Title
Manila Electric Co. vs. City of Muntinlupa
Case
G.R. No. 198529
Decision Date
Feb 9, 2021
Meralco contested Muntinlupa's franchise tax ordinance, deemed ultra vires under RA 7160. SC ruled the ordinance void ab initio, unenforceable despite cityhood conversion.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 198529)

Facts:

  • Parties and Background
    • Manila Electric Company (Meralco) is a public utility corporation franchised under Republic Act No. 9209 to operate an electric distribution system in Metro Manila and adjacent provinces.
    • The Municipality of Muntinlupa was converted into the Highly Urbanized City of Muntinlupa by Republic Act No. 7926, effective March 1, 1995.
  • Municipal Ordinance and Tax Assessment
    • Municipal Ordinance No. 93-35 (MO 93-35), the Revenue Code of the Municipality of Muntinlupa, took effect on January 1, 1994 and, under Section 25, imposed a franchise tax of 50% of 1% of gross annual receipts on public utilities.
    • Section 56 of RA 7926 adopted all existing municipal ordinances of Muntinlupa as of March 1, 1995, to continue in force unless the new city council enacted otherwise.
  • Pre-Litigation Correspondence
    • On June 28, 1999, City Treasurer Nelia A. Barlis demanded Meralco’s payment of franchise taxes for 1992–1999 and requested certified statements of gross receipts.
    • Meralco sought deferment of document submission, challenged the municipality’s taxing power and noted a pending Supreme Court decision in Manila Electric Co. v. Province of Laguna.
  • Trial Court Proceedings
    • Meralco filed a Petition with Prayer for a Writ of Preliminary Injunction before the RTC of Pasig City, Branch 67, to annul Section 25 of MO 93-35 as ultra vires and enjoin the City from enforcing it or demanding documents.
    • In a September 19, 2003 Decision, the RTC declared Section 25 null and void ab initio for being beyond municipal powers under the Local Government Code and granted the injunction.
  • Court of Appeals Decision
    • The CA, in its January 31, 2011 Decision, agreed Section 25 was ultra vires as a municipal ordinance but held that Section 56 of RA 7926 cured the defect prospectively.
    • The CA ordered Meralco to submit its gross‐receipts statements and pay franchise taxes only from March 1, 1995 onward.
  • Petition for Review
    • Meralco elevated the case to the Supreme Court via Petition for Review on Certiorari, contesting whether an ultra vires ordinance can be cured by a city-conversion statute.

Issues:

  • Whether Section 25 of MO 93-35, enacted by a municipality, was ultra vires and void ab initio under the Local Government Code.
  • Whether Section 56 of RA 7926, adopting municipal ordinances upon city conversion, cured the legal infirmity of Section 25.
  • Whether Meralco’s obligation to pay franchise tax may be validly reckoned only from the cityhood effectivity date.
  • Whether a municipality ever had authority to impose a franchise tax, given Sections 142, 134, 137, and 151 of RA 7160 (Local Government Code).

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.