8/11/2019 31 Suplico v NEDA

1/2

8/11/2019 31 Suplico v NEDA

2/2

meeting of October 2, 2007 with the Chinese President in Chinaas an official act of theexecutive department , the Court must take judicial notice of such official act without need ofevidence

Judicial power presupposes actual controversies, the very antithesis of mootness. In the absenceof actual justiciable controversies or disputes, the Court generally opts to refrain from deciding

moot issues. Where there is no more live subject of controversy, the Court ceases to have areason to render any ruling or make any pronouncement.

For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy one which involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of

judicial resolution; the case must not be moot or academic or based on extra-legal or othersimilar considerations not cognizable by a court of justice. Where the issue has become mootand academic, there is no justiciable controversy, and an adjudication thereon would be of nopractical use or value as courts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic questions to satisfyscholarly interest, however intellectually challenging.

While there were occasions when the Court passed upon issues although supervening eventshad rendered those petitions moot and academic, the instant case does not fall under theexceptional cases. In those cases, the Court was persuaded to resolve moot and academic issuesto formulate guiding and controlling constitutional principles, precepts, doctrines or rules for

future guidance of both bench and bar.