Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Ferrer Vs Bautista

    Uploaded by

    Vikki Amorio
    67 views1 page
    The City of Quezon City passed an ordinance imposing garbage collection fees on domestic households based on land or floor area. Jose Ferrer, a property owner, questioned the validity of the ordinance, arguing it violated equality by not also imposing fees on commercial establishments like restaurants that produce more garbage. The Supreme Court ruled the ordinance was not valid as it violated the equal protection clause, as there is no substantial distinction between residential and commercial establishments for purposes of garbage collection and output.

    Original Description:

    Taxation 1: Ferrer vs Bautista

    Original Title

    2. Ferrer vs Bautista

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The City of Quezon City passed an ordinance imposing garbage collection fees on domestic households based on land or floor area. Jose Ferrer, a property owner, questioned the validity of the ordinance, arguing it violated equality by not also imposing fees on commercial establishments like restaurants that produce more garbage. The Supreme Court ruled the ordinance was not valid as it violated the equal protection clause, as there is no substantial distinction between residential and commercial establishments for purposes of garbage collection and output.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    67 views1 page

    Ferrer Vs Bautista

    Uploaded by

    Vikki Amorio
    The City of Quezon City passed an ordinance imposing garbage collection fees on domestic households based on land or floor area. Jose Ferrer, a property owner, questioned the validity of the ordinance, arguing it violated equality by not also imposing fees on commercial establishments like restaurants that produce more garbage. The Supreme Court ruled the ordinance was not valid as it violated the equal protection clause, as there is no substantial distinction between residential and commercial establishments for purposes of garbage collection and output.

    Copyright:

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

    Ferrer, Jr. vs.

    Bautista
    760 SCRA 652

    FACTS:
    The City of Quezon City passed Ordinance No. SP-2235, S-2013 on Garbage
    Collection Fees imposing fees depending on the amount of the land or floor area.
    Jose Ferrer, a property owner questioned the validity of this city ordinance.
    According to him, it violates the he rule on equality because the fees are collected
    from only domestic households and not from restaurants, food courts, fast food
    chains, and other commercial dining places that spew garbage much more than
    residential property owners

    ISSUE:
    Whether the ordinance is valid.

    RULING:
    No, the ordinance is not valid because it violates the equal protection clause.

    For the purpose of garbage collection, there is, in fact, no substantial distinction
    between an occupant of a lot, on one hand, and an occupant of a unit in a
    condominium, socialized housing project or apartment, on the other hand. Most
    likely, garbage output produced by these types of occupants is uniform and does not
    vary to a large degree; thus, a similar schedule of fee is both just and equitable.

    You might also like