CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II | PEOPLE VS. POLMAR 46 Phil 440 (1924)

PEOPLE VS. POLMAR 

46 Phil 440 (1924) 


FACTS 

Defendant, the manager ad person in charge of La Flor dela Isabela, a cigarrete manufacturing company, was adjudged guilty by the Court of First Instance of refusing and failing to pay P80 to Macaria Fajardo, a pregnant employee, despite her repeated demands in violation of Sec 13 and 15 of Act No. 3071which provides for a 30 day vacation with pay before delivery and another 30 day vacation with pay after confinement of pregnant laborers in factories, shops and place of labor. In an appeal, respondent questioned the constitutionality of the Act arguing that it is in violation of the right to contract. 

ISSUE 

Whether or not Act 3071 is unconstitutional on the grounds that it is in violation of the constitutional guarantee of right to contract. 

RULING 

YES, Act 3071 is unconstitutional. 

The Right to enter into contract is included in the liberty of a person guaranteed by the constitution. It includes the right to contract for personal services or employment. The right to contract for labor is as essential to the capitalist as to the laborer. The right to and for labor includes the right to refuse or terminate. Legislature is not permitted to deprive citizen their right to enter into contract freely and without restraint. 

In the case at bar, the court ruled that Act 3071 is unconstitutional on the grounds that it is in violation of the constitutional guarantee of right to contract as it is unjustly oppressive to employers and unfairly favors the employee in violation of their right to enter into contract freely and without restraint.








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