Case Digest (G.R. No. 159796) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In G.R. No. 159796, decided July 17, 2007 under the 1987 Constitution, petitioners Romeo P. Gerochi, Katulong ng Bayan (KB) and Environmentalist Consumers Network, Inc. (ECN) assailed Section 34 of Republic Act 9136 (the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 or EPIRA) and Rule 18 of its Implementing Rules and Regulations, which impose the Universal Charge on all electricity end-users. The Universal Charge funds stranded debts and contract costs of the National Power Corporation (NPC), missionary electrification, environmental watershed rehabilitation, tax equalization for renewable energy and cross-subsidies. NPC-Strategic Power Utilities Group (SPUG) and NPC separately filed petitions with the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) to draw Universal Charge shares for missionary electrification and environmental funds, leading to ERC Orders in 2002 and 2003. Thereafter, Panay Electric Company, Inc. billed petitioner Gerochi and others for the Universal Charge from July 2003 onw Case Digest (G.R. No. 159796) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Legislative and Regulatory Framework
- Republic Act No. 9136 (Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 or EPIRA) was enacted on June 8, 2001 and took effect on June 26, 2001. Section 34 mandates a non-bypassable Universal Charge on all electricity end-users for:
- Recovery of stranded debts and stranded contract costs of NPC and distribution utilities;
- Missionary electrification;
- Equalization of taxes and royalties on indigenous/renewable vs. imported energy;
- An environmental charge of ₱0.0025/kWh for watershed rehabilitation;
- Cross-subsidies for up to three years.
- IRR Rule 18, approved February 27, 2002, implements Section 34, directing distribution utilities and TRANSCO to collect the charge and remit proceeds to PSALM, which must establish separate Special Trust Funds (STFs) for each purpose.
- ERC Proceedings and Consumer Billing
- April 5, 2002: NPC-SPUG filed ERC Case No. 2002-165 to avail its missionary electrification share of the Universal Charge.
- May 7, 2002: NPC filed ERC Case No. 2002-194 seeking approval to withdraw ₱119,488,847.59 from the STF for watershed rehabilitation.
- December 20, 2002: ERC Order provisionally approved ₱0.0168/kWh for NPC-SPUG’s missionary electrification share.
- June 26, 2003: ERC Decision increased the missionary electrification charge to ₱0.0373/kWh, effective June–July 2003.
- October 7, 2003: ERC granted NPC-SPUG’s motion for reconsideration, modifying reporting requirements.
- April 2, 2003: ERC authorized NPC to withdraw up to ₱70 million from the STF for environmental fund purposes.
- July 2003: PECO began charging the Universal Charge to petitioner Gerochi and other end-users.
- September 15, 2003: Petitioners filed a “Complaint” in the Supreme Court seeking:
- Declaration that Section 34 of EPIRA and Rule 18 of its IRR are unconstitutional;
- Refund of collected charges;
- Issuance of a preliminary injunction or TRO to halt collection.
Issues:
- Whether the Universal Charge under Section 34 of the EPIRA is a tax or an exaction under the State’s police power.
- Whether Section 34 and Rule 18 of the IRR unduly delegate legislative power to the ERC in violation of the Constitution.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)