Case Summary (G.R. No. L-5278)
Charges and Initial Ruling
The charge against Suy Sui stated that he unlawfully sold refined sugar at P2, which was 20 centavos above the maximum ceiling price of P1.80 established by law. Following a trial, the Court of First Instance of Manila convicted Suy Sui, imposing a fine of P5,000, subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and a five-year prohibition from engaging in business. Additionally, the court recommended his immediate deportation. This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, prompting the current case to arrive before the Supreme Court on certiorari.
Legal Ambiguity Regarding Ceiling Prices
Suy Sui’s main contention on appeal revolves around the alleged ambiguity in the classification of refined sugar and its corresponding ceiling prices as laid out in Executive Order No. 331. He argued that the order established two different ceiling prices for the same product: P0.40 per kilo and P0.45 per kilo, leading to confusion. According to his calculations, using the higher price, a 10-pound bag would cost approximately P2.02, thereby making his sale (at P2) not in violation of the law.
Waiver of Objections
The respondent, however, argued that Suy Sui had waived the ambiguity objection by failing to raise it during the initial trial or in the Court of Appeals, as required by Section 10, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court. This section dictates that failure to file a motion to quash constitutes a waiver of all objections, barring a few exceptions related to the charging of an offense or jurisdictional issues. The respondent emphasized that the issue raised by Suy Sui ultimately claimed that the information filed did not charge an offense.
Review of Appellate Court's Responsibility
The discussion also touched on the appellate court's review responsibility. It was opined that the appellate court should take note of errors that affect the rights of the accused, even if not specifically assigned, as part of its duty to ensure justice. Citing previous cases, the Supreme Court noted that constitutional rights should not be overlooked, reinforcing that substantive errors warrant a reversal regardless of procedural
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-5278)
Case Background
- The petitioner, Suy Sui, was charged with violating Executive Order No. 331 in relation to Republic Act No. 509.
- The charge stemmed from an incident on July 17, 1950, in Manila, where Suy Sui allegedly sold a 10-pound bag of refined sugar for P2, which exceeded the maximum ceiling price of P1.80 established by law.
- The Court of First Instance of Manila found Suy Sui guilty and imposed a fine of P5,000, with the possibility of subsidiary imprisonment if he could not pay, and barred him from engaging in wholesale and retail business for five years, recommending deportation.
Appeal Process
- Following the conviction, Suy Sui appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court's ruling.
- The case was subsequently brought before the Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari.
Legal Issues Raised
- The petitioner argued that the classification of refined sugar into two groups in Executive Order No. 331 was ambiguous, leading to confusion regarding the applicable ceiling prices.
- Two ceiling prices were presented: P0.40 and P0.45 per kilo.
- If P0.45 was considered, the price for a 10-pound bag would be approximately P2.02, which is only two centavos more than the pr