Title
Balacuit vs. Court of 1st Instance of Agusan del Norte and Butuan City, Branch II
Case
G.R. No. L-38429
Decision Date
Jun 30, 1988
Theaters in Butuan City challenged a local ordinance requiring discounted admission for children, arguing it exceeded municipal authority and violated due process. The Supreme Court ruled the ordinance unconstitutional, deeming it an invalid exercise of police power and an undue interference with private business rights.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 150234)

Facts:

  • Ordinance No. 640
    • Passed by the Municipal Board of the City of Butuan on April 21, 1969.
    • Prohibits ticket sellers from requiring children aged 7–12 to pay full adult admission fare, mandating a half-fare instead.
    • Prescribes penalties for violation: fine ₱200–₱600 or imprisonment 2–6 months, or both; manager or agent liable if violator is corporation.
    • Takes effect upon approval.
  • Parties and Procedural History
    • Petitioners: Carlos Balacuit, Lamberto Tan, Sergio Yu Carcel—managers of Maya, Dalisay, Crown, and Diamond Theaters.
    • June 30, 1969 – Petitioners file Special Civil Case No. 237 in the CFI of Agusan del Norte and Butuan City, seeking to declare Ordinance 640 void and unenforceable.
    • July 14, 1969 – Trial court issues temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement.
    • January 30, 1973 – Parties stipulate facts.
    • June 4, 1973 – Trial court upholds ordinance as constitutional, dissolves TRO, constrains fine to ₱200, and dismisses complaint with costs.
    • November 10, 1973 – Trial court denies petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
    • Thereafter – Petitioners elevate case to the Supreme Court via petition for review.

Issues:

  • Whether Ordinance No. 640 is ultra vires under City of Butuan Charter (R.A. 523, Sec. 15[n]) for fixing admission prices rather than imposing license fees.
  • Whether the Municipal Board may invoke its general welfare clause (R.A. 523, Sec. 15[nn]) or delegated police power to regulate ticket prices for children.
  • Whether the ordinance violates constitutional due process and property-right guarantees by unduly restraining trade and contract.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.