CONSTITUTION Cases - Deans CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 Circle 2016 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS Digested by DC 2016 Members Editors Tricia Lacuesta Lorenzo Luigi

CONSTITUTION Cases - Deans CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 Circle 2016...

This preview shows page 1 - 4 out of 180 pages.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 1 | P a g e Dean’s Circle 2016 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS Digested by: DC 2016 Members Editors: Tricia Lacuesta Lorenzo Luigi Gayya Cristopher Reyes Macky Siazon Janine Arenas Ninna Bonsol Lloyd Javier CONSTITUT IONAL LAW 1 FIRST SEM CASES
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 Table of Contents PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS2 THE STATE 3 STATE IMMUNITY 6 SEPARATION OF POWERS AND CHECKS AND BALANCES 15 DELEGATION OF POWERS 24 STATE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES 30 LEGISLATURE 42 PRESIDENCY74 JUDICIARY 108 CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS 132 CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION 138 COMMISSION ON ELECLTIONS 147 COMMISSION ON AUDIT 154 ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS159 AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS 181 2 | P a g e CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS MANILA PRINCE HOTEL vs. GSIS, MANILA HOTEL CORPORATION, COMMITTEE ON PRIVATIZATION, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNMENT CORPORATE COUNSEL G.R. No. 122156, February 3, 1997, BELLOSILLO, J. Adhering to the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, the subject constitutional provision is, as it should be, impliedly written in the bidding rules issued by respondent GSIS, lest the bidding rules be nullified for being violative of the Constitution. Facts: GSIS, pursuant to the privatization program of the Philippine Government decided to sell through public bidding issued and outstanding shares of respondent Manila Hotel Corporation (MHC). Two bidders participated: Manila Prince Hotel Corporation, a Filipino corporation, which offered to buy the shares at P41.58 per share, and Renong Berhad, a Malaysian firm, which bid for the same number of shares at P44.00 per share. Pending the declaration of Renong Berhard as the winning bidder/strategic partner and the execution of the necessary contracts, Manila Prince matched the bid price of P44.00 per share. Perhaps apprehensive that GSIS has disregarded the tender of the matching bid, Manila Prince came to the Supreme Court on prohibition and mandamus. Issue: Whether GSIS is mandated to abide the dictates of the Constitution on National Economy and Patrimony. Ruling: YES. It should be stressed that while the Malaysian firm offered the higher bid it is not yet the winning bidder. The bidding rules expressly provide that the highest bidder shall only be declared the winning bidder after it has negotiated and executed the necessary contracts, and secured the requisite approvals. Since the Filipino First Policy provision of the Constitution bestows preference on qualified Filipinos the mere tending of the highest bid is not an assurance that the highest bidder will be declared the winning bidder. Resultantly, respondents are not bound to make the award yet, nor are they under obligation to enter into one with the highest bidder. For in choosing the awardee, respondents are mandated to abide by the dictates of the 1987 Constitution the provisions of which are presumed to be known to all the bidders and other interested parties.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture