Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015PLDT vs. THE NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ANDCELLCOM, INC., EXPRESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO., INC (ETCI)G.R. No. 88404Octob! "8, "##0FACTS:On 22 June 1958, RA $0#0was enacted granting Felix Alberto & Co. (laterEC!" a #ranc$ise to establis$ radio stations #or do%estic and transoceanicteleco%%unications. On 1& 'a( 198)* EC! #iled an a++lication wit$ t$e ,C #or t$eissuance o# a certi#icate o# +ublic con-enience and necessit( to o+erate* etc. a Cellular'obile ele+$one .(ste% and an al+$a nu%eric +aging s(ste% in 'etro 'anila and int$e.out$ern/u0onregions* wit$a+ra(er #or+ro-isional aut$orit(too+eratewit$in'etro'anila. 1/2#iledano++ositionwit$a%otiontodis%iss. On12,o-e%ber198)* ,Co-erruled1/23so++ositionanddeclaredRA2090s$ouldbeliberall(construed so as to include t$e o+eration o# a cellular %obile tele+$one ser-ice as +arto# ser-iceso# t$e#ranc$ise. On122ece%ber1988* ,CgrantedEC! +ro-isionalaut$orit( to install* o+erate* and %aintain a cellular %obile tele+$one ser-ice initiall( in'etro'anilasub4ect tot$eter%sandconditionsset #ort$initsorder*includinganinterconnection agree%ent to be entered wit$ 1/2. 1/2 #iled an O++osition wit$ a 'otion to 2is%iss alleging t$at EC! is not aut$ori0edunder its #ranc$ise to a nationwide o+eration* t$at EC! lac5s t$e tec$nical and #inancialca+abilit(to+ursuesuc$o+eration* 1/2$asa+endinga++lication#or t$esa%eser-ices soug$t b( EC! and as suc$ t$e 6+rior o+erator7 or 6+rotection o# in-est%ent7doctrine %ust a++l( to its case and t$at t$e 1A i# granted* will result in a $ar%#ul andneedless du+lication.,Co-erruledt$eo++ositiono#1/2 anddeclaredt$atRA #0$0s$all beliberall(construedastoincludet$eser-icesa++lied#orb(EC! includedint$at #ranc$ise.1/2#ileda%otion#or reconsiderationbut tonoa-ail. ,Clater onissueda1Agranting t$e o+eration a++lied #or EC! regarding 1$ase A o# its +ro4ect in 'etro 'anilasub4ect to so%e conditions including an interconnection agree%ent wit$ 1/2. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 20151/2#ileda'otionto.et Asidet$eOrder allegingt$at t$einterconnectionwas-iolated due +rocess and t$at t$e order granting 1A to EC! was 4urisdictionall( and+rocedurall(in#ir%ed. ,Cdeniedreconsiderationandset t$edate#or $earing#orcontinuation o# t$e %ain +roceedings.$e .u+re%e Court issued a e%+orar( 8estraining Order en4oining ,C to cease anddesist #ro% all or an( o# its on9going +roceedings and EC! #ro% continuing wit$ an( o#its +ro4ects as granted in t$e issued 1A b( t$e ,C. $e %otion #iled b( EC! to li#t t$e8O was denied. ISSUES:1. :$et$er t$e +ro-isional aut$orit( was +ro+erl( granted.Held: $e +ro-isional aut$orit( granted b( t$e ,C (w$ic$ is t$e regulator( agenc( o#t$e,ational ;o-ern%ent o-er all teleco%%unicationsentities" $asade#initeex+ir(+eriod o# 18 %ont$s unless sooner renewed< %a( be re-o5ed* a%ended or re-ised b(t$e,C< co-ersoneo# #our +$ases< li%itedto'etro'anilaonl(< anddoesnotaut$ori0et$einstallationando+erationo# anal+$anu%eric+agings(ste%. !t was#urt$er issued a#ter due $earing* wit$ 1/2 attending and granted a#ter a +ri%a #acies$owing t$at EC! $ad t$e necessar( legal* #inancial and tec$nical ca+abilities< and t$at+ublic interest* con-enience and necessit( so de%anded. 1ro-isionalaut$orit( wouldbe %eaningless i# t$e grantee were not allowed to o+erate* as its li#eti%e is li%ited and%a( be re-o5ed b( t$e ,C at an( ti%e in accordance wit$ law.2.:$et$er EC!3s#ranc$iseincludeso+erationo# cellular %obiletele+$ones(ste%(C'." Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015HELD:$e ,C construed t$e tec$nicalter% 6radiotele+$on(7 liberall( as to includet$eo+erationo# acellular %obiletele+$ones(ste%. $econstructiongi-enb(anad%inistrati-e agenc( +ossessedo# t$e necessar( s+ecial5nowledge*ex+ertise andex+erience and deser-es great weig$t and res+ect. !t can onl( be set aside b( 4udicialinter-ention on +roo# o# gross abuse o# discretion* #raud or error o# law.3. :$et$er 1/2 can re#use interconnection wit$ EC!.HELD:$e,C%erel( exercised its delegated aut$orit( to regulate t$e use o#teleco%%unicationnetwor5s w$enit decreedinterconnection. 1/2cannot re#useinterconnection as suc$ is %andated under RA %#4# or t$e 'unici+al ele+$one Act o#1989. :$at interconnection see5s to acco%+lis$ is to enable t$e s(ste% to reac$ out tot$egreatest nu%bero# +eo+le+ossibleinlinewit$go-ern%ental +olicies. :it$t$ebroader reac$* +ublicinterest andcon-eniencewill bebetter ser-ed. 1ublicneed*+ublic interest* and t$e co%%on good are t$e decisi-e* i# not t$e ulti%ate*considerations. ot$ese+ublicandnational interests* +ublicutilit(co%+anies%ust(ield.$e ,C order does not de+ri-e 1/2 due +rocess as it allows t$e +arties t$e%sel-estodiscussandagreeu+ont$es+eci#icter%sandconditionso# t$einterconnectionagree%ent instead o# t$e ,C itsel# la(ing down t$e standards o# interconnection w$ic$it can -er( well i%+ose. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015GMCR INC.& SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC.& INT'L COMMUNICATIONS CORP.&ISLA COMMUNICATIONS CO., INC., vs. (ELL COMMUNICATIONS PHILS., INC.&THE NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND HON. SIMEON)INTANARGR "%4#%A*!+, -0, "##.FACTS:=ell eleco%%unications (=ellel" #iled be#ore t$e ,ationaleleco%%unications Co%%ission (,C" an a++lication #or a Certi#icate o# 1ublicCon-enience and ,ecessit( (C1C," to +rocure* install* o+erate and %aintain,ationwide !ntegrated eleco%%unications .er-ices (,!." and a 1ro-isional Aut$orit((1A" to e##ect suc$. 2uring suc$ a++lication* =ellel$as not been gi-en a legislati-e#ranc$ise to engage in t$e teleco%s ser-ice w$ic$ %ade in unable to +artici+ate in t$edeliberations#or ser-iceareaassign%ents#or local exc$angecarrier ser-ice(/EC"w$ere t$e+etitioners abo-e +artici+atedin. .ubse>uentl(*RA.%#$was enactedgranting =ellel a congressional #ranc$ise.On 12 Jul( 199?* =ellel #iled a second a++lication #or a certi#icate o# +ubliccon-enience* +ro+osing to install 2.@ %illion tele+$one lines in 1A (ears and to +ro-idea1AABdigital local exc$angenetwor5(NTCC/s#40$$#". !t also%o-ed#or t$ewit$drawalo# t$e #irst a++lication* wit$out+re4udice* w$ic$ was granted b( t$e ,C.=ellel3sa++lication(2nd" waso++osedb(-ariousteleco%%unicationco%+anies.=ellel3sa++licationwasre#erredtot$eCo%%onCarriers Aut$ori0ation2e+art%ent(CCA2"* w$ic$ #ound =ellel3s +ro+osal tec$nicall( #easible and =ellel to be #inanciall(ca+able. $etwode+ut(co%%issionerso# t$e,Csigni#iedt$eir a++ro-al o# t$eCCA2 reco%%endation. $e wor5ing dra#t was +re+ared b( t$e legal de+art%ent* wasinitialed b( t$e two de+ut( co%%issioners* but was not signed b( ,C Co%%issioner.i%eon Cintanar.$e +etitioners >uestioned t$e -alidit( o# t$e 1A because according to t$e% it is t$e+re-ailing +olic( and +rocedure in t$e ,C t$at t$e Co%%issioner $as t$e exclusi-e Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015aut$orit( to sign* -alidate and +ro%ulgate an( and all orders* resolutions and decisionso# t$e ,C and onl( $is -ote counts. =ellel #iled two %otions to resol-e t$e a++licationand t$e issuance o# t$e 1A but t$e ,C did not act on it. !n t$at relation* t$e +etitioners#iled an O++osition. Co%%issioner Cintanar issued an Order setting said %otions #or$earing but did not resol-e said %otions. Dowe-er* no $earing was conducted and itwas resc$eduled.=ellel #iled a %otion to +ro%ulgate* a#ter +re-iousl( #iling two urgent ex9+arte %otion toresol-e a++lication* w$ic$ was not acted u+on b( t$e ,C. On ? Jul( 1995* t$e ,Cdeniedt$e%otioninanordersignedsolel(b(Co%%issionerCintanar.On1)Jul(1995* =ellel #ileda+etition#or certiorari* %anda%usand+ro$ibitionagainst ,Cbe#oret$e.u+re%eCourt. $eCourt re#erredt$ecasetot$eCourt o# A++eals+ursuant to 1aragra+$ 1* .ection 9 o# =1 129. $e Court o# A++eals granted =ellel3s+osition. Dence* t$e +etitions #or re-iew b( t$e o++osing teleco%%unication co%+aniesand Co%%issioner Cintanar.ISSUE::$et$ert$e -oteo#t$eC$air%ano#t$eCo%%issionissu##icient to legall(render an ,C order* resolution or decision.HELD:Da-ing been organi0ed underE1c2t+v O!3! "4%as a t$ree9%anco%%ission* t$e ,C is a collegial bod( and was a collegial bod( e-en during t$e ti%eit was acting as a one9%an regi%e. ,C is a collegial bod( re>uiring a %a4orit( -ote outo# t$ree %e%bers o# t$e co%%ission in order to -alidl( decides a case or an( incidentt$erein. $e-otealoneo# t$ec$air%ano# t$eCo%%ission* absent t$ere>uiredconcurring -ote co%ing #ro% t$e rest o# t$e %e%bers$i+ o# t$e co%%ission to at leastarri-e at a %a4orit( decision* is not su##icient to legall( render an ,C order* resolutionor decision. EO 5?@* w$ic$ created t$e ,C under t$e 'inistries o# 1ublic :or5s and o#rans+ortation and Co%%unication* does not s+eci#icall( +ro-ide t$at t$e ,C is not acollegiate bod( nor did it %ention t$at ,C s$ould %eet En =anc in deciding its case or Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015>uasi94udicial#unctions. Dowe-er* t$is does not %ilitate against t$e collegial nature o#t$e,Cbecauset$e8uleso# 1rocedureand1racticea++liedb(t$e,Cinits+roceedings states t$at in cases $eard b( t$e =oard En =anc* t$e resolution or orders$ould be reac$ed wit$ t$e concurrence o# at least two regular %e%bers a#terdeliberation and consultation.NTC C+!c2,/!s "0"0#-, -0"0#- and t$e Order o# Cintanar*declaring t$e ,C as a single entit( or non9collegial entit(* are contrar( to law and t$usare null and -oid. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015ADDITIONAL TELECOM CASES:SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC. /43 PILIPINO TELECOMMUNICATIONCORPORATION vs. NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIONG.R. No. "5"#08A262st "$, $00-FACTS: On1@June2AAA* t$e,CissuedM7o!/4327C+!c2,/!"-0%0$000*+ro%ulgating rules and regulations on t$e billing o# teleco%%unications ser-ices< w$ic$includes +ro-isions +ertaining to t$e use and sale o# +re9+aid cards and unit o# billing #orcellular %obile tele+$one ser-ice (C'.".Asecond %e%orandu%was issuedaddressed to all cellular %obile tele+$one ser-ice (C'." o+erators* w$ic$ contained%easuresto%ini%i0ei# not totall(eli%inatet$eincidentso# stealingcellular+$oneunits..'A8 #iled a +etition to nulli#( t$e %e%orandu% regarding t$e billing and !slaco% and1iltel alleged t$at t$e ,C $as no 4urisdiction to regulate t$e sale o# consu%er goodssuc$as+re+aidcall cardssincet$e4urisdictionbelongstot$e2OCunder t$eConsu%erAct o# t$e1$ili++ines. !t #urt$erallegedt$at =illing%e%oiso++ressi-e*con#iscator( and -iolati-e o# t$e constitutional +ro$ibition against de+ri-ation o# +ro+ert(wit$out due +rocess o# law and t$at suc$ %e%o will i%+air t$e -iabilit( o# t$e +re+aidcellular ser-ice b( undul( +rolonging t$e -alidit( and ex+iration o# t$e +re+aid .!' andcall cards and t$e re>uire%ent in t$e %e%o t$at t$e identi#ication o# +re+aid bu(ers andcallbalance announce%ent areunreasonable t$us+ra(ing #or t$enulli#ication o# t$e=illing Circular.$e lower court granted t$e issuance o# t$e in4unction. ,C %o-ed #or reconsideration*but was denied. ,C t$erea#ter #iled a s+ecialci-ilaction #or certiorariand +robationbe#ore t$e Court o# A++eals. $e a++ellate court granted t$e +etition and dis%issed t$e Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015co%+anies3 co%+laint wit$out +re4udice to t$e re#erral o# t$eir grie-ances wit$ t$e ,C.Dence* t$e +etition #or re-iew wit$ t$e .u+re%e Court.ISSUE: :$et$er a +art( s$ould $a-e ex$austed ad%inistrati-e re%edies be#ore it #iledt$e case in court.HELD: ,o* t$e +arties need not ex$aust ad%inistrati-e re%edies. A+art( need not ex$aust ad%inistrati-e re%edies be#ore going to Court* w$en>uestioning t$e -alidit( or constitutionalit( o# a rule or regulation issued b( anad%inistrati-eagenc(. $e+rinci+leonl(a++liesw$ent$eact o# t$eagenc(was+er#or%ed +ursuant to its >uasi94udicial #unction* and not w$en t$e assailed and+ertained to its rule9%a5ing or >uasi9legislati-e +ower. $e >uasi9legislati-e #unction orrule9%a5ing+ower o# anad%inistrati-eagenc(isdi##erent #ro%its>uasi94udicial orad%inistrati-ead4udicator( +ower. $e#irstist$e+roducto#adelegatedlegislati-e+ower to create new and additional legal +ro-isions t$at $a-e t$e e##ect o# law. !t %ustbe in accordance wit$ t$e Constitution and ot$er re>uire%ents b( t$e law. $e secondin-ol-est$e+ower to$earanddeter%ine>uestionso# #act tow$ic$t$elegislati-e+olic( is to a++l( and to decide in accordance wit$ t$e standards la( down b( t$e lawitsel# in en#orcing and ad%inistering t$e sa%e law..incet$eissuance b(t$e,Co#t$etwocircularswas+ursuanttoitsrule9%a5ing+ower* t$e +etitioners were 4usti#ied in in-o5ing t$e 4udicial +ower o# t$e 8C to assailt$e constitutionalit( and -alidit( o# said circulars. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015PHILIPPINE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE CORP., vs. GLO(E TELECOM, INC.M/8 $5, $004G.R. No. "4.-$4FACTS: .e-eral (ears bac5 be#ore 1991* ;lobe $as been engaged in t$e coordinationo# t$e +ro-ision o# -arious co%%unication #acilities #or t$e E.%ilitar( bases in1a%+anga and Fa%bales. $e said co%%unication #acilities were installed andcon#igured #or t$e exclusi-e use o# t$e E. 2e#ense Co%%unications Agenc( (E.2CA"*and#orsecurit(reasons* wereo+eratedonl(b(its+ersonnel ort$oseo#A%ericanco%+anies contracted b( it to o+erate said #acilities. $e E.2CA contracted wit$ saidA%erican co%+anies* and t$e latter* in turn* contracted wit$ ;lobe #or t$e use o# t$eco%%unication #acilities. ;lobe* on t$e ot$er $and* contracted wit$ local ser-ice+ro-iders suc$ as t$e 1$ili++ine Co%%unications .atellite Cor+oration (1$ilco%sat" #ort$e +ro-ision o# t$e co%%unication #acilities. !n 1991* ;lobe and 1$ilco%sat entered into a contract w$erein t$e latter obliged itsel# toestablis$* o+erate and +ro-ide an eart$ station in Fa%bales w$ic$ will last #or 5 (ears.;lobe in turn* +ro%ised to +a( rentals #or eac$ leased circuit. At t$at ti%e* bot$ +arties5new t$at t$e E. %ilitar( bases w$ic$ is t$e basis #or t$e occu+anc( o# t$e %ilitar(base inFa%bales is to ex+irein t$esa%e(ear according toour Constitution w$ic$states t$at t$e %ilitar( bases* troo+s and #acilities s$all not be allowed in t$e 1$ili++inesunless a new treat( is signed w$ic$ will allow t$e sa%e. 2es+ite t$at* 1$ilco%sat builtt$e eart$ station as agreed wit$ ;lobe. $erea#ter* t$e .enate o# t$e 1$ili++ines did notconcur in a new treat(* w$ic$ will extend t$e ter% o# use b( t$e E. %ilitar( troo+s int$eir +resentl( occu+ied bases. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 20152uetot$at e-ent* ;lobe+ro#esseditsintentiontodiscontinuet$euseo# t$eeart$station wit$ 1$ilco%sat. !t contented a +art in t$eir agree%ent t$at neit$er +art( s$all be$eld liable or dee%ed to be in de#ault #or an( #ailure to +er#or% its obligation under t$isAgree%ent i# suc$ #ailure results directl( or indirectl( #ro% #orce %a4eure or #ortuitouse-ent. Force%a4eureaccordingtot$eir contact includecircu%stancesbe(ondt$econtrol o# t$e+art(in-ol-edincluding* but not li%itedto* an(law*order*regulation*direction or re>uest o# t$e ;o-ern%ent o# t$e 1$ili++ines* stri5es or ot$er labordi##iculties* insurrection riots* national e%ergencies* war*actso# +ublicene%ies* #ire*#loods* t(+$oons or ot$er catastro+$esor acts o# ;od. Dowe-er* t$ereis alsoasti+ulationint$at sa%eagree%ent regardingt$e+a(%ent a#ter discontinuanceo#ser-ice* w$ic$binds;lobeto+a(rentals#ora+articular+eriod. 2es+iteo# se-eralde%ands to +a( were sent to ;lobe b( 1$ilco%sat* t$e #or%er did not +a( an(. 1$ilco%sat t$en #iled a co%+laint +ra(ing #or t$e +a(%ent o# all %one( clai%s against;lobe.;lobeinreturninsistonitsde#enseo##orce%a4eureinnon9+a(%ent o#t$erentals.$e8Cruledin#a-oro#1$ilco%sat butt$ea%ountit+ra(ed#orwasnot granted+recisel( andit a##ir%ed t$e de#enseo# ;loberegarding t$e issueo# #orce %a4eure.=ot$ +arties a++ealed to t$e CA. .ince a##ir%ed t$e decision o# t$e 8C but ordered;lobe to +a( rentals #ro% t$e actual ti%e o# use until t$e ti%e t$e E. %ilitar( -acatedt$ebasesint$e%ont$o# 2ece%ber 1992. =ot$+artiesa++ealedt$ecasetot$e.u+re%e Court. ISSUES:1" :$et$er t$e ter%ination o# t$e 819E. 'ilitar( =ases Agree%entconstitutes force majeure w$ic$ would exe%+t ;lobe #ro% co%+l(ing wit$ its obligationto +a( rentals< 2" w$et$er ;lobe is liable to +a( rentals under t$e Agree%ent #or t$e%ont$ o# 2ece%ber 1992< and &" w$et$er 1$ilco%sat is entitled to attorne(3s #ees andexe%+lar( da%ages.HELD: As to t$e #irst issue* t$e .C ruled in #a-or o# ;lobe as t$e ter%ination o# t$e 819E. 'ilitar( =ases Agree%ent is a #orce %a4eure. Contrar( to t$e +osition o# 1$ilco%sat Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015t$at suc$ e-ent is not un#oreseeable* but were +ossibilities 5nown to it and ;lobe at t$eti%e t$e( entered into t$e Agree%ent* suc$ e-ents cannot exe%+t ;lobe #ro%+er#or%ing its obligation o# +a(ing rentals #or t$e entire #i-e9(ear ter% t$ereo#* t$e court$eld t$at Article 11)?* w$ic$ exe%+ts an obligor #ro% liabilit( on account o# #ortuitouse-ents orforce majeure* re#ers not onl( to e-ents t$at are un#oreseeable*but also tot$ose w$ic$ are #oreseeable* but ine-itable. $e e-ents w$ic$ t$e +arties included int$e enu%eration o# w$at #orce %a4eure is as to t$eir contract does not $a-e t$e e##ect o#ex+anding t$e #orce %a4eure enu%erated in t$e Ci-il Code. Furt$er%ore* under Article1&A@ o# t$e Ci-il Code* +arties to a contract %a( establis$ suc$ sti+ulations* clauses*ter%s and conditions as t$e( %a( dee% #it* as long as t$e sa%e do not run counter tot$e law* %orals* good custo%s* +ublic order or +ublic +olic(.8egarding t$e second issue* ;lobe s$ould not be %ade to +a( t$e rentals #or2ece%ber o# 1992. $e a#ore%entioned e-ents %ade i%+ossible t$e continuation o# t$eAgree%ent until t$e end o# its #i-e9(ear ter% wit$out #ault on t$e +art o# eit$er +art(. $eCourt o# A++eals was t$us correct in ruling t$at t$e $a++ening o# suc$ #ortuitous e-entsrendered ;lobe exe%+t #ro% +a(%ent o# rentals #or t$e re%ainder o# t$e ter% o# t$eAgree%ent. 'oreo-er* it would be un4ust to re>uire ;lobe to continue +a(ing rentalse-en t$oug$ 1$ilco%sat cannot be co%+elled to +er#or% its corres+onding obligationunder t$e Agree%ent. Finall(*inresol-ingt$et$irdissue* t$ecourt a##ir%edt$e#indingso# t$eCA innotawarding1$ilco%sat attorne(3s#eesandexe%+lar(da%ages. Exe%+lar(da%ages%a( be awarded in cases in-ol-ing contracts or >uasi9contracts* i# t$e erring +art( actedin a wanton* #raudulent* rec5less* o++ressi-e or %ale-olent %anner. !n t$e +resent case*it was not s$own t$at ;lobe acted wantonl( or o++ressi-el( in not $eeding 1$ilco%sat3sde%ands #or +a(%ent o# rentals. !t was establis$ed during t$e trial o# t$e case be#oret$e trial court t$at ;lobe $ad -alid grounds #or re#using to co%+l( wit$ its contractualobligations a#ter 1992. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015 Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015REPU(LIC O9 THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED (: ENERG: REGULATOR:(OARD *t+t+o4!, vs. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPAN:, !s*o434t.G.R. No. "4"-"4.Nov7b! "5, $00$FACTS:On 2ece%ber 2&* 199&* 'E8A/CO #iled wit$ t$e E8= an a++lication #or t$ere-isiono# itsratesc$edules. $ea++licationre#lectedana-erageincreaseo# 21centa-os +er 5ilowatt9$our (5w$" in its distribution c$arge. $e a++lication also includeda +ra(er #or +ro-isional a++ro-al o# t$e increase +ursuant to .ection 1@(c" o# t$e 1ublic.er-ice Act and .ection 8 o# E1c2t+v O!3! No. ".$.On Januar( 28* 199?* t$e E8= issued an Order granting a +ro-isional increase o#1A.18? +er 5w$* sub4ect to t$e #ollowing conditionG 6!nt$ee-ent* $owe-er* t$at t$e=oard#inds* a#ter $earingandsub%issionb(t$eCo%%ission on Audit o# an audit re+ort on t$e boo5s and records o# t$e a++licant t$att$e latter is entitled to a lesser increase in rates* all excess a%ounts collected #ro% t$ea++licant3scusto%ersasaresult o# t$isOrder s$all eit$er bere#undedtot$e%orcorres+ondingl(creditedint$eir#a-or #ora++licationtoelectricbillsco-ering#utureconsu%+tions.7On Februar( 11* 199)* t$e COA sub%itted its A23+t R*o!t SAO No. #500. (t$e 6COA8e+ort7" w$ic$ contained*a%ongot$ers*t$e reco%%endation notto includeinco%etaxes +aidb('E8A/COas +art o# itso+eratingex+enses#or +ur+oses o# ratedeter%ination and t$e use o# t$e net a-erage in-est%ent %et$od #or t$e co%+utation o#t$e +ro+ortionate -alue o# t$e +ro+erties used b( 'E8A/CO during t$e test (ear #or t$edeter%ination o# t$e rate base. $e E8= $eld t$at inco%e tax s$ould not be treated aso+erating ex+ense as t$is s$ould be 6borne b( t$e stoc5$olders w$o are reci+ients o#t$e inco%e or +ro#its reali0ed #ro% t$e o+eration o# t$eir business7 $ence* s$ould not be+assedontot$econsu%ers. Ona++eal* t$eCourt o# A++ealsset asidet$eE8=decision inso#ar as it directed t$e reduction o# t$e 'E8A/CO rates b( an a-erage o# Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 20151A.1@) +er 5w$ and t$e re#und o# suc$ a%ount to 'E8A/CO3s custo%ers beginningFebruar(199?anduntil itsbillingc(clebeginningFebruar(1998.$eregulationo#rates to be c$arged b( +ublic utilities is #ounded u+on t$e +olice +owers o# t$e .tateand statutes +rescribing rules #or t$e control and regulation o# +ublic utilities are a -alidexercise t$ereo#.ISSUE::$et$erornot t$e.tateexercisesits1olice1ower inregulatingrates#or+ublic use.HELD:!nregulatingratesc$argedb(+ublicutilities* t$e.tate+rotectst$e+ublicagainst arbitrar(andexcessi-eratesw$ile%aintainingt$ee##icienc(and>ualit(o#ser-ices rendered. Dowe-er* t$e +ower to regulate rates does not gi-e t$e .tate t$erig$t to +rescribe rates* w$ic$ are so low as to de+ri-e t$e +ublic utilit( o# a reasonablereturn on in-est%ent.$us* t$e rates +rescribed b( t$e .tate %ust be one t$at (ields a#air return on t$e +ublic utilit( u+on t$e -alue o# t$e +ro+ert( +er#or%ing t$e ser-ice andone t$at is reasonable to t$e +ublic #or t$e ser-ices rendered. $e #ixing o# 4ust andreasonable rates in-ol-es a balancing o# t$e in-estor and t$e consu%er interests. !t is asettled rule t$at t$e goal o# rate9%a5ing is to arri-e at a 4ust and reasonable rate #or bot$t$e+ublicutilit(andt$e+ublic* w$ic$a-ailso# t$e#or%er3s+roductsandser-ices.Dowe-er* w$at is a 4ust and reasonable rate cannot be #ixed b( an( i%%utable %et$odor #or%ula. Dence* it $asbeen$eldt$at no+ublicutilit($asa-estedrig$t toan(+articular %et$od o# -aluation.Accordingl(* wit$ res+ect to a deter%ination o# t$e +ro+er %et$od to be used in t$e-aluation o# +ro+ert( and e>ui+%ent used b( a +ublic utilit( #or rate9%a5ing +ur+oses*t$e ad%inistrati-e agenc( is not bound to a++l( an( one +articular #or%ula or %et$odsi%+l(becauset$esa%e%et$od$asbeen+re-iousl(usedanda++lied. !n#act*now$ereint$e+re-iousdecisionscitedb('E8A/CO* w$ic$a++liedt$etrending%et$od* did t$e Court rule t$at t$e sa%e s$ould be t$e onl( %et$od to be a++lied in allinstances. $us* t$e burden is u+on t$e o++ositor* 'E8A/CO* to +ro-e t$at t$e rates#ixed b( t$e E8= are unreasonable or ot$erwise con#iscator( as to %erit t$e re-ersal o#t$e E8=. !n t$e instant cases* 'E8A/CO was unable to disc$arge t$is burden. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015:$ere#ore* in -iew o# t$e #oregoing* t$e instant +etitions are ;8A,E2 and t$edecision o# t$e Court o# A++eals in C.A. G.R. SPNo. 4%888isREVERSED.8es+ondent 'E8A/COisaut$ori0edtoado+t aratead4ust%ent int$ea%ount o#1A.A1) +er 5ilowatt9$our* e##ecti-e wit$ res+ect to 'E8A/CO3s billing c(cles beginningFebruar( 199?. Furt$er* in accordance wit$ t$e decision o# t$e E8= dated Februar( 1@*1998* t$e excess a-erage a%ount o# 1A.1@) +er 5ilowatt9$our starting wit$ t$ea++licant3s billing c(cles beginning Februar( 1998 is ordered to be re#unded to'E8A/CO3s custo%ers or corres+ondingl( credited in t$eir #a-or #or #utureconsu%+tion. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015THE CIT: GO;ERNMENT O9 uenc( #or t$etotala%ount o#1?&*8)8*2A8.18* #ollowed b( t$e issuance o# se-eralwarrants o# le-(against =a(antels +ro+erties +re+arator( to t$eir sale at a +ublic auction set on Jul( &A*2AA2.$reatened wit$ t$e i%%inent loss o# its +ro+erties* =a(antel i%%ediatel( wit$drew itsa++eal wit$t$e/=AA andinstead#iledwit$t$e8Co# Hue0onCit(a+etition#or+ro$ibition wit$ an urgent a++lication #or a te%+orar( restraining order (8O" andJor writo# +reli%inar( in4unctionISSUE::$et$er or not =a(antel3s real +ro+erties in Hue0on Cit( are* under its#ranc$ise* exe%+t #ro% real +ro+ert( tax.HELD:$e +ower to tax is +ri%aril( -ested in t$e Congress< $owe-er* in our4urisdiction* it %a( be exercised b( local legislati-e bodies* no longer %erel( be -irtue o#a -alid delegation as be#ore* but +ursuant to direct aut$orit( con#erred b( .ection 5*Article I o# t$e Constitution. Ender t$e latter* t$e exercise o# t$e +ower %a( be sub4ectto suc$ guidelines and li%itations as t$e Congress %a( +ro-ide w$ic$* $owe-er* %ustbe consistent wit$ t$e basic +olic( o# local autono%(.!n net e##ect* t$e contro-ers( +resentl( be#ore t$e Court in-ol-es*at botto%* a clas$betweent$e in$erent taxing+owero# t$elegislature* w$ic$necessaril( includest$e+ower to exe%+t* and t$e local go-ern%ents delegated +ower to tax under t$e aegis o#t$e 198) Constitution. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015,ow to go bac5 to t$e Hue0on Cit( 8e-enue Code w$ic$ i%+osed real estate taxes onall real +ro+erties wit$in t$e cit(s territor( and re%o-ed exe%+tions t$ereto#oreK+re-iousl( granted to* or +resentl( en4o(ed b( all +ersons* w$et$er natural or4uridical..*K t$ere can reall( be no dis+ute t$at t$e +ower o# t$e Hue0on Cit(;o-ern%ent to tax is li%ited b( .ection 2&2 o# t$e /;C w$ic$ ex+ressl( +ro-ides t$atKa+ro-inceor cit(or %unici+alit(wit$int$e'etro+olitan'anila Area%a(le-(anannualad -alore% tax on real+ro+ert( suc$ as land* building* %ac$iner(* and ot$eri%+ro-e%ent not $ereina#ter s+eci#icall(exe%+ted.K Ender t$islaw* t$e/egislature$ig$lig$ted its +ower to t$erea#ter exe%+t certain realties #ro% t$e taxing +ower o# localgo-ern%ent units.Aninter+retationden(ingCongresssuc$+ower toexe%+t wouldreducet$e+$raseKnot $ereina#ter s+eci#icall(exe%+tedK asa+ure4argon* wit$out%eaning w$atsoe-er. ,eedless to state* suc$ absurd situation is unacce+table. As we see it* t$en* t$e issue in t$is case no longer dwells on w$et$er Congress $as t$e+ower to exe%+t =a(antels +ro+erties #ro% realt( taxes b( its enact%ent o# 8e+. Act,o. )@&&w$ic$a%ended=a(antelsoriginal #ranc$ise. $e%oredecisi-e>uestionturns on w$et$er Congress actuall( did exe%+t =a(antels +ro+erties at all b( -irtue o#.ection 11 o# 8e+. Act ,o. )@&&.Ad%ittedl(* 8e+. Act ,o. )@&& was enacted subse>uent to t$e /;C. 1er#ectl( awaret$at t$e/;C$asalread(wit$drawn=a(antels#or%erexe%+tion#ro%realt(taxes*Congress o+ted to +ass 8e+. Act ,o. )@&& using* under .ection 11 t$ereo#* exactl( t$esa%e de#ining +$rase Kexclusi-e o# t$is #ranc$iseK w$ic$ was t$e basis #or =a(antel sexe%+tion #ro% realt( taxes +rior to t$e /;C. !n +lain language* .ection 11 o# 8e+. Act,o. )@&& states t$at Kt$e grantee* its successors or assigns s$all be liable to +a( t$esa%etaxesont$eir real estate* buildingsand+ersonal +ro+ert(* exclusi-eo# t$is#ranc$ise* as ot$er +ersons or cor+orations are now or $erea#ter %a( be re>uired b(law to +a(.K $e Court -iews t$is subse>uent +iece o# legislation as an ex+ress and realintention on t$e +art o# Congress to once again re%o-e #ro% t$e /;Cs delegated taxing+ower* all o# t$e#ranc$isees(=a(antels" +ro+ertiest$at areactuall(* directl(andexclusi-el( used in t$e +ursuit o# its #ranc$ise. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015A/,/ v. G,ob T,co7CA ? G.R. No. .804#FACTS:1etitionersEli0abet$ Aala* et.al. aret$e+rinci+al* teac$ersandstudentso#.olano,ational Dig$.c$ool locatedat =aranga(Huirino* .olano* ,ue-aLi0ca(a.$e( are all +er%anent residents o# =rg( Huirino exce+t #or t$e teac$ers and studentso# t$e sc$ool w$o are considered transients to said baranga( w$ere t$e cellsite antennatower o# ;lobe is being constructed. 1etitioners seasonabl( registered t$eir +rotest ando++osition to t$e construction o# t$e said cell site antenna on t$e grounds o# securit(and sa#et( concerns and it beinga $ealt$ $a0ard. $e(+resented t$eirwitness*2r.FelixbertoA(a$ao* w$o#inis$edOtalar(ngolog(* $eadandnec5surger(. $elatterclai%ed t$at non9ioni0ing radiation could cause biological e##ects in t$e indi-idual. Ont$e ot$er $and* an a%icus curiae* 2r. Agnes 1eralta* 2irector o# Dealt$ 2e-ices andec$nolog( o# 2OD* clai%ed* a%ong ot$ers* t$at i# a +erson is at t$e %ini%u% sa#edistance or be(ond* t$ere is no $ar%#ul e##ect. $e 2OD +ress release stated also t$at.ec. 'anuel 2a(rit declared t$at +resent trans%itters could cause cancer. $e :DO$asalsoissuedastate%ent t$at +resent scienti#ic5nowledgedoesnot +ro-et$atradiation #ro% cellular +$one trans%itters could cause cancer.ISSUE::$et$er or not t$e+ro+osedcellsitewill +re4udicet$e$ealt$* sa#et(* andsecurit( concerns o# t$e +etitioners and sta5e$olders.HELD: $is tribunal $as to ad%it t$at it does not $a-e t$e resources and co%+etenceto rule on t$e issue. $e best t$at t$e Court can do is to sustain t$e +resent stand o#=ureauo# Dealt$2e-iceandec$nolog(under 2OD* t$at t$eradiatione%ittedb(cellsiteantennasisnot $a0ardousto$u%an$ealt$i# t$e%ini%u%sa#edistanceisobser-ed.:e* t$ere#ore agree wit$ t$e trial court #inding t$at w$ile t$e rig$ts o# t$e a++ellantsto sa#e and $ealt$( en-iron%ent ens$rined under .ec.15 and 1@ o# 198) Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015Constitution is recogni0ed 6 t$e #ailure o# t$e +etitioners to substantiate t$eirallegations o# $ealt$* sa#et( and securit( ris5s rendered t$eir +etition #or in4unction#or wit$out basis.:e ad%ire t$eir -igilance es+eciall( in t$e lig$t o# t$e #indings o# t$e :DO t$at t$ereare ga+s in t$e 5nowledge t$at $a-e been identi#ied #or #urt$er researc$ to %a5ebetter assess $ealt$ ris5. Telecoms Law Case Digest2nd Semester, A.Y. 2014 - 2015