Title
JMM Promotion and Management, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 120095
Decision Date
Aug 5, 1996
Government's ARB requirement for deploying female entertainers upheld as valid police power to prevent exploitation, no constitutional rights violated.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 120095)

Facts:

  • Parties and Context
    • Petitioners: JMM Promotion and Management, Inc. and Kary International, Inc. (“performing artist agencies”).
    • Respondents: Court of Appeals; Ma. Nieves Confessor and Jose Brillantes (Secretaries of Labor and Employment); Felicisimo Joson (POEA Administrator).
  • Regulatory Background and Procedural History
    • 1991–1994 Regulatory Scheme
      • After the 1991 death of entertainer Maricris Sioson, former President Aquino imposed a total ban on deployment of performing artists abroad, later lifted.
      • Department Order No. 28 (Aug. 16, 1993) created the Entertainment Industry Advisory Council (EIAC).
      • Department Order No. 3 (Jan. 6, 1994) and subsequent DOLE Orders 3-A, 3-B, 3-E, and 3-F instituted a regime of training, testing, certification, and the issuance of an Artist Record Book (ARB) as a prerequisite to processing POEA contracts.
    • Litigation and Lower Court Disposition
      • FETMOP filed Civil Case No. 95-72750 on Jan. 27, 1995, challenging the DOLE orders as violative of constitutional rights (due process, right to travel, contract impairment).
      • JMM and Kary intervened; trial court denied preliminary injunction and dismissed the complaint (Feb. 21, 1995).
      • Court of Appeals (CA G.R. SP No. 36713) affirmed the trial court, upholding the orders as valid exercises of the police power.

Issues:

  • Whether the ARB requirement and related DOLE orders exceed the State’s police power or are arbitrary and unreasonable, thereby violating the due process clause.
  • Whether accredited performing artists acquired a property right under the old scheme, making re-accreditation via the ARB requirement an unconstitutional deprivation of property without due process.
  • Whether the DOLE orders impermissibly impair existing contracts (non-impairment clause) or constitute class legislation in violation of the equal protection clause.

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.