Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    Case Digest (GR No. 138810, Sep 29, 2004) BATANGAS CATV v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Christian Ray Ganaden
    The document discusses a case regarding whether local government units can regulate subscriber rates charged by CATV operators. The court ruled that local governments do not have the authority to regulate rates, as the National Telecommunications Commission has sole authority over CATV operations according to an executive order.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digest (GR No. 138810, Sep 29, 2004) BATANGAS CATV v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Christian Ray Ganaden
    25 views2 pages
    The document discusses a case regarding whether local government units can regulate subscriber rates charged by CATV operators. The court ruled that local governments do not have the authority to regulate rates, as the National Telecommunications Commission has sole authority over CATV operations according to an executive order.

    Original Title

    Case Digest [ GR No. 138810, Sep 29, 2004] BATANGAS CATV v. CA

    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 document discusses a case regarding whether local government units can regulate subscriber rates charged by CATV operators. The court ruled that local governments do not have the authority to regulate rates, as the National Telecommunications Commission has sole authority over CATV operations according to an executive order.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digest (GR No. 138810, Sep 29, 2004) BATANGAS CATV v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Christian Ray Ganaden
    The document discusses a case regarding whether local government units can regulate subscriber rates charged by CATV operators. The court ruled that local governments do not have the authority to regulate rates, as the National Telecommunications Commission has sole authority over CATV operations according to an executive order.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Digest [ GR No. 138810, Sep 29, 2004] BATANGAS CATV v.

    CA

    Facts
    On July 28, 1986, respondent Sangguniang Panlungsod enacted Resolution No. 210[7] granting petitioner
    a permit to construct, install, and operate a CATV system in Batangas City.  Section 8 of the Resolution
    provides that petitioner is authorized to charge its subscribers the maximum rates specified therein, "provided,
    however, that any increase of rates shall be subject to the approval of the Sangguniang Panlungsod."
    Sometime in November 1993, petitioner increased its subscriber rates from P88.00 to P180.00 per
    month.  As a result, respondent Mayor wrote petitioner a letter [9] threatening to cancel its permit unless it
    secures the approval of respondent Sangguniang Panlungsod, pursuant to Resolution No. 210.
    Petitioner then filed with the RTC, Branch 7, Batangas City, a petition for injunction docketed as Civil
    Case No. 4254.  It alleged that respondent Sangguniang Panlungsod has no authority to regulate the subscriber
    rates charged by CATV operators because under Executive Order No.    205, the National Telecommunications
    Commission (NTC) has the sole authority to regulate the CATV operation in the Philippines.
    ISSUE
     Whether or not a local government unit (LGU) regulate the subscriber rates charged by CATV operators
    within its territorial jurisdiction?
    RULING
    NO, Resolution No. 210 is an enactment of an LGU acting only as agent of the national legislature.
    There is no law specifically authorizing the LGUs to grant franchises to operate CATV system.  Whatever
    authority the LGUs had before, the same had been withdrawn when President Marcos issued P.D. No.
    1512 "terminating all franchises, permits or certificates for the operation of CATV system previously granted by
    local governments." 
    Today, pursuant to Section 3 of E.O. No. 436, "only persons, associations, partnerships, corporations or
    cooperatives granted a Provisional Authority or Certificate of Authority by the NTC may install, operate and
    maintain a cable television system or render cable television service within a service area." It is clear that in the
    absence of constitutional or legislative authorization, municipalities have no power to grant
    franchises. Consequently, the protection of the constitutional provision as to impairment of the obligation of a
    contract does not extend to privileges, franchises and grants given by a municipality in excess of its powers,
    or ultra vires

    WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED.  The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals dated February 12,
    1999 as well as its Resolution dated May 26, 1999 in CA-G.R. CV No. 52461, are hereby REVERSED.  The
    RTC Decision in Civil Case No. 4254 is AFFIRMED.
    No pronouncement as to costs.

    SO ORDERED.

    You might also like