Ateneo de Manila University

UPDATED DRAFT*Constitutional Law One

Atty. Edilwasif T. Baddiri

First Semester, 2015-2016

Required Textbook

Bernas S.J., Fr. Joaquin (2011) The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Comprehensive Reviewer, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.

Bernas S.J., Fr. Joaquin (2003) The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.

Nachura, Antonio (2006) Outline Reviewer in Political Law, Quezon City: VJ Graphil Arts, Inc.

Classroom Policies

Students are expected to have read the assigned materials for the class sessions and will be called for recitation.

Attendance is checked. University rules governing absences are observed.

Cell phones and other electronic devices must be kept in silent mode. Students must refrain from using these devices during classroom sessions.

Plagiarism and cheating are grave offenses of intellectual dishonesty and are punishable by university rules.

Consultation and discussion is available upon request of the student. Email me: ebaddiri@gmail.comThe 1987 Philippine Constitution

Definition

Classification

Essential Parts of the Philippine Constitution

Interpretation/Construction of the Philippine Constitution

Francisco v. House of Representatives, GR 160261, Nov. 10, 2003

Civil Liberties Union v. ES, 194 SCRA 317

Brief History

Malolos Constitution

1900 McKinleys Instructions

Spooner Amendment

1902 Philippine Bill

1916 Jones Law (Philippine Autonomy Act)

Tydings-McDuffie Act (Philippine Independence Act)

1935 Constitution

Japanese Occupation Order No. 1 (Philippine Executive Commission)

1973 Constitution

Freedom Constitution

1987 Philippine Constitution

Important Constitutional Principles

Hierarchy of Laws

Supremacy of the Constitution

Separation of Powers Principle Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013: The principle of separation of powers refers to the constitutional demarcation of the three fundamental powers of government. The Constitution has given to the legislative branch, through Congress, the power to make laws, to the executive branch, through the President, the power to enforce laws, and to the judicial branch, through the Court, the power to interpret laws. By constitutional design, each department of government has exclusive cognizance of matters within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own sphere.Checks and Balances PrincipleBelgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013: The Constitution has also provided for an elaborate system of checks and balances to secure coordination in the workings of the various departments of the government.203A prime example of a constitutional check and balance would be the Presidents power to veto an item written into an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill submitted to him by Congress for approval through a process known as "bill presentment."Non-Delegation of Power

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013: (With respect to legislative power Congress, acting as a bicameral body, and the people, through the process of initiative and referendum, may constitutionally wield legislative power and no other. This premise embodies the principle of non-delegability of legislative power, and the only recognized exceptions thereto would be: (a) delegated legislative power to local governments which, by immemorial practice, are allowed to legislate on purely local matters; and (b) constitutionally-grafted exceptions such as the authority of the President to, by law, exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy in times of war or other national emergency,or fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions as Congress may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program of the Government.1Notably, the principle of non-delegability should not be confused as a restriction to delegate rule-making authority to implementing agencies for the limited purpose of either filling up the details of the law for its enforcement (supplementary rule-making) or ascertaining facts to bring the law into actual operation (contingent rule-making).199

Preamble

Article I: The National Territory

R.A. 9255 or the New Baselines Law of 2009.

1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

Reagan v. Commissioner, 30 SCRA 968

People v. Gozo, 53 SCRA 476

Magallona v. Ermita, 655 SCRA 476

Article II: Declaration of Principles and State Policies

Legal Value of Article II

Tondo Medical v. CA, 527 SCRA 746 (2007)

Bases Conversion and Development Authority v. Commission on Audit, 580 SCRA 295

Section 1. Philippines as a Democratic and Republican State

Functions of Government

Bacani v. NACOCO, 100 PHIL 468 (1956)

ACCFA v. CUGCO, 30 SCRA 649 (1969)

PVTA v. CIR, 65 SCRA 416 (1975)

PHHC v Court of Industrial Relations, 150 SCRA 296

Spouses Fontanilla v. Hon. Maliaman, GR Nos. 55963, February 27, 1991

VFP v. Reyes, 483 SCRA 526 (2006)Ramiscal v. Sandiganbayan, 499 SCRA 375 (2006)

Alzaga v. Sandiganbayan, 505 SCRA 848 (2006)

Javier v. Sandiganbayan, 599 SCRA 324 (2009)

MIAA v. CA, 495 SCRA 591 (2006)

Philippine Society v. COA, 534 SCRA 112 (2007)

Serana v. Sandiganbayan, 542 SCRA 224 (2008)

De Jure and De Facto Government

Co Kim Cham v. Valdez Tan Keh, 75 PHIL 113 (1945)

In re Letter of Associate Justice Puno, 210 SCRA 588

Republic v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 104768, July 21, 2003

Sovereignty

People v. Gozo, 53 SCRA 476 (1973)

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18Section 2. Generally Accepted Principles of International Law

Treaties and Agreeements

Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195

JBL Reyes v. Bagatsing, GR No. 65366, October 25, 1983

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10, 2000

Bayan v. Romulo, GR 159618, Feb 1, 2011

Equal Standing of International Law and Municipal Law

Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR 151445, April 11, 2002

Shangri-La v. Developers, GR 159938, March 31, 2006

Philip Morris, Inc. v. Fortune Tobacco Corporation, GR 158589, June 27, 2006

Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Mijares v. Ranada, GR 139325, April 12, 2005

Soft Law

Pharmaceutical v. DOH, GR 173034, October 9, 2007

Section 3. Civilian Supremacy and AFP Role

IBP v. Zamora, 338 SCRA 81 (2000)

Kulayan v. Tan, 675 SCRA 482 (2012)Section 4. Duty of Government to the People

Section 5. Maintenance of Peace and Order

Kilosbayan v. Morato, 246 SCRA 540 (1995) and MR 250 SCRA 130Kulayan v. Tan, 675 SCRA 482 (2012)

Section 6. Separation of Church and State

United Church of Christ in the Philippines, Inc v. Bradford United Church of Christ, Inc 674 SCRA 92 (2012)

Section 7. Independent Foreign Policy

Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR 151445, April 11, 2002

Section 8. Freedom from Nuclear Weapons

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10, 2000

Section 9. Social Order

Section 10. Social Justice

Section 11. Personal Dignity and Human Rights

Section 12. Family Life; Mother; Unborn

Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)

Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 US 390 (1922)

Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 262 US 510 (1925)

Wisconsin v. Yoder 40 LW 4476 (1972)

Ginsberg v. New York, 390 US 629 (1968)

Orceo v. COMELEC, GR 190779 March 26, 2010

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Section 13. Vital Role of Youth

Basco v. PAGCOR, 197 SCRA 252Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, June 7, 2011

Section 14. Role of Women and Equality of Men and Women

Section 15. Right to Health

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Section 16. Right to a Balanced and Healthful Ecology

Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792 (1993)

LLDA v. CA, 231 SCRA 292 (1994) and 251 SCRA 42 (1995)

MMDA v. Residents of Manila Bay, GR No. 171947, December 18, 2008

Boracay Foundation, Inc. v. The Province of Aklan, 674 SCRA 555 (2012)

Section 17. Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports

Section 18. Labor Protection

PNB v. Dan Padao, GR 180849, November 2011Section 19. Self-Reliant and Independent National Economy

Garcia v. BOI, 191 SCRA 288 (1990)

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

Section 20. Role of Private Sector

Marine Radio Communications Association of the Philippines v. Reyes, 191 SCRA 205

Boracay Foundation, Inc. v. The Province of Aklan, 674 SCRA 555 (2012)

Section 21. Promotion of Comprehensive Rural and Agrarian Policy

Wilson P. Gamboa v. Finance Secretary Margarito Teves, et al GR 176579 June 28, 2011(See Dissent of Abad- Section 21 is not self-executing, thus need for CARL)

Section 22. Promotion of Rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities

Section 23. Community-Based Private Organizations

Section 24. Vital Role of Communications

PLDT v. NTC, 190 SCRA 717Section 25. Local Economy

Rodolfo G. Navarro, et al. v. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, et al., GR 180050, 12 April 2011. (Section 25 as part of IRR of LGU provision on local autonomy)

Belgica v. ES 2013: With PDAF, a Congressman can simply bypass the local development council and initiate projects on his own, and even take sole credit for its execution. Indeed, this type of personality-driven project identification has not only contributed little to the overall development of the district, but has even contributed to "further weakening infrastructure planning and coordination efforts of the government."

Thus, insofar as individual legislators are authorized to intervene in purely local matters and thereby subvert genuine local autonomy, the 2013 PDAF Article as well as all other similar forms of Congressional Pork Barrel is deemed unconstitutional.Section 26. Equal Access to Political Opportunities and Political Dynasties

Pamatong v. COMELEC, 427 SCRA 96 (2004)

Belgica v. ES 2013Section 27. Honesty and Integrity in Public Service

Section 28. Full Public Disclosure

Neri v. Senate, GR 180643, March 25, 2008Wilson P. Garcia v. Finance Secretary Teves

Briccio Pollo v. Chairperson Karina David, GR 181881

Philippine Savings Bank and Pascual Garcia III v. Senate Impeachment Court, GR 200238, Feb 9, 2012

In Re: Production of Court Records, 14 February 2012

Article VI: The Legislative DepartmentSection 1. Legislative Power; Non-Delegation

Who may exercise legislative power?

1. Congress

2. Regional/Local legislative power

3. Peoples initiative on statutes

a) Initiative and referendum

4. The President under a martial law rule or in a revolutionary governmentGeneral Rule: Non-Delegation of Legislative Power

Exception;

Delegation to local governments and administrative bodies

Grant of Quasi-Legislative Power; In general: LGU and Administrative Bodies

Rubi v.Provincial Board of Mindoro 39 Phil. 660

Antipolo Realty Corp. v. NHA 153 SCRA 399

PITC v. Angales, GR 108461

Atitiw v. Zamora 471 SCRA 329

SEC v. Interport 567 SCRA 354

In instances allowed by the Constitution, e,g., Article VI, Section 23(2) and 28(2)

Issue on Delegation of Legislative Power

Valid delegation

Requisite of a valid delegation

Agustin v. Edu 88 SCRA 1

Free Telephone Workers v. Min. of Labor 108 SCRA 757

Guingona v. Carague 196 SCRA 221

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014Complete in Itself

Arena v. Gatmaitan 101 Phil 328

Marcos v. CA 278 SCRA 696

Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drug Board 570 SCRA 410

Pacific Steam v. LLDA 608 SCRA 442

Fixes a Standard

People v. Rosenthal 68 Phil 628

Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA 166 SCRA 533

Tablarin v. Gutierez 152 SCRA 730

Conference v. POEA 243 SCRA 666

Osmea v. Orbos 220 SCRA 703

Viola v. Alunan 277 SCRA 409

Abakada v. Ermita 469 SCRA 1

Beltran v. Secretary of Health 476 SCRA 168

Bayan v. Ermita 488 SCRA 226

Abakada v. Purisima, 562 SCRA 251 (2008)Filling in the Details

Fernandez v. Sto. Tomas, 242 SCRA 192Chiongbian v. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253

Rodrigo v. Sandiganbayan, 309 SCRA 661

Tondo Medical v. CA, 527 SCRA 746 (2007)

Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary, 677 SCRA 408 (2012)

Arroyo v. DOJ, 681 SCRA 181 (2012)

Undue DelegationPeople v. Vera, 65 PHIL 56

US v. Barrias, 11 SCRA 327 (1908)

US v. Panlilio, 28 PHIL 608 (1914)

People v. Maceren, 79 SCRA 450 (1977)

People v. Dacuycuy, 173 SCRA 90 (1989)

Cebu Oxygen v. Drilon, 176 SCRA 24 (1989)

Ynot v. IAC, 148 SCRA 659 (1987)

Pharmaceutical v. DOH (2007)

Abakada v. Purisima

Philippine Coconut v. Republic, GR 178193, January 24, 2012

Belgica v. ES 2013: The Court agrees with petitioners that the phrase "and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President" under Section 8 of PD 910 constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power insofar as it does not lay down a sufficient standard to adequately determine the limits of the Presidents authority with respect to the purpose for which the Malampaya Funds may be used. As it reads, the said phrase gives the President wide latitude to use the Malampaya Funds for any other purpose he may direct and, in effect, allows him to unilaterally appropriate public funds beyond the purview of the law.Executive Misapplication

Tatad v. Secretary DOE, 281 SCRA 330 (1997) and MR 282 SCRA 337 (1997)

Mere Directive

Dagan v. PRC, 578 SCRA 585 (2009)

Section 2. Senate Composition

Section 3. Qualifications of Senator

Section 4. Senator: Term of Office; Voluntary Renunciation

Section 5. Composition of the House of Representatives; Apportionment; Party List

Par. 2; Party-List Representation

Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC GR 147589

Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC GR 136781

AKLAT v. COMELEC 427 SCRA 712

Partido ng Manggagawa v. COMELEC 484 SCRA 671

Citizens v. COMELEC 521 SCRA 524

Bantay v. COMELEC 523 SCRA 1

Phil. Guardians v. COMELEC GR 190529

BANAT v. COMELEC 586 SCRA 210

Albayon v. COMELEC GR 189466

Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC GR 190582

Layug v. COMELEC 666 SCRA 321

Magdalo c. COMELEC 673 SCRA 651

Atong Paglaum et. al., GR 203766, April 12, 2013Pars. 1,3, and 4; Rules on Apportionment

Reapportionment through Special Law

Tobias v. Abalos 239 SCRA 106

Mariano v. COMELEC 242 SCRA 211

Sema v. COMELEC 558 SCRA 700

Rules on Apportionment

(1) In accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio

Montejo v. COMELEC 242 SCRA 415

Herrera v. COMELEC GR 131499, November 17, 1999(2) Contiguous, compact and adjacent territory

(3) Population size

Samson v. Aguirre 315 SCRA 53

Herrera v. COMELEC GR 131499, November 17, 1999Aldaba v. COMELEC GR 188078, January 25, 2010Aquino v. COMELEC GR 189793, April 17, 2010Navarro v. Ermita GR 180050, April 12, 2011(4) Following the return of every census, Congress shall make a reapportionment

Bagabuyo v. COMELEC GR 176970

Section 6. Qualifications of Representatives

Citizenship

Bengzon v. Cruz, GR 142840, May 7, 2001

Domicile and Residence

Aquino v. COMELEC, 243 SCRA 400 (1995)

Marcos v. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 300 (1995)

Domino v. COMELEC, GR 134015 (July 19, 1999)

Perez v. COMELEC, GR 133944, October 28, 1999

Fernandez v. HRET, 608 SCRA 733 (2009)

Additional Qualifications

Maquera v. Borra, 15 SCRA 7

Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board, GR No. 157870, November 3, 2008

Section 7. Term of Representatives

Dimaporo v. Mitra, 202 SCRA 779

Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387 (Dec. 10, 2003)

Quinto v. COMELEC, GR No. 189698, December 1, 2009

Section 8.Regular Elections

Codilla v. De Venecia GR No. 150605, December 10, 2002

Section 9. Special Elections

Tolentino v. COMELEC, GR 148334, January 21, 2004

Section 10. Salaries

Philconsa v. Mathay, 18 SCRA 300 (1966)

Section 11. Privilege from Arrest; Parliamentary Freedom of Speech

Privilege from Arrest

People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689

Trillanes v. Pimentel, 556 SCRA 471

Parliamentary Freedom of Speech

Jimenez v. Cabangbang, 17 SCRA 876 (1966)

Antonino v. Valencia, 57 SCRA 70

Pobre v. Defensor Santiago, AC No. 7399, August 25, 2009

Section 12. Disclosure of Financial and Business Interests

Section 13. Prohibitions on Members of Congress

Liban v. Gordon, GR No. 175352, July 15, 2009

Section 14. Prohibitions Related to the Practice of Profession

Puyat v. De Guzman, 113 SCRA 31

Section 15. Regular Session; Special Session

Section 16. Officers of Congress; Quorom; Discipline; Journal/Records

Officers of Congress

Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona GR 134577 November 18, 1998

Meaning of a quorum to do business and compulsion to attend

Avelino v. Cuenco - 83 Phil. 17 [1949]

People v. Jalosjos - 324 SCRA 689

Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011

Internal Rules and Discipline

Arroyo v. De Venecia - 277 SCRA 268 [1997]

Osmea v. Pendatun- 109 Phil. 863 [1960]

Santiago v. Sandiganbayan 356 SCRA 636

Duty to Keep Journals and Records

US v. Pons 34 Phil. 729 [1916]

Casco Phil. Commercial Co. v. Gimenez - 7 SCRA 347 [1963]

Morales v. Subido 27 SCRA 131 [1969]

Astorga v. Villegas 56 SCRA 714 [1974]

Phil. Judges Assn. v. Prado -227 SCRA 703

Abakada v. Ermita 469 SCRA 1

Section 17. Electoral Tribunal

Jurisdiction of Electoral Tribunal

Nature and Power

Angara v. Electoral Commission 63 Phil. 134 [1936]

Pre-proclamation controversies v. Election Contests; Scope of inquiry ; When Proper Election Contest

Vera v. Avelino 77 Phil. 192 [1946]

Roces v. HRET 469 SCRA 681 [2005]

Seneres v. COMELEC 585 SCRA 557 [2009]

Limkaichong v. COMELEC 594 SCRA 434 [2009]

Aquino v. COMELEC -243 SCRA 400 [1995]

Perez v. COMELEC GR 133944, October 28, 1999

Aggabao v. COMELEC 449 SCRA 400 [2005]

Barbers v. COMELEC 460 SCRA 569 [2005]

Rasul v. COMELEC GR 134142, August 24, 1999

Guerero v. COMELEC GR 137004, July 26, 2000

Villarosa v. HRET GR 143351, September 14, 2000

Abayon v. HRET GR 189466, February 11, 2010

Garcia v. HRET GR 134792, August 12, 1999

Pre-proclamation controversy

Chavez v. COMELEC 211 SCRA 315 [1991]

Composition

Abbas v. SET 166 SCRA 651 [1988]

Pimentel v. HRET GR 141489, November 29, 2002

Independence

Bondoc v. Pineda 201 SCRA 792 [1991]

Action/Decision

Robles v. HRET 181 SCRA 780 [1990]

Arroyo v. HRET 246 SCRA 384 [1995]

Lerias v. HRET 202 SCRA 808 [1991]

Sandoval v. HRET GR 149380, July 3, 2002

Lokin v. COMELEC GR 179431-32

Sema v. HRET GR 190734, March 26, 2010

Duenas v. HRET 593 SCRA 316 [2010]

Section 18. Commission on Appointments

Daza v. Singson, 180 SCRA 496 (1989)

Coseteng v. Mitra, 187 SCRA 377 (1990)

Guingona v. Gonzales, 214 SCRA 789 (1992); MR, 219 SCRA 326 (1993)

Drilon, et al v. Speaker, GR No. 180055, July 31, 2009

Section 19. Constitutions of the Electoral Tribunal and the Commission on Appointments

Section 20. Records and Books of Accounts

Section 21. Inquiries in Aid of Legislation

Power of Inquiry

Senate v. Ermita- 488 SCRA 1 [2006]

Gudani v. Senga- 498 SCRA 671 [2006]

Nature and Essence

Neg. O. II Elec. Coop. v. Sangguniang Panlungsod- 155 SCRA 421 [1991]

Requisites

Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee- 203 SCRA 767

1. In aid of legislation

Standard v. Senate- 541 SCRA 456 [2007]

De la Paz v. Senate- 579 SCRA 521 [2009]

Romero v. Estrada- 583 SCRA 396 [2009]

2. In Accordance with Duly Published Rules of Procedure

Garcillano v. House- GR 170338, December 23, 2008

3. Respect for the Rights of Persons Appearing In or Affected by Such Inquires

Neri v. Senate- 564 SCRA 152 [2008]

Power to Punish a Person Under Investigation

Arnault v. Nazareno- 87 PHIL. 25 [1950]

Sabio v. Gordon- 504 SCRA 704 [2006]

Sec. 22 Appearance of Heads of Departments in CongressSenate v. Ermita- 488 SCRA 1 [2006]Belgica v. Executive Secretary 2013: (Quoting Abakada case) Any post-enactment congressional measure x x x should be limited to scrutiny and investigation.1wphi1 In particular, congressional oversight must be confined to the following:

(1) scrutiny based primarily on Congress power of appropriation and the budget hearings conducted in connection with it, its power to ask heads of departments to appear before and be heard by either of its Houses on any matter pertaining to their departments and its power of confirmation; and

(2) investigation and monitoring of the implementation of laws pursuant to the power of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation.

Any action or step beyond that will undermine the separation of powers guaranteed by the Constitution.Sec. 23. Declaration of a State of War; Emergency PowersDelegation of Emergency Powers

SANLAKAS v. Executive Secretary, 421 SCRA 656 [2004]

Ampatuan v. Hon. DILG Sec. Puno, GR 190259, June 7, 2011

Sec. 24. Bills Originating in the House of Representatives

Guingona v. Carague- 196 SCRA 221 [1991]

Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance- 235 SCRA 630 [1994]

Alvarez v. Guingona- 292 SCRA 695 [1998]

Southern Cross Cement v. Phil. Cement, GR 158540, July 8, 2004

Appropriation of Public Revenue for Public Purpose

Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works- 110 PHIL. 331 [1960-1961]

Sec. 25. Rules on Appropriation

Limits on Power to Appropriate

Brillantes v. Comelec, GR 163193, June 15, 2004

Prohibition of Increase

Prohibition on riders in appropriation bills

Garcia v. Mata- 65 SCRA [1975]

Atitiw v. Zamora, GR 143374, Sept. 30, 2005

Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387, Dec. 10, 2003

Transfer of Funds

Demetria v. Alba- 148 SCRA 208 [1987]

Liga v. COMELEC- 232 SCRA 219 [1994]

Nazareth v. Villar, G.R. No. 188635, 29 January 2013, 689 SCRA 385Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 196425, 24 July 2012, 677 SCRA 408

Philconsa v. Enriquez- 235 SCRA 506

Sanchez v. COA- 552 SCRA 471Araullo v. President Aquino III, GR No. 209287, July 1, 2014Sec. 26.Subject and Title of Bills; Three Readings

General Prohibition of Riders

Cordero v. Cabatuando- 6 SCRA 418 [1962]

Philconsa v. Gimenez- 15 SCRA 479 [1965]

Alalayan v. NPC- 24 SCRA 172 [1968]

Insular Lumber Company v. CTA- 104 SCRA 710 [1981]

Tio v. Vediogram Regulatory Board- 151 SCRA 208 [1987]

Phil. Judges Assn. v. Prado- 227 SCRA 703 [1993]

Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance- 235 SCRA 630 [1994]

Tobias v. Abalos- 239 SCRA 106 [1994]

Tatad v. Sec. of DOE- 281 SCRA 330 [1997]

De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 146319, October 26, 2001

Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1 and MR [Sept. 1, 2005 & Oct. 18, 2005]

BANAT v. COMELEC- 595 SCR 477 [2009]

Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Sec. 27. Procedure in Passage of Bills; Item VetoPassage of Bills

Arroyo v. De Venecia, 277 SCRA 268 [1997]

Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1

Presidential Veto

CIR v .CTA- 185 SCRA 329 [1990]

Gonzales v. Macaraig- 191 SCRA 452 [1990]

Bengzon v. Drilon- 208 SCRA 133 [1992]

Philconsa v. Enriquez- 235 SCRA 506 [1994]

Item Veto

Belgica v. ES, 2013: For the President to exercise his item-veto power, it necessarily follows that there exists a proper "item" which may be the object of the veto. An item of appropriation must be an item characterized by singular correspondence meaning an allocation of a specified singular amount for a specified singular purpose, otherwise known as a "line-item."211 This treatment not only allows the item to be consistent with its definition as a "specific appropriation of money" but also ensures that the President may discernibly veto the same. what beckons constitutional infirmity are appropriations which merely provide for a singular lump-sum amount to be tapped as a source of funding for multiple purposes. Since such appropriation type necessitates the further determination of both the actual amount to be expended and the actual purpose of the appropriation which must still be chosen from the multiple purposes stated in the law, it cannot be said that the appropriation law already indicates a "specific appropriation of money and hence, without a proper line-item which the President may vetoSec. 28. Taxation

Scope and Purpose

Planters v. Fertiphil- 548 SCRA 485

Limitations on the Power: Uniform and Equitable

CIR v. CA- 261 SCRA 236 [1996]

CIR v. Lingayen Gulf 164 SCRA 27

Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance- 235 SCRA 506

Tan v. Del Rosario- 237 SCRA 324 [1994]

Progressive System

Delegated Tax Legislation

Southern Cross Cement v. Phil. Cement, GR 158540, July 8, 2004

Abakada v. Ermita- 469 SCRA 1 [2005]

Spouses Constantino v. Cuisia, GR 106064, Oct. 13. 2005

Exemptions

Abra Valley College v. Aquino- 162 SCRA 106 [1988]

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10,2000

Republic v. City of Kidapawan- 477 SCRA 324 [2005]

John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR 119775, Oct. 24, 2003

Lung Center v. QC, GR 144104, June 29, 2004

Sec. 29. Fiscal Powers of Congress; Limitations; Special FundsFiscal Powers of Congress

Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works- 110 PHIL. 331 [1960-1961]

MIAA v. Mabunay- GR 126151, January 20, 2000

Guingona v. Carague- 169 SCRA 221 [1991]

COMELEC v. Hon. Quijano- GR 151992, September 18, 2002

Araullo v. President Aquino III, GR No. 209287, July 1, 2014Special Funds

Gaston v. Republic Planters Bank- 158 SCRA 626 [1988]

Osmena v. Orbos- 220 SCRA 703 [1993]

Philippine Coconut v. Republic- 663 SCRA 514 [2012]

Sec. 30. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

First Lepanto Ceramics v. CA- 237 SCRA 519 [1994]

Diaz v. CA- 238 SCRA 785 [1994]

Fabian v. Desierto, GR 129742, September 16, 1998

Villavert v. Desierto, 326 SCRA 355 [2000]

Tirol v. COA, GR 133954, August 3, 2000

Cabrera v. Lapid- 510 SCRA 55 [2006]

Sec. 31. Titles of Royalty and Nobility

Sec. 32. Initiative and Referendum

Garcia v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 279 (1994)

SBMA v. COMELEC- 262 SCRA 492 [1996]

Defensor- Santiago v. COMELEC- 270 SCRA 106 [1997]

Lambino v. COMELEC, GR 174153, GR 174299, October 25, 2006

Article VII: Executive Department

Section 1. Executive Power; Privileges; Immunities

Scope of Power

Marcos v. Manglapus- 177 SCRA 668 [1989]

Example of exercise

Valid Exercise

Philconsa v. Enriquez- 235 SCRA 506 [1994]

Webb v. de Leon- 247 SCRA 652

Djumantan v. Domingo- 240 SCRA 746 [1995]

Chavez v. PCGG- GR 130716, December 9, 1998

Pontejos v. Ombudsman- 483 SCRA 83 [2006]

Banda v. Ermita- 618 SCRA 499 [2010]

Invalid Exercise

Laurel v. Garcia- 187 SCRA 797 [1990]

Review Center v. Ermita- 583 SCRA 42 [2009]

Biraogo v. Truth Commission- 637 SCRA 78 [2010]

Executive Privilege

US v. Nixon- 418 US 683 [1974]

Almonte v .Vasquez- 244 SCRA 286 [1995]

Senate v. Ermita- GR 169659, April 20, 2006 [E.O. 464]

Neri v. Senate- GR 180643, March 25, 2008

Akbayan v. Aquino- GR 170516, July 16, 2008

Immunity from Suit

Soliven v. Makasiar 167 SCRA 393 [1988]

Harlow v. Fitzgerald 457 US 800 [1982]

Clinton v. Jones 520 US 681 [1997]

Gloria v. CA- GR 119903, August 15, 2000

Estrada v. Desierto- GR 146740-15 and GR 146738, March 2, 2001 and MR- April 3, 2001

David v. Arroyo- 289 SCRA 162 [2006]

The Cabinet

Constantino v. Cuisia- 472 SCRA 505 [2005]

Section 2. Qualifications of the PresidentTecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004

Section 3. Vice President

Section 4. Election, Term Limits and Canvass

Anson-Roa v. Arroyo, GR 162384, March 24, 2004

Congress as National Board of Canvassers

Brillantes v. COMELEC- 432 SCRA [2005]

Pimentel v. Joint Committee- GR 163783, June 22, 2004

Lopez v. Senate- GR 163556, June 8, 2004

BANAT v. COMELEC, GR 177508, August 7, 2009

Breaking President or Vice-President Tie

Presidential or Vice- Presidential Controversies

Defensor- Santiago v. Ramos- 253 SCRA 559 [1996]

Tecson v. Lim- 424 SCRA 277 [2005]

Poe v. GMA, Pet Case No. 002, March 29, 2005

Macalintal v. PET- 635 SCRA 783 [2010]

Term Limit on the President

Pormento v. Estrada, GR 191988, August 31, 2010

Section 5. Oath

Section 6. Official Residence; Salary

Section 7. Vacancy at the Beginning of the Term of the Presidency

Section 8. Vacancy During the Term of the Presidency

Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452, 2001; MR, 356 SCRA 108, 2001

Lozano, et al v. Macapagal-Arroyo, February 6, 2001

Section 9. Vacancy in the Vice Presidency

Section 10. Vacancies in Both the Presidency and the Vice Presidency

Section 11. Incapacity of the President

Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452, 2001; MR, 356, SCRA 108, 2001

Section 12. Serious Illness of the President

Section 13. Prohibitions

Rafael v. Embroidery & Apparel Control Board- 21 SCRA 336 [1967]

CLU v. Exec. Secretary- 194 SCRA 317 [1991]

Flores v. Drilon, 223 SCRA 568, 1993

Bitonio v. COA, G.R. no. 147392, March 12, 2004

Public Interest Group v. Elma, GR No. 138965, June 30, 2006

De la Cruz v. COA, GR 138489, November 27, 2001

Funa v. Ermita- 612 SCRA 308 [2010]

Enrique U. Betoy v. The Board of Directors, National Power Corporation, GR 15655657, 04 October 2011

Other Prohibitions

Doromal v. Sandiganbayan- 177 SCRA 354 [1989]

Section 14. Appointments of Acting President

Section 15. Prohibited Appointments

In Re Appointments of Valenzuela and Vallarta, AM No. 98-5-01-SC, Nov. 9, 1998

De la Rama v. CA, G.R. No. 131136, Feb. 28, 2001

De Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council, GR No. 191002, April 20, 2010 and May 1, 2010

Section 16. Power to Appoint; Commission on Appointments

Nature of the Appointing Power

Government v. Springer- 50 PHIL 259 [1927]

Bermudez v. Exec, Secretary- GR 131429 [August 4, 1999]

Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, reconsideration, GR 196271, February 2012

Kinds of Presidential Appointments

Pimentel v. Ermita- 471 SCRA 587 [2005]

Scope of the Power of the Commission on Appointments

Sarmiento III v. Mison- 156 SCRA 549 [1987]

Bautista v. Salonga- 172 SCRA 1260 [1989]

Quintos- Deles v. CA- 177 SCRA 259 [1989]

Pobre v. Mendieta- 224 738 [1993]

Flores v. Drilon- GR 104732, June 22, 1993

Rufino v. Endriga- 496 SCRA 13 [2006]

Congress Requiring Confirmation by the Commission on Appointments on Other Appointments

Calderon v. Carale- 208 SCRA 254 [1992]

U-sing v. NLRC- 221 SCRA 680 [1993]

Tarrosa v. Singson- 232 SCRA 553 [1994]

Manolo v. Sistoza- 312 SCRA 239 [1999]

Soriano v. Lista, GR 153881, March 24, 2004

Recess or Ad- Intern Appointments and Temporary Appointments

Pimentel v. Ermita, GR 164978, October 13, 2005

Section 17. Power of Control

Lacson-Magallanes v. Pano 21 SCRA 395, 1967

Maceda v. Macaraig, Jr 197 SCRA 771

Roque v. Director of Lands, L-25373, July 1, 1976

Ang-Angco v. Castillo 9 SCRA 619, 1963

NAMARCO v. Arca 29 SCRA 648, 1969

Drilon v. Lim 235 SCRA 135, 1994

Joson v. Torres 290 SCRA 279, 1998

PASEI v. Torres-225 SCRA 417 [1993]

De Leon v. Carpio- 178 SCRA 457 [1989]

Hutchison v. SBMA- GR 131367, August 31, 2000

Dadole v. COA, GR No. 125350, Dec. 3, 2002

Domingo v. Zamora, GR 142283, Feb. 6, 2003

DENR v. DENR Employees, GR No. 149724, Aug. 19, 2003

Villaluz v. Zaldivar, 15 SCRA 710

Chavez v. Romulo- 431 SCRA 534 [2004]

KMU v. Dir.-Gen. of NEDA- 487 SCRA 623 [2006]

Tondo Medical Center Employees v. CA, GR No. 167324, July 17, 2007

Malaria Employees v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 160093, July 31, 2007

Orosa v. Roa, GR No. 14047, July 14, 2006

Phillips Seafood v. BOI, GR No. 175787, February 4, 2009

Biraogo v. Truth Commission, GR No. 192935, December 7, 2010

Angeles v. Gaite- 605 SCRA 409 [2009]

Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. Commission on Audit, GR 177131, 07 June 2011

Power of Supervision

Drilon v. Lim- 235 SCRA 135 [1994]

Faithful Execution Clause

PRA v. Bunag, GR 143784, Feb. 5, 2003

Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan, GR 152259, July 29, 2004

Section 18. Presidents Powers as Commander in Chief

Lansang vs. Garcia, 42 SCRA 448

Aberca v. Ver, 160 SCRA 590

IBP v. Zamora, GR 141284, August 15, 2000

Lacson v. Perez, GR 147780-81, 147799 and 1477810, May 10, 2001

Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 159085, February 3, 2004

David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR 171396, May 2006

David v. Ermita, GR No. 171409, May 3, 2006

Gudani v. Senga, GR No. 170165, April 15, 2006

Ampatuan v. Puno, 651 SCRA 228

Fortun v. Arroyo, GR 190293, March 20,2012

Section 19. Executive Clemency

Purpose of Executive Clemency

Cristobal v. Labrador 71 PHIL 34 [1940-1941]

Constitutional Limits on Executive Clemency

Llamas v. Orbos 202 SCRA 844 [1991]

People v. Salle- 250 SCRA 581 [1995]

People v. Bacang 260 SCRA 44 [1996]

Drilon v. CA 202 SCRA 378 [1991]

Torres v. Gonzales 152 SCRA 272 [1987]

People v. Casido 269 SCRA 360 [1997]

Pardon: Nature and Legal Effects

Monsanto v. Factoran 170 SCRA 190 [1989]

Garcia v. COA 226 SCRA 356 [1993]

Sabello v. Department of Education, GR No. 87687, December 26, 1989

People v. Salle, Jr GR No. 103567, December 4, 1995

Garcia v. COA, 226 SCRA 356, 1993

Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, GR No. 132601, Jan 19, 1999

Section 20. Foreign Loans

Spouses Constantino v. Cuisia, GR 106064, October 13, 2005

Section 21. Foreign Relations: Senate Concurrence in International Agreements

USAFFE Veterans Association v. Treasurer, 105 PHIL 1030, 1959

Gonzales v. Hechanova- 9 SCRA 230 [1963]

World Health Organization v. Aquino, 48 SCRA 242

Bayan v. Executive Secretary Zamora, 343 SCRA 449, 2000

Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, 2005

Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 151445, April 11, 2002

Secretary of Justice v. Judge Lantion, GR No. 139465, Oct. 17, 2000

Abaya v. Ebdane- 315 SCRA 720 (2007)

Pharmaceutical v. DOH- GR 173034, October 9, 2007

Vinuya v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 162230, April 28, 2010

Bayan Muna v. Romulo, 641 SCRA 244

Other Foreign Affairs Power

Vinuya v. Romulo- 619 SCRA 533 [2010]

Article VIII: Judicial Department

Section 1. Judicial Power

Definition and Scope

Marbury v. Madison Cranch 137 [1803]

Santiago v. Baustista 32 SCRA 188 [1970]

Radiowealth v. Agregado 86 Phil. 429 [1950]

In re Laureta 148 SCRA 382 [1987]

In re Borromeo 241 SCRA 405 [1995]

Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice GR 132601, January 19, 1999

Planters v. Fertiphil 548 SCRA 485 [2008]

RE: Letter to UP Law Faculty, A.M. No. 10-10-4-C, June 7, 2011

Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary - 677 SCRA 408 [2012]

Limits

Manila Electric Co. v. Pasay Transit Co. 57 Phil. 60 [1932-1933]

Noblejas v. Teehankee 23 SCRA 405 [1968]

Erdito Quarto v. Honorable Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo, et al., GR 169042, 05 October 2011

Principle of Judicial Restraint

Francisco Jr v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261, 10 November 2003

Grave Abuse of Discretion

PCGG v. Desierto, GR 132120 , Feb. 10, 2003

Domingo v. Scheer 421 SCRA 468 [2004]

Presidential Ad Hoc v. Desierto 548 SCRA 295 [2008]

Reyes v. Belisario 596 SCRA 31 [2009]

Eloisa L. Tolentino v. Atty. Roy M. Loyola, et al., GR 153809, 27 July 2011

Advisory Opinions

Channie Tan v. Republic, 107 PHIL 632

Santiago, Jr v. Bautista, 32 SCRA 188

Felipe v. Leuterio, 91 PHIL 482

Director of Prisons v. Ang Cho Kio 33 SCRA 494 [1970]

Justiciable Controversy

Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil 134

US v. Nixon- 418 US 683 [1974]

Marcos v. Manglapus 177 SCRA 668 [1989]

Daza v, Singson 180 SCRA 496 [1989]

Garcia v. BOI 191 SCRA 288 [1990]

Djumantan v. Domingo 240 SCRA 746 [1995]

Mariano v. COMELEC 242 SCRA 211 [1995]

PPI v COMELEC -224 SCRA 272

SBMA v. COMELEC 262 SCRA 492 [1996]

Tanada v. Angara 272 SCRA 18 [1997]

Arroyo v. De Venecia -277 SCRA 268 [1997]

CIR v. Santos 277 SCRA 617 [1997]

Garcia-Rueda v. Pascasio 278 SCRA 769[1997]

Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona, GR 134577, November 18, 1997

Tatad v. DOE 281 SCRA 330 [1997]

Telecom v. COMELEC - 289 SCRA 337 [1998]

Miranda v. Aguirre GR 133064, September 16, 1999

Cutaran v. DENR 350 SCRA 697 [2001]

Estrada v. Desierto GR 146740-15, March 2, 2001 and MR April 3, 2001

Cawaling v. COMELEC GR 146319, October 23, 2001

Montesclaros v. COMELEC GR 152295, July 9, 2002

John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR 119775, October 24, 2003

Velarde v. Social Justice Society, GR 159357, April 28, 2004

Panganiban v. Philippine Shell, GR 131471, Jan. 22, 2003

SMART v. NTC, GR 151908, August 12, 2003

Buac v. COMELEC 421 SCRA 92

Information Technology v. COMELEC -460 SCRA 291

Senate v. Ermita, GR 169659, April 20, 2006

Garcia v. Executive Secretary 583 SCRA 119 [2009]

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Distinguish from Declaration Relief

Macasiano v. NHA 224 SCRA 236 [1993]

Tano v. Socrates 278 SCRA 154 [1997]

Conclusive Character of Supreme Court Judgment

In re Subpoena Duces Tecum dated Jan. 11, 2011 614 SCRA 1

Plenary Judicial Power; Derivative; PET

Macalintal v. PET 635 SCRA 783 [2010]

Sec. 2. Power of Legislative Apportion Jurisdiction

Mantruste Systems v. CA -179 SCRA 136 [1989]

Malaga v. Penachos 213 SCRA 516 [1992]

Lupangco v. CA, 160 SCRA 848 (1988)

Sec. 3 Fiscal Autonomy

Radiowealth v. Agregado 86 Phil. 429 [1950]

Bengzon v. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133 (1992)

In re clarifying and strengthening the Philippine Judicial Academy 481 SCRA 1

RE: Petition for the recognition of the exemption of GSIS, A.M. No. 08-2-01-0, February 11, 2010

In re COA Opinion on Computation of Appraised Value of Properties -678 SCRA 1 [2012]

Sec. 4. Composition; En Banc and Division CasesFilling-in Vacancy in Supreme Court; 90 days

De Castro v. JBC 615 SCRA 666 [2010]

Referral to En Banc; Par. 3; Case Only; Modification of Doctrine

Fortich v. Corona GR 131457, August 19, 1997

People v. Dy, GR 115326-37, Jan. 16, 2003

People v. Ebio, GR 147750, Sept 29, 2004

Firestone Ceramics v. CA, GR No. 127245, June 28, 2000

Republic v. Garcia 527 SCRA 495 [2007]

Apo Fruits Corporation and Hijo Plantation, Inc v. Land Bank of the Philippines, GR 164195, 05 April 2011.

In re; Letter of Atty. Estelito P. Mendoza Re: G.R. No. 178083 Flight Attendant and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP) v. Philippine Airlines, Inc (PAL), et al., A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC, 13 March 2012

Sec. 5. Powers of Supreme Court

Judicial ReviewRequisites

Macasiano v. NHA 224 SCRA 236 [1993]

Liban v. Gordon 639 SCRA 709 [2011]

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Administrative Agencies; No Power

Serrano v. Gallant 582 SCRA 254 [2009]

First: Ripe for AdjudicationPACU v. Secretary of Education 97 Phil. 806 [1955]

Tan v. Macapagal 43 SCRA 678 [1972]

Solicitor General v. MMDA GR 102782, December 18, 1991

Militante v. CA, GR 107040, April 12, 2000Pimentel v. HRET GR 14189, November 29, 2002

Constantino v. Cuisia 472 SCRA 505

Senate v. Ermita 488 SCRA 1 [2006]

David v. Arroyo 489 SCRA 162 [2006]

Suplico v. NEDA GR 178830, July 14, 2008

Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Panel

Lozano v. Nograles 589 SCRA 356 [2009]

Drilon v. De Venecia 594 SCRA 749 [2009]

De Castro v. JBC 615 SCRA 666 [2010]

LAMP v. Sec. of Budget and Management 670 SCRA 373 [2012]

Second: StandingLegislators and Government Officials

Gonzales v. Macaraig, Jr.- 191 SCRA 452 [1990]

Philconsa v. Enriquez- 235 SCRA 506 [1994]

Del Mar v. PAGCOR, GR 138298, November 29, 2000

Sandoval v. PAGCOR- GR 138982, November 29, 2000

Jaworski v. PAGCOR- 419 SCRA 420

SANLAKAS v. Executive Secretary, GR 159085, Feb. 3, 2004

Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387, Dec. 10, 2003

Province of Batangas v. Romulo- 429 SCRA 736 [2004]

Disomangcop v. Datumanong-444 SCRA 203 [2004]

CHR- employees v. CHR- 444 SCRA 300 [2004]

Pimentel v. Executive Secretary- 462 SCRA 622

Pimentel v. Ermita- 495 SCRA 170 [2006]

Prov. Of North Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel- 564 SCRA 402 [2008]

Concepcion v. COMELEC- 591 SCRA 420 [2009]

Drilon v. De Venecia- 594 SCRA 749 [2009]

Biraogo v. PTC- 637 SCRA 78 [2010]

Taxpayers

Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works- 110 PHIL 331 [1960-1961]

Gonzales v. Marcos- 65 SCRA 624 [1975]

Gonzales v. Narvasa, GR 140835, August 14, 2000

Information Technology Foundation v. Comelec, GR 159131, Jan. 13 2004.

Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary- 421 SCRA 656 [2004]

Velarde v. SJS- 428 SCRA 283 [2004]

Brillantes v. COMELEC- 432 SCRA 269 [2004]

Domingo v. Carague- 456 SCRA 450

Republic v. Nolasco- 457 SCRA 400

Constantino v. Cuisia- 472 SCRA 305

Abaya v. Ebdane- 515 SCRA 720 [2007]

Planters v. Fertiphil- 548 SCRA 485 [2008]

Roque v. COMELEC- 599 SCRA 62 [2009]

Mamba v. Lara, GR 165109, December 14, 2009

De la Llana v. Chairperson, COA- 665 SCRA 176 [2012]

Galicto v. Aquino-667 SCRA 150 [2012]

Initiatives for Dialogue v. PSALM- 682 SCRA 602 [2012]

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013Citizens and Associations; Transcendental Importance

Legaspi v. CSC- 150 SCRA 530 [1987]

Oposa v. Factoran- 224 SCRA 792 [1993]

PASEI v. Torres-225 SCRA 417 [1993]

Joya v. PCGG- 225 SCRA 540 [1995]

Kilosbayan v. Morato- 246 SCRA 436 [1995]

Tatad v. Garcia 243 SCRA 436 [1995]

Board of Optometry v. Colet- 260 SCRA 88 [1996]

Anti-Graft League of the Philippines- 260 SCRA 250 [1996]

Telecom v. COMELEC- 289 SCRA 337 [1998]

Chavez v. PCGG- GR 130716 [May 19,1999]

IBP v. Zamora- GR 141284 [August 15, 2000]

Bayan v. Zamora- GR 138570, October 10, 2000

Cruz v. Secretary of DENR- gr 135385, December 6, 2000

Lozano v. Macapagal-Arroyo GR 146579, February 6, 2001

Lim v. Exec. Secretary- GR 151445 April 11, 2002

Chavez v. PEA- GR 133250, July 9, 2002

Tolentino v. COMELEC- 420 SCRA 438 [2004]

Agan v. PIATCO- 420 SCRA 575 [2004]

Tichangco v. Enriquez- 433 SCRA 324 [2004]

Automotive Industry Workers Alliance v. Rumolo- 449 SCRA 1

Pimentel v. Office of the Executive Secretary- 462 SCRA 622

Senate v. Ermita- 488 SCRA 1 [2006]

Purok v. Yuipco- 489 SCRA 382 [2006]

David v. Arroyo- 489 SCRA 162 [2006]

Holy Spirit v. Defensor- 497 SCRA 581 [2006]

Henares v. LTFRB- 505 SCRA 104 [2006]

Francisco v. Fernando- 507 SCRA [2006]

Public interest Center v. Roxas- 513 SCRA 457 [2007]

Garcia v. J.G. Summit- 516 SCRA 483 [2007]

Kilosbayan v. Ermita- 526 SCRA 353 [2007]

Tondo Medical v. CA- 527 SCRA 746 [2007]

Anak Mindanao v. Executive Secretary- 531 SCRA 583 [2007]

Pharmaceutical v. Duque- 535 SCRA 265

Chavez v. Gonzales-545 SCRA 441 [2008]

Akbayan v. Aquino- 558 SCRA 468 [2008]

SJS v. Dangerous Drugs Board- 570 SCRA 410 [2008]

Garcillano v. House- GR 170338, Dec. 23,2008

White Light v. City of Manila- 576 SCRA 416 [2009]

Chamber of Real Estete v. Romulo- 614 SCRA 605 [2010]

Chamber of Real Estate v. ERC- 624 SCRA 556 [2010]

Southern Hemisphere v. ATC- 632 SCRA 146 [2010]

Orlando A. Reyes v. City of Manila, GR 196063, 14 December 2011.

Jelbert B. Galicto v. H.E. President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino, III, GR 193978, 28 February 2012.

Bayan v. Romulo- 641 SCRA 244 [2011]

Magallona v. Ermita- 655 SCRA 476 [2011]

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013Other Rules: Raise at Earliest Opportunity and Constitutionality is the Very Lis MotaPeople v. Vera- 65 PHIL. 56 [1937-1938]

Mirasol v. CA- 351 SCRA 44 [2001]

Matibag v. Benipayo- 380 SCRA 49 [2002]

La Bugal v. Ramos- 421 SCRA 148 [2004]

Estarja v. Ranada- 492 SCRA 652 [2006]

Moldex v. HLURB- 525 SCRA 198 [2007]

Gobenciong v. CA- 550 SCRA 502 [2008]

Heirs v. Marasigan- 548 SCRA 409 [2008]

Abakada v. Purisima- 562 SCRA 251 [2008]

ABS- CBN v. Phil. Multi-Media- 576 SCRA 262 [2009]

CSC v. Andal- 608 SCRA 370 [2009]

BPI v. Shemberg- 628 SCRA 70 [2010]

Macalintal v. PET- 635 SCRA 783 [2010]

Sergio I. Carbonilla, et al. v. Board of Airlines Representatives, GR 193247,

Office of the President v. Board of Airlines Representatives GR 194276, 14 September 2011

Reiterating Moldex v. HLURB

Hacienda Luisita v. PARC, GR 171101, November 22, 2011

Sana v. CESB, GR 192926, November 15, 2011

Gamboa v. Teves- 652 SCRA 690 [2011]

Moot Cases

David v. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 162 (2006)

Suplico v. NEDA, GR 178830, July 14, 2008

Mattel Inc. v. Francisco, GR No. 166886, July 30, 2008

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013

Araullo, et al v. Aquino, et al, GR No. 209287, July 1, 2014 (p. 22)

Narra Nickel Mining v. Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp, GR 195580, April 21, 2014Political Questions; Requisites

Baker v. Carr- 369 US 169 [1962]

Torrecampo v. Metropolitan- 649 SCRA 482 [2011]

Belgica v. ES, GR 208566, November 19, 2013Textually Demonstrable CommitmentOsmena v. Pendatun- 109 PHIL. 683 [1960]

Arroyo v. De Venecia- 277 SCRA 268 [1997]

Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona- GR 134577, November 18, 1998

ICMC v. Calleja- GR 85750, September 28, 1990

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 [1997]

Garcia v. Corona, GR 132451, Dec. 17, 1999

Judicially Discoverable and Manageable StandardsLiang v. People- GR 125865, March 26, 2001

Effect of Unconstitutionality; Par. 2(a); Operative Fact Doctrine

Article 7, New Civil CodeDe Agbayani v. PNB- 38 SCRA 429 [1971]

Philippine Coconut v. Republic, supra.

Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, GR 171101, Nov. 22, 2011 (Operative Fact Doctrine applies to unconstitutional executive act)CIR v. San Roque Power Corporation, GR 187485, Oct 8, 2013 (Operative Fact Doctrine does not apply to a mere administrative practice; there must be a law or executive issuance)

Automatic Review; Paragraph 2 (d)

Garcia, et al. v. People- 318 SCRA 434

Pearson v. IAC, GR 74454, Sept. 3, 1998

People v. Mateo- 433 SCRA 640

People v. Duavis, GR 190681, 07 December 2011

Question of Law; Paragraph 2(e)

Cebu Womans Club v. De la Victoria- GR 120060 [March 9, 2000]

Change of Venue; Paragraph 4

People v. Gutierrez- 36 SCRA 172 [1970]

Power to Promulgate Rules; Paragraph 5Enforcement of Constitutional Rights, Pleading, Practice, and Procedure in All Courts

First Lepanto v. CA- 231 SCRA 30 [1994]

Lina v. Purisima- 82 SCRA 344 [1978]

Santero v. CFI- Cavite- 153 SCRA 728 [1965]

Damasco v. Laqui- 166 SCRA 214 [1988]

Carpio v. Sulu Resources- GR 148267, August 8, 2002

Baguio Market Vendors v. Hon. Cortes- GR 165922, February 26, 2010

In re Petition for Recognition- 612 SCRA 193 [2010]

In re Exemption of NPC- 615 SCRA 1 [2010]

In re: in the matter of clarification of Exemption from payment of all Court Sheriffs Fees of Cooperatives, A.M. 12-2-03-0,13 March 2012-668 SCRA 1 [2012]

Sto. Tomas v. Paneda- 685 SCRA 245 [2012]

Admission to the Practice of Law, the Integrated Bar, Disciplinary Powers, and Legal Assistance to the Underprivileged

In re Cunanan- 94 PHIL. 534 [953-1954]

Javellana v. DILG 212 SCRA 475 [1992]

Velez v. De Vera- A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006

In re letter of UP Law Faculty- 644 SCRA 543 [2011]

Limits of Power

Simplified and Inexpensive Procedure for Speedy Disposition

Uniform for All Courts of the Same Grade

Not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights

Bustos v. Lucero- 81 PHIL. 648 [1948]

PNB v. Asuncion- 80 SCRA 321 [1977]

Fabian v. Desierto, GR 129742, September 16, 1998

People v. Lacson- 400 SCRA 267 [2003]

Planters v. Fertiphil- 426 SCRA 414 [2004]

Tan v. Bausch- 478 SCRA 115 [2005]

Republic v. Gingoyon- 478 SCRA 474 [2005]

Camp John Hay v. BIR- GR 172457, December 24, 2008

Procedure of Special Sourts and Quasi-Judicial Bodies Effective Unless Disapproved by SC

LBP v. De Leon- GR 143275, September 10, 2002

Tan v. COMELEC- 507 SCRA 352 [2006]

Supervision Over the Judiciary

Ampong v. CSC- 563 SCRA 293 [2008]

Sec. 6. Supervision of Courts

Maceda v. Vasquez- 221 SCRA 464 [1993]

De Vera v. Pelayo, GR 137354, July 6, 2000;

Caoibes v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 132177, July 19,2001;

Fuentes v. OMB, GR 124295, October 23, 2001

Dolalas v. Office of the Ombudsman-265 SCRA 819 [1996]

Garcia v. De la Pena, 299 SCRA 776 [1994]

Maningas v. Barcenas, AM P-99-1315, Nov. 3, 1999

Gorospe v. Sandoval, AM RTJ-00-1534, Feb. 15, 2000

Caoibes v. Ombudsman, GR 132177, July 19, 2001

Fuentes v. Ombudsman, GR 124295, Oct. 23, 2001

Adajar v. Develos- 475 SCRA 361 [2005]

Garcia v. Miro- 582 SCRA 127 [2009]

Escalona v. Padillo, AM P-10-2785, September 21, 2010Sec. 7. Qualifications of Members of Judiciary

In re JBC v. Judge Quitain, JBC No. 013, August 22, 2007

Kilosbayan v. Ermita, GR No. 177721, July 3, 2007

Topacio v. Ong, GR No. 179895, December 15, 2008

Sec. 8. Judicial and Bar Council

Composition

Chavez v. JBC-676 SCRA 579 [2012]

De Castro v. JBC- 615 SCRA 666 [2010]

Sec. 9. Appointment of Justices and Judges

Sec. 10. Diminution of Salary

Nitafan v. CIR- 152 SCRA 284 [1987]

Sec. 11. Security of Tenure; Power to DisciplineVargas v. Rilloraza- 80 PHIL. 297 [1948]

De La Llana v. Alba- 112 SCRA 294 [1982]

People v. Gacott- 246 SCRA 52 [1995]

Lumpas v. Tamin, AM no. RTJ-99-1519

Sec. 12. Non-Judicial Assignments

In Re Judge Manzano, 166 SCRA 246

Macalintal v. Presidential Electoral Tribunal, 635 SCRA 783 [2010]

Sec. 13. Conclusions of the Supreme Court-How Reached?Consing v. Court of Appeals, GR 78272, August 29, 1989

Sec. 14. Contents of Decision; Petition for Review; Motion for Reconsideration

Decision expressing clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based

Sufficient

Air France v. Carrascoso- 18 SCRA 155 [1966]

People v. Bravo- 227 SCRA 285 [1993]

Hernandez v. CA- 208 SCRA 429 [1993]

Francisco v. Permskul- 173 SCRA 324 [1989]

People v. Landicho- 285 SCRA 1 [1996]

People v. Co- 245 SCRA 733 [1995]

People v. Macoy- 275 SCRA 1 [1997]

ABD v. NLRC- 286 SCRA 454 [1998]

People v. Gastador, GR 123727 [April 14, 1999]

People v. Ordonez, GR 136591, July 10, 2000

People v. Orbita, GR 1365891, July 11, 2002

Lorbes v. CA, 351 SCRA 716

People v. Mendoza, GR 143702, Sept. 13, 2001

Asia Traders v. CA- 423 SCRA 114 [2004]

Tichangco v. Enriquez- 433 SCRA 324 [2004]

Ceferina Lopez Tan v. Spouses Antazo, GR 187208, 23 February 2011.

Donnina C. Halley v. Printwell, Inc. GR 157549, 30 May 2011.

Hon. Waldo Q. Flores v. Atty. Antonio F. Montemayor, GR 17046, 8 June 2011

Reiting Solid Homes v. Laserna. Art VIII, Section 14 applies only to the judiciary)

Insufficient

People v. Escober- 157 SCRA 541 [1988]

Nicos v. CA 206 SCRA 127 [1992]

People v. Viernas 262 SCRA 641 [1996]

People v. Bugarin 273 SCRA 384 [1997]

People v. Nadera 342 SCRA 490 [2000]

Madrid v. CA, GR 130683, May 31 2000

Yao v. CA, GR 132428, October 24, 2000

People v. Dumaging, GR 135516, September 20, 2000

Ong Chiu Kwan, GR 13006, November 23, 2000

Spouse Yu Eng Cho v. Pan America World Airways, Inc., GR 123560, March 27, 2000

Kao v. C.A., G.R. No. 105014, December 18,2001

People v. Pastor, 379 SCRA 181 (2002)

People v. Lizada, GR 143468, Jan 24, 2003

Consing v. CA-425 SCRA 192 [2004]

Velarde v. SJS-428 SCRA 283 [2004]

Report on the Judicial Audit (MTC of Tambulig)- 472 SCRA 419 [2005]

Lacurom v. Tienzo- 535 SCRA 252 [2007]

Salazar v. Marigomen- 537 SCRA 25 [2007]

De la Pena v. CA- 579 SCRA 396 [2009]

Office of the President and Presidential Anti- Graft Commission v. Calixto R. Cataquiz, GR 183445, 14 September 2011.

Republic of the Philippines (University of the Philippines) v. Legaspi, GR 177611, 18 April 2012

Legal basis must be stated if a petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision shall be refused due course or denied

Borromeo v. CA- 186 SCRA 1 [1990]

JRB Realty v. CA-271 SCRA 229 [1997]

Komatsu v. CA-289 SCRA 604 [1998]

Martinez v. CA, GR 123547, May 21, 2001

Protacio v. Laya-582 SCRA 417 [2009]

Nationwide Security and Allied Services, Inc. v. Ronald P. Valderama, GR 186614, 23 February 2011. Reiterating Philippine Health care Providers, Inc. v. CIR.

Re: Verified Complaint of Engr. Oscar L. Ongjoco, A.M. OCA IPI No. 11-184-CA-J, 31 January 2012.

Agoy v. Araneta Center, GR 196358, 21 March 2012. Reiterating Borromeo v. CA

Sec. 15. Period for Making DecisionsDizon v. Judge Lopez- 278 SCRA 483 [1997]

Mosquera v. Legaspi, AM RTJ-99-1511, July 10,2000

OCA v. Salva, AM RTJ-98-1412, July 19, 2000

Dela Cruz v. Bersamira, AM RTJ-00-1567, July 24, 2000

Heirs of Sucaldito v. Cruz, AM RTJ-991456, July 27, 2000

Sulla v. Ramos, AM-MTJ-00-1319, September 27, 2000

Seares v. Salazar, AM MTJ-98-1160, November 22, 2000

Gil v. Jonolo, AM RTJ-00-1602, December 5, 2000

Aslarona v. Echavez, AM RTJ-03-1803, Oct. 2, 2003

Unitrust Devt Bank v. Caoibes, AM RTJ-03-1745, Aug, 20, 2003

Re: Request of Judge Javellana, AM 01-6-314-RTC, June 19, 2003

Salud v. Alumbres, AM RTJ-00-1594, June 20,2003

Samson v. Mejia, AM RTJ-02-1710,June 17,2003

Supplemnent:

Sibayan-Joaquin v. Judge Javellana, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1601, Nov. 13,2001

Sec. 16. Report to the President and to Congress

Article IX: Constitutional Commissions

A. Common Provisions

Section 1. Independent Commissions

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR 157013, July 10, 2003

Ombudsman v. Civil Service Commission, GR No. 159940, February 16, 2005

Section 2. Prohibition on Members

Section 3. Salary

Section 4. Power to Appoint

Section 5. Fiscal Autonomy

CSC v. DBM, 482 SCRA 233

Section 6. Promulgation of Rules

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR No. 157013, July 10, 2003

Sabili v. COMELEC, GR 193261, April 24, 2012Section 7. Decisions of the Commissions

Review of final orders, resolutions and decisions:

1. Rendered in the exercise of quasi-judicial functions

2. Rendered in the exercise of administrative functions

Filipinas Engineering and Machine Shop v. Ferrer, 135 SCRA 25

Saligumba v. CA, 117 SCRA 669

PTTC v. COA, 146 SCRA 190 (1986)

Cua v. COMELEC, 156 SCRA 582 (1987)

Estrella v. COMELEC, GR No. 160465, May 27, 2004

Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445 (1990)

Paredes v. COMELEC, 127 SCRA 653 (1984)

Ambil v. COMELEC, 344 SCRA 358 [2000]

Mateo v. CA, GR No. 113219, August 14, 1995

Reyes v. Regional Trial Court, GR No. 108886, May 5, 1995

ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, 323 SCRA 611

Salva v. Makalintal, GR 132603, September 18, 2000

Garces v. CA, GR. No. 114 795, July 17, 1996

Dumayas v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 141952-53, April 29, 2001

Aguilar v. COMELEC, GR No. 185140, June 30, 2009

Cayetano v. COMELEC, GR 193846, April 12, 2011Dela Llana v. The Chairperson, COA, GR 180989, February 7, 2012

Cagas v. COMELEC, 663 SCRA 644 (2012)

Section 8. Other Functions B. Civil Service Commission

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term

Gaminde v. COA 347 SCRA 655 (2000)

Mathay Jr. v. CA, GR No. 124374, December 15, 1999

Section 2.Scope of the system

Cuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6 2000

Under Civil Service Law

PARAGRAPH 1

MWSS v. Hernandez 143 SCRA 602 [1986]

NSC v. NLRC 168 SCRA 122

UP v. Regino 221 SCRA 598 [1993]

Mateo v. CA 247 SCRA 284 [1995]

DOH v. NLRC 251 SCRA 700 [1995]

Juco v. NLRC 277 SCRA 528 [1997]

Feliciano v. Gison 629 SCRA 103 [2010]

GOCCs Under the Corporation Code

BLISS v. Calejo 237 SCRA 271 [1994]Postigo v. Philippine Tuberculosis society 479 SCRA 628

LRTA v. Venus 485 SCRA 301

PARAGRAPH 2

Classifications and Appointments

HIGC v. CSC 220 SCRA 148 [1993]

Mauna v. CSC 232 SCRA 388 [1994]

Rimonte v. CSC 244 SCRA 498 [1995]

Gloria v. De Guzman 249 SCRA 126 [1995]Atty. Ellas Omar A Sana v. Career Executive Service Board, GR 192926, 15 November 2011

Competitive

Samson v. CA 145 SCRA 654[1986]

Non-Competitive

Astraquillo v. Mangalupas 190 SCRA 280 [1990]

Office of the President v. Buenaobra 501 SCRA 302

Policy-Determining

Primarily Confidential

Borres v. CA 153 SCRA 120 [1987] Grino v. CSC 194 SCRA 458 [1991] Santos v. Macaraig 208 SCRA 74 [1992]

Hilario v. CSC 243 SCRA 206 [1995] Rosete v. CA 264 SCRA 147 [1996]

CSC v. Salas 274 SCRA 414 [1997]

Acahacoso v. Macaraig 195 SCRA 235 [1991] Felix v. Buenaseda 240 SCRA 139 [1995] (par.2)

Pamantasan ng Maynila v. CSC 241 SCRA 503 [1995] Province of the Camarines Sur v. CA 246 SCRA 231 [1995] PEZA v. Mercado 614 SCRA 683 [2010]

CSC v. CA 635 SCRA 749 [2010]

Permanent

Luego v. CSC 143 SCRA 327 [1986] Pangilinan v. Maglaya 225 SCRA 511 [1993] (par.2)

Reorganization

Santiago v. CSC 178 SCRA 733 [1989]

Montecillo v. Civil Service Commission, GR NO. 131954. June 28, 2001 Gatmaitan v. Gonzales 492 SCRA 591 Nieves v. Blanco 673 SCRA 638 [2012]

Appointment vs. designation

Binamira v. Garucho 188 SCRA 154 [1990] (par.2) (designation by Dept. Sec.)

Removal for Cause/Security of Tenure Cause for Removal: PARAGRAPH 3

1. Loss confidence

Hernandez v. Villegas 14 SCRA 544 [1965]

2. Abolition of Office

Briones v. Osmena 104 PHIL. 588 [1958]

Eugene v. CSC 243 SCRA 196 [1995] 3. Reorganization

Romualdez-Yap v. CSC 225 SCRA 285 [1993] Fernandez v. Sto Tomas 242 SCRA 192 [1995] Chato v. Natividad 244 SCRA 787 [1995] Divinagracia v. Sto. Tomas 244 SCRA 595 [1995] (par.3) Vinzon-Chato v. Zenarosa, GR 120539, October 20, 2000

De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000

Cuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6, 2000

4. Qualification for Eligibility

Mayor v. Macaraig 194 SCRA 672 [1991

5. Abandonment; Acceptance of Incompatible/Other Employment

Canonizado v. Aguirre, 323 SCRA 312 [2001]

Salvador v. CA, GR 127501, May 5, 2000

Due Process in Removal

Enrique v. CA 229 SCRA 180 [1994] CSC v. Magnaye 619 SCRA 347 [2010]Rubenecia v. CSC 244 SCRA 640 [1995]

Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office Board Of Directors v. Marie Jean C. Lapid, GR 191940, 12 April 2011Security of Tenure

Chua v. CSC 206 SCRA 65 [1992]

NLTD v. CSC 221 SCRA 145 Cabagnot v. CSC 223 SCRA 59 (Marohombsar v. CA, GR 126481, February 18, 2000

Ong v. OP 664 SCRA 413 [2012]

Electioneering or Partisan Political Activity

Santos v. Yatco 106 PHIL 21

People v. De Venecia 14 SCRA 864 [1965] Right to Self-Organization and Right to Strike

SSS Employees v. CA 175 SCRA 686 [1989]

Balingasan v. CA 276 SCRA 557 [1997] Jacinto v. CA 281 SCRA 557 [1997] De la Cruz v. CA 305 SCRA 303

GSIS v. Kapisanan 510 SCRA 622Temporary Employees

Gloria v. CA, GR 119903, August 15, 2000

Section 3. Purpose of a Civil Service System

Lazo v. CSC, 236 SCRA 469

Section 4. Oath or Affirmation

Section 5. Standardization of Compensation

Section 6. Prohibition of Appointment of Lame Ducks

People v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 164185, July 23, 2008

Section 7. Prohibitions; Appointments; Office; Employment

Flores v. Drilon 223 SCRA 568 (1993)

In re Eduardo Escala, 653 SCRA 141

La Carlota City v. Rojo , GR 181367, 24 April 2012 Sec. 8Prohibitions; Compensation; Foreign Gift/Office/Title

Sedusasta v. Municipality of Surigao 72 PHIL. 482 [1941]

Peralta v. Mathay 38 SCRA 296 (1971)

Santos v. CA GR No. 139792, Nov. 22, 2000

Cabili v. CSC, GR No. 156503, June 22, 2006

Benguet State University v. Colting, GR No. 169637, June 8, 2007

Herrera, et al v. NPC, GR No. 166570, December 18, 2009

NEA v. CSC 611 SCRA 14 [2010] Yap v. COA 619 SCRA 154 [2010] Sergio I. Carbonilla, et al v. Board of Airlines, GR 193247

Office of the President v. Board of Airlines, GR 194276, 14 September 2011PEZA V. COA 675 SCRA 513[2012]Dimagiba v. Espartero 676 SCRA 420 [2012]

C. Commission on Elections

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term

Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991)

Brillantes v. Yorac, 192 SCRA 358 (1990)

Matibag v. Benipayo, 380 SCRA 49

Section 2. Powers and Functions

Administrative Power

Alfiado v. Comelec, GR 141787, September 18, 2000

Columbres v. Comelec, GR 142038,September 18, 2000

Sahali v. Comelec, GR 134169, February 2, 2000

Claudio v. Comelec, GR 140560, May 4, 2000

De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000

Social Weather Station, Inc v. COMELEC, GR NO. 147571, May 5, 2001

Information Technology Foundation v. Comelec, GR 159139, Jan 13, 2004

Buac v. Comelec, 421 SCRA 92

Capalla v. COMELEC 673 SCRA 1 [2012]

Election Contests

Flores v. COMELEC 184 SCRA 484 [1990]

Galido v. COMELEC 193 SCRA 78 [1991]

Mercado v. BES 243 SCRA 422 [1995]

Relampagos v. Cumba 243 SCRA 690 [1995]

People v. Delgado 189 SCRA 715 [1990]

Garces v. CA 259 SCRA 99 [1996]

Zarate v. Comelec and Lallave GR 129096, November 19, 1999

Regalado v. CA, GR 115962, February 15, 2000

Faelnar v. People,GR 140850-51, May 4, 2000

Tan v. Comelec, GR 148575, Dec. 10, 2003

Alauya v. Comelec, GR 158830, August 10, 2004

Powers Not Given

Deputizing Law Enforcement Agencies

People v. Basilla 179 SCRA 87[1989]

Registration of Parties and Organization

LDP v. Comelec, GR 161265, February 24, 2004

Atienza v. COMELEC 612 SCRA 761 [2010]

Lokin v. COMELEC 674 SCRA 538[2012]

Prosecution of Election Offenses

People v. Inting 187 SCRA 788 [1990]

Corpus v. Tanodbayan 149 SCRA 281[1987]

COMELEC v. Silva 286 SCRA 177[1998]

Comelec v. Hon. Espanol, GR 149164, Dec. 10, 2003

Arroyo v. DOJ 681 SCRA 181[2012]

Recommendatory PowersSection 3. Decisions

Pangilinan v. COMELEC 228 SCRA 36[1993] Sarmiento v. Comelec 212 SCRA 307[1992] Carnicosa v. COMELEC 282 SCRA 512[1997] Ramas v. COMELEC 286 SCRA 189[1998]

Garvida v. Sales 271 SCRA 767[1997]

Velayo v. Comelec, GR 135613, March 9, 2000

Sebastian v. Comelec, GR 139573, Mach 7, 2000

Soller v. Comelec, GR 139853, September 5, 2000

Barroso v. Ampig et al, GR138218, March 17, 2000

Maruhon v. Comelec, GR 139357, May 5,2000

Balindong v. Comelec, GR 153991, Oct. 16, 2003

Jaramilla v. Comelec, GR 155717, Oct. 23, 2003

Bautista v. Comelec, GR 154796-97, Oct. 23, 2003

De Llana v. Comelec, GR 152080, Nov. 28, 2003

Repol v. Comelec, GR 151418, Apr. 28, 2004

Pedragoza v. COMELEC 496 SCRA 513

Cayetano v. COMELEC 479 SCRA 514

Munoz v. COMELEC 495 SCRA 407

Tan v. COMELEC 507 SCRA 352

Enriquel v. COMELEC 613 SCRA 809

Mendoza v. COMELEC 616 SCRA 443

Maria Laarni L Cayetano v. Comelec, GR 193846, 12 April 2011 (also in Sec. 7, Art IX-A)

Section 4. Supervision/Regulation of Public Utilities, Media Grants, Privileges

Unido v. COMELEC, 104 SCRA 17

Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529 (1990)

Osmena v. COMELEC 199 SCRA 750 [1991]

Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, GR No. 119654, May 22, 1995

Telecom v. COMELEC 289 SCRA 337 [1998]

ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, GR No. 133486, Jan. 28, 2000

SWS v. COMELEC, GR No. 147571, May 5, 2001

Section 5. Favorable Recommendation for Pardon, Amnesty, Parole or Suspension of Sentence

Section 6. Free and Open Party System

Liberal Party v. COMELEC, GR No. 191771, May 6, 2010

Section 7. No Block-Voting

Section 8. Prohibition on Political Parties

Section 9. Election Period

Section 10. No Harassment and Discrimination

Section 11. Funds

D. Commission of Audit

Section 1. Qualifications; Term

Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445

Section 2. General Function; Powers

Sec. 2 Powers and Functions

Examine and Audit: Government revenues and Government expenditures

Blue Bar Coconut Phil. Tantuico 163 SCRA 716 [1988]

DBP v. COA 231 SCRA 202 [1994]

Eslao v. COA 236 SCRA 161 [1994]

J.F.F. Manacop v. CA 266 SCRA 235 [1997]

Polloso v. Gangan, GR 140563, July 14, 2000

Uy v. COA, GR 130685, March 21, 2000

Aguinaldo v. Sandiganbayan 265 SCRA 121 [1996]

DBP v. COA, 422 SCRA 459 [2004]

Home Development Mutual Fund v. COA, GR 142297, June 15, 2004

DBP v. COA 498 SCRA 537 [2006]

Nava v. Palattao 499 SCRA 745 [2006]

Gualberto De Llana v. COA, GR 180989, 7 Feb. 2012

Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012

Philippine Coconut v. Republic 663 SCRA 514 [2012]

Audit Jurisdiction

Caltex v. COA 208 SCRA 726 [1992]

Mamaril v. Domingo 227 SCRA 206[1993]

Philippine Airlines v. COA 245 SCRA 39 [1995]

CIR v. COA 218 SCRA 203 [1993]

CSC v. Pobre, GR 160568, Sept. 15, 2004

Luciano Velos, et al. v. Commission On Audit, GR 193677,6 Sept. 20011

Boy Scout of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, 7 June 2011

Dela Llana v. COA 665 SCRA 176 [2012]

Settle Government Account

Philippine Operations, Inc. v. Auditor General, 94 Phil 868 [1953-1954]

ICNA v. Republic, 21 SCRA 40 [1967]

Dingcong v. Guingona, 162 SCRA 782 [1988]

NHC v. COA 226 SCRA 55 [1993]

Euro-Med v. Province of Batangas, 495 SCRA 30 [2006]

Define Scope and Techniques of Auditing Procedures

Danville Maritime v. COA,175 SCRA 701 [1989]

Promulgate Accounting and Auditing Rules

Leycano v. COA, 482 SCRA 215

Decide Administrative Cases Involving Expenditures of Public Funds

NCMH v. COA, 265 SCRA 390 [1996] Ramos v. Aquino, 39 SCRA 256 [1971]

Salva v. Carague, 511 SCRA 258

City of Basilan v. Hechanova, 58 SCRA 711 [1974] Section 3. COA Jurisdiction

Luciano Veloso v. Commisssion on Audit, GR 193677, 6 September 2011Section 4. Annual Report to the President and to Congress

Article X. Local Government

Section 1. Territorial and Political Subdivisions of the Philippines

Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 79956, January 26, 1990

Section 2. Local Autonomy

Limbona v. Conte Mangelin, et al, GR No. 80391, February 28, 1989

San Juan v. CSC, 196 SCRA 69 (1991)

Drilon v. Lim 235 SCRA 135 [1994]

Magtajas v. Pryce Properties, GR No. 111097, July 20, 1994

Judge Leynes v. COA, GR No. 143596, Dec. 11, 2003

Batangas CATV v. CA and Batangas City, GR No. 138810, September 29, 2004

CREBA v. Secretary of DAR, GR 183409, June 18, 2010

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014Section 3. Local Government Code

Garcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 100 (1993)

Malonzo v. COMELEC, 269 SCRA 380 (1997)

Malonzo v. Zamora 323 SCRA 875 Section 4. Supervision by the President

Ganzon v. CA, 200 SCRA 271

Joson v. Torres, 290 SCRA 279

Drilon v. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994)

Bito-onon v. Fernandez 350 SCRA 732

National Liga v. Paredes 439 130 [2004]

SJS v. Atienza 545 SCRA 92 [2009]

Province of Negros v. COA, GR No. 182574, September 28, 2010

Section 5. Taxation Power of Local Government

LTO v. City of Butuan, 322 SCRA 805

Lina v. Pano, 364 SCRA 76 (2001)

Petron v. Mayor, GR No. 158881, April 16, 2008

Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium, GR No. 154993, October 25, 2005

Philippine Petroleum v. Municipality of Pililla, GR No. 90773, June 3, 1991

Acebedo Optical v. CA, GR 100152, March 21, 2000

PLDT v. City of Davao, GR 143867, March 25, 2003

John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR No. 119775, October 24, 2003

Manila Electric v. Province of Laguna, GR No. 131359, May 5, 1999

Batangas Power v. Batangas City, GR No. 152675, April 28, 2004

Smart Communications v. City of Davao, GR No. 155491, September 16, 2008

Section 6. Share in National Taxes

Pimentel v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 201 (2000)

Province of Batangas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004

Alternative Center v. Zamora, GR No. 144256, June 8, 2005

League of Cities v. COMELEC August 24, 2010

Section 7. Equitable Share in the National Wealth

Section 8. Term of Local Officials

Borja v. COMELEC, 295 SCRA 157

Lozanida v. COMELEC, GR No. 135150, July 28, 1999

Adormeo v. COMELEC, GR No. 147927, February 4, 2002

Socrates v. COMELEC, 391 SCRA 457 (2002)

Latasa v. COMELEC, GR No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003

David v. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 90 (1997)

Rivera v. COMELEC 523 SCRA 41

Montebon v. COMELEC, 551 SCRA 50

Ong v. Alegre, GR No. 163295, January 23, 2006

Laceda v. Lumena GR 182867, November 25, 2008

Dizon v. COMELEC, GR No. 182088, January 30, 2009

Alboin v. COMELEC, GR No. 184836, December 23, 2009

Bolos v. COMELEC 581 SCRA 786 [2009]

Aldovino v. COMELEC 609 SCRA 234 [2009]

Datu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, February 2012 (reconsideration; holdover provision in RA 9054 Unconstitutional as Congress in passing RA 10153 has made clear)

Section 9. Sectoral Representatives

Supangan Jr. v. Santos, GR No. 84662, August 24, 1990

Section 10. Creation, Abolition, Change of Boundaries

Tan v. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727 (1986)

Tobias v. Abalos 239 SCRA 106 [1994] (metes and bounds)

Mun. of Jimenez v. Judge Baz 265 SCRA 182 [1996](de jure corporation)

Cawaling v. COMELEC GR146319, October 26, 2001

League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, GR 176951, Nov. 29, 2008

Sema v. COMELEC, 558 SCRA 700

Camid v. Office of the President, GR No. 161414, January 17, 2005

Navarro v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 180050, February 10, 2010

Section 11. Metropolitan Political Subdivisions

MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association Assoc., GR No. 135962, March 27, 2000

MMDA v. Garin, GR No. 130230, April 15, 2005

Gancayco v. City Government of Quezon City, 658 SCRA 853

Section 12. Highly Urbanized Cities, Component Cities

Abella v. COMELEC, GR No. 100710, September 3, 1991

Section 13. Local Government Units Grouping Themselves

Section 14. Regional Development Councils and Other Similar Bodies

Pimentel v. Ochoa 676 SCRA 551 [2012]

Sec. 15 Purpose, and how many Autonomous Regions

Section 15. Autonomous Regions

Disomangcop v. Sec. of DPWH,GR 149848, Nov. 25, 2004

Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR No. 196271, October 18, 2011

Section 16. General Supervision of the President

Ampatuan v. Hon Ronaldo Puno, GR 190259. 17 June 2011 (Proclamation 1946 and AOs and 273 A do not violate the principle of local autonomy under Section 16, Article X of the Constitution, and Section 1 Article V of the Expanded ARMM Organic Act)

Kulayan v. Tan 675 SCRA 482 [2012]

Section 17. Powers Not Vested to the ARMM

Datu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011. (The framers decided to reinstate the provision in order to make it clear, once and for all, that these are the limits of the powers to the autonomous government; those not enumerated are actually to be exercised by the national government; the autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be invoked to defeat national policies and concerns Since the synchronization of elections not just a regional concerns but a national one, the ARMM is subject to it; the regional autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be used to exempt the region from having act in accordance with national policy mandated by no less than the Constitution)

Sections 18 and19. Organic Act for Autonomous Regions

Abbas v. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 (1989)

Ordillos v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100 (1990)

Badua v. CBA, 194 SCRA 101 (1991)

Atitiw v. Zamora, 471 SCRA 329

Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 82217, Jan. 29, 1990

Pandi v. CA, GR No. 116850, April 11, 2002

Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597, July 16, 2008

Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Panel

Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, February 2012 (means that only amendments to, or revisions of, the organic Act Constitutionally-essential to creation of autonomous regions i.e. , those aspects specially mentioned in the Constitution which Congress must provide for the Organic Act require ratification through a plebiscite)

Section 20. Legislative Powers of the Autonomous Regions

Province of North Cotabato v. Government of the Philippines Peace Panel, 568 SCRA 492

Section 21. Preservation of Peace and Order

Article XI. Accountability of Public Officers

Section 1. Public Office

Hipolito v. Mergas 195 SCRA 6 [1991]

Bornasal, Jr. v. Montes 280 SCRA 181 [1997]

Almario v. Resus AM NO. P941076, [November 22, 1999]

Juan v. People, GR 132378, January 18, 2000

Re; AWOL of Antonio Makalintal, AM 99-11-06-SC, February 15, 2000

Estrella v. Sandiganbayan, GR 125160, June 20, 2000

Malbas v. Blanco, A.M P99-1350, December 12, 2001

Manaois v. Lemeo, AM MTJ-03-1492, Aug. 26, 2003

Re; Gideon Alibang, AM 2003-11-SC June 15, 2004

ABAKADA v. Purisima 562 SCRA 251[2008]

Salumbides v. OMB, GR 180917, April 23, 2010

Section 2. Officers Subject to Removal by Impeachment

Ombudsman v. CA 452 SCRA 714 [2005] (exclusive list)

Section 3. Procedure for Impeachment

In re Gonzales, 160 SCRA 771 (1988)

Marcoleta v. Brawner 582 SCRA 474 [2009])

Romulo v. Yniguez, 141 SCRA 260 (1986)

Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44

Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452 (2001); MR, 356 SCRA 108 (2001)

Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice, 643 SCRA 198

Section 4. Sandiganbayan

Nunez v. Sandiganbayan 111 SCRA 433 [1982] (creation of Sandiganbayan)

Lecaros v. Sandiganbayan 128 SCRA 324 [1984] (crimes in relation to public office)

Cunanan v. Arceo 242 SCRA 88 [1995] (averment of the nature of the crime committed)

Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 58327, March 22, 1991

Azarcon v. Sandiganbanyan, GR No. 116033, February 26, 1997

Binay v. Sandiganbayan GR NO. 120681-83 [October 1, 1999]

Mayor Layus v. Sandiganbayan GR 134272, December 8, 1999

Abbot v. Mapayo, GR 134102, July 6, 2000

Defensor-Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, 356 SCRA 636 (2001)

Section 5. Ombudsman

Baluyot v. Holganza, GR 136374, February 2000

Garcia v. Ombudsman, GR 127710, February 16, 2000

Lapid v. CA, GR 142261, June 29, 2000

Tirol v. COA, GR 133954, August 3, 2000Mamburao v. Desierto, 429 SCRA 76

Carandang v. Desierto, 639 SCRA 293

Lacson v. ES, 649 SCRA 142

People v. Morales, 649 SCRA 182

Quarto v. Marcelo, 658 SCRA 580

Section 6. Appointments

Ombudsman v. CSC, GR No. 162215, July 20, 2007

Section 7. Tanodbayan as Special Prosecutor

Quimpo v. Tanodbayan 146 SCRA 137 [1986]

Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 843 (1988)

Acop v. Ombudsman, GR No. 120422, September 27, 1995

Deloso v. Domingo, 191 SCRA 545

Almonte v. Vasquez, GR No. 95367, May 22, 1995

Azarcon v. Guerrero, GR No. 121017, Feb 17, 1997

Azarcon v. Guerrero , GR No. 116033, Feb 26, 1997

Camanag v. Hon Guerrero 286 SCRA 473 [1997]

Buenasada v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645

Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, 376 SCRA 452

BIR v. Ombudsman, GR No. 115103, April 11, 2002

Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002

Office of the Ombudsman v. Valera 471 SCRA 715 [2005]

Perez v. Sandiganbayan 503 SCRA 252

Calingin v. Desierto 529 SCRA 720 [2007]

Lazatin v. Desierto 588 SCRA 285 [2009]

Section 8. Qualifications

Section 9. Appointments

Section 10. Rank

Section 11. Term

Section 12. Prompt Action on Complaints

Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002

Almonte v. Vasquez, 244 SCRA 286 (1995)

Uy v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 105965, March 20, 2001

Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000

Bautista v. Sandiganbayan, GR 136082, May 12, 2000

Roxas v. Vasquez, GR NO. 114944, June 19, 2001

Kara-an v. Ombudsman, GR 119990, June 21, 2004

People v. Sandiganbayan 451 SCRA 413 [2005]

Laxina v. Ombudsman 471 SCRA 542 [2005]

Gemma P. Cabalit v. Commission On Audit-Region VII, Gr 180236, 17 January 2012 (power of the Ombudsman to determine and impose administrative liability is mandatory)

Gonzales III v. OP 679 SCRA 614 [2012]

Section 13. Powers; Functions; Duties

In General

Cruz v. Sandiganbayan 194 SCRA 474 [1991]

Maceda v. Vasquez 221 SCRA 464 [1993]

Macalino v. Sandiganbayan 376 SCRA 452

Garcia v. Miro, GR No. 148944, Feb 5, 2003

Honasan II v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors GR No. 159747, April 13, 2004

Samson v. OMB, GR 117741, Sept 29, 2004

Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan, GR 162214, Nov. 11, 2004

Khan, Jr. v. Ombudsman, GR No. 125296, July 20, 2006

Ombudsman v. Estandarte, GR No. 168670, April 13, 2007

Ombudsman v. Lucero, November 24, 2006

Ombudsman v. CA, GR No. 169079, July 17, 2007

Sangguniang Barangay v. Punong Barangay, GR No. 170626, March 3, 2008

Perez v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 166062, September 26, 2006

Buencamino v. CA, GR No. 175895, April 4, 2007

Medina v. COA, GR No. 176478, February 4, 2008

Villas Nor v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 180700, March 4, 2008

Ombudsman v. Rodriguez, GR No. 172700, July 23, 2010

OMB v. Estendarte 521 SCRA 155 [2007]

Salvador v. Mapa 539 SCRA 34 [2000]

OMB v. Masing 542 SCRA 253 [2008]

Medina v. COA 543 SCRA 684[2008]

Borja v. People 553 SCRA 250 [2008]

Preventive Suspension and Imposition of Penalties

Buennaseda v. Favier 226 SCRA 645 [1993](when to suspension)

Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole 251 SCRA 243 [1995] (nature)

Vasquez v. Hobilla-Alinio 271 SCRA 67 [1997] (not in relation to duties)

OMB v. CA 491 SCRA 92

OMB v. Madriaga 503 SCRA 631

OMB v. CA 507 SCRA 593

Estorja v. Ranada 492 SCRA 652

OMB v. Lucero 508 SCRA 593

Balbastro v. Junio 527 SCRA 680 [2007]

OMB v. CA 527 SCRA 798 [2007]

COA v. CA 529 SCRA 245 [2007

OMB v. Santiago 533 SCRA 305 [2007]

Govenciong v. CA 550 SCRA 502 [2008]

Marohomsalic v. Cole 547 SCRA 98

OMB v. Lisondra 548 SCRA 83

Miro v. Abugan 549 SCRA 34

Cesa v. OMB 553 SCRA 357

OMB v. De Sahagun 562 SCRA 122

OMB v. Samaniego 564 SCRA 502

Boncalon v. OMB GR 171812, December 24, 2008

OMB v. Beltran 588 SCRA 574 [2009]

OMB v. Apolonio, GR 165132, 07 March 2012 (power to directly impose administrative penalties, including removal from office)

Jurisdiction over Criminal Cases

Natividad v. Felix 229 SCRA 680 [1994] (amount)

Lastimosa v. Vasquez 243 SCRA 497 [1995] (prosecutors assistance)

Presidential v. desierto 528 SCRA 20 [2007]

Fact-finding distinguished from Preliminary Investigation

Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000

Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, GR 148468, Jan 28, 2003

Section 14. Fiscal Autonomy

Section 15. Right to Recover Properties Unlawfully Acquired

Heirs of Gregorio Licaros v. SB, GR 157438, October 18, 2004

Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-finding Committee on Behest Loans v. OMB Desierto, GR 135715, 13 April 2011. (reiterating Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Desierto, GR 130140; provision applies only to civil actions for recovery of ill-gotten wealth, and not to criminal cases)

Section 16. Loan, Guaranty or Other Form of Financial Accommodation

Section 17. Declaration of Assets and Liabilities

Section 18. Allegiance of Public Officers

Caasi v. CA, 191 SCRA 229 (1990)

Sampayan v. Daza 213 SCRA 807 (1992) Article XII. National Economy and Patrimony

Section 1. Threefold Goal of the National Economy

Section 2. Regalian Doctrine

Public Domain and Regalian Doctrine

Lee Hong Kok v. David, 48 SCRA 372

Carino v. Insurer Government, 41 PHIL 935

Laurel v. Garcia, 187 SCRA 797 (1990)

Almeda v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 85322, April 30, 1991

Director of Lands v. Kalahi Investments, Inc, GR No. 48066, January 31, 1989

Land Mgt. Bureau v. CA, GR 112567, February 7, 2000

Republic v. De Guzman, GR 105630, February 23, 2000

Pua v. CA, GR 134992, November 20, 2000

Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, GR 135385, December 6, 2000

Chavez v. PEA, GR 133250, July 9, 2002

La Bugal-Blaan v. Ramos, GR 127872, Dec. 1, 2004

Dipido v. Gozun 485 SCRA 586

Chavez v. NHA 530 SCRA 235 [2007]

Republic v. Enciso, GR No. 160145, November 11, 2005

Philippine Geothermal v. Napocor, GR No. 144302, May 27, 2004

JG Summit v. CA, GR No. 124293, January 31, 2005

Alienation

Sta. Rosa Mining v. Lledo, 156 SCRA 1 [1987] (mining claims)

San Miguel Corporation v. CA, 185 SCRA 722 [1990] (possession in the concept of an owner)

Republic v. Bantigue Point development Corporation, GR 162322, 14 March 2012

(burden on applicant to prove land sought to be registered is alienable or disposable on a positive act the government)

Utilization

Miners v. Factoran 240 SCRA 100[1995] (jura regalia)

Tano v. Socrates 278 SCRA 154 [1997] (Subsistence fisherman)

Villaflor v. CA - 280 SCRA 297 [1997] (private ownership)

Republic v. CA and PREC GR 103882, [November 25, 1998] 299 SCRA 199

Republic v. Rosemoor Mining and Devt Corp. , GR 149927, Mar 30, 2004

Alvarez v. PICOP 606 SCRA 444 [2009]

IID v. PSALM 682 SCRA 602 [2012]

Narra Nickel Mining v. Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp, GR 195580, April 21, 2014

Section 3. Lands of the Public Domain

Director of Lands v. Aquino, 192 SCRA 296 (1990)

Republic v. CA, 160 SCRA 228 (1988)

Apex Mining v. Southeast Mindanao Gold, Inc, GR No. 152613, June 23, 2006

Dir. of Lands v. IAC, 146 SCRA 509 (1986)

Ten Forty Realty v. Lorenzana, GR No. 151212, Sept. 10, 2003

Chavez v. PEA, GR No. 133250, July 9, 2002

Republic v. Southside, 502 SCRA 587Republic v. T.A.N., 555 SCRA 477

Section 4. Specific Limits of Forest Lands and National Parks

La Bugal-Blaan Tribal Assn. v. DENR, GR127872, Jan 27, 2004, MR GR 127882, Dec. 1, 2004

Section 5. Ancestral Lands and Domain

Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, 347 SCRA 128 (2000)

Section 6. Common Good

Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)

Section 7. Private Lands

Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567

Zaragosa v. CA, GR No. 106401, September 29, 2000

Ramirez v. Vda. De Ramirez, 111 SCRA 704 (1982)

Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465 (1998)

Lee v. Republic, 366 SCRA (2001)

Frenzel v. Catito, GR No. 143958, July 11, 2003

Lentfer v. Wolff 441 SCRA 584 [2004]

Muller v. Muller 500 SCRA 65

Mulller v. Muller, GR No. 149615, August 29, 2006

Matthews v. Taylor Spouses, GR No. 164584, June 22, 2009

Hulst v. PR Builders, GR No. 156364, September 25, 2008

Ting Ho v. Teng 558 SCRA 421 [2008]

Hulst v. PR Builders 566 SCRA 333[2008]

Osmena v. Osmena 611 SCRA 164 [2010]

Beurmer v. Amores 686 SCRA 770 [2012]

Section 8. Exception for Former Filipino Citizens

Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567 (1994)

Section 9. Independent Economic and Planning Agency

Section 10. Filipinization

Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408 (1997)

Army and Navy Club v. CA, 271 SCRA 36 (1997)

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

Republic v. CA 299 SCRA 199

J.G. Summit Holdings v. CA, GR 124293, November 20, 2000

Section 11. Public Utilities

Bagatsing v. Committee, 246 SCRA 344 (1995)

Albano v. Reyes, 175 SCRA 36 (1997)

Tatad v. Garcia, 243 SCRA 436 (1995)

Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)

JG Summit Holdings v. CA, 345 SCRA 143 (2000)

Republic v. Express Telecom 373 SCRA 316

Del Mar v. Pagcor [2001]

PTC v. NTC, GR 138295, Aug. 28, 2003

Associated Communications v. NTC, GR No. 144109, February 17, 2003

Eastern Telecom v. Telecom Technologies, GR No. 135992, July 23, 2004

Royal Cargo Corp. v. CAB 421 SCRA 21

Metropolitan v. Adala 526 SCRA 465 [2007]

PAGCOR v. BIR, 645 SCRA 338

Francisco v. TRB 633 SCRA 470 [2010]

Wilson P. Gamboa v. Finance Secretary Malgarito B Tebes, GR 176579, 28 June 2011.

Definition of capital refers only to share of stock entitled to vote in the election of directors, and thus in the present case only to common share, and not the total outstanding capital stock comprising

Express Investment v. Bayantel 687 SCRA 50 [2012]

Section 12. Filipino First Policy

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

Section 13. Trade Policy

Espina v. Zamora, 631 SCRA 17Section 14. Development and Practice of Professions

Section 15. Agency to Promote Cooperatives

Section 16. Corporations

NDC v. PVB, 192 SCRA 257 (1990)

Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, 07 June 2011.

Section 16, Article XII should not be construed so as to prohibit Congress from creating public corporation. In fact, Congress has enacted numerous laws creating p