Reviewer from Seatwork/ Other Notes/ Related Cases

Compiled by: Mr. Anthony Ashley B. Wagan

Seatwork No. 1 Reviewer

1. The City of San Pablo wants to buy a piece of land so that the townsfolk can have a grand terminal of its
own and not cause any unnecessary traffic build-up due to the buses lining up in the designated loading
and unloading zone. You are the city legal officer of the city, and they ask you the steps in buying the
said land.

a. Is a resolution coming from the Sangguniang Panglungsod needed for the buying of the said
property? Explain.
No. Resolution coming from the Sangguniang Panglungsod is not needed for the buying of the
said property.
Under the Philippine law and jurisprudence, the LGU cannot authorize an expropriation of
private property through a mere resolution of its lawmaking body.
In this instant case, an ordinance enacted by the local legislative council is needed to exercise the
power of eminent domain and pursue expropriation proceeding over a particular private property.
b. What are the conditions/requirements for proper execution of an imminent domain?
Requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent domain are the following:
1. An Ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief executive, on behalf
of the LGU, to exercise the power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceeding over a
particular private property.
2. It must be for public use, purpose, or welfare or for the benefit of the poor or landless.
3. There must be payment of just compensation.
4. A valid and definite Offer has been previously made to the owner of the property sought to be
expropriated, but said offer was not accepted.

c. What are the requirements for an authorized immediate entry of the subject property in an
expropriation?

There are two requirements for an authorized immediate entry of the subject property in an
expropriation.
First, the filling of a complaint for expropriation which is sufficient in form and substance.
Second, deposit of the amount equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the
property to be expropriated based on its current tax declaration.
d. What is eminent domain?
Eminent domain is the inherent power of a nation or a sovereign state to take, or sanction the
taking of, private property for a public use without the owner's consent, conditioned upon payment of
just compensation. In other words, eminent domain is a coercive measure on the part of the state
whereby private interests are impaired for the general welfare.
 While eminent domain is an inherent power, it is not absolute such that it is subject to limitations
imposed under the 1987 Constitution. Section 1, Article III provides that no person shall be deprived of
property without due process of law, while Section 9 thereof states that private property shall not be
taken for public use without just compensation. These constitutionally enshrined restrictions ensure that
private individuals are not unduly prejudiced by the capricious or oppressive exercise of the State's
powers. Thus, in order for the State to exercise its power of eminent domain, the following requirements
must be present: (a) that it is for a particular purpose; and (b) that just compensation is paid to the
property owner.
e. What are the powers of a local government unit? Explain each.
Police Power
The police power of the LGU is not inherent. LGUs exercise the police power under the general
welfare clause (LGC, Sec. 16,).
Under the general welfare clause, every LGUs shall exercise powers that are necessary,
appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the
promotion of general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdiction, LGUs shall ensure and
support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety,
enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of
appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance
economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among its residents, maintain peace
and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitance.
Eminent Domain
Local government units have no inherent power of eminent domain. Local governments can
exercise such power only when expressly authorized by the Legislature. By virtue of the Local
Government Code, Congress conferred upon local government units the power to expropriate.
Strictly speaking, the power of eminent domain delegated to an LGU is in reality not eminent but
“inferior”. The national legislature is still the principal of the LGUs, and the latter cannot go against the
principal’s will or modify the same.
Taxation
It is already well-settled that although the power to tax is inherent in the State, the same is not
true for the LGUs to whom the power must be delegated by Congress and must be exercised within the
guidelines and limitations that Congress may provide.
Legislative Power
It is a fundamental principle that municipal ordinances are inferior in status and subordinate to
the laws of the State. An ordinance in conflict with a state law of general character and statewide
application is universally held to be invalid. In every power to pass ordinances given to a municipality,
there is an implied restriction that the ordinances shall be consistent with the general law.
2. A. What if only a few people will be benefited from the expropriation? Is the expropriation still
valid?
Yes, the expropriation is still valid.
 In case only a few could actually benefit from the expropriation of the property, the same does
not diminish its public use character. It is simply not possible to provide for all at once, land and shelter,
for all who need them. Corollary to the expanded notion of public use, expropriation is not anymore
confined to vast tracts of land and landed estates. It is therefore of no moment that the land sought to be
expropriated is less than half a hectare only.
Through the years, the public use requirement in eminent domain has evolved into a flexible
concept, influenced by changing conditions. Public use now includes the broader notion of indirect
public benefit or advantage including in particular urban land reform and housing.
B. Define Public Use
The right of the public to use property that was once privately owned after it has been taken by
the federal or state government through its eminent domain power. It establishes the government’s
power to take privately owned land, so long as the owner is fairly compensated, and it mandates that any
property taken must be for a public use.
The law states that no private property be taken for public use, without just compensation” As a
result, public use is one of two main factors used to evaluate the legality of a taking by the government–
the other being the adequacy of compensation.
Examples of public uses include infrastructure and services, like public schools, public utilities,
parks, and transit operations. Some jurisdictions define public use to mean “public benefit” or “public
advantage”. Other jurisdictions limit its meaning to actual use by the public “public employment”.
C. Define the President’s power of general supervision.
The President shall exercise general supervision over autonomous regions to ensure that the laws
are faithfully executed. (Sec. 16, Art. X, 1987 Constitution)
Consistent with the basic policy on local autonomy, the President shall exercise general
supervision over local government units to ensure that their acts are within the scope of their prescribed
powers and functions.

Seatwork No. 2 Reviewer

1. What are the requisites for a valid ordinance?
There are six (6) requisites for a valid ordinance.
1. Must not contravene the constitution and any statute.
2. Must not be unfair or oppressive.
3. Must not be partial or discriminatory.
4. Must not prohibit, but may regulate trade.
5. Must not be unreasonable.
6. Must be general in application and
Consistent with public policy. (Magtajas v. Pryce Properties Corporation, Inc., July 20, 1994)
2. Differentiate ordinance and resolution.
Ordinance and resolution are completely different terminology.
Ordinance can be described as a law, with general and permanent characteristics. In addition, it
is necessary for an ordinance to have a third reading.
On the other hand, a resolution is merely a declaration of a sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking
body on a specific matter, and it is temporary in nature. Furthermore, third reading is not necessary in a
resolution, unless decided otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members.
3. What is legislative power?
Legislative power can be defined in various ways. Generally, legislative power is the power to
create/ make laws. Specifically, it is the power or competence to propose, enact, ordain, amend/alter,
modify, abrogate, or repeal laws.
Under Section 1, Article VI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the legislative power shall be
vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of
Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and
referendum.
Under the nature of local legislative powers, it is a fundamental principle that municipal
ordinances are inferior in status and subordinate to the laws of the State. An ordinance in conflict with a
state law of general character and statewide application is universally held to be invalid. In every power
to pass ordinances given to a municipality, there is an implied restriction that the ordinances shall be
consistent with the general law.
4. What are the process for law making?
There are many processes for law making.
First and foremost, no bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed 3
readings on separate days. Second, printed copies of the bill in its final form should be distributed to the
Members 3 days before its passage.
Third, upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed. Fourth, the vote on
the bill shall be taken immediately after the last reading of a bill. Firth, the yeas and the nays shall be
entered in the Journal.
5. What happens if there is no quorum in the Sanggunian? What is the remedy for absentee members
of the Sanggunian?
If there is no quorum in the Sanggunian, the presiding officer may declare a recess until such
time that quorum is constituted.
However, the remedy for absentee members of the Sanggunian, presiding officer can compel
immediate attendance of the members who are absent without justifiable cause.
Under the LGC, Sec. 53 (b)(c), moreover, presiding officer can declare the session adjourned
for lack of quorum and no business shall be transacted if there is still no quorum despite enforcement
of attendance.
6. How many days before the Local Chief Executive can veto an ordinance? What items can the local
chief executive veto?
Under the LGC, Secs. 54 and 55, the Local Chief Executive may veto the ordinance only once on
the ground that the ordinance is ultra vires and prejudicial to public welfare. The veto must be
communicated to the Sanggunian within 15 days for a province and 10 days for a city or
municipality.
Under the Philippine laws, the items that the local chief executive can veto are item/s of an
appropriation ordinance, ordinance/resolution adopting local development plan and public
investment program and also ordinance directing the payment of money or creating liability.
7. How does an ordinance take effect?
Under the Philippine law and jurisprudence, approval of ordinances happens by affixing the
signature of the local chief executive on each and every page thereof if he approves the same, and also
by overriding the veto of the local chief executive by 2/3 vote of all members of the Sanggunian if the
local chief executive vetoed the same.
Under the LGC, Sec. 59 (a), in the effectivity of ordinance or resolution, the general rule is that
after 10 days from the date a copy is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of the capitol or
city, municipal or barangay hall and in at least 2 conspicuous spaces, unless otherwise stated in
the ordinance or resolution.
However, under the Philippine laws, there are ordinances requiring publication for its effectivity
such as ordinances that carry with them penal sanctions and also ordinances and resolutions
passed by highly urbanized and independent component cities.

Other Notes
Q. What is a nuisance?
A. Art. 694. of the Civil Code of the Philippines states that a nuisance is any act, omission, establishment,
business, condition of property, or anything else which:
1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; or
2) Annoys or offends the senses; or
3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; or
4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; or
5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.
Q. Differentiate nuisance per se or at law from nuisance per accidens or in facts
Nuisances may be classified as (1) nuisances per se or at law and as (2) nuisances per accidens or
in fact. Any act, erection, or use of property that is unlawful or unauthorized by a competent authority can
be a nuisance per se. A nuisance per se is also defined as an act, occupation, or structure which is a
nuisance at all times and under any circumstances, regardless of location or surroundings.
Therefore, a lawful business is never a nuisance per se. However, it can become a nuisance by
reason of circumstances. A person who conducts a business lawfully and in the best manner practicable
 with a sound operation can still commit a nuisance if such operation interferes unreasonably with another
persons’ use and enjoyment of their property.
Nuisances per accidens or in fact are those which become nuisances by reason of circumstances
and surroundings, and if an act creates any danger and inflicts injury upon a person or property. The
nuisance is intentional if the creator intends to bring about the conditions which are in fact found to be a
nuisance.
In other words, a nuisance per accidens is not a nuisance as such but becomes a nuisance in the
manner in which it is operated. The number of nuisances per se is limited when compared to nuisances per
accidens. Nuisance per accidens is divided into two further subclasses of nuisance: intentional and
negligent. Intentional private nuisances per accidens are those which become nuisances by reason of their
location or by reason of the manner in which they are constructed, maintained, or operated.
It is to be noted that the difference between a nuisance per se and a nuisance in fact lies in the proof, not
in the remedy. In the case of a nuisance per se, the thing becomes a nuisance as a matter of law. Its
existence need only be proved in any locality and the right to relief is established by averment and proof of
the mere act.
However, if a nuisance is not a nuisance per se, then it is a nuisance per accidens or in fact
depending upon its location and surroundings, the manner of its conduct, or other circumstances. In such
cases, proof of the act and its consequences is necessary. The question as to what constitutes a nuisance is
one of the laws for the court. However, it is the jury that decides whether a particular act or structure or use
of property that is not a nuisance per se is a nuisance in fact. Retrieved from: The US Legal
Q. Pocket veto vs. Item veto
A. Pocket Veto Item Veto
When the President is considered to have rejected Power of the President to nullify or cancel
a bill submitted to him for his approval when the specific provisions of a bill, usually a budget
Congress adjourns during the period given to the appropriations bill, without vetoing the entire
President to approve or reject a bill. legislative package.

Related Cases
Topic: Police Power and Nuisance (Question 3, Bar 2022 Political Law)
Q. A city ordinance was passed providing for the removal, at the owner’s expense, of: (i) all outdoor
advertising materials displayed or exposed to the public in designated regulated areas, such as residential zones,
bridges, and along main city streets; and billboards of substandard materials, or which obstruct road signs and
traffic signals. Failure to comply with said ordinance authorizes the mayor, assisted by the police, to implement
the removal of the non-compliant materials. ABC Ad Agency, owner of the billboards removed by the city,
filed a complaint because, considering the nature of its business, the removal of its billboards amounted to
taking of private property without Just compensation.
Will the complaint prosper? Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested Answer:
The complaint will not prosper.
 The city can, in its exercise of its delegated police power, enact an ordinance regulating the display
of signs, signboards, or billboards at the place or places where the profession or business advertised thereby is,
in whole or in part, conducted. (Sec. 458 (3)(iv), LGC; Evasco, Jr. v. Montanez, G.R. No. 199172, February 21,
2018). Hence, the removal of ABC Ad Agency’s billboards, if done under the first ground, is valid.
Also, pursuant to its delegated police power, the city can enact an ordinance abating a public
nuisance. (Sec. 458 (4)(i), LGC; Art. 699 (a), Civil Code). Hence, removing billboards under the second ground
– because they were of substandard materials that endangered the safety of others or obstructed road signs and
traffic signals that caused interference with the free passage of a public highway or street – is also valid.
Under both grounds, payment of just compensation is not required because they do not amount to
“taking” under the power of eminent domain. Payment of just compensation is not required in the exercise of
police power.

Topic: Equal Protection Clause (Question 5, Bar 2022 Political Law)

Q. The K-12 Law was passed with the objective to enhance the Philippine educational system by strengthening
its curriculum and adding two years of high school. Parents of students in a science high school sought to have
the law declared unconstitutional citing the equal protection clause of the Constitution. As well, the parents
averred that the law should not apply to their children because the latter belong to a distinct class, being gifted
and advanced for their age, with the capability to learn better and faster compared to other high school students.
Is the contention of the parents tenable? Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested Answer:
The contention is untenable.
The equal protection clause is directed principally against undue favor and individual or class
privilege. However, treating a class differently from the rest is valid so long as it is based on a valid
classification. Valid classification requires real and substantial differences to justify the variance of treatment
between the classes.
Here, the parents of students in the said science high school did not offer any substantial basis to
create a valid classification between their children and the rest of the high school students in the Philippines.
Otherwise stated, the equal protection clause would, in fact, be violated if the K-12 law treated the students of
this science high school differently from the rest of the high school students in the country. (CoTeSCUP v.
Secretary of Education, G.R. No.216930, October 09, 2018).

Topic: Due Process Clause (Question 13, Bar 2022 Political Law)
Q. Pursuant to law ordering the fixing of “just and reasonable standards, classifications, regulations, practices,
or services to be furnished, observed, and imposed by operators of public utility vehicles”, the Land
Transportation Franchise and regulatory Board (LTFRB) promulgated and published a regulation that “no car
beyond six years shall be operated as taxi.” Taxi operators assailed the validity of the regulation contending that
procedural due process was violated because position papers were not asked of them and no notice was given to
them prior to the issuance of the regulation.
Were the taxi operators denied procedural due process? Explain briefly. (5points)
Suggested Answer:
No, they were not denied of procedural due process.
The Due Process Clause can be invoked only when there is actual or a risk of an impending
deprivation of life, liberty, or property. To have a “property interest,” a person must establish or demonstrate
any vested right worthy of legal protection. A privilege or franchise to operate a private utility does not vest
absolute rights to the holder. Here, the regulation involves a franchise or a mere privilege. Hence, the
complaining taxi operators cannot invoke the right to procedural due process.
In addition, proceedings related to granting of permits or privileges are non-adversarial in nature
because no one will be deprived of any vested right when there are deviations to procedural rules. Hence, an
oppositor to the assailed regulation cannot invoke due process on the ground that position papers were not asked
of them, and they were not given notice prior to the issuance. (NTC v. Brancomm Cable and Television
Network Co., December 5, 2019)