Case Summary (G.R. No. L-15471)
Ordinance No. 092-2000 and Its Special Provisions
Ordinance No. 092-2000 regulates outdoor advertising in Davao City by prescribing:
- Section 7: setbacks for billboards in residential zones and highway rights-of-way
- Section 8: “regulated areas” within 200 m of certain bridges to protect scenic views
- Section 37: fees for sign permits based on display surface and structure
- Section 45: removal of illegal or non-compliant outdoor advertising after notice
Demands for Compliance and Demolition Orders
Beginning 2003, the City Engineer issued notices to outdoor advertisers, including APM, to secure or renew sign permits under the ordinance. In February and March 2006, orders of demolition demanded voluntary dismantling within three days, with summary removal set for March 30, 2006.
RTC Proceedings and Injunction
On March 28, 2006, APM petitioned the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for injunction and declaration of nullity of the ordinance and demolition order. On April 17, 2006, the RTC granted a writ of preliminary injunction restraining enforcement of the March 2006 demolition order pending trial.
Administrative Orders and Memorandum Circular
In response to typhoon damage in Metro Manila (September 2006), the President issued AO 160 and 160-A directing nationwide inspection and abatement of hazardous billboards. The DPWH, via NBCDO Memorandum Circular No. 3, halted local processing of billboard permits, prompting Davao City to suspend pending applications.
Intervention of DABASA and RTC Decision
DABASA intervened on behalf of its members. On January 19, 2009, the RTC declared Sections 7, 8, and 41 unconstitutional and made the preliminary injunction permanent. On April 1, 2009, the RTC amended its order to void Sections 7, 8, and 37, delete Section 41, and permanently enjoin enforcement.
Court of Appeals Ruling
The Court of Appeals denied the City’s appeal in its June 14, 2011 Decision (amended October 13, 2011). It declared Sections 7, 8, 37, and 45 of the ordinance null and void for inconsistency with the National Building Code, while reinstating deleted Section 41.
Supreme Court Ruling – Presumption of Validity and Police Power
The Supreme Court granted the petition, holding that:
- An ordinance is presumed constitutional absent clear breach of law or public policy.
- Davao City’s charter expressly delegated police power to regulate billboards, independent of the National Building Code.
- Consistency with the National Building Code is irrelevant when the local charter grants specific regulatory authority.
Supreme Court Ruling – Validity of Ordinance No. 092-2000
The Court found the ordinance a lawful exercise of police power because it:
- Addresses a public interest (safety, aesthetics, o
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-15471)
Background and Parties
- Petitioners: OIC City Engineer Leoncio Evasco, Jr. and City Administrator Wendel Avisado, acting for Davao City
- Respondent: Alex P. MontaAez, owner of Ad & Promo Management (APM)
- Respondent-Intervenor: Davao Billboard and Signmakers Association, Inc. (DABASA), representing outdoor-advertising businesses
Enactment and Objectives of Ordinance No. 092-2000
- Approved August 8, 2000 by the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Davao City
- Titled “An Ordinance Regulating the Construction, Repair, Renovation, Erection, Installation and Maintenance of Outdoor Advertising Materials and For Related Purposes”
- Declared policy to:
- Safeguard life and property by prescribing standards for signs and structures
- Keep city premises clean, orderly, decent and in good taste
- Preserve harmonious aesthetic relationships between signs and surroundings
Provisions Challenged in the Ordinance
- Section 7 (Billboard setbacks and prohibited zones)
- No billboards in residential zones
- 150-meter unobstructed line of sight between adjacent billboards
- Minimum 10-meter setback from property lines abutting road right-of-way
- Section 8 (Regulated areas)
- 200-meter buffer zones around Generoso Bridges I & II, Bolton Bridges I & II, Lasang Bridge to protect views of Davao River, Mt. Apo, city skyline, Samal Island
- Section 37 (Fees for sign permits)
- Display surface fees by type and area (P150 to P15 per square meter; P5 per poster)
- Structure support fees (P100 up to 4 sq. m.; P50 per additional sq. m.)
- Renewal fees and additional electrical permit fees
- Section 45 (Removal of illegal materials)
- Removal at owner’s expense for unpermitted signs, unmarked permits, expired permits or structural violations
- Sixty-day cure period from notice before summary removal
Administrative Enforcement Actions
- As early as 2003, City Engineer issued notices to APM and others to secure or renew sign permits
- February–March 2006: demolition orders requiring voluntary dismantling within three days or summary removal scheduled March 30, 2006
- September 2006: President Arroyo’s AO No. 160 and 160-A directed DPWH to inspect and abate hazardous or unlawful billboards nationwide
- NBCDO Memorandum Circular No. 3 (October 6, 2006) directed local building officials to cease permit issuance and renewals for bi