251637205-Envi-Law-Case-Digests.docx - CASE DIGEST IN...

CASE DIGEST IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CASES Sharla Louisse
A. Castillo
1 | P a g e
San Sebastian College-Recoletos College of Law
Environmental Law
Cases
Case Digests
Sharla Louisse A. Castillo
Schedule: NEL, Friday, 5 to 7 PM
Submitted to: Atty. Caguiat

CASE DIGEST IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CASES Sharla Louisse
A. Castillo
Oposa v Factoran 224 SCRA 792
Facts: A taxpayer’s class suit was initiated by the Philippine Ecological Network, Inc.
(PENI) together with the minors Juan Antonio Oposa et al and their parents. All were
duly represented. They claimed that as taxpayers they have the right to the full
benefit, use and enjoyment of the natural resources of the country’s rainforests.
They prayed that a judgment be rendered ordering Secretary Fulgencio Factoran, Jr,
his agents, representatives, and other persons acting in his behalf to cancel all
existing timber license agreements in the country and cease and desist from
receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or approving new timber license
agreements, Factoran being the secretary of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR).
Issue: Whether or not petitioners have a cause of action?
Held: Yes, petitioners have a cause of action. The case at bar is of common interest
to all Filipinos. The right to a balanced and healthy ecology carries with it the
correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment. The said right implies
the judicious management of the country’s forests. This right is also the mandate of
the government through DENR. A denial or violation of that right by the other who
has the correlative duty or obligation to respect or protect the same gives rise to a
cause of action. All licenses may thus be revoked or rescinded by executive action.
Merida vs People of the Philippines 554 SCRA 366
Facts: The government hailed Petitioner before the Regional Trial Court of Romblon,
Romblon, Branch 81 (trial court) with violation of Section 68 of PD 705, as amended,
for "cut[ting], gather[ing], collect[ing] and remov[ing]" a lone narra tree inside a
private land in Mayod, Ipil, Magdiwang, Romblon (Mayod Property) over which
private complainant Oscar M. Tansiongco (Tansiongco) claims ownership.
The RTC handed judgment rapidly. In its Decision dated 24 November 2000, the trial
court found petitioner guilty as charged, sentenced him to fourteen (14) years, eight
(8) months and one (1) day to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal and ordered
the seized lumber forfeited in Tansiongco's favor.[12] The trial court dismissed
petitioner's defense of denial in view of his repeated extrajudicial admissions that
he cut the narra tree in the Mayod Property with Calix's permission. With this finding
and petitioner's lack of DENR permit to cut the tree, the trial court held petitioner
liable for violation of Section 68 of PD 705, as amended.