PITC v. Angeles 263 SCRA 421 (1996) G.R. No. 108461, October 21, 1996

Fact: The petitioner issued an Administrative Order which, applications to the PITC for importation from China must be accompanied by a viable and confirmed Export Program of Philippine Products to China carried out by the improper himself or through a tie-up with a legitimate importer in an amount equivalent to the value of the importation from PROC being applied for, or, simply, at one is to one ratio. Desiring to make importations from China, private respondents Remington and Firestone, both domestic corporations, organized and existing under Philippine laws, individually applied for authority to import from China with the petitioner. They were granted such authority after satisfying the requirements for importers, and after they executed respective undertakings to balance their importations from PROC with corresponding export of Philippine products to China. Subsequently, for failing to comply with their undertakings to submit export credits equivalent to the value of their importations, further import applications were withheld by petitioner PITC from private respondents, such that the latter were both barred from importing goods from China. Consequently, Remington filed a Petition for Prohibition and Mandamus, with prayer for issuance of Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction against PITC. The court ruled that PITC’s authority to process and approve applications for imports from SOCPEC and to issue rules and regulations has already been repealed. adrianantazo.wordpress.com

Issue: Whether the Administrative Orders issued by the Petitioner valid without complying with Publication Requirements? adrianantazo.wordpress.com

Held: No, although the  Petitioner was legally empowered to issue Administrative Orders, as a valid exercise of a power ancillary to legislation. This does not imply however, that the subject Administrative Order is a valid exercise of such quasi-legislative power because the petitioner failed to  published the said order in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation. The questioned Administrative Order, legally, until it is published, is invalid within the context of Article 2 of Civil Code, which states that Laws shall take effect fifteen days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette (or in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines), unless it is otherwise provided. The fact that the amendments to Administrative Order were filed with, and published by the UP Law Center in the National Administrative Register, does not cure the defect related to the effectivity of the Administrative Order. The Administrative Order under consideration is one of those issuances which should be published for its effectivity, since its purpose is to enforce and implement an existing law pursuant to a valid delegation. adrianantazo.wordpress.com

One thought on “PITC v. Angeles 263 SCRA 421 (1996) G.R. No. 108461, October 21, 1996

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: