Title
University of the Philippines vs. Ayson
Case
G.R. No. 88386
Decision Date
Aug 17, 1989
UP Board of Regents phased out UPCBHS due to unmet purposes and financial issues; SC upheld decision as valid exercise of academic freedom, ruling courts cannot interfere.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 88386)

Facts:

  • Parties and procedural posture
  • The petitioners were The University of the Philippines, the UP Board of Regents, and Dean Patricio Lazaro.
  • The respondents were Hon. Judge Ruben Ayson, Br. VI, RTC-Baguio City, and the UP College Baguio High School Foundation, Inc., represented by its president and chairman of the board, Salvador Valdez, Jr.
  • The petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with urgent prayer for a temporary restraining order to annul two orders issued by the respondent judge dated May 25, 1989 and June 14, 1989 in Civil Case No. 1748-R.
  • The underlying civil case was entitled "UP College Baguio High School Foundation, Inc., et al., v. The University of the Philippines, et al., " and sought injunction with preliminary preventive and mandatory injunction with prayer for a temporary restraining order.
  • On June 27, 1989, the Supreme Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining implementation of the assailed orders.
  • Establishment and structural setup of the institution
  • In 1972, the UP Board of Regents approved the establishment of UP College Baguio High School (UPCBHS) as an integral part of the graduate program in education.
  • The purpose of UPCBHS included serving as a laboratory and demonstration school for prospective teachers.
  • The approval in 1972 contained conditionalities:
    • UPCBHS must be self-supporting.
    • UPCBHS must not entail any subsidy from the budget of UP.
  • In 1978, the Board of Regents provided for a Division of Education in UP College Baguio (UPCB) composed of:
    • a Department of Professional Education, and
    • a High School Department.
  • The Department of Professional Education was never organized, although the High School Department operated continuously.
  • Review and recommendations leading to phase-out
  • In 1981, the Committee to Review Academic Program recommended the abolition of UPCBHS.
  • In 1985, the Program Review Committee asked UPCB to look into the viability of its secondary education program due to:
    • limited financial resources, and
    • UPCBHS failed to serve as a laboratory school for teacher training because UPCB does not offer programs in Education.
  • Various discussions occurred regarding the proposed phase-out of UPCBHS.
  • Board of Regents decision to phase out and related directive
  • On January 30, 1989, the UP Board of Regents approved the proposed phase-out of UPCBHS.
  • The phase-out was grounded on findings that included:
    • only an insignificant number of UPCBHS graduates qualified for admission and actually enrolled in UPC (UP at Baguio), and
    • UPCBHS was not serving as a laboratory or demonstration school for prospective teachers, and
    • UPCBHS was not a self-supporting unit.
  • After the Board’s approval, Dean Patricio Lazaro issued a memorandum directing the principal of UPCBHS not to accept new incoming high school freshmen for school year 1989-1990.
  • Institution of civil action and assailed orders
  • On May 25, 1989, UP College Baguio High School Foundation, Inc. filed with the Regional Trial Court of Baguio, Br. VI, presided by Judge Ruben Ayson, a petition for injunction with preliminary preventive and mandatory injunction, with prayer for a temporary restraining order.
  • The petition was docketed as Civil Case No. 1748-R.
  • The petition alleged, among others, that the UP Board of Regents decision to phase out UPCBHS was without legal basis and unconstitutional.
  • After filing, respondent judge issued the assailed Orders:
    • restraining petitioners from implementing the Board’s decision to phase out UPCBHS, and
    • restraining petitioners from implementing Dean Lazaro’s memorandum.
  • Petitioners moved to dismiss...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Whether the decision to phase out UPCBHS could be sustained under the constitutional guarantee of academic freedom for institutions of higher learning
  • Whether the UP, as an institution of higher learning, enjoyed academic freedom that permitted phase-out or abolition of a secondary unit not meeting its institutional purposes and conditions.
  • Whether free public secondary education under the Constitution and Rep. Act No. 6655 compelled UP to continue operating UPCBHS
  • Whether secondary public education is demandable against an institution of higher learning such as UP.
  • Whether Rep. Act No. 6655, which includes state colleges and universities offering secondary courses, prevented UP from unilaterally withdrawing from o...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (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.