Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 39 views

    Case No. 26 Gancayco V. City Government of Quezon City G.R. No. 177807 October 11, 2011 Nature of Action

    Uploaded by

    Niv
    The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the validity of an ordinance passed by the Quezon City Council requiring the construction of arcades in commercial buildings. The ordinance was challenged by a property owner, Justice Gancayco, whose building was partially demolished by the MMDA for failing to comply with the arcade requirement. The Supreme Court ruled that the ordinance was a valid exercise of the city's police power to promote public health, safety, and welfare. However, the demolition by the MMDA was not validly delegated by the city government and the MMDA should be solely liable for damages caused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case No. 26 Gancayco V. City Government of Quezon City G.R. No. 177807 October 11, 2011 Nature of Action

    Uploaded by

    Niv
    39 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the validity of an ordinance passed by the Quezon City Council requiring the construction of arcades in commercial buildings. The ordinance was challenged by a property owner, Justice Gancayco, whose building was partially demolished by the MMDA for failing to comply with the arcade requirement. The Supreme Court ruled that the ordinance was a valid exercise of the city's police power to promote public health, safety, and welfare. However, the demolition by the MMDA was not validly delegated by the city government and the MMDA should be solely liable for damages caused.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    26

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the validity of an ordinance passed by the Quezon City Council requiring the construction of arcades in commercial buildings. The ordinance was challenged by a property owner, Justice Gancayco, whose building was partially demolished by the MMDA for failing to comply with the arcade requirement. The Supreme Court ruled that the ordinance was a valid exercise of the city's police power to promote public health, safety, and welfare. However, the demolition by the MMDA was not validly delegated by the city government and the MMDA should be solely liable for damages caused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    39 views2 pages

    Case No. 26 Gancayco V. City Government of Quezon City G.R. No. 177807 October 11, 2011 Nature of Action

    Uploaded by

    Niv
    The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the validity of an ordinance passed by the Quezon City Council requiring the construction of arcades in commercial buildings. The ordinance was challenged by a property owner, Justice Gancayco, whose building was partially demolished by the MMDA for failing to comply with the arcade requirement. The Supreme Court ruled that the ordinance was a valid exercise of the city's police power to promote public health, safety, and welfare. However, the demolition by the MMDA was not validly delegated by the city government and the MMDA should be solely liable for damages caused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Case No.

    26
    GANCAYCO v. CITY GOVERNMENT OF QUEZON CITY
    G.R. No. 177807
    October 11, 2011

    Nature of action:
    Petitions for Review

    Facts:
    Retired Justice Emilio A. Gancayco bought a parcel of land located at EDSA. The
    Quezon City Council issued an ordinance requiring the construction of arcades, for
    Commercial Buildings to be constructed in Zones Designated as Business Zones in the
    Zoning Plan of Quezon City. There was no building code passed by the legislature hence,
    the regulation is left to the discretion of LGU. In effect, property owners relinquish the
    use of the space for use as an arcade for pedestrians, instead of using it for their own
    purposes.

    The ordinance covered the property of Gancayco. He then sought the exemption
    of a two-storey building being constructed on his property from the application of
    Ordinance No. 2904. City Council acted favorably on Justice Gancayco’s request subject
    to the condition that upon notice by the City Engineer, the owner shall, within reasonable
    time, demolish the enclosure of said arcade at his own expense when public interest so
    demands.

    Decades after, MMDA conducted operations to clear obstructions along the


    sidewalk of EDSA. MMDA sent a notice of demolition to Justice Gancayco however the
    latter did not comply with the notice. In effect, MMDA proceeded to demolish the party
    wall, or the "wing walls," of the ground floor structure. Gancayco filed a Petition alleging
    that the ordinance authorized the taking of private property without due process of law
    and just compensation. He sought the declaration of nullity of the ordinance and payment
    for damages.

    RTC rules in favor of Gancayo and held that the questioned ordinance was
    unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals (CA) then partly granted the appeal; upheld the
    validity of the ordinance and and lifted the injunction against the enforcement and
    implementation of the said ordinance. Both party then filed a motion for review, hence
    this petition.

    Issue:
    Whether or not the ordinance is a valid exercise of police power

    Ruling:
    WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in
    is AFFIRMED.

    Ratio Decidendi:
    Yes it is a valid delegation of police power. Police power is an inherent attribute
    of sovereignty. When the conditions so demand as determined by the legislature, property
    rights must bow to the primacy of police power because property rights, though sheltered
    by due process, must yield to general welfare.

    In the case at bar, it is clear that the primary objectives of the city council of
    Quezon City when it issued the questioned ordinance ordering the construction of arcades
    were the health and safety of the city and its inhabitants; the promotion of their
    prosperity; and the improvement of their morals, peace, good order, comfort, and the
    convenience. In the exercise of police power, the government may enact legislation that
    may interfere with personal liberty, property, lawful businesses and occupations to
    promote the general welfare. However, the interference must be reasonable and not
    arbitrary.

    Moreover, there was no valid delegation of powers to the MMDA. Contrary to the
    claim of the MMDA, the City Government of Quezon City washed its hands off the acts
    of the former and stated, "the demolition was undertaken by the MMDA only, without the
    participation and/or consent of Quezon City." Therefore, the MMDA acted on its own and
    should be held solely liable for the destruction of the portion of Justice Gancayco’s
    building.

    You might also like