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”.