Case Digest (G.R. No. L-23645)
Facts:
Benjamin P. Gomez v. Enrico Palomar, G.R. No. L-23645. October 29, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Castro, J., writing for the Court. The petition challenged the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 1635, as amended by Republic Act No. 2631, which required that, annually from August 19 to September 30, semi‑postal stamps bearing an additional five centavos for the Philippine Tuberculosis Society be affixed to mail; newspapers were exempted by the amendment. The respondent Postmaster General implemented the law by issuing Administrative Orders No. 3 (June 20, 1958), 7 (Aug. 9, 1958), 9 (Aug. 28, 1958) and 10 (July 15, 1960), with the concurrence of the Secretary of Public Works and Communications; those orders prescribed practical modes of collection (cash receipts in lieu of stamps for certain classes of mail), listed governmental exemptions, and directed disposition of un‑stamped mail.On September 15, 1963 the petitioner mailed a letter at the San Fernando, Pampanga post office that did not bear the semi‑postal anti‑TB stamp; the letter was returned to him. The petitioner filed a complaint for declaratory relief in the Court of First Instance of Pampanga, seeking a declaration that the statute and the implementing administrative orders were unconstitutional on equal protection and uniformity/equality of taxation grounds, among others. The trial court declared the statute and administrative orders unconstitutional and...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the remedy of declaratory relief properly invoked despite the petitioner’s having mailed a letter without the anti‑TB stamp prior to filing suit?
- Does Republic Act No. 1635, as amended by Republic Act No. 2631, and the implementing Administrative Orders violate the equal protection clause by singling out mail users and by exempting newspapers and certain government entities?
- Does the levy (the five‑centavo charge) fail the requirements of public purpose or the rule of uniformity and equality of taxation?
- Did the implementing Administrative Orders constitute an undue delegation of legislative po...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)