Case Digest (G.R. No. 195003) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In G.R. No. 195003, decided on June 7, 2017 under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the City of Batangas, through then City Mayor Severina Vilma Abaya, filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 challenging the validity of City Ordinance No. 3, series of 2001. The ordinance, enacted by the Sangguniang Panlungsod and approved on June 7, 2001, required all heavy industries along Batangas Bay—including the Philippine Shell Petroleum Corporation’s Tabangao Refinery and Shell Philippines Exploration B.V. under Service Contract No. 38—to construct desalination plants and use seawater for cooling, forbidding the exploitation of underground freshwater. Heavy industries had a five-year grace period to comply. In May 2006, PSPC and intervenor SPEX sought a declaration of nullity in RTC–Batangas City, Branch 84 (SP Civil Cases Nos. 7924–7926), alleging the ordinance contravened the Water Code, encroached on the National Water Resources Board’s (NWRB) regulatory power, lacked f Case Digest (G.R. No. 195003) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner City of Batangas is an LGU created by RA 5495, with police power delegated under LGC Sec. 16. Its legislative body is the Sangguniang Panlungsod.
- Respondents Philippine Shell Petroleum Corporation (PSPC) and Shell Philippines Exploration B.V. (SPEX):
- PSPC operates the Tabangao Refinery in Batangas City.
- SPEX, under DOE Service Contract No. 38, discovered Malampaya natural gas and built a 504-km offshore pipeline to PSPC’s refinery.
- Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001 (Assailed Ordinance)
- Requires heavy industries along Batangas Bay to install desalination plants (use seawater for cooling) and prohibits use of underground freshwater.
- Grace period of five years from June 7, 2001; mayor may grant exemptions subject to environmental, economic, and procedural conditions.
- Penal clauses: 6–12 months imprisonment, P5,000 fine; authority to issue cease-and-desist orders; administrative fine of P5,000/day.
- Compliance deadline: May 28, 2006.
- Proceedings Below
- May 2006: PSPC filed Petition for Declaration of Nullity (SP Civil Case No. 7924); SPEX intervened; JG Summit and First Gas filed similar cases (Nos. 7925–7926); all consolidated before RTC Branch 84.
- June 29, 2007: RTC declared the ordinance invalid for:
- Want of necessity and factual basis (hydrogeological study showed groundwater recharge exceeds extraction; no saltwater intrusion).
- Encroachment on National Water Resources Board (NWRB) authority under the Water Code.
- Procedural defects (no proper hearings, publication, or referral to Sangguniang Panlalawigan).
- Due process violation (Section 8’s cease-and-desist power without prior notice and hearing).
- CA Fourth Division (May 28, 2009) and CA Tenth Division (May 25, 2010; denial of reconsideration Dec 30, 2010) affirmed the RTC decisions. Batangas City sought certiorari review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
Issues:
- Validity of City Ordinance No. 3, s. 2001
- Whether the ordinance is an ultra vires exercise of police power in contravention of the Water Code and usurping NWRB’s exclusive authority over water resources.
- Whether the ordinance is substantively and procedurally valid—specifically, whether it rests on factual necessity, complied with public hearing and publication requirements, was properly referred to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, and respected due process.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)