Title
Aguilar vs. Pasay Transportation Co., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 41205
Decision Date
Aug 29, 1934
A transportation certificate's restriction was removed without notice, prompting a competitor's challenge. The Supreme Court ruled affected parties must be notified and heard, ensuring due process and preventing unfair competition.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 238477)

Description of the Certificate and Transactions

The Public Service Commission originally issued a certificate of public convenience to Tomas Mata in 1922, allowing him to operate a passenger truck service between Manila and Salinas, Cavite. This certificate was sold to Saturnino Aguilar in 1924, with necessary approvals from the Public Service Commission. The certificate included a provision that prohibited Aguilar's truck from stopping near certain Manila Railroad Company stations to pick up passengers or cargo while allowing inspections. Aguilar's ownership of the certificate saw minor modifications concerning schedule changes until he sold the operation to the Manila Railroad Company in 1933.

Hearing and Opposition

Following the sale to the Manila Railroad Company, an application for approval was submitted to the Public Service Commission, which was set for a hearing. Despite some opposition from the Toledo Transportation Company, which was later withdrawn, the Pasay Transportation Company also engaged in the proceedings indirectly. They expressed concerns through their attorney but did not formally oppose the application initially.

Public Service Commission's Approval

The Public Service Commission eventually approved the sale, but notably eliminated the restrictive condition from Aguilar’s certificate that prevented operation near certain stations. Once the Pasay Transportation Company detected that the Manila Railroad Company was not adhering to the operational parameters established under Aguilar’s original certificate, they filed a motion for a new hearing and reconsideration of the decision that had removed those restrictions.

Denial of Motion for Rehearing

On January 12, 1934, the Public Service Commission denied the Pasay Transportation Company's motion for reconsideration without allowing them to present evidence. This denial prompted the Pasay Transportation Company to appeal the decision on January 30, 1934, asserting that the process had deprived them of their right to due process and an opportunity to be heard.

Review and Legal Framework

The Manila Railroad Company claimed the appeal was untimely, citing Section 35 of Act No. 3108, which governs the review of orders from the Commission. However, the court established that the provisions regarding timely appeals did not apply to the Pasay Transportation Company since they were not an original party to the decision, thus justifying their request for a hearing based on their interest as an affected operator.

Court's Conclusion on Due Process

The court determined that the Public Service Commission erred in denying the Pasay Transportation Company the opportunity to present evidence related to their reconsideration motion. The decision underscored t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.