v. the state cases digested

8/13/2019 V. the State Cases digested

1/17

CIR v. Campos Rueda, 42 SCRA 23 (1971)Jerson

FACTS:

Maria de la Estrella Soriano Vda. de Cerdeira, (Maria Cerdeira, for sort), died in

Tangier, (North Africa), on Jan. 2, 19. At the ti!e of her de!ise, she "as !arried to aS#anish Citi$en and a #er!anent resident of Tangier fro! 19%1 to her death. She left

#ro#erties in Tangier and in the 'hili##ines. A!ong the #ro#erties in the 'hili##ines are seeral

#arcels of land and !an shares of stoc*, acco&nts receia+le and other intangi+le #ersonal

#ro#erties. The real estate sit&ated in the 'hili##ines had a !ar*et al&e of '1,19,-%. and

her #ersonal #ro#erties also in the 'hili##ines had a al&e of '%9/,%.9. 0n the real estate,

the res#ondent Antonio Ca!#os &eda, as ad!inistrator of her estate, #aid the s&! of

'111,2. as estate ta and the s&! of '11,391.- as inheritance ta, on the transfer of her

real #ro#erties in the 'hili##ines, +&t ref&sed to #a the corres#onding deficienc estate and

inheritance taes d&e on the transfer of her intangi+le #ersonal #ro#erties, clai!ing that the

state is ee!#t fro! the #a!ent of said taes #&rs&ant to section 122 of the Ta Code. The

Collector of 4nternal een&e in a decision assessed the estate of the deceased, as deficienc

estate and inheritance taes, the s&! of '1/1,3-.9 incl&ding interest and #enalties, on the

transfer of intangi+le #ersonal #ro#erties of Maria Cerdeira. 0n a##eal the Co&rt of Ta A##eals

reersed the decision of the Collector, "ho eleated the case to the SC for reie", alleging that

the Co&rt of Ta A##eals erred in holding that5 (1) The testate estate of Maria Cerdeira is not

lia+le for the #a!ent of deficienc estate and inheritance taes in the s&! of '1/1,3-.96 (2)

The international $one of Tangier, een if it is not recogni$ed + the 'hili##ine 7oern!ent as a

state, co&ld aail of the reci#rocal #roisions of o&r Ta Code6 (%) The ter! 8foreign co&ntr8 in

Section 122 of the Ta Code, refers to a foreign goern!ent co!#etent to le taes "itho&t

an consideration for the international stat&s of said goern!ent6 (-) There eists reci#rocit

+et"een Tangier and 'hili##ine a"s on the !atter of death taes on intangi+le #ersonal#ro#ert6 () The certification Ehi+its :;1, 7;1, &isition of international #ersonalit is a condition sine >&a nonto Tangier(or any other state for that matter) being considered a "foreign

country" and therefore be covered by the tax exemption.

HE!:

The SC r&led in the negatie, there+ affir!ing the decision of the Co&rt of TaA##eal. The Co&rt held that 8? if a foreign co&ntr is to +e identified "ith a state, it is re>&ired

in line with Pound's formulation that it be a politically organized sovereign

community independent of outside control bound by penalties of nationhood,

legally supreme within its territory, acting through a government functioning

under a regime of law. t is thus a sovereign person with the people

composing it viewed as anorganized corporate society under a government with


2/17

the legal competence to exact obedience to its commands. t has been referred

to as a body!politic organized by common consent for mutual defense and

mutual safety and to promote the general welfare. orrectly has it been

described by #smein as "the $uridical personification of the nation." %his is

to view it in the light of its historical development. %he stress is on its

being a nation, its people occupying a definite territory, politically

organized, exercising by means of its government its sovereign will over the

individuals within it and maintaining its separate international personality.

&asi could spea of it then as a territorial society divided into

government and sub$ects, claiming within its allotted area a supremacy over

all other institutions. cver similarly would point to the power entrusted

to its government to maintain within its territory the conditions of a legal

order and to enter into international relations. ith the latter re*uisite

satisfied, international law does not exact independence as a condition of

statehood."

"#TE:

%he pertinent portion of section +, of the %ax ode, as amended by

section -, ep. /ct 0o. 12, recites as follows3

4#. +. 5efinitions. . . . . Provided, however, %hat in the case of

a resident, the transmission or transfer of any intangible personal property,

regardless of its location, is sub$ect to the taxes prescribed in this %itle6

/nd provided, further, %hat no tax shall be collected under %his %itle in

respect of intangible personal property (a) if the decedent at the time of

his death was a resident of a foreign country which at the time of his death

did not impose a transfer tax or death tax of any character in respect ofintangible personal property of citizens of the'hili##inesnot residing in the

foreign country, or (b) if the laws of the foreign country of which the

decedent was a resident at the time of his death allow a similar exemption

from transfer taxes or death taxes of every character in respect of

intangible personal property owned by citizens of the'hili##inesnot residing

in that foreign country.


3/17

Rea$a% vs CIR, 3& SCRA 9' (19'9)Charisse

FACTS:

'etitioner =illia! eagan, a ciilian e!#loee of @nited States Air orce in the'hil. =as assigned in the Clar* Air Base as a technical assistance at Bendi adio,

:iision of Bendi Aiation Cor#That on A#ril 22, 19/, =illia! eagan (#etitioner) i!#orted a ta;ee!#t 19/Cadillac car "ith accessories a!o&nting to /,--%.% incl&ding freight ins&rance andother charges.

That on J&l 11, 19/, #etitioner re>&ested the +ase co!!ander of Clar* AirBase to #er!it hi! to sell the said car, "hich "as latter granted, #roided that the sale"ill onl +e +et"een a !e!+er of @nited Stated Air orce or a citi$en of @nited Statese!#loed in the @S !ilitar +ase, in the 'hil. 0n the sa!e date, #etitioner sold the carto red Meneses for '%2,, eidenced + a deed of sale eec&ted in Manila.

As a res&lt of the transaction, res#ondent Co!!issioner of 4nternal een&efied the net taa+le inco!e arising fro! s&ch transaction. The a!o&nt of '13,912.%-

rendering hi! lia+le for the inco!e ta in the s&! of '2,939. After #aing the s&!, the#etitioner so&ght to ref&nd fro! the res#ondent, alleging that he "as ee!#t fro! s&chta. @#on the #endenc of s&ch action the #etitioner +ro&ght to C4, he filed a caseagainst res#ondent at Co&rt of Ta A##eals #raing for the ref&nd of '2,939 D the legalinterest rate.

ISSUE:

=hether or not the said inco!e ta of '2,939 "as legall colleted + res#ondentfor #etitioner,

HE!:

The Co&rt #rono&nce that the Clar* Air Base is not a foreign territor for#&r#oses of ta legislation and therefore !a*ing a #etitioner lia+le for the inco!e taarising fro! a sale of his a&to!o+ile in the Clar* ield Air Base.

=herefore, the decision of the Co&rt of Ta A##eals of Ma 12, 19// dening theref&nd of '2,939 as the inco!e ta #aid + #etitioner is affir!ed. =ith costs against#etitioner.


4/17

eop*e vs. +oo, -3 SCRA 47' (1973)Glenn


5/17

U.S. vs. !o, 2 /0*. 332 (19&3)Vladie May


6/17

eop*e v. Sa%d0$a%aa%, +.R. "o. 14-9-1, Au$us 12, 2&&3Edce

FACTS:

4n a #rior case, res#ondents "ere all charged "ith !alersation &nder Cri!inal Case23-1 +efore the SandiganBaan. 4n Noe!+er 12, 1999, res#ondent a!iscal filed "ith theSandiganBaan an @rgent Motion to :eclare n&llit of infor!ation and to defer the iss&ance ofhis "arrant of arrestF on the gro&nds that SandiganBaan is ass&!ed to hae no G&risdictionon the case, +eca&se the A';SBS, is a a #riate entit, f&rther arg&ing that the said entitis not a co&nter#art of 7S4S, and that their e!#loees do not receie salar fro! thegoern!ent and are not coered + the salar standardi$ation la".

The @rgent !otion "as denied + the SandiganBaan in a resol&tion #ro!&lgated onJan&ar /, 2. After the release of the resol&tion, the res#ondents filed a !otion forreconsideration. 4n a resol&tion filed + the Sandigan Baan s&staining the contention that the

A';SBS is a #riate entit, therefore, reconsidering its earlier decision and ordered thereie" and dis!issal of the earlier !entioned cri!inal case.

Th&s, the filing of a s#ecial ciil action for certiorari.

HE!:iling of a certiorari is not a re!ed in this case +eca&se &nder &le / of the r&les,

s&ch action !a onl +e aailed onl "hen there is no a##eal, or an #lain, s#eed andade>&ate re!ed in the ordinar co&rse of la", and in a case s&ch as this, an ordinar a##eal!a do so.

0n the a##eal that A';SBS is a #riate entit6 hence, &nder 'residental decree no.%/1, its #&r#ose and f&nctions are si!ilar to 7S4S and SSS ece#t that, it coers onl the!e!+ers of the !ilitar serice. 4ts #&r#ose is to ad!inister their retire!ent, #ension andse#aration +enefits for this #&r#ose, it also re>&ires indiid&al contri+&tions for each !e!+er ofthe said entit. 4n connection "ith those findings, the f&nds of A';SBS ece#t for the initialseed !one, is entirel fro! the contri+&tions of the !e!+ers on the +asis of Section 2, '.:,%/1, Section 2 that states6 The sste! shall +e f&nded as follo"s5

a.) a##ro#riations and contri+&tions6+.) donations, gifts, legacies, +e>&est and others to the sste!6c.) all earnings of the sste! "hich shall not +e s&+Gect to an ta

"hatsoeer.4n the a+oe #roision, there is no #roision that states the #rohi+ition of haing

additional f&nds to the +enefit of the !e!+ers of the A';SBS. Also, A';SBS isconsidered as an instit&tion that faors #&+lic interest, and that tho&gh a #riate entit e!+odiesa goal that is + nat&re faora+le to the #&+lic.


7/17

Th&s, SandiganBaan is directed to res&!e #roceedings of the case.

ACCFA v. CU+C#, 3& SCRA '49 (19'9)Love

FACTS:

These are t"o se#arate a##eals + certiorari fro! the decision dated March 2, 19/%(7.. No. ;21--) and the order dated Ma 21, 19/- (7.. No. ;2%/) as affir!ed + theresol&tions en +anc, of the Co&rt of 4nd&strial elations, in Cases Nos. %-;@' and 1%23;MC,

res#ectiel.

The Agric&lt&ral Credit and Coo#eratie inancing Ad!inistration (ACCA) "as agoern!ent agenc created &nder e#&+lic Act No. 21, as a!ended. 4ts ad!inistratie!achiner "as reorgani$ed and its na!e changed to Agric&lt&ral Credit Ad!inistration (ACA)&nder the and efor! Code (e#&+lic Act No. %--). 0n the other hand, the ACCASerisorsH Association (ASA) and the ACCA =or*ersH Association (A=A), hereinafterreferred to as the @nions, are la+or organi$ations co!#osed of the serisors and the ran*;and;file e!#loees, res#ectiel, in the ACCA (no" ACA).

+.R. "o. 2144

0n Se#te!+er -, 19/1 a collectie +argaining agree!ent, "hich "as to +e effectie for a #eriodof one (1) ear fro! J&l 1, 19/1, "as entered into + and +et"een the @nions and the ACCA.

A fe" !onths thereafter, the @nions started #rotesting against alleged iolations and non;i!#le!entation of said agree!ent. inall, on 0cto+er 2, 19/2 the @nions declared a stri*e,"hich "as ended "hen the stri*ers ol&ntaril ret&rned to "or* on Noe!+er 2/, 19/2.

0n 0cto+er %, 19/2 the @nions, together "ith its !other &nion, the Confederation of @nions in7oern!ent Cor#orations and 0ffices (C@7C0), filed a co!#laint "ith the Co&rt of 4nd&strialelations against the ACCA (Case No. %-;@') for haing allegedl co!!itted acts of&nfair la+or #ractice, na!el5 iolation of the collectie +argaining agree!ent in order todisco&rage the !e!+ers of the @nions in the eercise of their right to self;organi$ation,discri!ination against said !e!+ers in the !atter of #ro!otions, and ref&sal to +argain. The

ACCA denied the charges and inter#osed as affir!atie and s#ecial defenses lac* ofG&risdiction of the C4 oer the case, illegalit of the +argaining contract, e#iration of saidContract and lac* of a##roal + the office of the 'resident of the fringe +enefits #roided fortherein. Br&shing aside the foregoing defenses, the C4 in its decision dated March 2, 19/%ordered the ACCA5

81. To cease and desist fro! co!!itting f&rther acts tending to disco&rage the!e!+ers of co!#lainant &nions in the eercise of their right to self organi$ation6


8/17

82. To co!#l "ith and i!#le!ent the #roision of the collectie +argaining contracteec&ted on Se#te!+er -, 19/1, incl&ding the #a!ent of '%. a !onth liingallo"ance6

8%. To +argain in good faith and e#editio&sl "ith the herein co!#lainants.8

The ACCA !oed to reconsider +&t "as t&rned do"n in a resol&tion dated A#ril 2, 19/% of

the C4 en +anc. Thereon it +ro&ght this a##eal + certiorari.

The ACCA raises the follo"ing iss&es in its #etition, to "it5

81. =hether or not the res#ondent co&rt has G&risdiction oer this case, "hich in t&rnde#ends on "hether or not the ACCA eercised goern!ental or #ro#rietarf&nctions.

2. =hether or not the collectie +argaining agree!ent +et"een the #etitioner andthe res#ondent &nion is alid6 if alid, "hether or not it has alread la#sed6 and if

not, "hether or not its (sic) fringe +enefits are alread enforcea+le.%. =hether or not there is a legal andIor fact&al +asis for the finding of theres#ondent co&rt that the #etitioner had co!!itted acts of &nfair la+or #ractice.

-. =hether or not it is "ithin the co!#etence of the co&rt to enforce the collectie+argaining agree!ent +et"een the #etitioner and the res#ondent &nions, thesa!e haing alread e#ired.8

G.R. No. L-23605

:&ring the #endenc of the a+oe !entioned case (7.. No. ;21--), s#ecificall on A&g&st ,19/%, the 'resident of the 'hili##ines signed into la" the Agric&lt&ral and efor! Code(e#&+lic Act No. %--), "hich a!ong other things re>&ired the reorgani$ation of thead!inistratie !achiner of the Agric&lt&ral Credit and Coo#eratie inancing Ad!inistration(ACCA) and changed its na!e to Agric&lt&ral Credit Ad!inistration (ACA). 0n March 13, 19/-the ACCA SerisorsH Association and the ACCA =or*ersH Association filed a #etition forcertification election "ith the Co&rt of 4nd&strial elations (Case No. 1%23;MC) #raing that the+e certified as the ecl&sie +argaining agents for the serisors and ran*;and;file e!#loees,res#ectiel, in the ACA. The trial Co&rt in its order dated March %, 19/- directed the Manageror 0fficer;in;Charge of the ACA to allo" the #osting of said order 8for the infor!ation of alle!#loees and "or*ers thereof,8 and to ans"er the #etition. 4n co!#liance there"ith, the ACA,"hile ad!itting !ost of the allegations in the #etition, denied that the @nions re#resented the!aGorit of the serisors and ran*;and;file "or*ers, res#ectiel, in the ACA. 4t f&rther allegedthat the #etition "as #re!at&re, that the ACA "as not the #ro#er #art to +e notified and toans"er the #etition, and that the e!#loees and serisors co&ld not la"f&ll +eco!e!e!+ers of the @nions, nor +e re#resented + the!.

inding the re!aining gro&nds for ACAHs o##osition to the #etition to +e "itho&t !erit, the trialCo&rt in its order dated Ma 21, 19/- certified 8the ACCA =or*ersH Association and the

ACCA SerisorsH Association as the sole and ecl&sie +argaining re#resentaties of theran*;and;file e!#loees and serisors, res#ectiel, of the Agric&lt&ral Credit Ad!inistration.8Said order "as affir!ed + the C4 en +anc in its resol&tion dated A&g&st 2-, 19/-.


9/17

0n 0cto+er 2, 19/- the ACA filed in this Co&rt a #etition for certiorari "ith &rgent !otion to stathe C4 order of Ma 21, 19/-. 4n a resol&tion dated 0cto+er /, 19/-, this Co&rt dis!issed the#etition for Hlac* of ade>&ate allegations,8 +&t the dis!issal "as later reconsidered "hen the

ACA co!#lied "ith the for!al re>&ire!ent stated in said resol&tion. As #raed for, this Co&rtordered the C4 to sta the eec&tion of its order of Ma 21, 19/-.

HE!:

4n this a##eal, the ACA in effect challenges the G&risdiction of the C4 to entertain the#etition of the @nions for certification election on the gro&nd that it (ACA) is engaged ingoern!ental f&nctions. The @nions Goin the iss&e on this single #oint, contending that the ACA#erfor!s #ro#rietar f&nctions.

@nder Section % of the Agric&lt&ral and efor! Code the ACA "as esta+lished, a!ong othergoern!ental agencies, to etend credit and si!ilar assistance to agric&lt&re, in #&rs&ance ofthe #olic en&nciated in Section 2.

The i!#le!entation of the #olic th&s en&nciated, insofar as the role of the ACA thereinis concerned, is s#elled o&t in Sections 11 to 11, incl&sie, of the and efor! Code.

The i!#le!entation of the land refor! #rogra! of the goern!ent according to e#&+licAct No. %-- is !ost certainl a goern!ental, not a #ro#rietar, f&nction6 and for that #&r#oseEec&tie 0rder No. 3 has #laced the ACA &nder the and efor!. 'roGect Ad!inistration,together "ith the other !e!+er agencies, the #ersonnel co!#le!ent of all of "hich are #lacedin one single #ool and !ade aaila+le for assign!ent fro! one agenc to another, s&+Gect onl

to Ciil Serice la"s, r&les and reg&lations, #osition classification and "age str&ct&res.

4n ie" of the foregoing #re!ises, "e hold that the res#ondent @nions are not entitled tothe certification election so&ght in the Co&rt +elo". S&ch certification is ad!ittedl for #&r#osesof +argaining in +ehalf of the e!#loees "ith res#ect to ter!s and conditions of e!#lo!ent,incl&ding the right to stri*e as a coercie econo!ic "ea#on, as in fact the said &nions did stri*ein 19/2 against the ACCA (7.. No. ;212-). / This is contrar to Section 11 of e#&+lic ActNo. 3.

=ith the reorgani$ation of the ACCA and its conersion into the ACA &nder the andefor! Code and in ie" of o&r r&ling as to the goern!ental character of the f&nctions of the

ACA, the decision of the res#ondent Co&rt dated March 2, 19/%, and the resol&tion en +anc

affir!ing it, in the &nfair la+or #ractice case filed + the ACCA, "hich decision is the s&+Gect ofthe #resent reie" in 7. . No. ;21--, has +eco!e !oot and acade!ic, #artic&larl insofaras the order to +argain collectiel "ith the res#ondent @nions is concerned.

=hat re!ains to +e resoled is the >&estion of fringe +enefits #roided for in thecollectie +argaining contract of Se#te!+er -, 19/1. =e hold, therefore, that insofar as thefringe +enefits alread #aid are concerned, there is no reason to set aside the decision of theres#ondent Co&rt, +&t that since the res#ondent @nions hae no right to the certification election


10/17

so&ght + the! nor, conse>&entl, to +argain collectiel "ith the #etitioner, no f&rther fringe+enefits !a +e de!anded on the +asis of an collectie +argaining agree!ent.

The decisions and orders a##ealed fro! are set aside andIor !odified in accordance"ith the foregoing #rono&nce!ents. No costs.

5a*mo%e vs. 6e*mo%e, 17& SCRA 2-' (199)Richard


11/17

+ove%me% vs. o%e de e0dad, 3- /0*. 72 (191')Ayen


12/17

Caa%as vs. 0*ap0*, - SCRA 94 (1974)Thelma


13/17

+o%a*es v. a8os, '- SCRA '24 (197-)Jano


14/17

Co 0m C/am vs. 5a*de, 7- /0* 113, 371 (194')Cyrus


15/17

ae;s ea$ue v. es. A


16/17

a8a0o*a vs. Asu%80o%, supaRowel


17/17

Have vs. Comm0ss0o%e, 1'2 SCRA 4& (19)Hex

v. the state cases digested

Documents