Title
Valencia vs. City of Dumaguete
Case
G.R. No. L-17799
Decision Date
Aug 31, 1962
Residents sued Dumaguete City and movie operators over illegal surcharges under a void ordinance; case dismissed as improper class suit.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-17799)

Allegations and Claims

The plaintiffs contended that the surcharges collected were illegal due to the purported lack of authority of the City of Dumaguete to enact such an ordinance. They asserted that approximately 30,000 individuals shared a common interest in the case, justifying the representation of a limited number of plaintiffs. The defendants had collected substantial amounts, totaling P59,433.54 from three cinemas and P15,000.58 from Gets Theater, yet had not refunded any overcharges to the moviegoers.

Legal Proceedings and Motions

Following the filing of the complaint on June 6, 1959, the City of Dumaguete moved for a bill of particulars, seeking specific details about the claims, including the amounts sought by each plaintiff and the individual circumstances of their ticket purchases. Meanwhile, the defendants denied liability and contested the appropriateness of the class suit. The plaintiffs opposed the defendants’ requests, arguing the impracticality of detailing individual claims given the number of affected parties.

Court Orders and Compliance

On July 14, 1959, the lower court ordered the plaintiffs to comply with the motion for a bill of particulars. Subsequently, on July 31, 1959, the plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint reaffirming the illegality of the ordinance and emphasizing that defendants had ceased collection due to an order from the Secretary of Finance. The amended complaint, however, did not adequately address the claims of each individual party, leading to questions about the validity of a class suit.

Legal Implications and Findings

The court found that the amended complaint rendered the original matter of the ordinance's validity moot. The case focused primarily on recovering the surcharges. It was determined that each plaintiff claimed exclusive rights to the amounts paid individually, rather than ha

...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.