Agustin vs

edu

FACTS
Leovillo Agustin, the owner of a Beetle,
challenged the constitutionality of Letter of
Instruction 229 wheras clauses -(statistics
show that one of the major causes of fatal
or serious accidents in land transportation
is the presence of disabled, stalled, or
parked motor vehicles along streets or
highways without any appropriate early
warning device to signal approaching
motorists of their presence, the hazards
posed by such obstructions to traffic have
been recognized by international bodies
concerned with traffic safety, the 1968
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and
Signals and the United Nations
Organization (U.N.); [Whereas], the said
Vienna Convention which was ratified by
the Philippine Government under P.D. No.
207, recommended the enactment of local
legislation for the installation of road
safety signs and devices
Petitioner claimed that his car already had
warning lights and did not want to use this.
And because LTO was the issuer of the
device at the rate of not more than 15% of
the acquisition cost and it will make
manufacturers and car dealers millionaires
at the expense of car owners at 56-72
pesos per set.
To the petitioner, this was still an unlawful
delegation of police power.
Hence the petition.

ISSUE
WON the LOI
is valid
exercise of
police
power?

DECISION
Valid exercise of police power.
Police power is a state authority to enact legislation
that may interfere with personal liberty or property
to promote the general welfare. It is the power to
describe regulations to promote the health, morals,
peace, education, good order, and general welfare
of the people.
There was no factual foundation on petitioner to
refute validity. (Ermita Malate Hotel)-The
presumption of constitutionality must prevail in the
absence of factual record in over throwing the
statute.
There was no constitutional basis for petitioner
because the law doesnt violate any constitutional
provision.
LOI 229 doesnt force motor vehicle owners to
purchase the reflector from the LTO. It only
prescribes the requirement from any source. The
objective is public safety.
The Vienna convention on road rights and PD 207
both recommended enforcement for installation of
ewds. Bother possess relevance in applying rules
with the decvlaration of principles in the
Constitution.
The petition itself quoted these two whereas
clauses of the assailed Letter of Instruction:
"[Whereas], the hazards posed by such obstructions
to traffic have been recognized by international
bodies concerned with traffic safety, the 1968
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals and
the United Nations Organization (U.N.); [Whereas],
the said Vienna Convention, which was ratified by
the Philippine Government under P.D. No. 207,
recommended the enactment of local legislation for
the installation of road safety signs and

devices; . . ." It cannot be disputed then that this

Declaration of Principle found in the Constitution
possesses relevance: "The Philippines . . . adopts
the generally accepted principles of international
law as part of the law of the land, . . ." The 1968
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals is
impressed with such a character. It is not for this
country to repudiate a commitment to which it had
pledged its word. The concept of Pacta sunt
servanda stands in the way of such an attitude,
which is, moreover, at war with the principle of
international morality.
PAFLU vs
Sec of
Labor
1969-02-27
| G.R. No. L22228

Petitioners pray for writs of certiorari and

prohibition against the Secretary of Labor
from enforcing an order of cancellation of
the registration certificate of the Social
Security System Employees Association hereinafter referred to as the SSSEA which is affiliated to PAFLU - as well as to
annul all proceedings in connection with
said cancellation and to prohibit
respondents from enforcing Section 23 of
Republic Act No. 875 (an act to promote
industrial peace and for other purposes)repealed by the labor code.
Petitioners failed to submit their financial
reports within the required period and
hence respondent ordered the cancellation
of their registration certificate. Petitioners
claimed it is a violation of their right to self
organization guaranteed by the united
declaration of Human Rights.

WON
respondent
violated
petitioners
right to self
organize

NO. 1. the action was premature because there is

nothing, as yet, for the Secretary of Labor to
approve or disapprove, since petitioners' motion for
reconsideration of the Registrar's decision is still
pending resolution. In fact, this circumstance shows,
not only that the present action is premature, but
also, that petitioners have failed to exhaust the
administrative remedies available to them.
2. The determination of the question whether the
requirements of sec23 have been met, or whether
or not the requisite financial report have been filed
within the period above stated, is not judicial
power. Indeed, all officers of the government,
including those in the executive department, are
supposed to act on the basis of facts, as they see
the same. This is specially true as regards
administrative agencies given by law the power to
investigate and render decisions concerning details
related to the execution of laws and enforcement of
which is entrusted thereto.
3. the language of Section 23 suggests that, once
the conditions therein specified are present, the
office concerned "shall" have no choice but to issue
the order of cancellation. And the legal provisions

prescribing the period within which a decision

should be rendered are directory, not mandatory in
nature - in the sense that, a judgment promulgated
after the expiration of said period is not null and
void, although the officer who failed to comply with
law may be dealt with administratively, in
consequence of his delay

Reyes vs
Bagatsing

Swiss vs
USA
(The
Interhandel
case)

This was a petition for mandamus with writ

of preliminary injunction to review the
decision of the City of Mayor of Manila
Ramon Bagatsing, denying the application
for permit to hold a rally from Luneta to
the gates of the United States Embassy.

The General Aniline Film Co. GAF is a

corporation incorporated in US. Under the
trading with the Enemy Act, the Us govt
took almost all of the shares of said
company because such shares belong to a
certain Farben (german) an enemy
company. Farben controlled the shares of
GAF through a swiss company called
Interhandel and was found by the Swiss
authorities later on that it is no longer
controlled by any german or other enemy
company. Hence Switzerland seeks the

Whether the
contention
of mayor
Bagatsing as
to denying
the
application
for permit to
hold rally
was in
accordance
to the
Veinna
Convention?

WON the ICJ

has
jurisdiction
over the
case

NO.The Constitution adopts the generally accepted

principle of International law as part of the law of
the land. The Veinna Convention is a restatement of
the generally accepted principles of international
law. It should be a part of the law of the land. That
being a case, If there were clear and present danger
of any intrusion or damage or distribution of the
peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity,
there would be a justification for the denial of the
permit insofar as the terminal point would be the
Embassy.
Petition is GRANTED. The court found that there was
no clear and present danger of a substantive evil to
a legitimate public interest that would justify the
denial of the exercise of the constitutional rights of
free speech and peaceble assembly.
NO
The rule that local remedies must be exhausted
before international proceedings may be instituted
is a well-established rule of customary international
law; the rule has been generally observed in cases
in which a State has adopted the cause of its
national whose rights are claimed to have been
disregarded in another State in violation of
international law. Before resort may be had to an
international court in such a situation, it has been
considered necessary that the State where the
violation occurred should have an opportunity to

restoration of the shares of GAF that is

owned by Interhandel. However it was
opposed by the US who maintained that
Interhandel being controlled by farben,
hence still belongs to them.
Switzerland would like to submit the
dispute to the International Court of Justice
however US opposed saying that the ICJ
has no jurisdiction over the matter
because such matters belongs to the
domestic jurisdiction of the US.
The Swiss Government invokes Article VI of
the Washington Accord, which provides: 'In
case differences of opinion arise with
regard to the application or interpretation
of this Accord which cannot be settled in
any other way, recourse shall be had to
arbitration.' It also invokes the Treaty of
Arbitration and Conciliation between
Switzerland and the United States, dated
February 16th, 1931. Article I of this Treaty
provides: 'Every dispute arising between
the Contracting Parties, of whatever nature
it may be, shall, when ordinary diplomatic
proceedings have failed, be submitted to
arbitration or to conciliation, as the
Contracting Parties may at the time
decide.' The interpretation and application
of these provisions relating to arbitration
and conciliation involve questions of
international law.

redress it by its own means, within the framework

of its own domestic legal system.
It has also been contended on behalf of the Swiss
Government that in the proceedings based upon the
Trading with the Enemy Act, the United States
courts are not in a position to adjudicate in
accordance with the rules of international law and
that the Supreme Court, in its decision it made no
reference to the many questions of international law
which, in the opinion of the Swiss Government,
constitute the subject of the present dispute. But
the decisions of the United States courts bear
witness to the fact that United States courts are
competent to apply international law in their
decisions when necessary. In the present case,
when the dispute was brought to this Court, the
proceedings in the United States courts had not
reached the merits, in which considerations of
international law could have been profitably relied
upon.