Evasco vs. Montanez

EVASCO vs. MONTANEZ (TRIXIE) (DABASA) to intervene through a civil case on behalf of its members.
February 21, 2018 | Leonardo-De Castro, J. | Police Power 9. RTC: Granted. Ordinance was void and unconstitutional and contrary to
Presidential Decree No. 1096 (National Building Code of the Philippines).
PETITIONERS: HON. LEONCIO EVASCO, JR., in his capacity as Officer- 10. CA: Modified the decision of the lower court (only reinstated Section 41).
in-Command City Engineer of Davao City and HON. WENDEL AVISADO, in ISSUE: W/N RTC & CA erred in declaring Sections 7, 8, 37 and 45 unconstitutional
his capacity as the City Administrator of Davao City and null and void for being inconsistent with the National Building Code – YES.
RESPONDENTS: ALEX P. MONTANEZ, doing business under the name and
style APM or AD AND PROMO MANAGEMENTS RULING: Wherefore, in view of all the foregoing, the instant petition is
GRANTED. The Decision and Amended Decision of the Court of Appeals are
SUMMARY: Sangguiang Panlungsod issued an ordinance related to hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
billboards. City government asked the respondents to take down their billboards
for being in violation of the ordinance. RTC and CA declared the ordinance RATIO:
unconstitutional. SC reversed the decision and upheld the validity of the 1. Ordinance which regulates the construction and installation of building and
ordinance as the power to regulate billboards was validly delegated to the local other structures within Davao City is an exercise of police power.
government units and the issuance of the ordinance was a valid exercise of 2. While police power is lodged primarily in legislation, Congress may
police power. delegate this power to local government units. Once delegated, the agents
can exercise only such legislative powers as are conferred on them by the
DOCTRINE: Sangguiang Panlungsod was expressly granted power to regulate national lawmaking body (MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association).
billboard structures within its territorial limits by Congress through the Davao 3. Republic Act No. 4354 (Davao City Charter) vested the local Sangguniang
City Charter. Issuing Ordinance No. 092-2000 was a valid exercise of police Panlungsod with the legislative power to regulate, prohibit, and fix license
power. fees for the display, construction, and maintenance of billboards and similar
structures. Congress expressly granted power to regulate billboard
FACTS: structures within its territorial jurisdiction with the aforementioned
1. August 8, 2000: Sangguniang Panlungsod in Davao approved “An law.
Ordinance Regulating the Construction, Repair, Renovation, Erection, 4. The power to regulate billboards within its territorial jurisdiction has been
Installation and Maintenance of Outdoor Advertising Materials and for delegated by Congress to the Sangguniang Panlungsod via the Davao City
Related Purposes”. Charter. This direct and specific grant takes precedence over requirements
2. 2003: City Engineer started sending notices of illegal construction to set forth in another law of general application thus the city government does
various outdoor advertising businesses, including Ad & Promo not need to refer to the procedures laid down in the National Building Code
Management (APM), owned by the respondent, Alex P. Montanez. City to exercise this power and the consistency of Ordinance No. 092-2000 to
Engineer reminded them to secure permits and apply for renewals for each the National Building Code is irrelevant to its validity.
of their billboard structures. 5. Even if the National Building Code imposes minimum requirements as to
3. March 17, 2006: City Engineer issued orders of demolition and directed the construction and regulation of billboards, the city government may
businesses to voluntarily dismantle their billboards within three days from impose stricter limitations because its police power to do so originates.
the receipt. Otherwise, the city government shall remove the structures. City 6. Valid of Exercise of Police Power First, it has a lawful subject such that the
government set the summary removal on March 20, 2006 at 8:30am. interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular
4. March 17, 2006: APM filed for an injunction and temporary restraining class, require its exercise. Second, it uses a lawful method such that its
order. implementing measures must be reasonably necessary to accomplish the
5. RTC: Granted the application and issued a writ of preliminary injunction. purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.
6. October 4, 2006: President Arroyo issued Administrative Order No. 160 First: Ordinance seeks to regulate all signs and sign structures based
and directed nationwide inspections, evaluations and assessments of on prescribed standards as to its location, design, size, quality of
billboards at the wake of typhoon Milenyo. materials, construction and maintenance to: (a) safeguard the life and
7. October 6, 2006: Acting Secretary Ebdane, Jr. issued Memorandum property; (b) keep the surroundings clean and orderly; (c) ensure
Circular No. 3 and directed all local governments to cease and desist from public decency and good taste; and (d) preserve a harmonious
processing application for and issuing and renewing billboard permits. aesthetic relationship of these structures as against the general
8. September 25, 2008: City Engineer issued orders of demolition against surroundings.
Prime Advertisements & Signs and gave the agency until October 8, 2008 Second: Ordinance employs the following rules in implementing its
to trim. Such prompted Davao Billboards and Signmakers Association
policy: (a) minimum distances must be observed in installing and
constructing outdoor billbords; (b) additional requirements shall be
observed; (c) sign permits must be secured from and proper fees paid
to the city government; and (d) those without permits, without the
required marking signs or found in violation of any provision shall
be removed, allowing the owner 60 days to correct/address the
violation.

Evasco vs. Montanez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evasco vs. Montanez

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evasco vs. Montanez

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EVASCO vs. MONTANEZ (TRIXIE) (DABASA) to intervene through a civil case on behalf of its members.

You might also like