.
for motives political or otherwise. In 1995, petitioner filed a complaint against A later law which enlarges, abridges, or in any
the owner of the lot with the RTC, the manner changes the intent of the parties to
complaint sought the demolition of the said the contract necessarily impairs the contract
commercial structure for having violated the itself and cannot be given retroactive effect
terms and conditions of the Deed of Sale. without violating the constitutional prohibition
Complainant prayed for the issuance of a against impairment of contracts.
TRO and injunction to prohibit petitioner from
in engaging a commercial activity on the lot But, the foregoing principles do admit of
while the trial court issued and denied the MR certain exceptions. One involves police power.
of the private Respondent. A law enacted in the exercise of police power
to regulate or govern certain activities or
Private Respondent filed with the CA a special transactions could be given retroactive effect
civil action for certiorari, ascribing to the trial and may reasonably impair vested rights or
court grave abuse of discretion which the contracts. Police power legislation is
appellate court granted. Complainant applicable not only to future contracts, but
ORTIGAS & CO. LTD.vs. THE COURT OF seasonably moved for reconsideration, but the equally to those already in existence. Non-
APPEALS and ISMAEL G. MATHAY III appellate court denied it, hence this petition. impairment of contracts or vested rights
clauses will have to yield to the superior and
G.R. No. 126102 December 4, 2000 ISSUE: legitimate exercise by the State of police
power to promote the health, morals, peace,
Whether the retroactive effect of the assailed education, good order, safety, and general
FACTS: ordinance violates the Right to Non- welfare of the people. Moreover, statutes in
Impairment of Contracts of the complainants? exercise of valid police power must be read
In 1981, the Metropolitan Manila Commission into every contract.
(now MMDA) enacted an Ordinance HELD:
reclassified as a commercial area a portion of The contractual stipulations annotated on the
Ortigas Avenue from Madison to Roosevelt No, In general, the court agree that laws are Torrens Title, on which Ortigas relies, must
Streets of Greenhills Subdivision where the lot to be construed as having only prospective yield to the ordinance. When that stretch of
is located. In 1984, private respondent leased operation. Lex prospicit, non respicit. Equally Ortigas Avenue from Roosevelt Street to
the lot and constructed a single story settled, only laws existing at the time of the Madison Street was reclassified as a
commercial building for Greenhills Autohaus, execution of a contract are applicable thereto commercial zone by the Metropolitan Manila
Inc., a car sales company. and not later statutes, unless the latter are Commission in March 1981, the restrictions in
the contract of sale between Ortigas and Act 2000 (Limited Access Highway Act) which Upon assumption of Hon. Presiding Judge
Hermoso, limiting all construction on the was enacted in 1957. Cornejo, both the petitioners and respondents
disputed lot to single-family residential were required to file their Memoranda.
buildings, were deemed extinguished by the Previously, pursuant to its mandate under RA
retroactive operation of the zoning ordinance 2000, DPWH issued on June 25, 1998 Dept. The court issued an order dismissing the
and could no longer be enforced. Order no. 215 declaring the Manila Cavite petition but declaring invalid DO 123.The
(Coastal Road) Toll Expressway as limited petitioners moved for reconsideration but it
While our legal system upholds the sanctity of access facilities. was denied.
contract so that a contract is deemed law
between the contracting parties, nonetheless, Petitioners filed an Amended Petition on RTC ruled that DO 74 is valid but DO 123 is
stipulations in a contract cannot contravene February 8, 2001 wherein petitioners sought invalid being violative of the equal protection
“law, morals, good customs, public order, or the declaration of nullity of the aforesaid clause of the Constitution
public policy.” Otherwise such stipulations administrative issuances.
would be deemed null and void. ISSUES :
The petitioners prayed for the issuance of a
temporary restraining order to prevent the 1. Whether DO 74, DO 215 and the TRB
enforcement of the total ban on motorcycles regulation contravene RA 2000.
JAMES MIRASOL, RICHARD SANTIAGO, along NLEX, SLEX, Manila-Cavite (Coastal
and LUZON MOTORCYCLISTS Road) toll Expressway under DO 215. 2. Whether AO 1 is unconstitutional.
FEDERATION, INC. vs. DPWH and TOLL HELD:
REGULATORY BOARD RTC, after due hearing, granted the
petitioner’s application for preliminary 1. YES. The petitioners claimed that DO 74,
G.R. No. 158793 June 8, 2006 injunction conditioned upon petitioner’s filing DO 215 and TRB’s rules and regulation
of cash bond in the amount of P100, 000 issued under them unduly expanded the
FACTS: which petitioners complied. power of the DPWH in sec. 4 of RA 2000 to
regulate toll ways. They contend that
Petitioners filed before the court a petition for DPWH issued an order (DO 123) allowing DPWH’s regulatory authority is limited to acts
declaratory judgment with application for motorcycles with engine displacement of 400 like redesigning curbings or central dividing
temporary restraining order and injunction. It cubic centimeters inside limited access sections.
seeks the declaration of nullification of facilities (toll ways).
administrative issuances for being They claim that DPWH is only allowed to
inconsistent with the provisions of Republic redesign the physical structure of toll ways
and not to determine “who or what can be The burden to prove its unconstitutionality and the DILG, specifically tasked to monitor
qualifies as toll ways user”. rested on the party assailing it, more so when the drugstores’ compliance with the law;
police power was at issue and passed the test promulgate the implementing rules and
The court ruled that DO 74 and DO 215 are of reasonableness. The Administrative Order regulations for the effective implementation of
void because the DPWH has no authority to was not oppressive, as it did not impose the law; and prosecute and revoke the
declare certain expressways as limited access unreasonable restrictions or deprive licenses of erring drugstore establishments.
facilities. Under the law, it is the DOTC which petitioners of their right to use the facilities. It
is authorized to administer and enforce all merely set rules to ensure public safety and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed
laws, rules and regulations in the field of the uninhibited flow of traffic within those into law R.A. No. 9257 otherwise known as
transportation and to regulate related limited-access facilities. the “Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003.”
activities.
The right to travel did not mean the right to Sec. 4(a) of the Act states that The
Since the DPWH has no authority to regulate choose any vehicle in traversing a tollway. senior citizens shall be entitled to the
activities relative to transportation, the Toll Petitioners were free to access the tollway as following: (a) the grant of twenty percent
Regulatory Board (TRB) cannot derive its much as the rest of the public. However, the (20%) discount from all establishments
power from the DPWH to issue regulations mode in which they wished to travel, relative to the utilization of services in
governing limited access facilities. pertaining to their manner of using the tollway, hotels and similar lodging
was a subject that could validly be limited by establishments, restaurants and
The DPWH cannot delegate a power or regulation. There was no absolute right to recreation centers, and purchase of
function which it does not possess in the first drive; on the contrary, this privilege was medicines in all establishments for the
place. heavily regulated. exclusive use or enjoyment of senior
citizens, including funeral and burial
2. NO. The Court emphasized that the CARLOS SUPERDRUG CORP. vs. DSWD, services for the death of senior citizens;
secretary of the then Department of Public et. al.
Works and Communications had issued AO 1 G.R. No. 166494 June 29, 2007 Petitioners assert that Section 4(a) of the law
in February 1968, as authorized under Section is unconstitutional because it constitutes
3 of Republic Act 2000, prior to the splitting of deprivation of private property. Compelling
the department and the eventual devolution of FACTS: drugstore owners and establishments to grant
its powers to the DOTC. the discount will result in a loss of profit and
Petitioners are domestic corporations and capital because according to them drugstores
Because administrative issuances had the proprietors operating drugstores in the impose a mark-up of only 5% to 10% on
force and effect of law, AO 1 enjoyed the Philippines. Public respondents, on the other branded medicines, and the law failed to
presumption of validity and constitutionality. hand, include the DSWD, DOH, DOF, DOJ,
provide a scheme whereby drugstores will be law states that the cost of the discount shall
justly compensated for the discount. For this reason, when the conditions so be deducted from gross income, the amount
demand as determined by the legislature, of income derived from all sources before
ISSUE: property rights must bow to the primacy of deducting allowable expenses, which will
police power because property rights, though result in net income.
WON RA 9257 is constitutional. sheltered by due process, must yield to
general welfare. Here, petitioners tried to show a loss on a per
HELD: transaction basis, which should not be the
Police power as an attribute to promote the case. An income statement, showing an
YES. The law is a legitimate exercise of police common good would be diluted considerably if accounting of petitioners sales, expenses, and
power which, similar to the power of eminent on the mere plea of petitioners that they will net profit (or loss) for a given period could
domain, has general welfare for its object. suffer loss of earnings and capital, the have accurately reflected the effect of the
Police power is not capable of an exact questioned provision is invalidated. Moreover, discount on their income. Absent any financial
definition, but has been purposely veiled in in the absence of evidence demonstrating the statement, petitioners cannot substantiate
general terms to underscore its alleged confiscatory effect of the provision in their claim that they will be operating at a loss
comprehensiveness to meet all exigencies question, there is no basis for its nullification should they give the discount. In addition, the
and provide enough room for an efficient and in view of the presumption of validity which computation was erroneously based on the
flexible response to conditions and every law has in its favor. assumption that their customers consisted
circumstances, thus assuring the greatest wholly of senior citizens. Lastly, the 32% tax
benefits. Given these, it is incorrect for petitioners to rate is to be imposed on income, not on the
insist that the grant of the senior citizen amount of the discount.
Accordingly, it has been described as the discount is unduly oppressive to their
most essential, insistent and the least limitable business, because petitioners have not taken While the Constitution protects property rights,
of powers, extending as it does to all the great time to calculate correctly and come up with a petitioners must accept the realities of
public needs. It is [t]he power vested in the financial report, so that they have not been business and the State, in the exercise of
legislature by the constitution to make, ordain, able to show properly whether or not the tax police power, can intervene in the operations
and establish all manner of wholesome and deduction scheme really works greatly to their of a business which may result in an
reasonable laws, statutes, and ordinances, disadvantage. impairment of property rights in the process.
either with penalties or without, not repugnant
to the constitution, as they shall judge to be In treating the discount as a tax deduction,
for the good and welfare of the petitioners insist that they will incur losses.
commonwealth, and of the subjects of the However,petitioner’s computation is clearly
same. flawed. For purposes of reimbursement, the
 The private respondent is a graduate of the
University of the East with a degree of ISSUE:
Bachelor of Science in Zoology. The petitioner
claims that he took the NMAT three times and Whether a person who has thrice failed the
flunked it as many times. When he applied to National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) is
take it again, the petitioner rejected his entitled to take it again. If not allowed, is there
application on the basis of the aforesaid rule. arbitrary exercise of the police power.
He then went to the Regional Trial Court of
Valenzuela, Metro Manila, to compel his HELD:
admission to the test. In his original petition for
mandamus, he first invoked his constitutional No. He cannot and it is not an arbitrary
rights to academic freedom and quality exercise of police power, thus, he is not
education. By agreement of the parties, the deprived of his right to pursue medical
private respondent was allowed to take the education.
NMAT scheduled on April 16, 1989, subject to
the outcome of his petition. The petitioner contends he may not, under its
rule that a student shall be allowed only three
In an amended petition filed with leave of (3) chances to take the NMAT. After three (3)
court, he squarely challenged the successive failures, a student shall not be
constitutionality of MECS Order No. 12, Series allowed to take the NMAT for the fourth time.
of 1972, containing the above-cited rule. The
additional grounds raised were due process The proper exercise of the police power
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE and equal protection. After hearing, the requires the concurrence of a lawful subject
AND SPORTS (DECS) and DIRECTOR OF respondent judge rendered a decision on July and a lawful method. The subject of the
CENTER FOR EDUCATIONAL 4, 1989, declaring the challenged order invalid challenged regulation is certainly within the
MEASUREMENT vs. ROBERTO REY C. and granting the petition. ambit of the police power. It is the right and
SAN DIEGO and JUDGE TERESITA DIZON- indeed the responsibility of the State to insure
CAPULONG Judge Teresita Dizon-Capulong held that the that the medical profession is not infiltrated by
petitioner had been deprived of his right to incompetents to whom patients may unwarily
G.R. No. 89572 December 21, 1989 pursue a medical education through an entrust their lives and health.
arbitrary exercise of the police power. We
FACTS: cannot sustain the respondent judge. Her The method employed by the challenged
decision must be reversed. regulation is not irrelevant to the purpose of
the law nor is it arbitrary or oppressive. The successful examinees in the Medical allow the respondents to take the physician’s
three-flunk rule is intended to insulate the Licensure Examination, the Board of Medicine oath and to register them as physicians. The
medical schools and ultimately the medical observed that the grades of the 79 Fatima same was appealed by the PRC to the Court
profession from the intrusion of those not College of Medicine successful examinees of Appeals which sustained the RTC decision.
qualified to be doctors. The right to quality were unusually and exceptionally high in the Hence, this petition.
education invoked by the private respondent two (2) most difficult subjects of the exam, i.e.,
is not absolute. The Constitution also provides Biochemistry and Obstetrics and Gynecology. ISSUES:
that "every citizen has the right to choose a
profession or course of study, subject to fair, The Board then issued Resolution No. 19 1. WON it is a ministerial duty for the Board of
reasonable and equitable admission and withholding the registration as physicians of all Medicine to issue certificates of registration as
academic requirements. the examinees from Fatima College of physicians under RA 2382
Medicine. As noted by PRC’s statistician
The Court feels that it is not enough to simply consultant, Fr. Nebres of ADMU, compared 2. WON the respondent-examinees have the
invoke the right to quality education as a with other examinees from other schools, the right to be registered as physicians
guarantee of the Constitution: one must show results of those from Fatima were not only
that he is entitled to it because of his incredibly high but unusually clustered close HELD:
preparation and promise. The private to each other. The NBI Investigation
respondent has failed the NMAT five times. concluded that the Fatima examinees gained 1. A careful reading of Section 20 of the
early access to the test questions. Medical Act of 1959 discloses that the law
While his persistence is noteworthy, to say the uses the word “shall” with respect to the
least, it is certainly misplaced, like a hopeless On July 5, 1993, the respondents-examinees issuance of certificates of registration. Thus,
love. filed a petition for mandamus before the RTC the petitioners “shall sign and issue
of Manila to compel the PRC to give them certificates of registration to those who have
their licenses to practice medicine. Meanwhile satisfactorily complied with the requirements
PRC, et.al. vs. ARLENE V. DE GUZMAN, on July 21, 1993, the Board of Medicine of the Board.” In statutory construction the
et.al. issued Resolution No. 21 charging the term “shall” is a word of command. It is given
respondents of immorality, dishonest conduct, imperative meaning. Thus, when an examinee
G.R. No. 144681 June 21, 2004 fraud and deceit and recommended that the satisfies the requirements for the grant of his
test results of the Fatima Examinees be physician’s license, the Board is obliged to
FACTS: nullified. administer to him his oath and register him as
a physician, pursuant to Section 20 and par.
After the Professional Regulations On December 19, 1994, the RTC of Manila (1) of Section 22 of the Medical Act of 1959.
Commission (PRC) released the names of promulgated its decision ordering the PRC to
However, the surrounding circumstances in 2. It is long established rule that a license to qualifications and none of the
this case call for serious inquiry concerning practice medicine is a privilege or franchise disqualifications.
the satisfactory compliance with the Board granted by the government. It is true that this
requirements by the respondents. Court has upheld the constitutional right of Furthermore, it must appear that he has fully
every citizen to select a profession or course complied with all the conditions and
Section 8 of Rep. Act No. 2382 prescribes, of study subject to a fair, reasonable, and requirements imposed by the law and the
among others, that a person who aspires to equitable admission and academic licensing authority. Should doubt taint or mar
practice medicine in the Philippines, must requirements. But like all rights and freedoms the compliance as being less than
have “satisfactorily passed the corresponding guaranteed by the Charter, their exercise may satisfactory, then the privilege will not issue.
Board Examination.” Section 22, in turn, be so regulated pursuant to the police power For said privilege is distinguishable from a
provides that the oath may only be of the State to safeguard health, morals, matter of right, which may be demanded if
administered “to physicians who qualified in peace, education, order, safety, and general denied. Thus, without a definite showing that
the examinations.” The operative word here is welfare of the people. Thus, persons who the aforesaid requirements and conditions
“satisfactorily,” defined as “sufficient to meet a desire to engage in the learned professions have been satisfactorily met, the courts may
condition or obligation” or “capable of requiring scientific or technical knowledge not grant the writ of mandamus to secure said
dispelling doubt or ignorance.” Gleaned from may be required to take an examination as a privilege without thwarting the legislative will.
Board Resolution No. 26, the licensing prerequisite to engaging in their chosen
authority apparently did not find that the careers. This regulation takes particular
respondents “satisfactorily passed” the pertinence in the field of medicine, to protect
licensure examinations. The Board instead the public from the potentially deadly effects of
sought to nullify the examination results incompetence and ignorance among those
obtained by the respondents. who would practice medicine.

Hence, until the moral and mental fitness of In the present case, RA 2382, as amended,
the respondents could be ascertained, the prescribed the requirements for admission to
Board has discretion to hold in abeyance the the practice of medicine, the qualifications of
administration of the Hippocratic Oath and the candidates for the board examinations, the
issuance of the certificates to them. The writ scope and conduct of the examinations, the
of mandamus does not lie to compel grounds for denying the issuance of a
performance of an act which is not duly physician’s license, or revoking a license that ST. LUKE'S MEDICAL CENTER
authorized. has been issued. Verily, to be granted the EMPLOYEE'S ASSOCIATION-AFW
privilege to practice medicine, the applicant (SLMCEA-AFW) AND MARIBEL S.
must show that he possesses all the
 SANTOS, vs. NLRC AND ST. LUKE'S employment at the Institute of Radiology of ISSUE:
MEDICAL CENTER, INC. the private respondent SLMC and that the
latter is giving her the last chance to take and Whether or not the petitioner is legally
G.R. No. 162053 March 7, 2007 pass the forthcoming board examination dismissed pursuant to R.A. 7431 exercising
scheduled in June 1998; otherwise, private police power of the State.
FACTS:: respondent SLMC shall be constrained to take
action which may include her separation from HELD:
Congress passed and enacted Republic Act employment.
No. 7431 known as the “Radiologic Yes, the petitioner dismissal is valid due to her
Technology Act of 1992.” Said law requires On November 23, 1998, the Director of the inability to secure a certificate of registration
that no person shall practice or offer to Institute of Radiology issued a notice to from Board of Radiologic Technology.
practice as a radiology and/or x-ray petitioner Maribel S. Santos informing the
technologist in the Philippines without having latter that the management of private While the right of workers to security of tenure
obtained the proper certificate of registration respondent SLMC has approved her is guaranteed by the Constitution, its exercise
from the Board of Radiologic Technology. retirement in lieu of separation pay. SLMC may be reasonably regulated pursuant to the
Petitioner Maribel Santos was hired as X-Ray issued a “Notice of Separation from the police power of the State to safeguard health,
Technician in the Radiology department of Company” to petitioner Maribel S. Santos morals, peace, education, order, safety, and
private respondent St. Luke’s Medical Center, effective December 30, 1998 in view of the the general welfare of the people.
Inc. (SLMC). latter’s refusal to accept private respondent Consequently, persons who desire to engage
SLMC’s offer for early retirement. in the learned professions requiring scientific
Pursuant to RA 7431 the assistant Executive or technical knowledge may be required to
Director-Ancillary Services and HR Director of Petitioner Maribel Santos files a complaint take an examination as a prerequisite to
private respondent SLMC issued a final notice against private respondent illegal dismissal engaging in their chosen careers.
to all practitioners of Radiologic Technology to and non-payment of salaries, allowances and
comply with the requirement otherwise, the other monetary benefits. She further contends The state is justified in prescribing the specific
unlicensed employee will be transferred to an that her failure to pass the board licensure requirements for x-ray technicians and/or any
area which does not require a license to exam for exam for X-ray technicians did not other professions connected with the health
practice if a slot is available. constitute just cause for termination as it and safety of its citizens. Respondent being
violated her constitutional right to security of engaged in the hospital and health care
The Director of the Institute of Radiology tenure. The appellate court finds this business, is a proper subject of the cited law;
issued another memorandum to petitioner contention untenable, hence this petition for thus, having in mind the legal requirements of
Maribel S. Santos advising her that only a certiorari. these laws, the latter cannot close its eyes
license can assure her of her continued and complainant private interest override
public interest. The law is clear that the Intent and Mineral Production-Sharing
Certificate of Registration cannot be MINERS ASSOCIATION OF THE Agreement within 2 years from the effectivity
substituted by any other requirement to allow PHILIPPINES, INC. vs. HON. FULGENCIO of the Department Administrative Order No.
a person to practice as a Radiologic S. FACTORAN, JR. 57 shall cause the abandonment of the
Technologist and/or X-ray Technologist mining, quarry, and sand and gravel claims,
(Technician). G.R. No. 98332 January 16, 1995 after their respective effectivity dates
compelled the Miners Association of the
FACTS: Philippines, Inc., an organization composed of
mining prospectors and claim owners and
Former President Corazon Aquino issued claim holders, to file the instant petition
Executive Order Nos 211 and 279 in the assailing their validity and constitutionality
exercise of her legislative powers. EO No. 211 before this Court.
prescribes the interim procedures in the
processing and approval of applications for ISSUE :
the exploration, development and utilization of
minerals pursuant to Section 2, Article XII of Whether or not the two Department
the 1987 Constitution. EO No. 279 authorizes Administrative Orders are valid.
the DENR Secretary to negotiate and
conclude joint-venture, co-production, or HELD :
production- sharing agreements for the
exploration, development, and utilization of Yes. Petitioner's insistence on the application
mineral resources. of Presidential Decree No. 463, as amended,
as the governing law on the acceptance and
The issuance and the impeding approval of declarations of location and all
implementation by the DENR of Administrative other kinds of applications for the exploration,
Order Nos. 57 which declares that all existing development, and utilization of mineral
mining leases or agreements which were resources pursuant to Executive Order No.
granted after the effectivity of the 1987 211, is erroneous. Presidential Decree No.
Constitution...shall be converted into 463, as amended, pertains to the old system
production-sharing agreements within one (1) of exploration, development and utilization of
year from the effectivity of these guidelines.” natural resources through "license,
and Administrative Order No. 82 which concession or lease" which, however, has
provides that a failure to submit Letter of been disallowed by Article XII, Section 2 of the
1987 Constitution. By virtue of the said
constitutional mandate and its implementing Accordingly, the State, in the exercise of its
law, Executive Order No. 279 which police power in this regard, may not be HON. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, et.al. vs.
superseded Executive Order No. 211, the precluded by the constitutional restriction on SOUTHWING HEAVY INDUSTRIES
provisions dealing on "license, concession or non-impairment of contract from altering,
lease" of mineral resources under Presidential modifying and amending the mining leases or G.R. No. 164171 February 20, 2006
Decree No. 463, as amended, and other agreements granted under Presidential
existing mining laws are deemed repealed Decree No. 463, as amended, pursuant to
FACTS;
and, therefore, ceased to operate as the Executive Order No. 211.
governing law.
Police Power, being co-extensive with the Executive Order No. 156 (EO 156), issued by
In other words, in all other areas of necessities of the case and the demands of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (President
administration and management of mineral public interest; extends to all the vital public Arroyo) on 12 December 2002, imposes a ban
lands, the provisions of Presidential Decree needs. The passage of Executive Order No. on the importation of used motor vehicles,
No. 463, as amended, and other existing 279 which superseded Executive Order No. with a few exceptions. The ban is part of
mining laws, still govern. Section 7 of 211 provided legal basis for the DENR
several measures EO 156 adopts to
Executive Order No. 279 provides, thus: Secretary to carry into effect the mandate of
Article XII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution. “accelerate the sound development of the
Sec. 7. All provisions of Presidential motor vehicle industry in the Philippines.” In
Decree No. 463, as amended, other Hence, the petition is dismissed for lack of issuing EO 156, particularly the prohibition on
existing mining laws, and their merit. importation under Article 2, Section 3.1, the
implementing rules and regulations, or President envisioned to rationalize the
parts thereof, which are not inconsistent importation of used motor vehicles and to
with the provisions of this Executive
enhance the capabilities of the Philippine
Order, shall continue in force and effect.
motor manufacturing firms to be globally
Well -settled is the rule, however, that competitive producers of completely build-up
regardless of the reservation clause, mining units and their parts and components for the
leases or agreements granted by the State, local and export markets.
such as those granted pursuant to Executive
Order No. 211 referred to this petition, are EO 156 is assailed on the ground that it has
subject to alterations through a reasonable
exercise of the police power of the State. no constitutional and statutory bases.
 national development program of the influx of imported used motor vehicles is
Government.” an urgent national concern that needs to
be swiftly addressed by the President. In
ISSUES: This constitutional provision is the exercise of delegated police power,
implemented by certain legislations, the executive can therefore validly
1. Whether or not such ban on importation namely: the Tariff and Customs Code proscribe the importation of these
of used motor vehicles as embodied in and Executive Order No. 226, the vehicles.
Article 2, Sec. 3.1 of EO 156 Omnibus Investment Code of the
constitutional; and Philippines which was issued on July 16, 2. No. The subject matter of the laws
1987, by then President Corazon C. (Tariff and Customs Code, Omnibus
2. Whether the ban is applicable against Aquino. Under Section 401 of the Tariff Investment Code) authorizing the
importations of used motor vehicles in and Customs Code, the President, in the President to regulate or forbid
the Freeport (Subic Bay Freeport) interest of national economy, general importation of used motor vehicles, is
welfare and/or national security, to, inter the domestic industry. EO 156 cannot
HELD: alia, is expressly authorized to prohibit be applied against the importation of
the importation of any commodity as used cars to the Freeport, which RA
1. Yes, it is constitutional because it is a provided for under Section 401 thereof. 7227, considers to some extent, a
valid exercise of a delegated police And under Article 7, paragraph 12 of the foreign territory. The domestic industry
power. Said EO 156 finds basis on Omnibus Investment Code of the which the EO seeks to protect is actually
Section 28(2) of Article VI of the Philippines, the President is empowered the “customs territory” which is defined
Constitution which provides that “the to approve or reject the prohibition on under the Rules and Regulations
Congress may, by law, authorize the the importation of any equipment or raw Implementing RA 7227, as follows: “the
President to fix within specified limits, materials or finished products. portion of the Philippines outside the
and subject to such limitations and Subic Bay Freeport where the Tariff and
restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, There is no doubt that the issuance of Customs Code of the Philippines and
import and export quotas, tonnage and the ban to protect the domestic industry other national tariff and customs laws
wharfage dues, and other duties or is a reasonable exercise of police are in force and effect.”
imposts within the framework of the power. The deterioration of the local
motor manufacturing firms due to the
The proscription in the importation of RA 7227 which is to create a market that (3) It cannot sell reading and similar
used motor vehicles should be operative would draw investors and ultimately eyeglasses without a prescription having
only outside the Freeport and the boost the national economy. first been made by an independent
inclusion of said zone within the ambit of optometrist or independent optical clinic.
the prohibition is an invalid modification Acebedo can only sell directly to the
of RA 7227. Indeed, when the public, without need of a prescription,
application of an administrative issuance ACEBEDO OPTICAL COMPANY v. CA Ray-Ban and similar eyeglasses;
modifies existing laws or exceeds the (4) It cannot advertise optical lenses and
intended scope, as in the instant case, G.R. No. 100152 March 31, 2000 eyeglasses, but can advertise Ray-Ban
the issuance becomes void, not only for and similar glasses and frames;and
FACTS:
being ultra vires, but also for being
unreasonable. (5) It is allowed to grind lenses but only
Petitioner applied with the Office of the City
upon the prescription of an independent
Mayor of Iligan for a business permit. After
As long as the used motor vehicles do optometrist.
consideration of petitioner's application and
not enter the customs territory, the injury
the opposition interposed thereto by local
or harm sought to be prevented or On December 5, 1988, private respondent
optometrists, respondent City Mayor issued
remedied will not arise. The application Samahan ng Optometrist Sa Pilipinas (SOPI
Business Permit No. 5342 subject to the
of the law should be consistent with the lodged a complaint against the petitioner
following conditions:
purpose of and reason for the law. alleging that Acebedo had violated the
(1) Since it is a corporation, Acebedo
Ratione cessat lex, et cessat lex. When conditions set forth in its business permit and
cannot put up an optical clinic but
the reason for the law ceases, the law requesting the cancellation and/or revocation
only a commercial store;
ceases. It is not the letter alone but the of such permit.
spirit of the law also that gives it life. To
(2) It cannot examine and/or prescribe
apply the proscription to the Freeport On July 19, 1989, the City Mayor sent
reading and similar optical glasses for
would not serve the purpose of the EO. petitioner a Notice of Resolution and
patients, because these are functions of
Instead of improving the general Cancellation of Business Permit effective as of
optical clinics;
economy of the country, the application said date and giving petitioner three (3)
of the importation ban in the Freeport months to wind up its affairs.
would subvert the avowed purpose of
ISSUE:: conditions. Petitioner agrees with the holding produce a valid certificate of registration as
by the Court of Appeals that respondent City optometrist, from the Board of Examiners in
Whether the City Mayor has the authority to Mayor acted beyond his authority in imposing Optometry. A business permit is issued
impose special conditions, as a valid exercise such special conditions in its permit as the primarily to regulate the conduct of business
of police power, in the grant of business same have no basis in the law or ordinance. and the City Mayor cannot, through the
permits. Public respondents and private respondent issuance of such permit, regulate the practice
SOPI are one in saying that the imposition of of a profession. Such a function is within the
HELD: said special conditions is well within the exclusive domain of the administrative agency
authority of the City Mayor as a valid exercise specifically empowered by law to supervise
Police power as an inherent attribute of of police power. the profession, in this case the Professional
sovereignty is the power to prescribe Regulations Commission and the Board of
regulations to promote the health, morals, The issuance of business licenses and Examiners in Optometry.
peace, education, good order or safety and permits by a municipality or city is essentially
general welfare of the people. It is essentially regulatory in nature. The authority, which Hence, the petition is granted and the
regulatory in nature and the power to issue devolved upon local government units to issue respondent City Mayor is hereby ordered to
licenses or grant business permits, if or grant such licenses or permits, is reissue petitioner's business permit in
exercised for a regulatory and not revenue- essentially in the exercise of the police power accordance with law and with this disposition.
raising purpose, is within the ambit of this of the State within the contemplation of the
power. The authority of city mayors to issue or general welfare clause of the Local Note:
grant licenses and business permits is beyond Government Code.
cavil. However, the power to grant or issue Doctrine: The scope of police power has
licenses or business permits must always be What is sought by petitioner from respondent been held to be so comprehensive as to
exercised in accordance with law, with utmost City Mayor is a permit to engage in the encompass almost all matters affecting
observance of the rights of all concerned to business of running an optical shop. It does the health, safety, peace, order, morals,
due process and equal protection of the law. not purport to seek a license to engage in the comfort and convenience of the
practice of optometry. The objective of the community. Police power is essentially
In the case under consideration, the business imposition of subject conditions on petitioner's regulatory in nature and the power to
permit granted by respondent City Mayor to business permit could be attained by requiring issue licenses or grant business permits,
petitioner was burdened with several the optometrists in petitioner's employ to if exercised for a regulatory and not
revenue-raising purpose, is within the Ordinance directly affects their business
ambit of this power. interests as operators of drive-in-hotels and
motels in Manila.
Requisites
RTC ruled in favor of the petitioner.
1 - LAWFUL SUBJECT: The interests WHITE LIGHT CORPORATION, TITANIUM CA reversed the decision and asserted that
of the public generally, as distinguished CORPORATION and STA. MESA TOURIST the Ordinance is a valid exercise of police
from those of a particular class, require & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. power.
CITY OF MANILA, represented by DE
the exercise of the police power
CASTRO, MAYOR ALFREDO S. LIM
ISSUE:
2 - LAWFUL MEANS: The means G.R. No. 122846 January 20, 2009
employed are reasonably necessary for WON the ordinance is constitutional.
the accomplishment of the purpose and FACTS:
not unduly oppressive upon individuals HELD:
In 1992, Mayor Alfredo S. Lim signed into law
the Ordinance No. 7744 that prohibits hotels, NO.The ordinance is null and void as it indeed
motels, inns, lodging houses, pension houses infringes upon individual liberty. It also violates
and similar establishments from offering short- the due process clause which serves as a
time admission, as well as pro-rated or “wash guaranty for protection against arbitrary
up” rates or other similarly concocted terms, in regulation or seizure. The said ordinance
the City of Manila. invades private rights. Note that not all who
goes into motels and hotels for wash up rate
The apparent goal of the Ordinance is to are really there for obscene purposes only.
minimize if not eliminate the use of the Some are tourists who needed rest or to
covered establishments for illicit sex, “wash up” or to freshen up.
prostitution, drug use and alike.
Hence, the infidelity sought to be avoided by
Petitioners White Light Corporation (WLC) et. the said ordinance is more or less subjected
al. filed a petition on the ground that the only to a limited group of people. The SC
reiterates that individual rights may be Then Mayor Magtajas together with the city WON Ordinance No. 3353 and Ordinance No.
adversely affected only to the extent that may legislators and civil organizations of the City of 3375-93 are a valid exercise of police power.
fairly be required by the legitimate demands of Cagayan de Oro denounced such project.
public interest or public welfare. HELD:
In reaction to this project, the Sangguniang
Panlungsod of Cagayan de Oro City enacted NO. The ordinances enacted are invalid.
MAYOR PABLO P. MAGTAJAS & THE CITY two (2) ordinances prohibiting the issuance of Ordinances should not contravene a statute.
OF CAGAYAN DE ORO vs. PRYCE a business permit and canceling existing Municipal governments are merely agents of
PROPERTIES CORPORATION, INC. & business permit to establishment for the the National Government. Local Councils
PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT AND GAMING
operation of casino (ORDINANCE NO. 3353) exercise only delegated powers conferred by
CORPORATION
and an ordinance prohibiting the operation of Congress. The delegate cannot be superior to
G.R. No. 111097 July 20, 1994 casino and providing penalty for its violation. the principal powers higher than those of the
(ORDINANCE NO. 3375-93). latter. PD 1869 authorized casino gambling.
As a statute, it cannot be amended/nullified by
FACTS: Pryce assailed the ordinances before the a mere ordinance.
Court of Appeals, where it was joined by
PAGCOR is a corporation created directly by PAGCOR as intervenor and supplemental As to petitioners attack on gambling as
P.D. 1869 to help centralize and regulate all petitioner. harmful and immoral, the Court stressed that
games of chance, including casinos on land the morality of gambling is not a justiciable
and sea within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals declared the ordinances issue. Gambling is not illegal per se. While it is
Philippines. invalid and issued the writ prayed for to generally considered inimical to the interests
prohibit their enforcement. 1 Reconsideration of the people, there is nothing in the
PAGCOR decided to expand its operations to of this decision was denied against Constitution categorically proscribing or
Cagayan de Oro City. It leased a portion of a petitioners. penalizing gambling or, for that matter, even
building belonging to Pryce Properties mentioning it at all. It is left to Congress to
Corporations, Inc., renovated & equipped the Hence, this petition for review under Rule 45. deal with the activity as it sees fit. In the
same, and prepared to inaugurate its casino exercise of its own discretion, the legislature
during the Christmas season. ISSUE: may prohibit gambling altogether or allow it
without limitation or it may prohibit some forms
of gambling and allow others for whatever The Petitioners, theater owners, aggrieved by
reasons it may consider sufficient. Thus, it has said ordinance, they file a complaint before
prohibited jueteng and monte but permits the Court of First Instance of Agusan del
lotteries, cockfighting, and horse-racing. In Norte and Butuan City assailing the
making such choices, Congress has consulted constitutionality of Ordinance No. 640.
its own wisdom, which this Court has no
authority to review, much less reverse. Well The Court rendered judgment declaring
has it been said that courts do not sit to Ordinance No. 640 of the City of Butuan
resolve the merits of conflicting theories. That constitutional and valid.
is the prerogative of the political departments. CARLOS BALACUIT, LAMBERTO TAN and
It is settled that questions regarding the SERGIO YU CARCEL vs. COURT OF FIRST ISSUE:
wisdom, morality, or practicability of statutes INSTANCE OF AGUSAN DEL NORTE AND
BUTUAN CITY
are not addressed to the judiciary but may be WON Ordinance No. 640 is a valid exercise of
resolved only by the legislative and executive G.R. No. L-38429 June 30, 1988 police power.
departments, to which the function belongs in
our scheme of government. That function is FACTS: HELD:
exclusive. Whichever way these branches
decide, they are answerable only to their own The Municipal Board of the City of Butuan No. Ordinance No. 640 infringes theater
conscience and the constituents who will pass an ordinance penalizing any person, owners’ right to property.
ultimately judge their acts, and not to the group of persons, entity, or corporation
courts of justice. engaged in the business of selling admission While it is true that a business may be
tickets to any movie or other public regulated, it is equally true that such
exhibitions, games, contests, or other regulation must be within the bounds of
performances to require children between reason, that is, the regulatory ordinance must
seven (7) and twelve (12) years of age to pay be reasonable, and its provisions cannot be
full payment for admission tickets intended for oppressive amounting to an arbitrary
adults but should charge only one-half of the interference with the business or calling
value of the said tickets. subject of regulation. A lawful business or
calling may not, under the guise of regulation,
be unreasonably interfered with even by the the implementing rules and regulations of the
exercise of police power. Wherefore, the decision of the trial court in said instruction.
Special Civil Case No. 237 is REVERSED and
A police measure for the regulation of the SET ASIDE and a new judgment is hereby Petitioner make known that he "is the owner of
conduct, control and operation of a business rendered declaring Ordinance No. 640 a Volkswagen Beetle Car, Model 13035,
should not encroach upon the legitimate and unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void. already properly equipped when it came out
lawful exercise by the citizens of their property from the assembly lines with blinking lights
rights. The right of the owner to fix a price at fore and aft, which could very well serve as an
which his property shall be sold or used is an early warning device in case of the
inherent attribute of the property itself and, as emergencies mentioned in Letter of
such, within the protection of the due process Instructions No. 229, as amended, as well as
clause. Hence, the proprietors of a theater LEOVILLO C. AGUSTIN vs. HON. ROMEO the implementing rules and regulations in
have a right to manage their property in their F. EDU, et.al. Administrative Order No. 1 issued by the land
own way, to fix what prices of admission they transportation Commission,"
G.R. No. L-49112 February 2, 1979
think most for their own advantage, and that Furthermore, he contends that the law is "one-
any person who did not approve could stay FACTS: sided, onerous and patently illegal and
away. immoral because [they] will make
Petitioner, Agustin assails the validity of the manufacturers and dealers instant millionaires
Ordinance No. 640 clearly invades the Letter of Instruction No. 229 which requires an at the expense of car owners who are
personal and property rights of petitioners for early warning device to be carried by users of compelled to buy a set of the so-called early
even if We could assume that, on its face, the motor vehicles as being violative of the warning device at the rate of P 56.00 to
interference was reasonable, from the constitutional guarantee of due process and P72.00 per set." are unlawful and
foregoing considerations, it has been fully transgresses the fundamental principle of non- unconstitutional and contrary to the precepts
shown that it is an unwarranted and unlawful delegation of legislative power. of a compassionate New Society [as being]
curtailment of the property and personal rights compulsory and confiscatory on the part of the
of citizens. For being unreasonable and an Herein respondent Romeo Edu in his capacity motorists who could very well provide a
undue restraint of trade, it cannot, under the as Land Transportation Commisioner set forth practical alternative road safety device, or a
guise of exercising police power, be upheld as better substitute to the specified set of Early
valid. Warning Device (EWD)."
 welfare. In this case, the particular exercise of
This instruction, signed by President Marcos, police power was clearly intended to promote
aims to prevent accidents on streets and public safety.
highways, including expressways or limited It cannot be disputed that the Declaration of
access roads caused by the presence of Principle found in the Constitution possesses
disabled, stalled or parked motor vehicles relevance: “The Philippines adopts the
without appropriate early warning devices. generally accepted principles of international
The hazards posed by these disabled vehicles law as part of the law of the nation.”
are recognized by international bodies
concerned with traffic safety. The Philippines Thus, as impressed in the 1968 Vienna
is a signatory of the 1968 Vienna Convention Convention it is not for this country to
on Road Signs and Signals and the United repudiate a commitment to which it had
Nations Organizations and the said Vienna pledged its word. Our country’s word was
Convention was ratified by the Philippine resembled in our own act of legislative
Government under PD 207. ratification of the said Hague and Vienna MMDA vs. BEL-AIR VILLAGE
Conventions thru P.D. No. 207. ASSOCIATION, INC.
ISSUE:
G.R. No. 135962 March 27, 2000
The concept of Pacta sunt servanda stands in
WON the LOI 229 is invalid and violated the way of such an attitude which is,
FACTS:
constitutional guarantees of due process. moreoever, at war with the principle of
international morality.
Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
HELD:
(MMDA), petitioner herein, is a Government
NO. The assailed Letter of Instruction was a Hence, the petition must be dismissed.
Agency 　 tasked with the delivery of basic
valid exercise of police power and there was
services in Metro Manila. Bel-Air Village
no unlawful delegation of legislative power on
Association (BAVA), 　 respondent herein,
the part of the respondent. As identified,
received a letter of request from the petitioner
police power is a state authority to enact
to open Neptune Street of Bel-Air Village for
legislation that may interfere personal liberty
the use of the public. The said opening of
or property in order to promote the general
Neptune Street will be for the safe and
convenient movement of persons and to NO. The Court held that the MMDA does not
regulate the flow of traffic in Makati City. This have the capacity to exercise police power.
was　pursuant to MMDA law or Republic Act Police power 　 is primarily lodged in the
No. 7924.　On the same day, the respondent National Legislature. However, police power
was 　 appraised that the perimeter wall may be delegated to 　 government units.
separating the 　 subdivision and Kalayaan Petitioner herein is a development authority
Avenue would be　demolished. and not a political government 　 unit.
Therefore, the MMDA cannot exercise police
The respondent, to stop the opening of the power because it cannot be delegated to
said street and demolition of the wall, filed a them.
preliminary injunction and a temporary
restraining order. Respondent claimed that the It is not a legislative unit of the government.
MMDA had 　 no authority to do so and the Republic Act No. 7924 does not empower the
lower court decided in favor of the MMDA 　 to enact ordinances, approve
Respondent. Petitioner appealed 　 the resolutions and appropriate funds for the
decision of the lower courts and claimed that it general welfare of the　inhabitants of Manila. MMDA v.. DANTE O. GARIN
has the authority to open Neptune Street to There is no syllable in the said act that grants
G.R. No. 130230             April 15, 2005
public traffic because it is an agent of the MMDA police power.　It is an agency created
State that can 　 practice police power in the for the purpose of laying down policies and FACTS:
delivery of　basic services in Metro Manila. coordinating with various 　 national
government agencies, people’s organizations, The issue arose from an incident involving the
ISSUE: non-governmental organizations and the respondent Dante O. Garin, a lawyer, who
private sector for the efficient and expeditious was issued a traffic violation receipt (TVR) by
Whether or not the MMDA has the mandate to delivery of basic services in the vast MMDA and his driver's license confiscated for
open Neptune Street to public traffic pursuant metropolitan　area. parking illegally along Gandara Street,
to its regulatory and police powers.
Binondo, Manila, on August 1995.

HELD:
Shortly before the expiration of the TVR's ISSUE: the provinces, cities, municipalities and
validity, the respondent addressed a letter to barangays, which exercise police power
then MMDA Chairman Prospero Oreta WON MMDA, through Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act through their respective legislative bodies.
requesting the return of his driver's license, No. 7924 could validly exercise police power.
and expressing his preference for his case to Metropolitan or Metro Manila is a body
be filed in court. HELD: composed of several local government units.
With the passage of Rep. Act No. 7924 in
Receiving no immediate reply, Garin filed the NO. The MMDA could not validly exercise 1995, Metropolitan Manila was declared as a
original complaint with application for police power. "special development and administrative
preliminary injunction, contending that, in the region" and the administration of "metro-wide"
absence of any implementing rules and Police Power, having been lodged primarily in basic services affecting the region placed
regulations, Sec. 5(f) of Rep. Act No. 7924 the National Legislature, cannot be exercised under "a development authority" referred to as
grants the MMDA unbridled discretion to by any group or body of individuals not the MMDA. Thus: The MMDA is, as termed in
deprive erring motorists of their licenses, pre- possessing legislative power. The National the charter itself, a "development authority." It
empting a judicial determination of the validity Legislature, however, may delegate this is an agency created for the purpose of laying
of the deprivation, thereby violating the due power to the president and administrative down policies and coordinating with the
process clause of the Constitution. boards as well as the lawmaking bodies of various national government agencies,
municipal corporations or local government people's organizations, non-governmental
The respondent further contended that the units (LGUs). Once delegated, the agents can organizations and the private sector for the
provision violates the constitutional prohibition exercise only such legislative powers as are efficient and expeditious delivery of basic
against undue delegation of legislative conferred on them by the national lawmaking services in the vast metropolitan area. All its
authority, allowing as it does the MMDA to fix body. functions are administrative in nature and
and impose unspecified — and therefore these are actually summed up in the charter
unlimited — fines and other penalties on Our Congress delegated police power to the itself:
erring motorists. LGUs in the Local Government Code of 1991.
15 A local government is a "political * Section 5 of Rep. Act No. 7924
The trial court rendered the assailed decision subdivision of a nation or state which is enumerates the "Functions and Powers
in favor of herein respondent. constituted by law and has substantial control of the Metro Manila Development
of local affairs." 16 Local government units are Authority." The contested clause in Sec.
5(f) states that the petitioner shall "install recommended a plan to “decongest traffic by
and administer a single ticketing system, eliminating the bus terminals now located
fix, impose and collect fines and along major Metro Manila thoroughfares and
penalties for all kinds of violations of providing more and convenient access to the
traffic rules and regulations, whether mass transport system.” The MMC gave a go
moving or non-moving in nature, and signal for the project. Viron Transit, a bus
confiscate and suspend or revoke company assailed the move. They alleged
drivers' licenses in the enforcement of that the MMDA didn’t have the power to direct
such traffic laws and regulations, the operators to abandon their terminals. In doing
provisions of Rep. Act No. 4136 and so they asked the court to interpret the extent
P.D. No. 1605 to the contrary and scope of MMDA’s power under RA 7924.
notwithstanding," and that "(f)or this They also asked if the MMDA law
purpose, the Authority shall enforce all contravened the Public Service Act.
traffic laws and regulations in Metro
Manila, through its traffic operation Another bus operator, Mencorp, prayed for a
center, and may deputize members of TRO for the implementation in a trial court. In
the PNP, traffic enforcers of local the Pre-Trial Order17 issued by the trial court,
government units, duly licensed security the issues were narrowed down to whether 1)
guards, or members of non- THE METROPOLITAN MANILA the MMDA’s power to regulate traffic in Metro
governmental organizations to whom DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and BAYANI Manila included the power to direct provincial
may be delegated certain authority, FERNANDO vs. VIRON TRANSPORTATION bus operators to abandon and close their duly
subject to such conditions and CO., INC. established and existing bus terminals in order
requirements as the Authority may to conduct business in a common terminal; (2)
G.R. No. 170656 August 15, 2007
impose." the E.O. is consistent with the Public Service
FACTS: Act and the Constitution; and (3) provincial
bus operators would be deprived of their real
GMA declared Executive Order (E.O.) No. 179 properties without due process of law should
operational, thereby creating the MMDA in they be required to use the common bus
2003. Due to traffic congestion, the MMDA
terminals. The trial court sustained the make available for use government property among other things, the loss of income from
constitutionality. along EDSA and South Expressway corridors. the operation and/or rentals of stalls thereat.
They add that the only relation created by the Precisely, respondents claim a deprivation of
Both bus lines filed for a MFR in the trial court. E.O. is that between the Chief Executive and their constitutional right to property without
It, on September 8, 2005, reversed its the implementing officials, but not between due process of law.
Decision, this time holding that the E.O. was third persons.
"an unreasonable exercise of police power"; Respondents have thus amply demonstrated
that the authority of the MMDA under Section ISSUES: a "personal and substantial interest in the
(5)(e) of R.A. No. 7924 does not include the 1. Is there a justiciable controversy? case such that [they have] sustained, or will
power to order the closure of Viron’s and sustain, direct injury as a result of [the E.O.’s]
Mencorp’s existing bus terminals; and that the 2. Is the elimination of bus terminals enforcement." Consequently, the established
E.O. is inconsistent with the provisions of the unconstitutional? rule that the constitutionality of a law or
Public Service Act. administrative issuance can be challenged by
HELD: one who will sustain a direct injury as a result
MMDA filed a petition in the Supreme Court. of its enforcement has been satisfied by
Petitioners contend that there is no justiciable 1. Yes. The Court reiterated the requisites that respondents.
controversy in the cases for declaratory relief constitutes a justiceable controversy, that: 2. Yes. Under E.O. 125 A, the DOTC was
as nothing in the body of the E.O. mentions or (a) there must be a justiciable given the objective of guiding government and
orders the closure and elimination of bus controversy; (b) the controversy must be private investment in the development of the
terminals along the major thoroughfares of between persons whose interests are country’s intermodal transportation and
Metro Manila. To them, Viron and Mencorp adverse; (c) the party seeking communications systems. It was also tasked
failed to produce any letter or communication declaratory relief must have a legal to administer all laws, rules and regulations in
from the Executive Department apprising interest in the controversy; and (d) the the field of transportation and
them of an immediate plan to close down their issue invoked must be ripe for judicial communications.
bus terminals. determination
It bears stressing that under the provisions of
And petitioners maintain that the E.O. is only It cannot be gainsaid that the E.O. would have E.O. No. 125, as amended, it is the DOTC,
an administrative directive to government an adverse effect on respondents. The and not the MMDA, which is authorized to
agencies to coordinate with the MMDA and to closure of their bus terminals would mean, establish and implement a project such as the
one subject of the cases at bar. Thus, the have been validly designated by the President say the least, a menace to public safety." As
President, although authorized to establish or to undertake the Project. such, measures calculated to promote the
cause the implementation of the Project, must safety and convenience of the people using
exercise the authority through the MMDA’s move didn’t satisfy police power the thoroughfares by the regulation of
instrumentality of the DOTC which, by law, is requirements such as that (1) the interest of vehicular traffic present a proper subject for
the primary implementing and administrative the public generally, as distinguished from that the exercise of police power.
entity in the promotion, development and of a particular class, requires its exercise; and
regulation of networks of transportation, and (2) the means employed are reasonably Notably, the parties herein concede that traffic
the one so authorized to establish and necessary for the accomplishment of the congestion is a public concern that needs to
implement a project such as the Project in purpose and not unduly oppressive upon be addressed immediately. Are the means
question. individuals. Stated differently, the police power employed appropriate and reasonably
legislation must be firmly grounded on public necessary for the accomplishment of the
By designating the MMDA as the interest and welfare and a reasonable relation purpose. Are they not duly oppressive?
implementing agency of the Project, the must exist between the purposes and the
President clearly overstepped the limits of the means. De la Cruz v. Paras- Bus terminals per se do
authority conferred by law, rendering E.O. No. not, however, impede or help impede the flow
179 ultra vires. There was no grant of As early as Calalang v. Williams, this Court of traffic. How the outright proscription against
authority to MMDA. It was delegated only to recognized that traffic congestion is a public, the existence of all terminals, apart from that
set the policies concerning traffic in Metro not merely a private, concern. The Court franchised to petitioner, can be considered as
Manila, and shall coordinate and regulate the therein held that public welfare underlies the reasonably necessary to solve the traffic
implementation of all programs and projects contested statute authorizing the Director of problem, this Court has not been enlightened
concerning traffic management, specifically Public Works to promulgate rules and
pertaining to enforcement, engineering and regulations to regulate and control traffic on In the subject ordinances, however, the scope
education. national roads. of the proscription against the maintenance of
terminals is so broad that even entities which
In light of the administrative nature of its Likewise, in Luque v. Villegas,46 this Court might be able to provide facilities better than
powers and functions, the MMDA is devoid of emphasized that public welfare lies at the the franchised terminal are barred from
authority to implement the Project as bottom of any regulatory measure designed operating at all.
envisioned by the E.O; hence, it could not "to relieve congestion of traffic, which is, to
Finally, an order for the closure of
respondents’ terminals is not in line with the
provisions of the Public Service Act.

Consonant with such grant of authority, the

PSC (now the ltfrb)was empowered to
"impose such conditions as to construction,
equipment, maintenance, service, or operation
as the public interests and convenience may
reasonably require" in approving any franchise
or privilege. The law mandates the ltfrb to
require any public service to establish,
construct, maintain, and operate any
reasonable extension of its existing facilities.