CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II | CITY OF MANILA VS. LAGUIO JR. 4545 SCRA 308 (2005)


CITY OF MANILA VS. LAGUIO JR. 

4545 SCRA 308 (2005) 


FACTS 

The Local Government of the City of Manila passed ordinance 7783 which prohibits establishments or operation of business providing certain forms of amusements, entertainment, services and facilities in the Ermita-Malate area. Prohibited establishements defined in the law includes bars, karaoke bars, motels, hotels in the red District known for harboring thrill seekers. 

Malate Tourist Development Corp. which manages motels in the district contends that the ordinance is invalid; that they do not market such not use women for entertainment/amusement purposes. The City government argues that the enactment of the ordinance is to promote morality and that is a valid exercise of police power. 

ISSUE 

Whether or not ordinance 7783 is null and void. 

RULING 

YES, ordinance 7783 is null and void. 

The police power granted to LGUs must always be exercised with utmost observance of the rights of the people to due process and equal protection of the law; due process requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering with the rights of the people to their life, liberty and property. 

In the case at bar, the court held that Ordinance 7783 infringes the due process clause as it does not convene a valid exercise of police power as the prohibition of the enumerated establishments will not per se promote and protect moral and social welfare of the society. Further adds that the Local Government Code merely empowers LGUs to regulate and not to prohibit the enumerated establishments.








Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ DELOS SANTOS VS. JARRA/ G. R. NO. L-4150/ 10 FEBRUARY 1910/ 15 PHIL. 147