8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 1/9

VERDER 2D

What is RA 7160? (See RA 7160, Sec 1 )

It is also called as the Local Government Code of the Philippines

Declaration of Policy (See RA 7160, Sec 2)

1. To enjo local a!tonom to attain their f!llest development as self"reliant comm!nitiesand ma#e them more e$ective partners in the attainment of national %oals.

2. To ens!re acco!nta&ilit of local %overnment !nits 'a#a LG(s).

*. To cond!ct periodic cons!ltations +ith appropriate LG(s.

What is Decentralization? (See RA 7160, Sec 3)

o  To allocate di$erent LG(s of theor respective po+ers, f!nctions, responsi&ilities andreso!rces.

o  To have an acco!nta&le, e-cient and namic or%aniaitonal str!ct!re.

o  To f!rther improve the performance of LG(s and the /!alit of comm!nit life.

In case of doubt in the interpretation of Local o!ern"ent #ode$ %ho shallpre!ail? (See RA 7160, Sec 5)

o 0n provisions in LG(s shall &e interpreted in its favor. In case of do!&t, it shall &e

resolved in favor of devol!tion of po+ers and of the lo+er LG(s. In case of eistence of po+er, it shall &e interpreted in favor of  LG( concerned.

o 0n ta ordinance or reven!e meas!re shall &e constr!ed strictl a%ainst the LG(enactin% it.

o or %eneral +elfare provisions, it shall &e interpreted as to %ive more po+ers to LG(s

in acceleratin% economic development and !p%radin% the /!alit of life for the peoplein the comm!nit.

o In ri%hts, contracts and o&li%ations, it shall &e %overned & its terms and conditions.

o If no le%al provision or j!rispr!dence applies, c!stoms and traditions in the place +here

the controversies +ill ta#e place.

Who has the po%er to create L&s? (See RA 7160, Sec 6)

o La+ enacted & Con%ress for province, cit, m!nicipalit or an other politicals!&division 'i.e. DP34, DTI)

o 5rdinance passed & provincial or cit co!ncil for &aran%a located +ithin its territorial

 j!risdiction.o 0ll s!&ject to limitations and re/!irements prescri&ed in this code 'i.e. income,

pop!lation and territor re/!irements)

What are the indicators before a L& "ay be created? (See RA 7160, Sec 7)

o 0 s!-cient inco"e'

o  Total n!m&er of inha&itants or population.o Land aream!st &e conti%!o!s.

o If it comprises t+o or more islands 5R separated & a LG( independent of theothers, it shall &e properl identi6ed & metes and &o!nds +ith technicaldescriptions and it sho!ld &e s!-cient to s!pport its people.

o 0ll indicators shall &e attested & D5, 785 and L9:, attached a%enc of DE7R.

(o% does the di!ision and "er)er of an L& applies? (See RA 7160, Sec 8)

o It sho!ld compl +ith re/!irements in R0 ;1<=, 8ec ;.

o It sho!ld not red!ce the IPT 'Income, Pop!lation > Territor) of the LG(?s to less than

the minim!m re/!irements prescri&ed in this code.o Income classi6cation sho!ld not fall &elo+ its c!rrent income classi6cation prior to

s!ch division.

(o% to abolish a L&? (See RA 7160, Sec 9)

o 3hen its income, pop!lation or land area has &een irreversi&l red!ced to less thanthe minim!m standards prescri&ed for its created !nder :oo# III ':aran%a,9!nicipalit, Cit, Province), as certi6ed & the Con%ress or 8an%%!nian concerned, asthe case ma &e.

o La+ or ordinance sho!ld &e passed +hen a&olishin% a LG(.

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 2/9

VERDER 2D

o 0&olishin% an LG( ma also have the meanin% as &ein% mer%ed or incorporated intoan eistin% one.

eneral Po%ers and Attributes of L&

*atalin #oconut #o' !s *unicipal #ouncil of *alaban)$ Lanao Del +ur$ R ,o' L-

./1/$ Au)ust 1$ 1/6

o In an action for declarator relief  assailin% the validit of a m!nicipal ta ordinance, theco!rt, in decidin% that the ordinance is void, is a!thoried to re/!ire a ref!ndof taes paid there !nder +itho!t the necessit of convertin% the proceedin% into anordinar action there havin% &een no alle%ed violation et.

o 0 6ed ta denominatd as a @police inspection feeA of P=.*= per sac# of cassava starch

shipped o!t of the m!nicipalit is V5ID +here it is not for public purpose, just anduniform &eca!se the police do nothin% &!t co!nt the n!m&er of cassava sac#s shippedo!t.

o Inspection fee sho!ld not &e ecessive and con6scator

o  The po+er to re%!late as an eercise of police po+er does not incl!de the po+er

to impose fees for reven!e p!rposes.o ees for p!rel re%!lator p!rposes m!st &e no more s!-cient to cover the act!al cost

of inspection and eamination as nearl as the same can &e estimated.

*a)ta2as !s Pryce Properties$ Inc$ R ,o' 11107$ 3uly .0$ 14

o  Tests of a valid ordinance B to &e valid, it m!st conform to the follo+in% s!&stantivere/!irements

o It m!st not contravene the #onstit!tion or an stat!te.o It m!st not &e unfair or oppressive.

o It m!st not &e partial or discriminator.o It m!st not prohi&it &!t re%!late trade.

o It m!st not &e unreasona&le.o It m!st &e )eneral and consistent +ith p!&lic polic.

o

97E957IC C(P P(Go  The rationale of the re/!irement that the ordinances sho!ld not contravene a stat!te is

o&vio!s as m!nicipal %overnments are 57L 0GE7T8 of the national %overnment andthat the dele%ate cannot &e s!perior to the principal or eercise po+ers hi%her thanthose of the latter.

o Implied repeals B it is a familiar r!le that implied repeals are not li%htl pres!med inthe a&sence of a clear and !nmista#a&le sho+in% of s!ch intention.

o 0 contravention of a la+ is not necessaril a contravention of the constit!tion.

5atel !s *unicipality of irac$ R ,o' 40.4$ *arch 11$ 1.

o 9!nicipal corporations are a%encies of the 8tate for the promotion and maintenance of local self"%overnment and as s!ch are endo+ed +ith police po+er in order toe$ectivel accomplish and carr o!t the declared o&jects of their creation.

o Role of a local a%enc !nit and tests of a valid ordinance +as disc!ssed here as +ell.

#ity of #ebu !s #A$ R ,o' 1017$ 3uly $ 16

o 0 Local Government (nit ma, thro!%h its Chief Eec!tive and actin% p!rs!ant to anordinance, eercise the po+er of eminent domain provided, ho+ever, that thepo+er of eminent domain ma not &e eercised !nless a valid and e6nite o$er has&een previo!sl made to the o+ner and as s!ch o$er +as not accepted.

o R0 ;1<=, 8ection 1. Eminent Domain

o General R!le (pon pament of j!st compensation

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 3/9

VERDER 2D

o Provided, ho+ever B a valid and de6nite o$er has &een made previo!sl to theo+ner.

o Provided, f!rther B LG( ma immediatel ta#e possession of the propert !pon

6lin% of the epropriation proceedin%s 07D !pon ma#in% a deposit +ith thepropert co!rt of at least 1F of the  fair mar#et val!e of the propert to &eepropriated.

o Provided, 6nall B 8!ch amo!nt shall &e determined & the proper co!rt, &ased

on the fair mar#et val!e at the time of the ta#in% of the propert.

Dacanay !s Asistio$ 3r'$ .0/ +#RA 404

o  The ri%ht of the p!&lic to !se the cit streets ma not &e &ar%ained a+a thro!%h acontract.

o Eec!tive 5rder ma not infrin%e !pon vested ri%ht of the p!&lic to !se cit streets forthe p!rpose the +ere intended to serve.

*acasiano !s' Dio8no$ r ,o' 7764$ Au)ust 10$ 1.

o Properties of the local %overnment, +hich are devoted to p!&lic service, are deemed

p!&lic and are !nder the a&sol!te control of Con%ress.o Properties of p!&lic dominion devoted to p!&lic !se and made availa&le to the p!&lic in

%eneral are o!tside the commerce of men and cannot &e disposed of or leased & theLG( to private persons.

o Roads and streets +hich are availa&le to the p!&lic in %eneral and ordinaril !sed for

vehic!lar tra-c are still considered p!&lic propert devoted to p!&lic !se.

9r%in 3a!ellana !s DIL$ R ,o' 10.4

o Co!rt accords %reat respect to the decisions and?or actions of administrativea!thorities. 3hH :eca!se it is pres!med that the are #no+led%ea&le and epertise inthe enforcement of la+s and re%!lations entr!sted to their j!risdiction.

o It is prohi&ited for a %overnment o-cial to en%a%e in private practice of his professionI s!ch practice +o!ld represent interests adverse to the %overnment.

*etropolitan *anila De!elop"ent Authority :**DA; !s' <el-Air illa)e Association$Inc' ./ +#RA /6

o Police po+er is an inherent attri&!te of soverei%nt.

o Police po+er is lod%ed primaril in Con%ress +hich ma dele%ate the po+er to the

President and administrative &oards as +ell as the la+ma#in% &odies of m!nicipal corporations or LG(.

o Local %overnment is a political s!&division of a nation or state +hich is constit!ted &la+ and has s!&stantial control of local a$airs.

o Police po+er is dele%ated to LG(. This dele%ation is #no+n as the %eneral +elfare

cla!se.o LG(s eercise police po+er thro!%h their respective le%islative &odies.

o 8an%%!nian% Panlala+i%an " Provincial %overnment

o 8an%%!nian% Panl!n%sod " Cit %overnmento 8an%%!nian% :aan " 9!nicipal %overnment

o 8an%%!nian% :aran%a " :aran%a

o 0&ove le%islative &odies has the po+er to enact ordinances, approve

resol!tions and appropriate f!nds for the %eneral +elfare of their j!risdictionand its inha&itants and in the proper eercise of corporate po+ers of the same.

o 7othin% +as fo!nd in R0 ;2J +hich %rants the 99D0 police po+er, let alonele%islative po+er.

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 4/9

VERDER 2D

o 99D0 is not a political !nit of %overnment !nli#e +ith 9etro 9anila Co!ncil +hich hasthe po+er to prom!l%ate administrative r!les and re%!lations in the implementation of 99D0Ks f!nctions.

o 99D0 is not a LG( or p!&lic corporation endo+ed +ith le%islative po+er. It is not even

a special metropolitan political s!&divisionK as contemplated in Constit!tion, 8ec 11,0rt M.

o  The creation of special metropolitan political s!&division re/!ires the approval

& a majorit of the votes cast in a ple&iscite in political !nits directl a$ected.o  The Chairman of 99D8 is not even an o-cial elected & the people, &!t

appointed & the President +ith ran# and privile%es of a ca&inet mem&er.o (nli#e 99C, 99D0 has no po+er to enact ordinances for the +elfare of the

comm!nit.

Lina !s Dizon Pano :R 1.0; B This stat!te remains valid toda. 3hile lotto is clearl a%ame of chance, the national %overnment deems it +ise and proper to permit it. 4ence,the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of La%!na, a local %overnment !nit, cannot iss!e a resol!tion oran ordinance that +o!ld see# to prohi&it permits. 8tated other+ise,%hat the nationalle)islature e=pressly allo%s by la%$ such as lotto$ a pro!incial board "ay notdisallo% by ordinance or resolution.In o!r sstem of %overnment, the po+er of local %overnment !nits to le%islate and enactordinances and resol!tions is merel a dele%ated po+er comin% from Con%ress.

#hus$ +r' !s <enilda 9state #orporation B 0 cause of action  is de6ned as an act oromission & +hich a part violates a ri%ht of another.< The test of the s!-cienc of the factsfo!nd in a petition as constit!tin% a ca!se of action is +hether or not, admittin% the factsalle%ed, the co!rt can render a valid j!d%ment !pon the same in accordance +ith the praerthereof.;

Al!arez !s uin)ona B In this re%ard, +e hold that petitionersK asseverations are !ntena&le&eca!se Internal Re!enue Allot"ents for" part of the inco"e of Local o!ern"ent&nits'

It is tr!e that for a m!nicipalit to &e converted into a component cit, it m!st, amon% others,have an avera%e ann!al income of at least T+ent 9illion Pesos for the last t+o '2) consec!tiveears &ased on 11 constant prices.1 8!ch income m!st &e d!l certi6ed & the Departmentof inance.2  Resol!tion of the controvers re%ardin% compliance &

the 9!nicipalit of 8antia%o +ith the aforecited income re/!irement hin%es on a correlativeand contet!al eplication of the meanin% of internal reven!e allotments 'IR0s) vis-a-vis thenotion of income of a local %overnment !nit and the principles of local a!tonom anddecentraliation !nderlin% the instit!tionaliation and intensi6ed empo+erment of the local%overnment sstem.

0 Local o!ern"ent &nit is a political subdi!ision of the +tate  , +hich is constit!ted &la+ and possessed of s!&stantial control over its o+n a$airs.*Remainin% to &e an intrasoverei%n s!&division of one soverei%n nation, &!t not intended, ho+ever, to &e an imperi!min imperio,J the local %overnment !nit is a!tonomo!s in the sense that it is %iven more po+ers,a!thorit, responsi&ilities and reso!rces.F Po+er +hich !sed to &e hi%hl centralied in 9anila,is there& deconcentrated, ena&lin% especiall the peripheral local %overnment !nits todevelop not onl at their o+n pace and discretion &!t also +ith their o+n reso!rces andassets.<

 The practical side to development thro!%h a decentralized local )o!ern"ent syste"certainl concerns the matter of 6nancial reso!rces. 3ith its &roadened po+ers and increasedresponsi&ilities, a local %overnment !nit m!st no+ operate on a m!ch +ider scale. 9oreetensive operations, in t!rn, entail more epenses. (nderstanda&l, the vestin% of d!t,responsi&ilit and acco!nta&ilit in ever local %overnment !nit is accompanied +ith aprovision for reasona&l ade/!ate reso!rces to dischar%e its po+ers and e$ectivel carr o!tits f!nctions.; 0vailment of s!ch reso!rces is e$ect!ated thro!%h the vestin% in ever local%overnment !nit of '1) the ri%ht to create and &roaden its o+n so!rce of reven!eN '2) the right to be allocated a just share in national taxes, such share being in the form of internal revenue

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 5/9

VERDER 2D

allotments (IRAs! and '*) the ri%ht to &e %iven its e/!ita&le share in the proceeds of the!tiliation and development of the national +ealth, if an, +ithin its territorial &o!ndaries.O.

#ordillera <road #oalition !s #A :R 76;

 The #AR is not a public corporation or a territorial and political s!&division. It does nothave a separate j!ridical personalit, !nli#e provinces, cities and m!nicipalities. 7either is it

vested +ith the po+ers that are normall %ranted to p!&lic corporations, e"g. the po+er to s!eand &e s!ed, the po+er to o+n and dispose of propert, the po+er to create its o+n so!rces of reven!e, etc. 0s stated earlier, the C0R +as created primaril to coordinate the plannin% andimplementation of pro%rams and services in the covered areas.It m!st &e clari6ed that the constit!tional %!arantee of local a!tonom in the Constit!tion 0rt.M, sec. 2Q refers to the administrative a!tonom of local %overnment !nits or, cast in moretechnical lan%!a%e, the decentralization of )o!ern"ent authority<atan)as #A5 Inc !s #A :R 1//10; B (nder cover of the eneral Welfare #lauseasprovided in this section, Local Government (nits can perform j!st a&o!t an po+er that +ill&ene6t their constit!encies. Th!s, local %overnment !nits can eercise po+ers that are

:1; epressl %rantedN:.; necessaril implied from the po+er that is epressl %rantedN:; necessar, appropriate or incidental for its e-cient and e$ective %overnanceN and:4; essential to the promotion of the %eneral +elfare of their inha&itants. 'Pimentel, The Local Government Code of 11, p. J<)

 The )rant of re)ulatory po%er to the ,5#  is easil !nderstanda&le. C0TV sstem is not amere local concern. The compleities that characterie this ne+ technolo% demand that it &ere%!lated & a specialied a%enc. This is partic!larl tr!e in the area of rate"6in%. Rate6in% involves a series of technical operations. Conse/!entl, on the hands of the re%!lator&od lies the ample discretion in the choice of s!ch rational processes as mi%ht &e appropriateto the sol!tion of its hi%hl complicated and technical pro&lems. Considerin% that the C0TVind!str is so technical a 6eld, +e &elieve that the 7TC, a specialied a%enc, is in a &etterposition than the LG(, to re%!late it.

8pea#in% for the Co!rt in the leadin% case of #nited States vs" Abendan, !stice 9oreland said@0n ordinance enacted & virt!e of the %eneral +elfare cla!se is valid, !nless it contravenesthe f!ndamental la+ of the Philippine Islands, or an 0ct of the Philippine Le%islat!re, or !nlessit is a%ainst p!&lic polic, or is !nreasona&le, oppressive, partial, discriminatin%, or in

dero%ation of common ri%ht.A In $e la %ru& vs" Para& , +e laid the %eneral r!le @that ordinancespassed & virt!e of the implied po+er fo!nd in the %eneral +elfare cla!se m!st &e reasona&le,consonant +ith the %eneral po+ers and p!rposes of the corporation, and not inconsistent%ith the la%s or policy of the +tate'A

Lea)ue of #ities of the Philippines !s #>*9L9# :R 1761$ 1774$ 17/06;

We should not be restricted by technical rules of procedure at the epense of thetranscendental interest of j!stice and e/!it. 3hile it is tr!e that liti%ation m!st end, even atthe epense of errors in j!d%ment, it is no&ler rather for this Co!rt of last resort, as van%!ardof tr!th, to toil in order to dispel apprehensions and do!&t, as the follo+in% prono!ncement of this Co!rt instr!cts

 The ri%ht and po+er of j!dicial tri&!nals to declare +hether enactments of the le%islat!reeceed the constit!tional limitations and are invalid has al+as &een considered a %rave

responsi&ilit, as +ell as a solemn d!t. The co!rts invaria&l %ive the most caref!lconsideration to /!estions involvin% the interpretation and application of the Constit!tion, andapproach constit!tional /!estions +ith %reat deli&eration, eercisin% their po+er in this respect+ith the %reatest possi&le ca!tion and even rel!ctanceN and the sho!ld never declare astat!te void, !nless its invalidit is, in their j!d%ment, &eond reasona&le do!&t. To j!stif aco!rt in prono!ncin% a le%islative act !nconstit!tional, or a provision of a state constit!tion to&e in contravention of the Constit!tion , the case m!st &e so clear to &e free from do!&t,and the conSict of the stat!te +ith the constit!tion m!st &e irreconcila&le, &eca!se it is &!t adecent respect to the +isdom, the inte%rit, and the patriotism of the le%islative &od & +hichan la+ is passed to pres!me in favor of its validit !ntil the contrar is sho+n &eond

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 6/9

VERDER 2D

reasona&le do!&t. Therefore, in no do!&tf!l case +ill the j!diciar prono!nce a le%islative actto &e contrar to the constit!tion. To do!&t the constit!tionalit of a la+ is to resolve the do!&tin favor of its validit.

*&,I#IPAL LIA<ILI5 

1. Palafo= !s Pro!ince of Ilocos ,orte B 9!nicipalit is not lia&le if it performs

)o!ern"ental functions ecept if there is a la+ permittin% it.

2. 5orio !s @ontanilla B 9!nicipalit is lia&le if it performs in proprietary functions'i.e. holdin% a to+n 6esta) and therefore lia&le to third persons !nder the la+ of contracts or torts.

*. Pro!ince of #ebu !s IA# B The doctrine of i"plied "unicipal liability has &eensaid to appl to all cases +here mone or other propert of a part is received !nders!ch circ!mstances that the %eneral la+, independent of epress contract implies ano&li%ation !pon the m!nicipalit to do j!stice +ith respect to the same.A

J. >s"ena !s #>A :R /; B Quantum Meruit  is &ased on j!stice and e/!it, tocompensate a propert or &ene6t received if restit!tion is e/!ita&le and if s!ch actioninvolves no violation, fr!stration or opposition to p!&lic polic.

F. >s"ena !s #>A :R 11004; B That the Cit of Ce&! complied +ith the relevantformalities contemplated & la+ can hardl &e do!&ted. The co"pro"isea)ree"ent +as s!&mitted to its le%islative co!ncil, the Sangguniang Panlungsod,+hich approved it conforma&l +ith its esta&lished r!les and proced!re, partic!larlthe stip!lation for the pament of P*=,===.== to the de la Cerna famil. 7either ma it&e disp!ted that since, as a m!nicipal corporation, Ce&! Cit has the po+er to s!e and&e s!ed, 17 it has the a!thorit to settle or compromise s!its, 1/ as +ell as theo&li%ation to pa j!st and valid claims a%ainst it.

<. Ra"os !s #A :R 4.; B Pri!ate attorneys cannot represent a pro!ince orm!nicipalit in la+s!its. 'aw allows a private counsel to be hired b a municipalit onl when the municipalit is an adverse part in a case involving the provincialgovernment or another municipalit or cit within the province. 5nl acco!nta&lep!&lic o-cers ma act for and in &ehalf of p!&lic entities and that p!&lic f!nds sho!ld

not &e epanded to hire private la+ers.

ualiBcations C 9lection of 9lecti!e Local >cials

1. :orja r. vs C59ELEC 'GR 1**JF) B In &oth the Constit!tion and the Local GovernmentCode, the three-ter" li"itation refers to the term of o-ce for +hich the local o-cial+as elected. It made no reference to s!ccession to an o-ce to +hich he +as notelected. In the case &efore the Commission, respondent Capco +as not elected to theposition of 9aor in the an!ar 1O, 1OO local elections. 4e s!cceeded to s!ch o-ce& operation of la+ and served for the !nepired term of his predecessor.Conse/!entl, s!ch s!ccession into o-ce is not co!nted as one '1) term for p!rposesof the comp!tation of the three"term limitation !nder the Constit!tion and the LocalGovernment Code. The ter" li"it for electi!e local ocials m!st &e ta#en to referto the right to be elected as +ell as the right to serve in the same elective position .

Conse/!entl, it is not eno!%h that an individ!al has served three consec!tive terms inan elective local o-ce, he m!st also have &een elected to the same position for thesame n!m&er of times &efore the dis/!ali6cation can appl.

2. Rom!alde vs RTC 'GR 1=J<=) B In election cases$ the #ourt treats do"icile andresidence as synony"ous ter"s, th!s @'t)he term @residenceA as !sed in theelection la+ is snonmo!s +ith @domicileA, +hich imports not onl an intention toreside in a 6ed place &!t also personal presence in that place, co!pled +ith cond!ctindicative of s!ch intention.A

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 7/9

VERDER 2D

*. Rodri%!e vs C59ELEC 'GR 12==) B 0rt. ;*. Dis/!ali6cations. The follo+in%persons shall &e dis/!ali6ed from r!nnin% for an elective local positionN 'e) @u)iti!esfro" 2ustice in criminal or non"political cases here or a&road. )ugitive from justicerefers to a person who has been convicted b *nal judgment . 'Emphasis s!pplied).

J. rivaldo vs C59ELEC '2F; 8CR0 ;2;) B the Local Government Codespea#s of “Qualifcation! of E9L9#5I9 >@@I#IAL+$F not o" can#i#ate$ In case

of do!&t in the interpretation or application of la+s, it is to &e pres!med that the la+"ma#in% &od intended ri%ht and j!stice to prevail.

acancies and +uccession

1. arinas vs :ar&a 'GR 11<;<*) B 3here there is no political part to ma#e a nomination,the 8an%%!nian, +here the vacanc occ!rs, m!st &e considered theappropriateauthority for "a8in) the reco""endation, & analo% to vacancies created in the8an%%!nian% :aran%a +hose mem&ers are & la+ prohi&ited from havin% an parta-liation.

2. Victoria vs C59ELEC 'GR 1===F) B The ran8in) in the +an))unian shall &edetermined on the &asis of the proportion of the votes o&tained & each +innin%candidate of the total n!m&er of re%istered voters +ho act!all voted. In s!ch a case,the Co!rt has no reco!rse &!t to merel appl the la+. The co!rts ma not spec!lateas to the pro&a&le intent of the le%islat!re apart from the +ords

*. Gam&oa r. vs 0%!irre 'GR 1*J21*) B :ein% the 0ctin% Governor, the ice-o!ernorcannot continue to si"ultaneously e=ercise the duties of the latter oce ,since the nat!re of the d!ties of the provincial Governor call for a f!ll"time occ!pant todischar%e them. 1 8!ch is not onl consistent +ith &!t also appears to &e the clearrationale of the ne+ Code +herein the polic of performin% d!al f!nctions in &otho-ces has alread &een a&andoned. To repeat, the creation of a temporar vacanc inthe o-ce of the Governor creates a correspondin% temporar vacanc in the o-ce of the Vice"Governor +henever the latter acts as Governor & virt!e of s!ch temporarvacanc.

Local Le)islation

1. 9a%tajas vs Prce Properties Inc 'GR 111=;) B The rationale of the re/!irement that

the ordinances should not contra!ene a statute is o&vio!s. 9!nicipal%overnments are onl a%ents of the national %overnment. Local co!ncils eercise onldele%ated le%islative po+ers conferred on them & Con%ress as the national la+ma#in%&od. The dele%ate cannot &e s!perior to the principal or eercise po+ers hi%her thanthose of the latter. It is a heres to s!%%est that the local %overnment !nits can !ndothe acts of Con%ress, from +hich the have derived their po+er in the 6rst place, andne%ate & mere ordinance the mandate of the stat!te.

2. 9oda vs C0 'GR 1=;1<) B The li"itations on the po%er of e"inent do"ainarethat the !se m!st &e p!&lic, compensation m!st &e made and d!e process of la+ m!st&eo&served. .. The 8!preme Co!rt, ta#in% co%niance of s!ch iss!es as the ade/!ac of compensation, necessit of the ta#in% and the p!&lic !se character or the p!rpose of the ta#in%, . has r!led that the necessit of eercisin% eminent domain m!st &e%en!ine and of a p!&lic character. .4 Government ma not capricio!sl choose +hat

private propert sho!ld &e ta#en.

*. 88 vs 0tiena, r. 'GR 1F<=F2) B 5rdinance 7o. O=2; +as enacted ri%ht after thePhilippines, alon% +ith the rest of the +orld, +itnessed the horror of the 8eptem&er 11,2==1 attac# on the T+in To+ers of the 3orld Trade Center in 7e+ or# Cit. The ob2ecti!e of the ordinance is to protect the residents of 9anila from thecatastrophic devastation that +ill s!rel occ!r in case of a terrorist attac# on thePandacan Terminals. 7o reason eists +h s!ch a protective meas!re sho!ld &edelaed.

Disciplinary Actions

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 8/9

VERDER 2D

1. 8alalima et al vs G!in%ona 'GR 11FO"2) B 3e a%ree +ith the petitioners thatGovernor 8alalima co!ld no lon%er &e held administrativel lia&le in 5.P. Case 7o. FJF=in connection +ith the ne%otiated contract entered into on < 9arch 12 +ith R(Constr!ction for additional reha&ilitation +or# at the Ta&aco P!&lic 9ar#et. 7or co!ldthe petitioners &e held administrativel lia&le in 5.P. Case 7o. FJ< for the eec!tion in7ovem&er 1O of the retainer contract +ith 0tt. es!s Corna%o and the Cortes and

Rena La+ irm. This is so &eca!sepublic ocials cannot be sub2ect todisciplinary action for ad"inistrati!e "isconduct co""itted durin) a priorter"' The !nderlin% theor is that each term is separate from other terms, and thatthe reelection to o-ce operates as a condonation of the o-cerKs previo!s miscond!ctto the etent of c!ttin% o$ the ri%ht to remove him therefor. 8!ch a r!le is not onlfo!nded on the theor that an o-cialKs reelection epresses the soverei%n +ill of theelectorate to for%ive or condone an act or omission constit!tin% a %ro!nd foradministrative discipline +hich +as committed d!rin% his previo!s term. 3e ma addthat so!nd p!&lic polic dictates it. To r!le other+ise +o!ld open the Sood%ates toeacer&atin% endless partisan contests &et+een the reelected o-cial and his politicalenemies, +ho ma not stop to ho!nd the former d!rin% his ne+ term +ithadministrative cases for acts, alle%ed to have &een committed d!rin% his previo!sterm. 4is second term ma th!s &e devoted to defendin% himself in the said cases tothe detriment of p!&lic service. This doctrine of for)i!eness orcondonation cannot, ho+ever, appl to criminal acts +hich the reelected o-cial ma

have committed d!rin% his previo!s term.

2. The Cit of 0n%eles, 4on. 0ntonio 0&ad 8antos vs C0 'GR ;OO2) B :!t the end never j!sti6es the means, and ho+ever la!da&le the p!rpose of the constr!ction in /!estion,this Co!rt cannot and +ill not co!ntenance an o!tri%ht and contin!in% violation of thela+s of the land, especiall +hen committed & p!&lic o-cials.

In theor, the cost of s!ch demolition, and the reim&!rsement of the p!&lic f!ndsepended in the constr!ction thereof, sho!ld &e &orne & the o-cials of the Cit0n%eles +ho ordered and directed s!ch constr!ction. This Co!rt has time and a%ainr!led that p!&lic o-cials are not imm!ne from dama%es in their personal capacitiesarisin% from acts done in &ad faith. 5ther+ise stated, a p!&lic o-cial ma &e lia&le inhis personal capacit for +hatever dama%e he ma have ca!sed & his act done +ithmalice and in &ad faith or &eond the scope of his a!thorit or j!risdiction. .0 

Indisp!ta&l, said p!&lic o-cials acted &eond the scope of their a!thorit and j!risdiction and +ith evident &ad faith. 4o+ever, as noted & the trial co!rt .1$ thepetitioners maor and mem&ers of the 8an%%!nian% Panl!n%sod of 0n%eles Cit +eres!ed onl in their o+cial capacities, hence, the co!ld not &e held personall lia&le+itho!t 6rst %ivin% them their da in co!rt. Prevailin% j!rispr!dence .. holdin%thatpublic ocials are personally liable for da"a)es arisin) fro" ille)al actsdone in bad faith are premised on said o-cials havin% &een s!ed &oth in their o-cialand personal capacities.

Recall

1. 0n%a&!n% vs C59ELEC 'GR 12<F;<) B In the instant case, this co!rt is confronted +itha proced!re that is !na&ashedl rep!%nant to the applica&le la+ and no less s!ch tothe spirit !nderlin% that la+. Private respondent +ho is a la+er, #no+s that 8ection< 'd) of the Local Government Code plainl provides that recall is validl initiated & a

petition of 2F of the total n!m&er of re%istered voters. 7ot+ithstandin% s!cha+areness, private respondent proceeded to 6le the petition for recall +ith onl herself as the 6ler and initiator. 8he claims in her petition that she has, to%ether +ith manothers in T!ma!ini, Isa&ela, lost con6dence in the leadership of petitioner. :!t thepetition does not &ear the names of all these other citiens of T!ma!ini +ho havereportedl also &ecome anio!s to o!st petitioner from the post of maor. There is nodo!&t that private respondent is tr!l earnest in her ca!se, and the ver fact that shea-ed her name in the petition sho+s that she claims responsi&ilit for the seemin%a$ront to petitionerKs contin!ance in o-ce. :!t the same cannot &e said of all theother people +hom private respondent claims to have sentiments similar to hers.

8/9/2019 Pub Corp Reviewer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pub-corp-reviewer 9/9

VERDER 2D

3hile the people are vested +ith the po+er to recall their elected o-cials, the samepo+er is accompanied & the concomitant responsi&ilit to see thro!%h all theconse/!ences of the eercise of s!ch po+er, incl!din% risin% a&ove anonmit,confrontin% the o-cial so!%ht to &e recalled, his famil, his friends, and his s!pporters,and seein% the recall election to its !ltimate end. The proced!re of allo+in% j!st oneperson to 6le the initiator recall petition and then settin% a date for the si%nin% of thepetition, +hich amo!nts to invitin% and co!rtin% the p!&lic +hich ma have not, in the

6rst place, even entertained an displeas!re in the performance of the o-cial so!%htto &e recalled, is not onl violative of stat!tor la+ &!t also tainted +ith an attempt to%o aro!nd the la+. 3e can not and m!st not, !nder an and all circ!mstances,co!ntenance a circ!mvention of the eplicit 2F minim!m voter reGuire"ent in theinitiation of the recall process' 

2. 9alono vs C59ELEC 'GR 12;=<<) B The 9in!tes of the session of the Preparator0ssem&l indicated that there +as a session held. 0ttendees constit!te the majorit of all the mem&ers of the Preparator 0ssem&l, as +e shall later on esta&lish. R!les of proced!re, simple the ma &e +ere form!lated. Deli&erations +ere cond!cted on themain iss!e, +hich +as that of petitionerKs recall. The mem&ers +ere %iven theopport!nit to artic!late on their resolve a&o!t the matter. 9ore importantl, theirsentiments +ere epressed thro!%h their votes si%ni6ed & their si%nat!res andth!m&mar#s a-ed to the Resol!tion. 7o proof +as add!ced & Petitioner tos!&stantiate his claim that the si%nat!res appearin% thereon represented a ca!se other

than that of adoptin% the resol!tion. The la+ on recall did not prescri&e an ela&orateproceedin%. 7either did it demand a speci6c proced!re. 3hat is f!ndamental iscompliance +ith the provision that there should be a session called for thepurpose of initiatin) recall proceedin)s$ attended & a majorit of all themem&ers of the preparator recall assem&l, in a p!&lic place and that the resol!tionres!ltin% from s!ch assem&l &e adopted & a majorit of all the PR0 mem&ers.

(u"an Resources and De!elop"ent

1. avellana vs DILG 'GR 1=2FJ) B In the 6rst place, complaints a%ainst p!&lic o-cersand emploees relatin% or incidental to the performance of their d!ties are necessarilimpressed +ith p!&lic interest for & epress constit!tional mandate, a p!&lic o-ce isa p!&lic tr!st. The complaint for ille%al dismissal 6led & aviero and Catapan% a%ainstCit En%ineer Divina%racia is in e$ect a complaint a%ainst the Cit Government of :a%o

Cit, their real emploer, of +hich petitioner avellana is a co!ncilman. 4ence, j!d%ment a%ainst Cit En%ineer Divina%racia +o!ld act!all &e a j!d%ment a%ainst theCit Government. : servin% as co!nsel for the complainin% emploees and assistin%them to prosec!te their claims a%ainst Cit En%ineer Divina%racia, the petitionerviolated 9emorand!m Circ!lar 7o. ;J"FO 'in relation to 8ection ;&"2Q of R0<;1*) prohibitin) a )o!ern"ent ocial fro" en)a)in) in the pri!ate practiceof his profession$ if such practice %ould represent interests ad!erse to the)o!ern"ent' 

2. To&ias vs 4on. :enjamin 0&alos 'GR 11J;O*) B 0nent the 6rst iss!e, +e a%ree +ith theo&servation of the 8olicitor General that the stat!tor conversion of 9andal!on% intoa hi%hl !r&anied cit +ith a pop!lation of not less than t+o h!ndred 6ft tho!sandind!&ita&l ordains compliance +ith the @one city-one representati!eF proviso inthe Constit!tion

. . . Each cit +ith a pop!lation of at least t+o h!ndred 6ft tho!sand, or eachprovince, shall have at least one representativeA '0rticle VI, 8ection F'*), Constit!tion)

4ence, it is in compliance +ith the aforestated constit!tional mandate that the creationof a separate con%ressional district for the Cit of 9andal!on% is decreed !nder0rticle VIII, 8ection J of R.0. 7o. ;<;F.