Title
People vs. Gozo
Case
G.R. No. L-36409
Decision Date
Oct 26, 1973
Loreta Gozo constructed a house within the U.S. Naval Reservation in Olongapo without a permit, claiming reliance on advice. The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the ordinance, affirming Olongapo's jurisdiction and requiring Gozo to obtain a permit or demolish the structure.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 185814)

Factual Background

Loreta Gozo purchased a house and lot inside the U.S. Naval Reservation. Believing no permit was needed, she demolished the existing structure and erected a new dwelling without first obtaining a building permit from the Mayor of Olongapo City. On December 29, 1966, city inspectors and police apprehended carpenters working on her property, leading to an investigation and formal charge for violating Municipal Ordinance No. 14, which mandates a mayoral permit for construction, alteration, repair, or demolition of any building.

Procedural History

– City Court of Olongapo City: Found Gozo guilty; sentenced to one month’s imprisonment and costs.
– Court of First Instance of Zambales: On appeal, affirmed guilt but imposed a P200 fine, ordered demolition of the house unless a permit was obtained within thirty days.
– Court of Appeals: Noting constitutional questions raised regarding due process and jurisdiction over the naval reservation, certified the case to the Supreme Court.

Ordinance Validity and Municipal Power

The Supreme Court affirmed that chartered cities and municipalities possess the power to require building permits under their police power to promote the general welfare, public health, safety, morals, and order, as upheld since Switzer v. Municipality of Cebu (1911) and subsequent precedents. An ordinance may be constitutionally challenged only if its exercise infringes a specific right or is inherently oppressive or unreasonable.

Distinction from People v. Fajardo

In People v. Fajardo (1958), the ordinance’s application was deemed oppressive because the Municipal Mayor withheld permits arbitrarily, destroying appellants’ need for shelter. Here, by contrast, Gozo made no application for a permit and offered no evidence that the city would have arbitrarily denied her request. The ordinance is reasonably susceptible to an interpretation that affords fair administrative discretion, obviating any due process infirmity.

Sovereignty and Jurisdiction over U.S. Bases

Gozo’s argument that municipal administrative jurisdiction lapses within the U.S. Naval Reservation was rejected. Under the 1947 Bases Agreement, Philippine sovereignty remains intact; the United States enjoys preferential but not exclusive jurisdiction over offenses within the bases. Municipal powers derived from national law ext

...continue reading

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