Case Digest: So v. Republic (G.R. No. 170603)

So v. Republic | G.R. No. 170603 | 29 Jan 2007 | Callejo, Sr. J. | Art IV (Section 1, Par 4) | Petitioners: Edison So Respondents: Republic of the Philippines Recit Ready Summary Herein Petitioner So filed for a Petition for Naturalization under CA No. 473 aka the Revised Naturalization Law.He presented 2 witnesses à fam business lawyer Atty. Adasa & UST classmate Mark Salcedo. RTC granted So’s petition. Respondent Republic of the Phil through OSG said not so fast! Coz SolGen claims na the 2 witnesses So presented did not know him (So) well enough and that they only gave general statements upon being asked about the character and moral conduct of So. CA set aside RTC’s decision. Hence, this present petition. The issue is W/N So qualifies for Philippines Citizenship and the Court said NO. It was wrong for So to claim that that RA 9139 should apply to his case instead of CA No. 473. This is because the latter applied to ALL ALIENS regardless of class while the former applies to nati...
Post a Comment

Case Digest: Marbury v. Madison (5 U.S. 137)

Marbury v. Madison | 5 U.S. 137 | February 1803 | Marshall, C.J. | Topic: Origin of Judicial Review |

DOCTRINE: The Constitution is the supreme law. It was ordained by the people, the ultimate source of all political authority. It confers limited powers on the national government. x x x If the government consciously or unconsciously oversteps these limitations there must be some authority competent to hold it in control, to thwart its unconstitutional attempt, and thus to vindicate and preserve inviolate the will of the people as expressed in the Constitution. This power the courts exercise. This is the beginning and the end of the theory of judicial review.

FACTS:

  • Under the Organic Act, US President John Adams named 42 justices of the peace and 16 new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia.
  • The Organic Act was an attempt by the Federalists to take control of the federal judiciary before President Jefferson took office. 
    • In effect, this was a “midnight appointment.”
  • The commissions were signed by President Adams then sealed by acting Secretary of State John Marshall (eventually becoming the Chief Justice) but they were not delivered before the expiration of Pres. Adams’s term. 
  • Incoming President Thomas Jefferson refused to honor the commissions, claiming that they were invalid because they had not been delivered by the end of Adams’s term.
  • William Marbury (Petitioner) was an intended recipient of an appointment as justice of the peace. Marbury applied directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of mandamus to compel Jefferson’s Secretary of State, James Madison (Defendant), to deliver the commissions. 
    • Philippine context: Under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, a petition for mandamus is employed to compel the performance, when refused, of a ministerial, as opposed to a discretionary, duty.
  • The Judiciary Act of 1789 had granted the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus “…to any courts appointed, or persons holding office, under the authority of the United States

ISSUES/HELD

Whether or not the Supreme Court has judicial review power. [YES]

  • Yes, but not in the instant case.
  • The Judiciary Act of 1789 clearly gives the Supreme Court “judicial review” or jurisdiction over writs of mandamus.  However, Article III of the Constitution does not give the Supreme Court authority to review the writs.
    • Therefore, the two laws are in conflict. 
  • As such, the Supreme Court – being charged with upholding the Constitution – must adopt Article III’s application. 
    • Justice Marshall argued that there would be no point for the Supreme Court to exist were it not to uphold the Constitution and strike down laws adopted by Congress that necessarily conflict with the Constitution itself.
    • The power of the legislative department to create laws cannot ever exceed the written Constitution which itself is the source of such power. 
    • The action for mandamus in this case filed by the petitioner is in excess of the Court's jurisdiction, and any law enacted by the legislature which diminishes or increases the Court's jurisdiction without the Court's prior consent is unconstitutional and must be discharged.
    • In so doing, Marshall established the principle of judicial review.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Digest: Republic v. Sereno (G.R. No 237428) w/ Summary of Separate Opinions

Republic v. Sereno (including Summary of Separate Opinions) | G.R. No. 237428 | May 11, 2018 | Tijam, J. |  Topic: Art. VIII, Sec 5 (other topics included in the full digest) | SUMMARY:   A petition for quo warranto was filed by the OSG assailing the appointment of CJ Sereno as Chief Justice on the ground that she failed to prove her integrity during the nomination process as she failed to comply with the SALN requirements of the JBC. Several groups and individuals filed Motions for Leave to Intervene, among them Senators De Lima and Trillanes. CJ Sereno filed a Motion to Inhibit against six Justices. The Republic argues that (1) quo warranto is the proper remedy, as the Constitution does not make impeachment the exclusive mode of unseating an impeachable officer; (2) the petition is not time barred as prescription cannot run against the States; and, (3) that, at the time of her appointment, CJ Sereno was not of “proven integrity” she not having filed the required SALNs a...
Read more

Case Digest: Gloria Dy v. People (G.R. No 189081)

Gloria Dy v. People of the Philippines | G.R. No. 189081 | August 10, 2016 | Topic: Liability ex delicto / ex contractu FACTS: Dy, as the General Manager of Mandy Commodities Company, Inc. (MCCI) proposed to William Mandy (President of MCCI) to purchase a property for the company. To facilitate the purchase, the president obtained a loan from International China Bank of Commerce (bank), which was granted to the company in the amount of P20 million.   As security, MCCI executed a chattel mortgage over their warehouses. The president entrusted Dy to manage the payment of the loan. Later on, MCCI received a notice of foreclosure over the mortgaged property due to its default in paying.   In order to prevent the foreclosure, the president delivered to Dy, P21,706,281 worth of checks issued by MCCI, with the instruction that Dy shall use the checks to pay the loan. However, the president later discovered that the checks weren’t paid to the bank when the bank foreclosed the mortg...
Read more

Case Digest: Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo (G.R. No. 180906)

Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo |  G.R. No. 180906 | October 7, 2008 |  Puno. C.J. Doctrine and Concepts: The Writ of Amparo offers a better remedy to extralegal killings and enforced disappearances and threats thereof due to the nature of swiftness required to resolve these cases The remedy provides rapid judicial relief as it partakes of a summary that requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner; it is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt or liability for damages requiring preponderance of evidence or administrative responsibility requiring full and exhaustive proceedings. Facts The case at bar is an appeal via Petition for Review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court in relation to Section 19 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo , seeking to reverse and set aside , the Decision promulgated by Court of Appeals in C.A. G.R. AMPARO No. 00001. The original case was filed by ...
Read more