Title
Supreme Court
Ilocos Norte Electric Cooperative, Inc. vs. Energy Regulatory Commission
Case
G.R. No. 246940
Decision Date
Sep 15, 2021
INEC sought ERC approval for over/under-recoveries from 2004-2010; ERC ordered a refund. CA and SC upheld ERC’s decision, ruling no due process violation and affirming computations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 246940)

Applicable Law

The Energy Regulatory Commission was established under Republic Act No. 9136, also known as the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA). This legislation provides a comprehensive framework for the restructuring of the Philippine electric power industry, empowering the ERC to regulate and oversee the sector, ensuring competitive practices and reasonable electricity pricing.

Procedural Background

INEC filed a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court to contest the Decision dated November 15, 2018, and the Resolution dated May 3, 2019, from the Court of Appeals (CA). These rulings confirmed the ERC’s decisions from August 12, 2013, and May 30, 2017, which mandated INEC to refund a total of Php 394,911,640.39 to its customers due to over-recoveries in its billing practices.

Findings of the Energy Regulatory Commission

The ERC's initial decision dated August 12, 2013, detailed the various computations that led to a total over-recovery amounting to Php 479,784,177.48. The ERC approved INEC’s application but modified the amounts to be refunded across several cost components, detailing how much INEC needed to pay starting from the next billing cycle. Following a Motion for Reconsideration, the ERC partially granted INEC’s request, adjusting the refund period from 36 months to 48 months while upholding the fundamental computations of over and under-recoveries.

Court of Appeals' Rulings

The CA reviewed INEC's petition against the ERC's computations and reaffirmed the ERC’s decisions. It highlighted that the retroactive application of ERC Resolution 16-09 did not infringe upon any vested rights of INEC. The CA concluded that the ERC had exercised its regulatory powers appropriately, ensuring compliance with the overarching goal of fairness in electricity pricing as mandated under EPIRA.

Legal Issues Presented

INEC raised several arguments in its petition including alleged errors regarding:

  1. ERC’s failure to verify generation and system loss rates.
  2. Violation of substantive due process due to retroactive application of ERC Resolution 16-09.
  3. Denial of procedural due process for lack of data disclosures from ERC.
  4. Errors in the recomputation of over-recoveries.

Court’s Analysis and Determination

The Supreme Court determined that the petition lacked merit. It affirmed that INEC failed to establish the material dates necessary to substantiate claims of ERC’s failure to verify the rates. Furthermore, the Court ruled against the assertion of retroactive application causing a deprivation of property rights. It examined that the ERC had not imposed new obligations; rather, it mere

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.