Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Chavez v. Romulo Pursuant to PGMA’s speech stressing the W/N the revocation of the NO. The right to bear arms is a mere A license authorizing a person to enjoy a certain
GR No. 157036 need for a nationwide gun ban in all public PTCFORs pursuant to the statutory privilege, not a constitutional privilege is neither a property nor property right.
9 June 2004 places, PNP Chief Ebdane issued the Guidelines is a violation of right. Being a mere statutory creation,
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J. “Guidelines in the Implementation of the the people’s right to the right to bear arms cannot be
Ban on the Carrying of Firearms Outside property. considered an inalienable or absolute
of Residence.” It revoked all existing right. A license authorizing a person to
Permits to Carry Firearms Outside of enjoy a certain privilege is neither a
Residence (PTCFOR), subject to renewal. property nor property right.
Francisco Chavez, a licensed gun owner to YES. It is apparent from the assailed
whom a PTCFOR has been issued, Guidelines that the basis for its issuance
requested the DILG to reconsider the was the need for peace and order in the
implementation of the assailed Guidelines. W/N the issuance of the society. Undeniably, the motivating
His request was denied. Thus, he went to assailed Guidelines is a valid factor in the issuance of the Guidelines
court to challenge the constitutionality of exercise of police power. is the interest of the public in general.
the Guidelines.
1
Constitutional Law Case Digest
PRC v. de Guzman 79 successful examinees of the Physician W/N the Board has YES. The practice of medicine is a The power to regulate the exercise of a
GR No. 144681 Licensure Examination from Fatima discretion to hold in privilege, subject to qualifications and profession or pursuit of an occupation cannot be
21 June 2004 College obtained unusual and abeyance the administration disqualifications. It must appear that the exercised by the State or its agents in an
Tinga, J. exceptionally high scores in the two most of the Hippocratic oath and applicant has fully complied with all the arbitrary, despotic, or oppressive manner.
difficult subjects of the exam, which the issuance of the conditions and requirements imposed
aroused the suspicion of the Board of certificates to successful by the law and the licensing authority.
Medicine. They had the results surveyed board examinees. Should doubt taint or mar the
by a statistician and investigated by the compliance as being less than
NBI. satisfactory, then the privilege will not
issue. Until the moral and mental fitness
Subsequently, they adopted a Resolution of de Guzman, et al. could be
which withheld the registration as ascertained, the Board has discretion to
physicians of the Fatima examinees. After hold in abeyance the administration of
the results of the investigation of the NBI the Hippocratic oath and the issuance of
and the survey of Fr. Nebres, the Board the certificates to them. The writ of
issued another Resolution charging the said mandamus does not lie to compel
examinees with immorality, dishonest performance of an act which is not duly
conduct, fraud, and deceit. authorized.
2
Constitutional Law Case Digest
3
Constitutional Law Case Digest
168741 enumerates the vehicles 1. Its promulgation is actually 2. It must be promulgated in accordance
20 February 2006 excluded/exempted from the prohibition. authorized by the legislature with the prescribed procedure;
Ynares-Santiago, J. Three separate actions for declaratory (Tariff and Customs Code, 3. It must be within the scope of the
relief were filed before an Olongapo RTC, Omnibus Investment Code, authority given by the legislature; and
asserting that Article 2, Section 3.1 is Safeguard Measures Act); and 4. It must be reasonable.
unconstitutional and illegal. The RTC 2. It is presumed that the EO duly
granted all the petitions and declared the complied with the procedures
EO unconstitutional. and limitations imposed by law,
absent any strong evidence to
the contrary.
However, the proscription in the
importation of used motor vehicles
should be operative only outside the
Freeport and he inclusion of said zone
within the ambit of prohibition is an
invalid modification of RA 7227 (Bases
Conversion and Development Act of
1992). When the application of an
administrative issuance modifies
existing laws or exceeds the intended
scope, the issuance becomes void, not
only for being ultra vires but also for
being unreasonable.
Lucero v. City The brothers Lucero and one Tenorio were W/N the Luceros may claim NO. The 1983 lease contracts did not A public market is one dedicated to the service
Government of Pasig granted lease contracts to occupy stalls in a vested right to the market give petitioners irrefutable rights to the of the general public and operated under
GR No. 132834 the public market if Pasig in 1983. In 1993, stalls they were occupying. market stalls. They were mere grantees government control and supervision as a public
24 November 2006 Pasig renovated its market facilities and of a privilege to occupy and operate utility. Hence, the operation of a public market
Corona, J. passed Municipal Ordinance No. 56 which such booths. and its facilities is imbued with public interest.
mandated all stall occupants to fill up and
submit application forms which would YES. The operation of a market stall by
serve as their lease contracts if approved. W/N the Municipal virtue of a license is always subject to
Ordinance was a valid the police power of a city government.
The Luceros and Tenorio, however, refused exercise of police power. An application for this privilege may be
to apply for a new lease on their stalls. The granted or refused for reasons of public
Pasig government filed a case for policy and sound public administration.
ejectment against them.
4
Constitutional Law Case Digest
Various petitions were filed to annul the NO. The PIATCO contracts run afoul of
CA, ARCA, and the Supplements; and to the Constitution. This is because the
prohibit the DOTC, and MIAA from W/N the PIATCO Contracts ARCA provides for a direct government
implementing them. themselves are guaranty in the form of taking over of
5
Constitutional Law Case Digest
6
Constitutional Law Case Digest
reconveyance of his lot and offered to pay owner reacquires the property so meet a public exigency and is said to be an
for the value of his former land. He expropriated. On the other hand, when essential part of governance even in its most
maintained that the original purpose for land has been acquired for public use in primitive form and thus inseparable from
which the property was expropriated had fee simple, unconditionally, either by sovereignty.
ceased, and title to the property should the exercise of eminent domain or by
therefore revert to him. purchase, the former owner retains no Notwithstanding the grant to individuals, the
rights in the land, and the public use eminent domain, the highest and most exact idea
may be abandoned or the land may be of property, remains in the government, or in the
devoted to a different use, without any aggregate body of people in their sovereign
impairment of the estate or title capacity; and they have the right to resume the
acquired, or any reversion to the former possession of the property whenever the public
owner. In this case, the terms of interest so requires it.
judgment regarding the expropriation of
the property granted title in fee simple
to the Republic of the Philippines.
Therefore, no rights either express or
implied, have been retained by Gopuco.
7
Constitutional Law Case Digest
not appear whether payment of just expropriation or memorandum of understood to be an ultimate right of the
compensation had been made. agreement, shall not entitle the owner to sovereign power to appropriate any property
In 1994, NIA assessed the Palileos an the recovery of possession but only to within its territorial sovereignty for a public
irrigation service fee. Shortly thereafter, just compensation, following existing purpose.
the Palileos demanded reasonable rentals case law. However, with respect to the
from NIA for occupying their property. claim of just compensation, PD 552 has
When NIA refused to pay, the Palileos barred their claims. With respect to the
sued for recovery of possession, arguing irrigation canal, the action accrued 18
that there was no payment of just years prior to the PD’s approval. The
compensation, nor was there expropriation PD provides that actions for recovery of
proceedings filed with respect to the compensation and damages against NIA
acquisition of the property used as an which have accrued for 10 or more
access road. years prior to the decree’s approval are
deemed to have prescribed and are
barred forever. As for the access road,
the action was commenced only after 12
years. The PD also provides that claims
should be taken within 5 years from the
time the property was taken. Thus, the
actions of the Palileos have already
prescribed. They cannot recover just
compensation anymore.