CASE 2019-0006: GIOS-SAMAR, INC. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON GERARDO M. MALIANO VS. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION AND CIVIL AVIATION ATHORITY OF THE PHILIPPINES (G.R. NO. 217158. MARCH 12, 2019, JARDELEZA, J.) (SUBJECT/S: GUIDELINES IN THE EXERCISE OF COURT;S POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW) (BRIEF TITLE: GIOS-SAMAR INC VS DOTC ET AL)
DISPOSITIVE:
“WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the petition is
DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.”
SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:
WHAT ARE THE PILLARS OF LIMITATION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW BASED ON U.S. CASES?
THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS:
- THAT THERE BE ABSOLUTE NECESSITY OF DECIDING A CASE;
- THAT RULES OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SHALL BE FORMULATED ONLY AS REQUIRED BY THE FACTS OF THE CASE;
- THAT JUDGMENT MAY NOT BE SUSTAINED ON SOME OTHER GROUND;
- THAT THERE BE ACTUAL INJURY SUSTAINED BY THE PARTY BY REASON OF THE OPERATION OF THE STATUTE
- THAT THE PARTIES ARE NOT IN ESTOPPEL;
- THAT THE COURT UPHOLDS THE PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY.
WHAT ARE PARALLEL GUIDELINES ADOPTED BY THIS COURT?
THEY ARE:
ACTUAL CASE OR CONTROVERSY CALLING FOR THE
EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL POWER;
THE PERSON CHALLENGING THE ACT MUST HAVE
“STANDING” TO CHALLENGE; HE MUST HAVE A
PERSONAL AND SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN THE CASE
SUCH THAT HE HAS SUSTAINED, OR WILL SUSTAIN,
DIRECT INJURY AS A RESULT OF ITS ENFORCEMENT;
THE QUESTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY MUST BE
RAISED AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY;
THE ISSUE OF CONSTITUTIONALITY MUST BE THE
VERY LIS MOTA OF THE CASE.
TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.
SCD-2019-0006-GIOS-SAMAR, INC. VS. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION ET AL
NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH JUST TYPE “jabbulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST TYPE “jabbulao and forum shopping”.
