Case Digest (Resolution)
Facts:
In the Matter of the Petitions for Admission to the Bar of Unsuccessful Candidates of 1946 to 1953; Albino Cunanan et al., G.R. not specified, March 18, 1954, the Supreme Court En Banc, Diokno, J., writing for the Court.The petitioners (unsuccessful bar candidates from 1946–1953, led by Albino Cunanan et al.) moved for admission to the Philippine Bar relying on Republic Act No. 972 (enacted June 21, 1953 without the President’s signature), which reduced the passing general average for specified postwar bar examinations and contained rules on treating subject grades for future computations. Many unsuccessful postwar candidates — some whose motions for revision were pending, others who had not sought reconsideration — invoked R.A. No. 972 to secure admission; a larger universe of candidates stood to benefit if the law were applied broadly.
Antecedent events: under Rule 127, sec. 14, Rules of Court, a 75% general average (with no subject below 50%) was required to pass; however, this Court in various postwar years admitted candidates with lower averages (72% in 1946, 69% in 1947, 70% in 1948, 74% in 1949), then effectively restored 75% from 1950. Congress first passed Senate Bill No. 12 (1951) to reduce the passing average retroactively to 70%, which the President vetoed after this Court submitted adverse comments. Congress then passed a revised bill (Bill No. 371), which the President allowed to lapse into law as R.A. No. 972 on June 21, 1953.
The Court first reviewed motions for reconsideration of examination papers and found no ground to alter grades; it then consolidated and set for hearing the petitions that invoked R.A. No. 972 and limited the hearing to the constitutionality of the Act. After extensive briefing and oral argument (including memoranda and amicus participation by many bar members and the Solicitor General), the Court deliberated and voted. The Court’s En Banc resolution, Diokno, J., announced the Court’s decision on March 18, 1954: it declared portions of R.A. ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does Republic Act No. 972, insofar as it retroactively fixes passing averages and directs admission of specified unsuccessful bar candidates, unconstitutionally usurp the judicial power to admit attorneys and thereby exceed Congress’s rule-making authority under the Constitution?
- Is Republic Act No. 972 void as arbitrary class legislation and for violating constitutional limits on legislation (including the title requirement and retroactivity principles)?
- If parts of R.A. No. 972 are invalid, what is the proper disposition of the pe...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)