ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
December-1990 Jurisprudence                 

  • [G.R. No. 32945 : December 3, 1990.] MARIANO T. NASSER, Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS, HON. MALCOLM SARMIENTO, in his capacity as Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of Pampanga, Branch I, AURORA RIVERA CANLAS, PATERNO R. CANLAS, and TOMAS CENTILLAS, Respondents. [G.R. No. 32946. December 3, 1990.] MARIANO T. NASSER, Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS, PATERNO R. CANLAS, AURORA RIVERA-CANLAS, TOMAS CENTILLAS and THE CHIEF OF POLICE OF SAN ISIDRO, DAVAO ORIENTAL, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 39430 : December 3, 1990.] FRANCISCO MANLAPAZ, DELFIN SANGCAP, DOMINGO SANGCAP, PEDRO CUNANAN, FAUSTO DE LA PENA and HONORATA DE LA PENA, Petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. JUDGE LORENZO R. MOSQUEDA, HON. JUDGE VIRGILIO CANIVEL, TEODORO RIVERA, PABLO RIVERA, RENATO RIVERA and BONIFACIO RIVERA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 55466 : December 3, 1990.] MANILA SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC., Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and WILLIAM H. QUASHA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 78778 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA 814 LEONIDA CORONADO, FELIX BUENO, MELANIA RETIZOS, BERNARDINO BUENASEDA and JOVITA MONTEFALCON, Petitioners, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and JUANA BUENO ALBOVIAS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 79560 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA 823 ANDRES E. DITAN, Petitioner, vs. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ASIAWORLD RECRUITMENT, INC., AND/OR INTRACO SALES CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 80904 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA 830 BALTAZAR, PEDRO, URSULA, and DOMINGO, all surnamed PANTIG, Petitioners, vs. VENANCIO BALTAZAR, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 82115 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA 836 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ROMEO ORTIZ y BALLARES, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 84884 : December 3, 1990.] EULALIO M. RUIZ and ILUMINADA RUIZ, Petitioners, vs. HON. DOROTEO N. CANEBA, THE CITY SHERIFF OF MANILA AND/OR HIS DEPUTIES, ZENAIDA SANGALANG and ADOLFO CRUZ, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 87264 : December 3, 1990.] MARIANO DINGLASAN and FELICIDAD DINGLASAN, Petitioners, vs. THE HON. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, Presiding Judge of Branch 159, Regional Trial Court, Pasig, Metro Manila, National Capital Judicial Region, The GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, and CONCEPCION T. TINIO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 89545 : December 3, 1990.] SPOUSES ROLANDO DOLORFINO and MONINA FULE, Petitioners, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, SEVERO ALCOS and EFIGENIA DE LUNA-ALCOS, Respondents.

  • [UDK No. 9864 : December 3, 1990.] RUFINA VDA. DE TANGUB, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, PRESIDING JUDGE of the [CAR] RTC, Branch 4, Iligan City, and SPOUSES DOMINGO and EUGENIA MARTIL, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 58668 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 1 SANTIAGO ESCARTE, JR., ERNESTO VILLANUEVA, FELIXBERTO VILLANUEVA, and LOURDES VILLANUEVA, Petitioners, vs. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES and TEODORO MEDINA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 71929 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 9 ALITALIA, Petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and FELIPA E. PABLO, Respondents.

  • 192 SCRA 21 CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA, Petitioner, vs. THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, JESUS BERNAS and REMEDIOS Q. BERNAS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 80505 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 28 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARIO TANDOY y LIM, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 80791 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 34 PEOPLE'S FINANCING CORP. and ENRIQUE V. ARCENAS, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS (Sixteenth Division), GAUDIOSO MANLIGUEZ and PURIFICACION MANLIGUEZ, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 86586 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 42 NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION, Petitioner, vs. HONORABLE TEODORO P. REGINO, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 84, QUEZON CITY and CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OF AUSTRALIA-PHILIPPINES INC., Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 86889 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 51 LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 88177 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 84 DOLORES A. PAREDES, Petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND REMEDIOS A. AMOR, Respondents. [G.R. No. 89530 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 84 DOLORES A. PAREDES, Petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD AND REMEDIOS A. AMOR, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 93054 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 100 Cordillera Regional Assembly Member ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, (Banaue), Ifugao Provincial Board Member CORAZON MONTINIG, (Mayoyao), Former Vice-Mayor MARTIN UDAN (Banaue), Municipal Councilors MARTIN GANO, (Lagawe), and TEODORO HEWE, (Hingyon), Barangay Councilman PEDRO W. DULAG (Lamut); Aguinaldo residents SANDY B. CHANGIWAN, and DONATO TIMAGO; Lamut resident REY ANTONIO; Kiangan residents ORLANDO PUGUON, and REYNAND DULDULAO; Lagawe residents TOMAS KIMAYONG, GREGORIO DANGO, GEORGE B. BAYWONG, and VICENTE LUNAG; Hingyon residents PABLO M. DULNUAN and CONSTANCIO GANO; Mayoyao residents PEDRO M. BAOANG, LEONARDO IGADNA, and MAXIMO IGADNA; and Banaue residents PUMA-A CULHI, LATAYON BUTTIG, MIGUEL PUMELBAN, ANDRES ORDILLO, FEDERICO MARIANO, SANDY BINOMNGA, GABRIEL LIMMANG, ROMEO TONGALI, RUBEN BAHATAN, MHOMDY GABRIEL, and NADRES GHAMANG, Petitioners, vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; The Honorable FRANKLIN M. DRILON, Secretary of Justice; Hon. CATALINO MACARAIG, Executive Secretary; The Cabinet Officer for Regional Development; Hon. GUILLERMO CARAGUE, Secretary of Budget and Management; and Hon. ROSALINA S. CAJUCOM, OIC, National Treasurer, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 30616 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 110 EUFRACIO D. ROJAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA, Defendant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. 36827 : December 10, 1990.] THE DIRECTOR OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION, THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS and THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs. HON. RAMON C. FERNANDEZ, HERMOGENES CONCEPCION, JR., and EMILIO A. GANCAYCO, ET AL., Respondents. [G.R. No. 56622 : December 10, 1990.] THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS and THE DIRECTOR OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS (Ninth Division), GREGORIO A. LEGASPI and VALENTINA CERVANIA, Respondents. [G.R. No. 70076 : December 10, 1990.] REYNALDA ESPEJO, BENITA GARLITOS and ENRIQUETA OXCIANO, Petitioners, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, HON. ANTONIO M. BELEN, as Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Lingayen, Pangasinan Branch XXXVIII and ASTERIO SAURA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 44749 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 141 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MELVIN GIRON y SANTOS, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 50661 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 151 RUBEN DELFIN, BENITO DOLOSA, CORNELIO AGUILAR, ANASTACIO GORDOLA, CESAR PANALIGAN, LUIS VIESCA, VICENTE GUADAMOR, JUAN CAGATIN, SIMEON CHICA, REYNALDO CINCO, WILFREDO IPAS, SIMEON TAGAYONA, FLORENCIO SINAMBAN, FERMINIO DIEGO, POLICARPIO DILE, EDDIE DE CASTRO, AQUILINO CABILITASAN, CRISOGONO CANTERO, GUALBERTO REBUSTER, RODOLFO GATCHALIAN, ANGELITO DOMINGO, FERNANDO JOVER, RAFAEL SALCEDO, SIMON DIANA, BENJAMIN GONZALES, JR., BENIGNO ROJA, DEMETRIO SIMEON, JOSE TELAN, HILARIO VILLANUEVA, NICK FRANCISCO, PACIFICO DALIPE, EUPEMIO DALITE, ARTEMIO DE CASTRO, ISABELO RASTICA, ANECITO RASTICA, LAMBERTO NIETO, ESMERALDO TATEL, PASCUAL BATOCTOY, ESMENIO PATRICIO, ARMANDO DE GUZMAN, JESUS MALLARI, JOSE MALLARI, SULPICIO MALLARI, GENEROSO COS, AGAPITO ESPINOSA, VIRGILIO SEVAÑES, RICARDO MANZAN, OSCAR BENSOL, PABLO DIAGSAY, EMILIO DIAGSAY, PAULINO COMETA, MATERO COREA, BENJAMIN LACANARIA, GAUDY TIU, JOVENCIO AGUILAR, ROMULO POSADA, RICARDO POSIC, ALFONSO SALGADO, RICARDO TAGANAP, ARMANDO RAMIREZ, FELIPE RAMIRES, EDELBERTO BERNARDO, PONCIANO MONTILLA, JUAN MONTILLA, IGNACIO PANCHITO, JEORGE SERRAN, VICTOR IGNIS, LUCAS IGAT, BARTOLOME MAGDAEL, AUGUSTO ROSALINAS, RAFAEL SOCITO, JORGE CO, LUCINO WAGAN, CELSO BARADA, WINSTON DIENZO, PAULINO SANCHEZ, ELESEO SANCHES, CONRADO SANCHES, GENEROSO ANTONIO, AGUSTIN LOPEZ, RUDY SOCITO, SEGUNDO SOCITO, JOAQUIN PARAS, DOMINADOR BUTAHON, GERMOGENES GINGCO, HONORIO DETOITO, ELIGIO MENDOZA, RUBEN QUITORIANO, LEON DELA CRUZ, PACITO SALES, ANTONIO CEMANES, IRENEO LUBUGIN, FORTUNATO MATO, ROMEO MERIC, ALBERTO GALLO, MELCHOR SALGADO, SIMEON QUIJANO, ANTONIO CARAAN, CARLITO GUZMAN, ALBERTO SALMON, FELIMON TAN, FERNANDO FAUSTINO, CONRADO DAVID, REYNALDO NOLASCO, ANTONIO NIETO, JAIME CAMACHO, ALBERTO PANGLAO, ROSAURO GANAC, ALFREDO ARCABIO, PEDRO MANASALA, VICENTE BELARMINO, ROMULO SIOCO, SEVERINO ATIENZA, JR., RUFO ABALOS, JESUS POSADA, ALBINO BACARRO, ERNESTO DAJAY, WILFREDO VILLALON, CELESTINO BACARRO, MANUEL TOLENTINO, ERNESTO ANTONIO, OSCAR ABUNDIO, ZOSIMO IJARES, RUBEN ARISTORENAS, GAUDENCIO CASTILLO, DOMINGO DELA TORRE, DANILO RONCADA, RAFEL PUPA, ALFONSO SAPINORO, LUISITO JACRIQUE, MARCELINO BESA, ANSELMO DATELES, ALBERTO PALCULAN, BIENVENIDO FUENSALIDA AND JOSE ORZAL, Petitioners, vs. THE HON. AMADO G. INCIONG in his capacity as Deputy Minister of Labor; NLRC Commissioners DIEGO ATIENZA, CLETO VILLATUYA and GERONIMO QUADRA; ATLANTIC CONTAINER CORPORATION; INLAND INDUSTRIES, INC., LAZARO ARRIOLA, BIENVENIDO KATALBAS, AURORA JEREZA, GOSHI DE YULO AND PAZ YULO AND ROBERTO JACINTO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 55361 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 163 SPOUSES TEOFILO ERCILLO and TERESITA ERCILLO, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and SPOUSES LUTGARDA CIFRA and BENJAMIN CIFRA, SR., represented by their son and attorney-in-fact, BENJAMIN CIFRA, JR., and HON. JOSE P. CASTRO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 55613 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 169 ERNESTO DICHOSO, Petitioner, vs. The HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and TEODOLFO RAMOS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 56620 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 177 FILIPINAS MILLS, INC., BUENAVENTURA TAN and VIRGINIA DUMLAO-TAN, Petitioners, vs. HON. ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch II, ASSOCIATED CITIZENS BANK and OSCAR V. ATAYDE, in his capacity as the Deputy Sheriff of the CFI-Manila, Branch II, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 69863-65 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 183 LINO BROCKA, BENJAMIN CERVANTES, COSME GARCIA, RODOLFO SANTOS, VALENTINO SALIPSIP, RICARDO VEGA, ERIC MARIANO, JOSE EMMANUEL OYALES, RONNIE MATTA, ALFREDO VIAJE, RUBEN EUGENIO, REYNALDO ORTIZ, ORLANDO ORTIZ, NOEL REYES, EDUARDO IMPERIAL, NESTOR SARMIENTO, FRANCO PALISOC, VIRGILIO DE GUZMAN, ALBERTO REYES, JESSIE PINILI, ROMULO AUGUIS, DOMINADOR RESURRECION III, RONNIE LAYGO, ROSAURO ROQUE, CLARENCE SORIANO, OCTAVO DEPAWA, CARLITO LA TORRE, SEVERNO ILANO, JR., DOMINGO CAJIPE, ALAN ALEGRE, RAMON MARTINEZ, MA. GILDA HERNANDEZ, EDNA P. VILLANUEVA, DOLLY S. CANU, MELQUIADES C. ATIENZA, ELIGIO P. VERA CRUZ, ROGER C. BAGAN, ABUNDIO M. CALISTE, Petitioners, vs. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, MAJ. GENERAL FIDEL V. RAMOS, BRIG. GENERAL PEDRO BALBANERO, COL. ABAD, COL. DAWIS, SERGIO APOSTOL, P/LT, RODOLFO M. GARCIA and JUDGE RICARDO TENSUAN, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 74762 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 191 COMMERCIAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSIONERS, SECOND DIVISION, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, and PEDRO UMLAS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 78163 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 199 ANGELINA P. SANTIAGO, Petitioner, vs. The Honorable DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY and HI-CEMENT CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 79962 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 209 LUCIO R. CRUZ, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS AND CONRADO Q. SALONGA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 80397 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 224 S & A GAISANO INCORPORATED, CANUTO CUPIN, represented by his son Salvador P. Cupin as Attorney-in-Fact; VICENTE CUPIN; EVARISTO CUPIN, represented by his wife Marites R. Cupin as Attorney-in-Fact; RAMON CUPIN; FE CUPIN and BUENAVENTURA CUPIN, both represented by their brother Ramon Cupin as Attorney-in-Fact, Petitioners, vs. HON. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, Executive and Presiding Judge of Regional Trial Court of Butuan City and Agusan del Norte; Branch V, Region X; VICTOR CHAN; ATTY. ARTURO RICAFORTE, in his capacity as Register of Deeds of Butuan City; CITY ENGINEER VICTORIOSO GO, in his capacity as National Building Official of Butuan City, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 82215 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 232 ANTIPAZ PRESCO y PARAS, ANTONIO AMORES y PARAS, and ANSELMA PARAS, Petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. MARIANO UMALI, Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Cavite, Branch 25, Trece Martires City, HON. EDWINA P. MENDOZA, Judge of the Municipal Trial Court of General Trias, Cavite, MODESTO PARAS, and SIMPLICIO SANCHEZ, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 82374 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 242 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ERNESTO AVILA y MENDOZA AND JOHN DOE, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 82495 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 246 ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. HON. SECRETARY SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ (Public Respondent) and ALFREDO CHING (Private Respondent), Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. 84132-33 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 257 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND NEW AGRIX, INC., Petitioners, vs. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, THE EX-OFFICIO SHERIFF and GODOFREDO QUILING, in his capacity as Deputy Sheriff of Calamba, Laguna, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 85531 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 266 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. AMANDO TASARRA and ABELARDO TASARRA, Accused-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. 89988 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 274 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LYDIA RAMA, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 91041 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 277 JOSE A. SADDUL, JR., Petitioner, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS and THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.

  • [A.M. No. P-86-32 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 288 ALFREDO LLANES, complainant, vs. GAUDIOSO BORJA, DEPUTY SHERIFF, RTC, BRANCH 19, NAGA CITY, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 31688 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA 296 DIRECTOR OF LANDS, DIRECTOR OF FORESTRY and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs. HON. JUAN P. AQUINO, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Abra, Second Judicial District and ABRA INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 68514 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA 305 TRADERS ROYAL BANK, Petitioner, vs. HON. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and HON. GREGORIO S. CENDAÑA, in his capacity as DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL MEDIA PRODUCTION CENTER (NMPC), Respondents

  • [G.R. No. 71589 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA 315 CAGAYAN DE ORO COLISEUM, INC., Petitioner, vs. OFFICE OF THE MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, represented by Deputy Minister VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR. and ANGEL CHAVES, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 76303 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA 320 DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Petitioner, vs. SPOUSES FRANCISCO K. REDOR and ANGELITA CASTRO, and HON. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR., Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch XXVII, Sta. Cruz, Laguna, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 78623 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA 326 DR. OFELIA P. TRISTE, Petitioner, vs. LEYTE STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, namely: Hon. Lourdes R. Quisumbing, Secretary of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports and Chairman of the Board and/or Dr. Minda C. Sutaria as the authorized representative; Dr. Purificacion M. Flores, President of the Leyte State College and Vice-Chairman of the Board; Director Venancio Baclagon, National Economic and Development Authority, Regional Office No. VIII and Member of the Board; HON. SEDFREY A. ORDOÑEZ, Secretary of Justice and Chairman of the Review Committee under Executive Order No. 17; and DR. CRES V. CHAN-GONZAGA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 83530 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 342 CRISTITO AUSTRIA y RODIS, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents-Appellees.

  • [G.R. No. 93867 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 358 SIXTO S. BRILLANTES, JR., Petitioner, vs. HAYDEE B. YORAC, in her capacity as ACTING CHAIRPERSON of the COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.

  • [G.R. Nos. 95203-05 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 363 SENATOR ERNESTO MACEDA, Petitioner, vs. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD (ERB); MARCELO N. FERNANDO, ALEJANDRO B. AFURONG; REX V. TANTIONGCO; and OSCAR E. ALA, in their collective official capacities as Chairman and Members of the Board (ERB), respectively; CATALINO MACARAIG, in his quadruple official capacities as Executive Secretary, Chairman of Philippine National Oil Company; Office of the Energy Affairs, and with MANUEL ESTRELLA, in their respective official capacities as Chairman and President of the Petron Corporation; PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION; with CESAR BUENAVENTURA and REY GAMBOA as chairman and President, respectively; CALTEX PHILIPPINES with FRANCIS ABLAN, President and Chief Executive Officer; and the Presidents of Philippine Petroleum Dealer's Association, Caltex Dealer's Co., Petron Dealer's Asso., Shell Dealer's Asso. of the Phil., Liquefied Petroleum Gas Institute of the Phils., any and all concerned gasoline and petrol dealers or stations; and such other persons, officials, and parties, acting for and on their behalf; or in representation of and/or under their authority, Respondents. [G.R. Nos. 95119-21 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 363 OLIVER O. LOZANO, Petitioner, vs. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD (ERB), PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, CALTEX (PHIL.), INC., and PETRON CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 95263 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 374 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JUVENAL KYAMKO, Accused-Appellant.

  • [A.C. No. 2756 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA 381 PRUDENTIAL BANK, Petitioner, vs. BENJAMIN M. GRECIA, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 44167 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA 388 JULITA FRANCISCO and her husband, HERMENEGILDO TANKENKO, and RESTITUTO FRANCISCO and his wife, FELISA ABEJO, Petitioners, vs. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan; FRANCISCA FRANCISCO, MAXIMA FRANCISCO and FRANCISCO FRANCISCO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. 88710-13 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA 396 UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES (UFE), MANUEL L. SARMIENTO, BENJAMIN M. ALTAREJOS, RODOLFO D. PAGLINAWAN, CARMELITA G. NUQUI, CORAZON Y SAZON, RODRIGO P. LUCAS, RUDOLPH C. ARMAS, EDUARDO A. ABELLA, ANGEL A. CANETE, JUANITO T. CAPILI, ADOLFO S. CASTILLO, JR., PONCIANO A. CARINGAL, ERIBERTO S. LEONARDO, ADELAIDA B. MIRA, EUGENIA C. NUÑEZ, PAZ B. SAN JOSE, VENUSITO S. SOLIS, EMMANUEL S. VILLENA, ALFONSO R. RICAFRENTE, MELANIO C. LANTIN, AMADOR M. MONTOJO, RODOLFO M. MUNSOD, RENATO P. DIAZ, RODRIGO M. URGELLES, CARLOS B. SAN JOSE, EUSTAQUIO E. BUNYI, NELSON P. CENTENO, SOTERO A. GACUTAN, GUILLERMO G. DE BORJA, DIONISIO H. NIPALES, EUGENIO S. SAN PEDRO, MANUEL DELA FUENTE, CARLO MEDINA, CESAR B. PONCE, JORGE B. CASTRO, JR., RICARDO AREVALO, REY M. BEO, FELIX ESGUERRA, REYNALDO ALMENANZA, MELITON C. ROXAS (as represented by his surviving spouse, MA. CORAZON ROXAS), ROMEO A. ARANDELA, ISIDRO A. NATIVIDAD, EMILIANO M. SAYAO, CELSO J. CENIDO, PAUL C. MEJARES, SILVERIO C. PAMPANG, DIONISIO S. CANLOBO, GILBERT C. NOBLE, RODOLFO D. CALONG-CALONG, SR., PEPITO Q. QUITLONG, DIONISIO C. COMPLETO, ANTONIO T. AVELINO, ANGELITO PAYABYAB, ISAIAS A. RIEZA, DEODITO M. BELARMINO, QUEZON G. MATEO, CARLITO PRE, CIPRIANO P. LUPEBA, EFREN P. DINSAY, WILDON C. BARROS, SUSAN A. BERRO, MANUEL A. LAVIN, ROY U. BACONGUIS, JEROME T. FIEL, ANASTACIO G. CABALLERO, JR., ROGELIO E. RAIZ, JOSE T. ISIDTO, ANGELITO M. ANICIETE, RAUL ROBERTO C. NANQUIL, LIZA T. VILLANUEVA, CESAR S. CRUZ, REYNALDO L. CALIGUIA, ERNESTO M. SOLOMON, OSCAR G. AGUINALDO, DIEGO P. OLIVA, JAIME D. NILLAS, ELPIDIO A. HERMOCILLA, DANTE L. ESCOSURA, FEDERICO P. CONTEMPRATO, LAURO C. MAKILING, RENATO O. MINDANAO, RAFAEL C. TURA AND QUINTIN J. PEDRIDO, JR., Petitioners, vs. NESTLÉ PHILIPPINES, INC., NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, HON. EDUARDO G. MAGNO, HON. ZOSIMO T. VASALLO and HON. EVANGELINE S. LUBATON, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 91025 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA 414 UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 95478 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA 430 EDUARDO ACOP, ROGER ALMENDAREZ, BIENVENIDO AMBRAY, BENITO ARELLANO, WILLIAM ARMENDARES, HERMINIO ARREZA, TEODORO ARREZA, PEREGRINO BANGUIS, MOISES BARENG, HIPOLITO BONGGOT, RAMON BUCALON, MELITO BUENAVIDES, FELIX CAGONG, LORENZO CALIWATAN, ANGEL CALUMBA, HENRY CARIAGA, GEORGE CASANO, REYNALDO CAPUTOLAN, FELOMENO CHATO, JULIETO CONGSIGNA, REYMUNDO CUADRA, EUFRONIO CUBERO, BIENVENIDO CURAYAG, RUDICASTRO CURAYAG, JOVENCIO DARAY, DAVID DE LEON, NELSON ECHIN, ROLANDO ESCATRON, BERTINO ESPINOLA, CRESENCIO FRANCIS, MATEO FRIAS, RODOLFO FUENTES, BENEDICTO GALLOGO, HERMANO GALOPE, JORGE GALVE, ERNESTO GONABO, VIRGILIO GRUMO, JEMELITO GUBAL, RICARDO GUILLEN, GENEROSO HERNANDEZ, JR., NELSON JABAY, EMILIO JACINTO, EMELIANO JALA, JR., IGNACIO JURALBAR, ALFREDO LOMOLJO, CELESTINO LOMOLJO, EDUARDO LOPEZ, LUCIO LOPIO, SAMUEL LOREDO, NORBERTO LORIA, MARCOS LOSIS, MARIO LUENGAS, NICOLAS MAGHINAY, ROGELIO MATILDO, FLORANTE MIRANDA, ANACLETO MONTON, NARCISO MONTON, ERNESTO OROZCO, CHARLITO ORQUITA, MERLCHOR PANTO, CASIMIRO PEREGRINO, EDUARDO PLAZA, NELSON PLAZA, PAQUITO PLAZA, PEDRO PLAZA, FREDIOMIO QUIÑONES, PEPE RAMIREZ, JOEL REMEDIO, EDUARDO REVELLEZA, GERALDO ROSIL, JR., TEMESTOCLES RUBENAL, REMEGIO SABUSIDO, ROGER SOTES, BELTRANO SULLANO, JAIME SULLANO, ERNIE TACUGDOY, WENIFREDO TOCMO, SR., PAQUITO TRUGILLO, ANIOLITO URBIZTONDO, ROMARICO URIARTE DARIO ORQUIZA, BERTINO VALLEJO, FRANCISCO VEGA, CRESENCIO YPARRAGUIRRE, RUDY YPARUAGUIRRI and EDUARDO SACRAGON, SR., Petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, (Fifth Division), SURIGAO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (SUDECOR) and RET. GEN. REYNALDO G. DILAN, Vice President for Field Operations & Administration, Respondents.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA 434 EFREN JAVIER and PEDRO JAVIER, Complainants, vs. JUDGE SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR., Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 46198 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 445 DOMINGO REYES, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE JUDGE SERAFIN

  • [G.R. No. 53556 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 454 LILIA AGUIRRE, GENATO AGUIRRE and BENITO AGRAVA, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF LEYTE, BRANCH III, EDUARDO TAMPIL and LETICIA A. TAMPIL, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 72019 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 459 WORLD MACHINE ENTERPRISES, Petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT AND J.R. LITHOPLATES, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 81835 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 469 ROMEO J. ORDOÑEZ, Petitioner, vs. THE HON. ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, in his capacity as presiding judge of Regional Trial Court of Cavite, Branch XVI, Cavite City, Municipality of Rosario, Cavite, former Mayor Calixto D. Enriquez of Rosario, Cavite, and Valeriano Espiritu of Mabolo, Bacoor, Cavite, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 82002 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 478 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN y DE DIOS, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. Nos. 86492-94 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 483 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 88114 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 492 PENTAGON SECURITY and INVESTIGATION AGENCY, Petitioner, vs. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL., and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, SECOND DIVISION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 89618 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 496 HON. RAUL S. MANGLAPUS, in his capacity as Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Petitioner, vs. HON. ANDRES E. MATIAS, Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Manila (Branch 45) and GAVINO P. ABAYA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. 92029-30 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 507 NICANOR G. DE GUZMAN, JR., Petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, Former Fifth Division, HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, National Capital Judicial Region, Br. 48, Manila, and ENRIQUE KP. TAN, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 93394 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA 514 FNCB FINANCE, Petitioner, vs. NAPOLEON ESTAVILLO, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 43659 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 521 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. HON. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON and FEDERICO DE GUZMAN, Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. 48535-36 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 533 KOH TIECK HENG, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 49454 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 548 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellant, vs. SALVADOR MONTEIRO, Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. 49588 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 554 DIONG BI CHU, alias PATRICK CHANG, CHANG KA HEE and LU LIONG CORPORATION, Petitioners, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. GREGORIO G. PINEDA, as Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch XXI; JAIME NAVOA and MILAGROS DE LEOS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 63753-54 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 561 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ARTURO DEVARAS, ARTEMIO TULANG (at large), and RUFINO CAMINONG (at large), accused. GREGORIO BERINGUEL and ARTURO DEVARAS, Accused-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. 76519 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 575 TIMOTEO POJAS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT JUDGE, CITY OF TAGBILARAN, IRENEA POJAS, CESARIA LAGROSA and CORNELIA BETINOL, Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. 78551-52 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 579 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO y VILLANUEVA and ANTONIO MARCEDONIO y VILLANUEVA, Accused-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. 78854 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 588 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ alias "Jun Plementero", Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 79526 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 598 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FREE TRADE UNIONS (NAFTU), Petitioner, vs. MAINIT LUMBER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WORKERS UNION-UNITED LUMBER AND GENERAL WORKERS OF THE PHILIPPINES. (MALDECOWU-ULGWP), Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 80276 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 604 HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS and THE HON. DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE, ALFREDO PIO DE RODA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 83257-58 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 612 OSIAS ACADEMY and MONICA R. DE CASTRO, Petitioners, vs. THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, CONCHITA MERCADO, NECITAS GACIS, EVELYN B. GARAIS, ESTRELLA GATON, EVA L. CAYETANO, TERESA G. BILAZON, SUSAN G. FUELLAS, ELVIRA D. GACIS, LOURDES CORREA, JULIETA A. MANALO, NILA G. GABELO and TEODORO GUANIZO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 83696 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 621 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. DANTE BARTULAY Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 84918 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 635 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 87807 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 644 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ISAGANI DESLATE and ROMY FRANCISCO alias "Romeo Francisco", Accused, ISAGANI DESLATE, Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 89407 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 649 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ISABELO SANCHEZ y PANDILI, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. Nos. 89682-83 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 655 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. BENJAMIN HERICO, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 91513 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA 663 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GERONIMO GOLES, Defendant-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. 43491 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 674 ATTY. TEODORO V. CABILAN & ALEJANDRO A. PARALISAN, Petitioners, vs. HON. JUDGE JOSE R. RAMOLETE & PROVINCIAL/CITY JAIL WARDEN of Cebu City, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 46210 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 680 RICARDO VILLAFLOR, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,** Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 61527 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 691 VICENTE GERARDO, VALENTINA GERARDO, CORNELIO GERARDO, BENJAMIN GERARDO, ANGEL GERARDO, & CONSTANTE GERARDO, Petitioners, vs. HON. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, Presiding Judge, Branch VI, Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte, TERESA ANTONIO BELZA, VISITACION ANTONIO ADINA, ILUMINADA PASCUA ANTONIO, FELICIDAD BATACAN MATA, POLICARPO BATACAN, BASILIO BATACAN, ISABEL BANGLOY, IRINEO BANGLOY, EDUARDO BANGLOY, DIONICIO BANGLOY, DOMINGA BANGLOY, and ERMINIO BANGLOY, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 70556 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 698 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARIO ABLAO, ISAGANI SACOP, LEOPOLDO DE GUZMAN, PEDRO LADIANA, ZENON SAMONTE, ALFREDO DEL MUNDO, BRUNO ABLAO, ISIDORO GALEMA, DANILO MERCADO, RUSTICO LIWANAG, FRANCISCO BALDEMECA, HECTOR SAMONTE and DAVID ABLAO, accused, MARIO ABLAO, ISAGANI SACOP, LEOPOLDO DE GUZMAN, PEDRO LADIANA, ZENON SAMONTE, and ALFREDO DEL MUNDO, Accused-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. 77668 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 709 SPOUSES EUFRACIO ROJAS AND CONCEPCION ROJAS, Petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, AND SPOUSES FELIX E. MEDALLA AND DIONISIA PACATAN MEDALLA, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 81039 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 725 INVESTMENT AND UNDERWRITING CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs. COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC. and GENE V. TAMESIS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 85157 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 735 FRANCISCO JOSE, ANTONIO, ERLINDA, JOVITA, ARACELI, DOLORES, VIRGINIA, MARTA, LEDINIA, and ANITA, all surnamed RAMON JAO, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and LAUREANA C. VDA. DE BAIRAN, as administratrix of the Estate of Pablo Bairan, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 88336 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 743 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 92625 : December 26, 1990.] 192 SCRA 768 JOSE ORDA and IMELDA LOZADA, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and GIL GALANG Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 32945 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO T. NASSER v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 39430 December 3, 1990 - FRANCISCO MANLAPAZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55466 December 3, 1990 - MANILA SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78778 December 3, 1990 - LEONIDA CORONADO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79560 December 3, 1990 - ANDRES E. DITAN v. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80904 December 3, 1990 - BALTAZAR PANTIG, ET AL. v. VENANCIO BALTAZAR

  • G.R. No. 82115 December 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO B. ORTIZ

  • G.R. No. 84884 December 3, 1990 - EULALIO M. RUIZ, ET AL. v. DOROTEO N. CANEBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87264 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO DINGLASAN, ET AL. v. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89545 December 3, 1990 - ROLANDO DOLORFINO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • UDK No. 9864 December 3, 1990 - RUFINA VDA. DE TANGUB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 58668 December 4, 1990 - SANTIAGO ESCARTE, JR., ET AL. v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71929 December 4, 1990 - ALITALIA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74577 December 4, 1990 - CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80505 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO L. TANDOY

  • G.R. No. 80791 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE’S FINANCING CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86586 December 4, 1990 - NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION v. TEODORO P. REGINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM

  • G.R. No. 88177 December 4, 1990 - DOLORES A. PAREDES v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93054 December 4, 1990 - ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 30616 December 10, 1990 - EUFRACIO D. ROJAS v. CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA

  • G.R. No. 36827 December 10, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION, ET AL. v. RAMON C. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 44749 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELVIN S. GIRON

  • G.R. No. 50661 December 10, 1990 - RUBEN DELFIN, ET AL. v. AMADO G. INCIONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55361 December 10, 1990 - TEOFILO ERCILLO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55613 December 10, 1990 - ERNESTO DICHOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 56620 December 10, 1990 - FILIPINAS MILLS, INC., ET AL. v. ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69863-65 December 10, 1990 - LINO BROCKA, ET AL. v. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74762 December 10, 1990 - COMMERCIAL MOTORS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONERS, NLRC, SECOND DIVISION

  • G.R. No. 78163 December 10, 1990 - ANGELINA P. SANTIAGO v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79962 December 10, 1990 - LUCIO R. CRUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A GAISANO INC., ET AL. v. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82215 December 10, 1990 - ANTIPAZ P. PRESCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82374 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO M. AVILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82495 December 10, 1990 - ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION v. SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL. v. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85531 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMANDO TASARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89988 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LYDIA RAMA

  • G.R. No. 91041 December 10, 1990 - JOSE A. SADDUL, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-86-32 December 10, 1990 - ALFREDO LLANES v. GAUDIOSO BORJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 31688 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL. v. JUAN P. AQUINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68514 December 17, 1990 - TRADERS ROYAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71589 December 17, 1990 - CAGAYAN DE ORO COLISEUM, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76303 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. FRANCISCO K. REDOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78623 December 17, 1990 - OFELIA P. TRISTE v. LEYTE STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83530 December 18, 1990 - CRISTITO R. AUSTRIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93867 December 18, 1990 - SIXTO S. BRILLANTES, JR. v. HAYDEE B. YORAC

  • G.R. Nos. 95203-05 December 18, 1990 - ERNESTO MACEDA v. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95263 December 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUVENAL KYAMKO

  • A.C. No. 2756 December 18, 1990 - PRUDENTIAL BANK v. BENJAMIN M. GRECIA

  • G.R. No. 44167 December 19, 1990 - JULITA FRANCISCO, ET AL. v. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 88710-13 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, ET AL. v. NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91025 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95478 December 19, 1990 - EDUARDO ACOP, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 December 19, 1990 - EFREN JAVIER, ET AL. v. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 46198 December 20, 1990 - DOMINGO REYES v. SERAFIN E. CAMILON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 53556 December 20, 1990 - LILIA AGUIRRE, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF LEYTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72019 December 20, 1990 - WORLD MACHINE ENTERPRISES v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81835 December 20, 1990 - ROMEO J. ORDOÑEZ v. ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82002 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN

  • G.R. Nos. 86492-94 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE

  • G.R. No. 88114 December 20, 1990 - PENTAGON SECURITY, ET AL. v. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89618 December 20, 1990 - RAUL S. MANGLAPUS v. ANDRES E. MATIAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 92029-30 December 20, 1990 - NICANOR G. DE GUZMAN, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93394 December 20, 1990 - FNCB FINANCE v. NAPOLEON ESTAVILLO

  • G.R. No. 43659 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 48535-36 December 21, 1990 - KOH TIECK HENG v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 49454 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR MONTEIRO

  • G.R. No. 49588 December 21, 1990 - DIONG BI CHU, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 63753-54 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76519 December 21, 1990 - TIMOTEO POJAS v. MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 78551-52 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO

  • G.R. No. 78854 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ

  • G.R. No. 79526 December 21, 1990 - NATIONAL ASSO. OF FREE TRADE UNIONS v. MAINIT LUMBER DEVT. COMPANY WORKERS

  • G.R. No. 80276 December 21, 1990 - HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS CORPORATION v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83257-58 December 21, 1990 - OSIAS ACADEMY, ET AL. v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83696 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE BARTULAY

  • G.R. No. 84918 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA

  • G.R. No. 87807 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISAGANI DESLATE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89407 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISABELO P. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 89682-83 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN HERICO

  • G.R. No. 91513 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERONIMO GOLES

  • G.R. No. 43491 December 26, 1990 - TEODORO V. CABILAN, ET AL. v. JOSE R. RAMOLETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 46210 December 26, 1990 - RICARDO VILLAFLOR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61527 December 26, 1990 - VICENTE GERARDO, ET AL. v. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70556 December 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO ABLAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77668 December 26, 1990 - EUFRACIO ROJAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81039 December 26, 1990 - INVESTMENT AND UNDERWRITING CORP. OF THE PHIL. v. COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85157 December 26, 1990 - FRANCISCO JOSE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88336 December 26, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 92625 December 26, 1990 - JOSE ORDA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 32945 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO T. NASSER v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 39430 December 3, 1990 - FRANCISCO MANLAPAZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55466 December 3, 1990 - MANILA SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78778 December 3, 1990 - LEONIDA CORONADO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79560 December 3, 1990 - ANDRES E. DITAN v. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80904 December 3, 1990 - BALTAZAR PANTIG, ET AL. v. VENANCIO BALTAZAR

  • G.R. No. 82115 December 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO B. ORTIZ

  • G.R. No. 84884 December 3, 1990 - EULALIO M. RUIZ, ET AL. v. DOROTEO N. CANEBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87264 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO DINGLASAN, ET AL. v. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89545 December 3, 1990 - ROLANDO DOLORFINO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • UDK No. 9864 December 3, 1990 - RUFINA VDA. DE TANGUB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 58668 December 4, 1990 - SANTIAGO ESCARTE, JR., ET AL. v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71929 December 4, 1990 - ALITALIA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74577 December 4, 1990 - CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80505 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO L. TANDOY

  • G.R. No. 80791 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE’S FINANCING CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86586 December 4, 1990 - NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION v. TEODORO P. REGINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM

  • G.R. No. 88177 December 4, 1990 - DOLORES A. PAREDES v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93054 December 4, 1990 - ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 30616 December 10, 1990 - EUFRACIO D. ROJAS v. CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA

  • G.R. No. 36827 December 10, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION, ET AL. v. RAMON C. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 44749 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELVIN S. GIRON

  • G.R. No. 50661 December 10, 1990 - RUBEN DELFIN, ET AL. v. AMADO G. INCIONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55361 December 10, 1990 - TEOFILO ERCILLO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55613 December 10, 1990 - ERNESTO DICHOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 56620 December 10, 1990 - FILIPINAS MILLS, INC., ET AL. v. ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69863-65 December 10, 1990 - LINO BROCKA, ET AL. v. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74762 December 10, 1990 - COMMERCIAL MOTORS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONERS, NLRC, SECOND DIVISION

  • G.R. No. 78163 December 10, 1990 - ANGELINA P. SANTIAGO v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79962 December 10, 1990 - LUCIO R. CRUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A GAISANO INC., ET AL. v. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82215 December 10, 1990 - ANTIPAZ P. PRESCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82374 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO M. AVILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82495 December 10, 1990 - ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION v. SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL. v. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85531 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMANDO TASARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89988 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LYDIA RAMA

  • G.R. No. 91041 December 10, 1990 - JOSE A. SADDUL, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-86-32 December 10, 1990 - ALFREDO LLANES v. GAUDIOSO BORJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 31688 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL. v. JUAN P. AQUINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68514 December 17, 1990 - TRADERS ROYAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71589 December 17, 1990 - CAGAYAN DE ORO COLISEUM, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76303 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. FRANCISCO K. REDOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78623 December 17, 1990 - OFELIA P. TRISTE v. LEYTE STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83530 December 18, 1990 - CRISTITO R. AUSTRIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93867 December 18, 1990 - SIXTO S. BRILLANTES, JR. v. HAYDEE B. YORAC

  • G.R. Nos. 95203-05 December 18, 1990 - ERNESTO MACEDA v. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95263 December 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUVENAL KYAMKO

  • A.C. No. 2756 December 18, 1990 - PRUDENTIAL BANK v. BENJAMIN M. GRECIA

  • G.R. No. 44167 December 19, 1990 - JULITA FRANCISCO, ET AL. v. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 88710-13 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, ET AL. v. NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91025 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95478 December 19, 1990 - EDUARDO ACOP, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 December 19, 1990 - EFREN JAVIER, ET AL. v. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 46198 December 20, 1990 - DOMINGO REYES v. SERAFIN E. CAMILON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 53556 December 20, 1990 - LILIA AGUIRRE, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF LEYTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72019 December 20, 1990 - WORLD MACHINE ENTERPRISES v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81835 December 20, 1990 - ROMEO J. ORDOÑEZ v. ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82002 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN

  • G.R. Nos. 86492-94 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE

  • G.R. No. 88114 December 20, 1990 - PENTAGON SECURITY, ET AL. v. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89618 December 20, 1990 - RAUL S. MANGLAPUS v. ANDRES E. MATIAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 92029-30 December 20, 1990 - NICANOR G. DE GUZMAN, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93394 December 20, 1990 - FNCB FINANCE v. NAPOLEON ESTAVILLO

  • G.R. No. 43659 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 48535-36 December 21, 1990 - KOH TIECK HENG v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 49454 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR MONTEIRO

  • G.R. No. 49588 December 21, 1990 - DIONG BI CHU, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 63753-54 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76519 December 21, 1990 - TIMOTEO POJAS v. MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 78551-52 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO

  • G.R. No. 78854 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ

  • G.R. No. 79526 December 21, 1990 - NATIONAL ASSO. OF FREE TRADE UNIONS v. MAINIT LUMBER DEVT. COMPANY WORKERS

  • G.R. No. 80276 December 21, 1990 - HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS CORPORATION v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83257-58 December 21, 1990 - OSIAS ACADEMY, ET AL. v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83696 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE BARTULAY

  • G.R. No. 84918 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA

  • G.R. No. 87807 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISAGANI DESLATE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89407 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISABELO P. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 89682-83 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN HERICO

  • G.R. No. 91513 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERONIMO GOLES

  • G.R. No. 43491 December 26, 1990 - TEODORO V. CABILAN, ET AL. v. JOSE R. RAMOLETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 46210 December 26, 1990 - RICARDO VILLAFLOR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61527 December 26, 1990 - VICENTE GERARDO, ET AL. v. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70556 December 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO ABLAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77668 December 26, 1990 - EUFRACIO ROJAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81039 December 26, 1990 - INVESTMENT AND UNDERWRITING CORP. OF THE PHIL. v. COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85157 December 26, 1990 - FRANCISCO JOSE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88336 December 26, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 92625 December 26, 1990 - JOSE ORDA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 32945 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO T. NASSER v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 39430 December 3, 1990 - FRANCISCO MANLAPAZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55466 December 3, 1990 - MANILA SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78778 December 3, 1990 - LEONIDA CORONADO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79560 December 3, 1990 - ANDRES E. DITAN v. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80904 December 3, 1990 - BALTAZAR PANTIG, ET AL. v. VENANCIO BALTAZAR

  • G.R. No. 82115 December 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO B. ORTIZ

  • G.R. No. 84884 December 3, 1990 - EULALIO M. RUIZ, ET AL. v. DOROTEO N. CANEBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87264 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO DINGLASAN, ET AL. v. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89545 December 3, 1990 - ROLANDO DOLORFINO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • UDK No. 9864 December 3, 1990 - RUFINA VDA. DE TANGUB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 58668 December 4, 1990 - SANTIAGO ESCARTE, JR., ET AL. v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71929 December 4, 1990 - ALITALIA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74577 December 4, 1990 - CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80505 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO L. TANDOY

  • G.R. No. 80791 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE’S FINANCING CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86586 December 4, 1990 - NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION v. TEODORO P. REGINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM

  • G.R. No. 88177 December 4, 1990 - DOLORES A. PAREDES v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93054 December 4, 1990 - ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 30616 December 10, 1990 - EUFRACIO D. ROJAS v. CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA

  • G.R. No. 36827 December 10, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION, ET AL. v. RAMON C. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 44749 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELVIN S. GIRON

  • G.R. No. 50661 December 10, 1990 - RUBEN DELFIN, ET AL. v. AMADO G. INCIONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55361 December 10, 1990 - TEOFILO ERCILLO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55613 December 10, 1990 - ERNESTO DICHOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 56620 December 10, 1990 - FILIPINAS MILLS, INC., ET AL. v. ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69863-65 December 10, 1990 - LINO BROCKA, ET AL. v. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74762 December 10, 1990 - COMMERCIAL MOTORS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONERS, NLRC, SECOND DIVISION

  • G.R. No. 78163 December 10, 1990 - ANGELINA P. SANTIAGO v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79962 December 10, 1990 - LUCIO R. CRUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A GAISANO INC., ET AL. v. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82215 December 10, 1990 - ANTIPAZ P. PRESCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82374 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO M. AVILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82495 December 10, 1990 - ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION v. SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL. v. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85531 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMANDO TASARRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89988 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LYDIA RAMA

  • G.R. No. 91041 December 10, 1990 - JOSE A. SADDUL, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-86-32 December 10, 1990 - ALFREDO LLANES v. GAUDIOSO BORJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 31688 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL. v. JUAN P. AQUINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68514 December 17, 1990 - TRADERS ROYAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71589 December 17, 1990 - CAGAYAN DE ORO COLISEUM, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76303 December 17, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. FRANCISCO K. REDOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78623 December 17, 1990 - OFELIA P. TRISTE v. LEYTE STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83530 December 18, 1990 - CRISTITO R. AUSTRIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93867 December 18, 1990 - SIXTO S. BRILLANTES, JR. v. HAYDEE B. YORAC

  • G.R. Nos. 95203-05 December 18, 1990 - ERNESTO MACEDA v. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95263 December 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUVENAL KYAMKO

  • A.C. No. 2756 December 18, 1990 - PRUDENTIAL BANK v. BENJAMIN M. GRECIA

  • G.R. No. 44167 December 19, 1990 - JULITA FRANCISCO, ET AL. v. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 88710-13 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, ET AL. v. NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91025 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95478 December 19, 1990 - EDUARDO ACOP, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 December 19, 1990 - EFREN JAVIER, ET AL. v. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 46198 December 20, 1990 - DOMINGO REYES v. SERAFIN E. CAMILON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 53556 December 20, 1990 - LILIA AGUIRRE, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF LEYTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72019 December 20, 1990 - WORLD MACHINE ENTERPRISES v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81835 December 20, 1990 - ROMEO J. ORDOÑEZ v. ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82002 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN

  • G.R. Nos. 86492-94 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE

  • G.R. No. 88114 December 20, 1990 - PENTAGON SECURITY, ET AL. v. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89618 December 20, 1990 - RAUL S. MANGLAPUS v. ANDRES E. MATIAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 92029-30 December 20, 1990 - NICANOR G. DE GUZMAN, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 93394 December 20, 1990 - FNCB FINANCE v. NAPOLEON ESTAVILLO

  • G.R. No. 43659 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 48535-36 December 21, 1990 - KOH TIECK HENG v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 49454 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR MONTEIRO

  • G.R. No. 49588 December 21, 1990 - DIONG BI CHU, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 63753-54 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76519 December 21, 1990 - TIMOTEO POJAS v. MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 78551-52 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO

  • G.R. No. 78854 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ

  • G.R. No. 79526 December 21, 1990 - NATIONAL ASSO. OF FREE TRADE UNIONS v. MAINIT LUMBER DEVT. COMPANY WORKERS

  • G.R. No. 80276 December 21, 1990 - HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS CORPORATION v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83257-58 December 21, 1990 - OSIAS ACADEMY, ET AL. v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83696 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE BARTULAY

  • G.R. No. 84918 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA

  • G.R. No. 87807 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISAGANI DESLATE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89407 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISABELO P. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 89682-83 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN HERICO

  • G.R. No. 91513 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERONIMO GOLES

  • G.R. No. 43491 December 26, 1990 - TEODORO V. CABILAN, ET AL. v. JOSE R. RAMOLETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 46210 December 26, 1990 - RICARDO VILLAFLOR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61527 December 26, 1990 - VICENTE GERARDO, ET AL. v. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70556 December 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO ABLAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77668 December 26, 1990 - EUFRACIO ROJAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81039 December 26, 1990 - INVESTMENT AND UNDERWRITING CORP. OF THE PHIL. v. COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85157 December 26, 1990 - FRANCISCO JOSE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88336 December 26, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 92625 December 26, 1990 - JOSE ORDA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  •  





     
     

    [G.R. No. 86889 :  December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 51 LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, Respondent.

     

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. 86889 :  December 4, 1990.]

    192 SCRA 51

    LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, Respondent.

     

    D E C I S I O N

     

    PARAS, J.:

     

    This is a petition for prohibition with prayer for restraining order and/or preliminary and permanent injunction against the Honorable Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform for acting without jurisdiction in enforcing the assailed provisions of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 and in promulgating the Guidelines and Procedure Implementing Production and Profit Sharing under R.A. No. 6657, insofar as the same apply to herein petitioner, and further from performing an act in violation of the constitutional rights of the petitioner.

    As gathered from the records, the factual background of this case, is as follows:

    On June 10, 1988, the President of the Philippines approved R.A. No. 6657, which includes the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage (Rollo, p. 80).

    On January 2, 1989, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform promulgated the Guidelines and Procedures Implementing Production and Profit Sharing as embodied in Sections 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 (Rollo, p. 80).

    On January 9, 1989, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform promulgated its Rules and Regulations implementing Section 11 of R.A. No. 6657 (Commercial Farms). (Rollo, p. 81).

    Luz Farms, petitioner in this case, is a corporation engaged in the livestock and poultry business and together with others in the same business allegedly stands to be adversely affected by the enforcement of Section 3(b), Section 11, Section 13, Section 16(d) and 17 and Section 32 of R.A. No. 6657 otherwise known as Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and of the Guidelines and Procedures Implementing Production and Profit Sharing under R.A. No. 6657 promulgated on January 2, 1989 and the Rules and Regulations Implementing Section 11 thereof as promulgated by the DAR on January 9, 1989 (Rollo, pp. 2-36).: rd

    Hence, this petition praying that aforesaid laws, guidelines and rules be declared unconstitutional. Meanwhile, it is also prayed that a writ of preliminary injunction or restraining order be issued enjoining public respondents from enforcing the same, insofar as they are made to apply to Luz Farms and other livestock and poultry raisers.

    This Court in its Resolution dated July 4, 1939 resolved to deny, among others, Luz Farms' prayer for the issuance of a preliminary injunction in its Manifestation dated May 26, and 31, 1989. (Rollo, p. 98).

    Later, however, this Court in its Resolution dated August 24, 1989 resolved to grant said Motion for Reconsideration regarding the injunctive relief, after the filing and approval by this Court of an injunction bond in the amount of P100,000.00. This Court also gave due course to the petition and required the parties to file their respective memoranda (Rollo, p. 119).

    The petitioner filed its Memorandum on September 6, 1989 (Rollo, pp. 131-168).

    On December 22, 1989, the Solicitor General adopted his Comment to the petition as his Memorandum (Rollo, pp. 186-187).

    Luz Farms questions the following provisions of R.A. 6657, insofar as they are made to apply to it:

    (a) Section 3(b) which includes the "raising of livestock (and poultry)" in the definition of "Agricultural, Agricultural Enterprise or Agricultural Activity."

    (b) Section 11 which defines "commercial farms" as "private agricultural lands devoted to commercial, livestock, poultry and swine raising . . ."

    (c) Section 13 which calls upon petitioner to execute a production-sharing plan.

    (d) Section 16(d) and 17 which vest on the Department of Agrarian Reform the authority to summarily determine the just compensation to be paid for lands covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.

    (e) Section 32 which spells out the production-sharing plan mentioned in Section 13 —

    ". . . (W)hereby three percent (3%) of the gross sales from the production of such lands are distributed within sixty (60) days of the end of the fiscal year as compensation to regular and other farmworkers in such lands over and above the compensation they currently receive: Provided, That these individuals or entities realize gross sales in excess of five million pesos per annum unless the DAR, upon proper application, determine a lower ceiling.

    In the event that the individual or entity realizes a profit, an additional ten (10%) of the net profit after tax shall be distributed to said regular and other farmworkers within ninety (90) days of the end of the fiscal year . . ."

    The main issue in this petition is the constitutionality of Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988), insofar as the said law includes the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as the Implementing Rules and Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith.:-cralaw

    The constitutional provision under consideration reads as follows:

    ARTICLE XIII

    x  x  x

    AGRARIAN AND NATURAL RESOURCES REFORM

    Section 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the rights of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

    x  x  x"

    Luz Farms contended that it does not seek the nullification of R.A. 6657 in its entirety. In fact, it acknowledges the correctness of the decision of this Court in the case of the Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. vs.  Secretary of Agrarian Reform (G.R. 78742, 14 July 1989) affirming the constitutionality of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. It, however, argued that Congress in enacting the said law has transcended the mandate of the Constitution, in including land devoted to the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage (Rollo, p. 131). Livestock or poultry raising is not similar to crop or tree farming. Land is not the primary resource in this undertaking and represents no more than five percent (5%) of the total investment of commercial livestock and poultry raisers. Indeed, there are many owners of residential lands all over the country who use available space in their residence for commercial livestock and raising purposes, under "contract-growing arrangements," whereby processing corporations and other commercial livestock and poultry raisers (Rollo, p. 10). Lands support the buildings and other amenities attendant to the raising of animals and birds. The use of land is incidental to but not the principal factor or consideration in productivity in this industry. Including backyard raisers, about 80% of those in commercial livestock and poultry production occupy five hectares or less. The remaining 20% are mostly corporate farms (Rollo, p. 11).

    On the other hand, the public respondent argued that livestock and poultry raising is embraced in the term "agriculture" and the inclusion of such enterprise under Section 3(b) of R.A. 6657 is proper. He cited that Webster's International Dictionary, Second Edition (1954), defines the following words:

    "Agriculture — the art or science of cultivating the ground and raising and harvesting crops, often, including also, feeding, breeding and management of livestock, tillage, husbandry, farming.

    It includes farming, horticulture, forestry, dairying, sugarmaking . . .

    Livestock — domestic animals used or raised on a farm, especially for profit.

    Farm — a plot or tract of land devoted to the raising of domestic or other animals." (Rollo, pp. 82-83).

    The petition is impressed with merit.

    The question raised is one of constitutional construction. The primary task in constitutional construction is to ascertain and thereafter assure the realization of the purpose of the framers in the adoption of the Constitution (J.M. Tuazon & Co. vs.  Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413 [1970]).: rd

    Ascertainment of the meaning of the provision of Constitution begins with the language of the document itself. The words used in the Constitution are to be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed in which case the significance thus attached to them prevails (J.M. Tuazon & Co. vs.  Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413 [1970]).

    It is generally held that, in construing constitutional provisions which are ambiguous or of doubtful meaning, the courts may consider the debates in the constitutional convention as throwing light on the intent of the framers of the Constitution. It is true that the intent of the convention is not controlling by itself, but as its proceeding was preliminary to the adoption by the people of the Constitution the understanding of the convention as to what was meant by the terms of the constitutional provision which was the subject of the deliberation, goes a long way toward explaining the understanding of the people when they ratified it (Aquino, Jr. v. Enrile, 59 SCRA 183 [1974]).

    The transcripts of the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 on the meaning of the word "agricultural," clearly show that it was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution to include livestock and poultry industry in the coverage of the constitutionally-mandated agrarian reform program of the Government.

    The Committee adopted the definition of "agricultural land" as defined under Section 166 of R.A. 3844, as laud devoted to any growth, including but not limited to crop lands, saltbeds, fishponds, idle and abandoned land (Record, CONCOM, August 7, 1986, Vol. III, p. 11).

    The intention of the Committee is to limit the application of the word "agriculture." Commissioner Jamir proposed to insert the word "ARABLE" to distinguish this kind of agricultural land from such lands as commercial and industrial lands and residential properties because all of them fall under the general classification of the word "agricultural". This proposal, however, was not considered because the Committee contemplated that agricultural lands are limited to arable and suitable agricultural lands and therefore, do not include commercial, industrial and residential lands (Record, CONCOM, August 7, 1986, Vol. III, p. 30).

    In the interpellation, then Commissioner Regalado (now a Supreme Court Justice), posed several questions, among others, quoted as follows:

    x  x  x

    "Line 19 refers to genuine reform program founded on the primary right of farmers and farmworkers. I wonder if it means that leasehold tenancy is thereby proscribed under this provision because it speaks of the primary right of farmers and farmworkers to own directly or collectively the lands they till. As also mentioned by Commissioner Tadeo, farmworkers include those who work in piggeries and poultry projects.

    I was wondering whether I am wrong in my appreciation that if somebody puts up a piggery or a poultry project and for that purpose hires farmworkers therein, these farmworkers will automatically have the right to own eventually, directly or ultimately or collectively, the land on which the piggeries and poultry projects were constructed. (Record, CONCOM, August 2, 1986, p. 618).

    x  x  x

    The questions were answered and explained in the statement of then Commissioner Tadeo, quoted as follows:

    x  x  x

    "Sa pangalawang katanungan ng Ginoo ay medyo hindi kami nagkaunawaan. Ipinaaalam ko kay Commissioner Regalado na hindi namin inilagay ang agricultural worker sa kadahilanang kasama rito ang piggery, poultry at livestock workers. Ang inilagay namin dito ay farm worker kaya hindi kasama ang piggery, poultry at livestock workers (Record, CONCOM, August 2, 1986, Vol. II, p. 621).

    It is evident from the foregoing discussion that Section II of R.A. 6657 which includes "private agricultural lands devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising" in the definition of "commercial farms" is invalid, to the extent that the aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be covered by the agrarian reform program of the State. There is simply no reason to include livestock and poultry lands in the coverage of agrarian reform. (Rollo, p. 21).

    Hence, there is merit in Luz Farms' argument that the requirement in Sections 13 and 32 of R.A. 6657 directing "corporate farms" which include livestock and poultry raisers to execute and implement "production-sharing plans" (pending final redistribution of their landholdings) whereby they are called upon to distribute from three percent (3%) of their gross sales and ten percent (10%) of their net profits to their workers as additional compensation is unreasonable for being confiscatory, and therefore violative of due process (Rollo, p. 21).:-cralaw

    It has been established that this Court will assume jurisdiction over a constitutional question only if it is shown that the essential requisites of a judicial inquiry into such a question are first satisfied. Thus, there must be an actual case or controversy involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of judicial determination, the constitutional question must have been opportunely raised by the proper party, and the resolution of the question is unavoidably necessary to the decision of the case itself (Association of Small Landowners of the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. 78742; Acuna v. Arroyo, G.R. 79310; Pabico v. Juico, G.R. 79744; Manaay v. Juico, G.R. 79777, 14 July 1989, 175 SCRA 343).

    However, despite the inhibitions pressing upon the Court when confronted with constitutional issues, it will not hesitate to declare a law or act invalid when it is convinced that this must be done. In arriving at this conclusion, its only criterion will be the Constitution and God as its conscience gives it in the light to probe its meaning and discover its purpose. Personal motives and political considerations are irrelevancies that cannot influence its decisions. Blandishment is as ineffectual as intimidation, for all the awesome power of the Congress and Executive, the Court will not hesitate "to make the hammer fall heavily," where the acts of these departments, or of any official, betray the people's will as expressed in the Constitution (Association of Small Landowners of the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. 78742; Acuna v. Arroyo, G.R. 79310; Pabico v. Juico, G.R. 79744; Manaay v. Juico, G.R. 79777, 14 July 1989).

    Thus, where the legislature or the executive acts beyond the scope of its constitutional powers, it becomes the duty of the judiciary to declare what the other branches of the government had assumed to do, as void. This is the essence of judicial power conferred by the Constitution "(I)n one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law" (Art. VIII, Section 1 of the 1935 Constitution; Article X, Section I of the 1973 Constitution and which was adopted as part of the Freedom Constitution, and Article VIII, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution) and which power this Court has exercised in many instances (Demetria v. Alba, 148 SCRA 208 [1987]).

    PREMISES CONSIDERED, the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 insofar as the inclusion of the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as the Implementing Rules and Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith, are hereby DECLARED null and void for being unconstitutional and the writ of preliminary injunction issued is hereby MADE permanent.

    SO ORDERED.

    Fernan (C.J.), Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino, Medialdea and Regalado, JJ., concur.

    Feliciano, J., is on leave.

     

    Separate Opinions

     

    SARMIENTO, J., concurring:

    I agree that the petition be granted.

    It is my opinion however that the main issue on the validity of the assailed provisions of R.A. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988) and its Implementing Rules and Guidelines insofar as they include the raising of livestock, poultry, and swine in their coverage cannot be simplistically reduced to a question of constitutional construction.

    It is a well-settled rule that construction and interpretation come only after it has been demonstrated that application is impossible or inadequate without them. A close reading however of the constitutional text in point, specifically, Sec. 4, Art. XIII, particularly the phrase, ". . . in case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof," provides a basis for the clear and possible coverage of livestock, poultry, and swine raising within the ambit of the comprehensive agrarian reform program. This accords with the principle that every presumption should be indulged in favor of the constitutionality of a statute and the court in considering the validity of a statute should give it such reasonable construction as can be reached to bring it within the fundamental law.  1

    The presumption against unconstitutionality, I must say, assumes greater weight when a ruling to the contrary would, in effect, defeat the laudable and noble purpose of the law, i.e., the welfare of the landless farmers and farmworkers in the promotion of social justice, by the expedient conversion of agricultural lands into livestock, poultry, and swine raising by scheming landowners, thus, rendering the comprehensive nature of the agrarian program merely illusory.

    The instant controversy, I submit, boils down to the question of whether or not the assailed provisions violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution (Article II, section 1) which teaches simply that all persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.  2

    There is merit in the contention of the petitioner that substantial distinctions exist between land directed purely to cultivation and harvesting of fruits or crops and land exclusively used for livestock, poultry and swine raising, that make real differences, to wit:

    x  x  x

    No land is tilled and no crop is harvested in livestock and poultry farming. There are no tenants nor landlords, only employers and employees.

    Livestock and poultry do not sprout from land nor are they "fruits of the land."

    Land is not even a primary resource in this industry. The land input is inconsequential that all the commercial hog and poultry farms combined occupy less than one percent (1%) (0.4% for piggery, 0.2% for poultry) of the 5.45 million hectares of land supposedly covered by the CARP. And most farms utilize only 2 to 5 hectares of land.: nad

    In every respect livestock and poultry production is an industrial activity. Its use of an inconsequential portion of land is a mere incident of its operation, as in any other undertaking, business or otherwise.

    The fallacy of defining livestock and poultry production as an agricultural enterprise is nowhere more evident when one considers that at least 95% of total investment in these farms is in the form of fixed assets which are industrial in nature.

    These include (1) animal housing structures and facilities complete with drainage, waterers, blowers, misters and in some cases even piped-in music; (2) feedmills complete with grinders, mixers, conveyors, exhausts, generators, etc.; (3) extensive warehousing facilities for feeds and other supplies; (4) anti-pollution equipment such as bio-gas and digester plants augmented by lagoons and concrete ponds; (5) deepwells, elevated water tanks, pumphouses and accessory facilities; (6) modern equipment such as sprayers, pregnancy testers, etc.; (7) laboratory facilities complete with expensive tools and equipment; and a myriad other such technologically advanced appurtances.

    How then can livestock and poultry farmlands be arable when such are almost totally occupied by these structures?

    The fallacy of equating the status of livestock and poultry farmworkers with that of agricultural tenants surfaces when one considers contribution to output. Labor cost of livestock and poultry farms is no more than 4% of total operating cost. The 98% balance represents inputs not obtained from the land nor provided by the farmworkers — inputs such as feeds and biochemicals (80% of the total cost), power cost, cost of money and several others.

    Moreover, livestock and poultry farmworkers are covered by minimum wage law rather than by tenancy law. They are entitled to social security benefits where tenant-farmers are not. They are paid fixed wages rather than crop shares. And as in any other industry, they receive additional benefits such as allowances, bonuses, and other incentives such as free housing privileges, light and water.

    Equating livestock and poultry farming with other agricultural activities is also fallacious in the sense that like the manufacturing sector, it is a market for, rather than a source of agricultural output. At least 60% of the entire domestic supply of corn is absorbed by livestock and poultry farms. So are the by-products of rice (rice-bran), coconut (copra meal), banana (banana pulp meal), and fish (fish meal).  3

    x  x  x

    In view of the foregoing, it is clear that both kinds of lands are not similarly situated and hence, cannot be treated alike. Therefore, the assailed provisions which allow for the inclusion of livestock and poultry industry within the coverage of the agrarian reform program constitute invalid classification and must accordingly be struck down as repugnant to the equal protection clause of the Constitution.chanrobles virtual law library

     

    Endnotes

    SARMIENTO, J., concurring:

      1. In re Guarina, 24 Phil. 37; Yu Cong Eng v. Trinidad, 70 L. ed., p. 1059.

      2. Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 1155.

      3. Rollo, 29-30.

    [G.R. No. 86889 :  December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 51 LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, Respondent.




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

               

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED