Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Constitutional Law 1: (Notes and Cases)
Constitutional Law 1: (Notes and Cases)
By
DELEGATION OF POWERS
NON-DELEGATION OF POWERS
Sec. 3, Art. X - Congress shall enact a local government code which shall
4) Delegation to LOCAL
provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure
GOVERNMENTS instituted through a system of decentralization...
Sec. 28(2), Art. VI, 1987 Constitution - The Congress may by law authorize
the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations
BASIS and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas,
tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts, within the
framework of the national development program of the government.
Garcia vs. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 101273. July 3, 1992 - Sec. 28(2) of Art. VI
of the Constitution provides as follows: (There is thus explicit constitutional permission 1
to Congress to authorize the President "subject to such limitations and restrictions is
Illustrative [Congress] may impose" to fix "within specific limits" "tariff rates . . . and other duties or
Case imposts . . .” The relevant congressional statute is the Tariff and Customs Code of the
Philippines, and Sections 104 and 401, the pertinent provisions thereof. These are the
provisions which the President explicitly invoked in promulgating Executive Orders Nos.
475 and 478. Section 104 of the Tariff and Customs Code provides in relevant part:
CONDITIONS FOR DELEGATION OF EMERGENCY POWERS
a) p ow e r s n e c e s s a r y a n d
3. delegation must be subject to such proper;
restrictions as Congress may
prescribe; b) for carrying out a declared
national policy.
Sec. 26, Art. VI, 1935 Constitution - In times of Although HB 727 (repealing all
war or other national emergency, the Congress Emergency Powers Acts), had
may by law authorize the President, for a
limited period and subject to such restrictions been vetoed by the President and
2nd CASE as it may prescribe, to promulgate rules and did not thereby become a regular
regulations to carry out a declared national policy. statute, it may at least be
Rodriguez vs. Gella considered as a concurrent
SEC. 4, CA 671 - This Act shall take effect upon
G.R. No. L-6266. Feb. 2, 1953 its approval, and the rules and regulations resolution of the Congress
promulgated hereunder shall be in force and f o r m a l l y d e c l a ri n g t h e
effect until the Congress of the Philippines shall termination of the
otherwise provide. emergency powers.
3. DELEGATION TO THE PEOPLE
1935 Constitution 1973 Constitution 1987 Constitution
(Art. XV, Sec. 1) (Art. XVI, Sec. 1(1)) (Sec. 2, Art. XVII)
The Congress in
joint session assembled,
Amendments to this Constitution
Any amendment to, or
by a vote of three-fourths
revision of, this Constitution
may likewise be directly proposed
of all the Members of the by the people through initiative
may be proposed by the
Senate and of the House of
Batasang Pambansa
Representatives upon a petition of at least twelve
voting separately, per centum of the total number
upon a vote of three-fourths
of registered voters,
of all its Members,
may propose amendments
to this Constitution of which every legislative district
or
must be represented by at least
or three per centum of the
by a constitutional convention.
registered voters therein.
call a convention for this
purpose.
4. DELEGATION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
Lucena Grand Central Terminal vs. JAC Liner, G.R. No. 148339. Feb.
2. not unfair or
23, 2005- since compulsory use of the terminal would subject users
oppressive. thereof to fees, such measure is unduly oppressive.
Lagcao vs. Labra, G.R. No. 155746. Oct. 13, 2004 - fact that petitioners’
3. not partial or small property was singled out for expropriation for the purpose of
discriminatory. awarding it to no more than a few squatters indicated manifest partiality
against petitioners.
Dela Cruz vs. Paras, G.R. No. L-42571. July 25, 1983 - If night clubs
4. not prohibit but may
were merely then regulated and not prohibited, certainly the assailed
regulate trade. ordinance would pass the test of validity.
White Light Corp. vs. City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846. Jan. 20, 2009 -
The Ordinance needlessly restrains the operation of the businesses of the
6. not unreasonable. petitioners as well as restricting the rights of their patrons without
sufficient justification.
5. DELEGATION TO ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
RULES
those issued by administrative or executive officers; in
and
REGULATIONS
accordance with and as authorized by law.
U.S. vs. Ang Tang G.R. No. 17122. Feb. 27, 1922 - Legislature did not
specify under what conditions the rules may be issued and did not define
Illustrative Case what constitutes extraordinary increase in price of cereals. Promulgation
of rules is left to sole discretion of Governor General. Law is thus
incomplete as a legislation.
Ynot vs. IAC, G.R. No. 74457. Mar. 20, 1987 - One searches in vain
for the usual standard and the reasonable guideline, or better still, the
Illustrative Case limitations that said officers must observe when they make their
distribution. There is none.
LIMITATIONS ON RULE-MAKING POWER
DAR vs. Sutton, G.R. No. 162070. Oct. 19, 2005 - DAR AO No. 9 which sought to
regulate livestock farms by including them in the coverage of agrarian reform and
prescribing a maximum retention limit for their ownership, contravenes the Constitution.
1. not inconsistent DAR has no power to regulate livestock farms which have been exempted by the
Constitution from the coverage of agrarian reform.
with the Constitution
or statute. Solicitor General vs. MMA, G.R. No. 102782. Dec. 11, 1991 - PD 1605 does not
allow either removal of license plates or confiscation of driver's licenses for traffic
violations. Ordinance imposes sanctions PD does not allow and actually prohibits.
Ordinance violates and in effect partially repeals the law.
BOIE-Takeda vs. De la Serna, G.R. No. 92174. Dec. 10, 1993 - In including
commissions in the computation of 13th month pay, DOLE unduly expanded the
2. cannot amend an concept of ‘basic salary” as defined in PD 851. It is a fundamental rule that
act of Congress. implementing rules cannot add or detract from the provisions of the law it is designed to
implement. They cannot widen its scope . Administrative agency cannot amend an act of
Congress.
United BFHA vs. BF Homes, G.R. No. 124873. July 14, 1999 - HIGC went beyond
the authority provided by the law when it promulgated the revised rules of procedure.
3. cannot exceed There was a clear attempt to unduly expand the provisions of PD 902-A. The inclusion of
provisions of basic law the phrase GENERAL PUBLIC OR OTHER ENTITY is a matter which HIGC cannot
legally do.
4. uniform, reasonable, Lupangco vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 77372. Apr. 29, 1988 - Resolution 105 is
not only unreasonable and arbitrary, it also infringes on the examinees' right to liberty
and not unfair or guaranteed by the Constitution. PRC has no authority to dictate on the reviewees as to
discriminatory how they should prepare themselves for the licensure examinations.
END