Drilon vs Lim Case Digest

Here are some digested cases from the Jurisprudence regarding issues related to the Executive Department. I know, I digested it differently but this is how I remember things easily. You still have to read the whole Jurisprudence. You will never understand the things I wrote below, maybe some but perhaps most of the things I jot down are only the important ones and I might even forgot some important key factors, unless you have read the original text. Do not rely too much ion this. These digested cases will just help you remember things out during oral recitations. God bless future lawyers!

Drilon vs Lim

GR No. 112497

August 4, 1994

The principal issue in this case is the constitutionality of Section 187 of the Local Government Code. The Secretary of Justice (on appeal to him of four oil companies and a taxpayer) declared Ordinance No. 7794 (Manila Revenue Code) null and void for non-compliance with the procedure in the enactment of tax ordinances and for containing certain provisions contrary to law and public policy.

RTC’s Ruling:

1.    The RTC revoked the Secretary’s resolution and sustained the ordinance. It declared Sec 187 of the LGC as unconstitutional because it vests on the Secretary the power of control over LGUs in violation of the policy of local autonomy mandated in the Constitution.

Petitioner’s Argument:

1.    The annulled Section 187 is constitutional and that the procedural requirements for the enactment of tax ordinances as specified in the Local Government Code had indeed not been observed. (Petition originally dismissed by the Court due to failure to submit certified true copy of the decision, but reinstated it anyway.)

2.    Grounds of non-compliance of procedure

a.    No written notices as required by Art 276 of Rules of Local Government Code

b.    Not published

c.    Not translated to tagalog

Supreme Court’s Argument:

1.    Section 187 authorizes the petitioner to review only the constitutionality or legality of tax ordinance. What he found only was that it was illegal. That act is not control but supervision.

2.    Control lays down the rules in the doing of act and if not followed order the act undone or re-done. Supervision sees to it that the rules are followed.

3.    Two grounds of declaring Manila Revenue Code null and void (1) inclusion of certain ultra vires provisions (2) non-compliance with prescribed procedure in its enactment but were followed.

The requirements are upon approval of local development plans and public investment programs of LGU not to tax ordinances.