EASTERN SHIPPING LINES V POEA 166 SCRA 533
G.R. No. 76633 October 18, 1988
FACTS:
Vitaliano Saco was Chief Officer of the M/V Eastern Polaris when he
was killed in an accident in Tokyo, Japan, March 15, 1985. His
widow sued for damages under Executive Order No. 797 and
Memorandum Circular No. 2 of the POEA.
The petitioner, as owner of the vessel, argued that the complaint
was cognizable not by the POEA but by the Social Security System
and should have been filed against the State Insurance Fund.
The POEA nevertheless assumed jurisdiction and after considering
the position papers of the parties ruled in favor of the complainant.
The award consisted of P180,000.00 as death benefits and
P12,000.00 for burial expenses.
The petitioner does not contend that Saco was not its employee or
that the claim of his widow is not compensable. What it does urge is
that he was not an overseas worker but a 'domestic employee and
consequently his widow's claim should have been filed with Social
Security System, subject to appeal to the Employees Compensation
Commission.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not the POEA had jurisdiction over the case as the
husband was not an overseas worker.
2. Whether or not the validity of Memorandum Circular No. 2 itself is
a violative of the principle of non-delegation of legislative power.
RULING:
1. Yes. Vitaliano Saco was an overseas employee of the petitioner
at the time he met with the fatal accident in Japan in 1985. Under
the 1985 Rules and Regulations on Overseas Employment,
overseas employment is defined as "employment of a worker
outside the Philippines, including employment on board vessels
plying international waters, covered by a valid contract. A
contract worker is described as "any person working or who has
worked overseas under a valid employment contract and shall
include seamen" or "any person working overseas or who has
been employed by another which may be a local employer,
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
foreign employer, principal or partner under a valid employment
contract and shall include seamen." 5 These definitions clearly
apply to Vitaliano Saco for it is not disputed that he died while
under a contract of employment with the petitioner and alongside
the petitioner's vessel, the M/V Eastern Polaris, while berthed in a
foreign country.
2. No. Memorandum Circular No. 2 is one such administrative
regulation. The model contract prescribed thereby has been
applied in a significant number of the cases without challenge by
the employer. The power of the POEA (and before it the National
Seamen Board) in requiring the model contract is not unlimited as
there is a sufficient standard guiding the delegate in the exercise
of the said authority. That standard is discoverable in the
executive order itself which, in creating the Philippine Overseas
Employment Administration, mandated it to protect the rights of
overseas Filipino workers to "fair and equitable employment
practices."
The Supreme Court speaking through Justice Cruz, J., states that
the delegation of legislative powers in general are particularly
applicable to administrative bodies. With the proliferation of
specialized activities and their attendant peculiar problems, the
national legislature has found it more and more necessary to
entrust to administrative agencies the authority to issue rules to
carry out the general provisions of the statute. This is called the
"power of subordinate legislation."
With this power, administrative bodies may implement the broad
policies laid down in a statute by "filling in' the details which the
Congress may not have the opportunity or competence to
provide. This is effected by their promulgation of what are known
as supplementary regulations, such as the implementing rules
issued by the Department of Labor on the new Labor Code.
These regulations have the force and effect of law.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED, with costs against the
petitioner. The temporary restraining order dated December 10,
1986 is hereby LIFTED. It is so ordered.
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
SSS V. COURT OF APPEALS 120 SCRA 707
G.R. No. L-41299 February 21, 1983
FACTS:
Sometime in March, 1963 the spouses David B. Cruz and Socorro
Concio Cruz applied for and were granted a real estate loan by the
SSS with their residential lot located at Lozada Street, Sto. Rosario,
Pateros, Rizal covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 2000 of
the Register of Deeds of Rizal as collateral. The mortgagors,
plaintiffs herein, complied with their monthly payments although
there were times when delays were incurred in their monthly
payments which were due every first five (5) days of the month. On
July 9, 1968, defendant SSS filed an application with the Provincial
Sheriff of Rizal for the foreclosure of the real estate mortgage.
On July 24, 1968, the Cruz spouses, together with their daughter
Lorna C. Cruz, instituted before the Court of First Instance of Rizal
an action for damages and attorney's fees against the Social
Security System (SSS) and the Provincial Sheriff of Rizal alleging,
among other things, that they had fully and religiously paid their
monthly amortizations and had not defaulted in any payment.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not SSS can be sued.
2. Whether or not SSS, exercising governmental functions can be
held liable for the damages.
RULING:
1. Yes. The Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Melencio
Herrera J. stated that there should be no question on this score
considering that the SSS is a juridical entity with a personality of
its own. It has corporate powers separate and distinct from the
Government. 13 SSS' own organic act specifically provides that it
can sue and be sued in Court. 14 These words "sue and be sued"
embrace all civil process incident to a legal action. 15 So that,
even assuming that the SSS, as it claims, enjoys immunity from
suit as an entity performing governmental functions, by virtue of
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
the explicit provision of the aforecited enabling law, the
Government must be deemed to have waived immunity in
respect of the SSS, although it does not thereby concede its
liability. That statutory law has given to the private-citizen a
remedy for the enforcement and protection of his rights. The SSS
thereby has been required to submit to the jurisdiction of the
Courts, subject to its right to interpose any lawful defense.
Whether the SSS performs governmental or proprietary functions
thus becomes unnecessary to belabor. For by that waiver, a
private citizen may bring a suit against it for varied objectives,
such as, in this case, to obtain compensation in damages arising
from contract 16 and even for tort.
2. Yes. The SSS can be held liable for nominal damages. This type
of damages is not for the purpose of indemnifying private
respondents for any loss suffered by them but to vindicate or
recognize their rights which have been violated or invaded by
petitioner SSS.
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
Calalang V. Williams 7. Phil 726 (1940)
G.R. No. 47800. December 2, 1940
FACTS:
Maximo Calalang, in his capacity as a private citizen and as a
taxpayer of Manila, brought before this court this petition for a writ of
prohibition against the respondents, A. D. Williams, as Chairman of
the National Traffic Commission; Vicente Fragante, as Director of
Public Works; Sergio Bayan, as Acting Secretary of Public Works
and Communications; Eulogio Rodriguez, as Mayor of the City of
Manila; and Juan Dominguez, as Acting Chief of Police of Manila.
On August 10, 1940, the Secretary of Public Works and
Communications, in his second indorsement addressed to the
Director of Public Works, approved the recommendation of that
Rosario Street and Rizal Avenue be closed to traffic of animal-drawn
vehicles (Rosario Street extending from Plaza Calderon de la Barca
to Dasmariñas Street, from 7:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and from 1:30
p.m. to 5:30 p.m.; and along Rizal Avenue extending from the
railroad crossing at Antipolo Street to Echague Street, from 7 a.m. to
11 p.m.) for a period of one year from the date of the opening of the
Colgante Bridge to traffic; that the Mayor of Manila and the Acting
Chief of Police of Manila have enforced and caused to be enforced
the rules and regulations thus adopted; that as a consequence of
such enforcement, all animal-drawn vehicles are not allowed to pass
and pick up passengers in the places above-mentioned to the
detriment not only of their owners but of the riding public as well.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the regulation promotes social justice.
RULING:
1. Yes. The promotion of social justice, however, is to be achieved
not through a mistaken sympathy towards any given group.
Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor
atomism, nor anarchy," but the humanization of laws and the
equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that
justice in its rational and objectively secular conception may at
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
least be approximated. Social justice means the promotion of the
welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of
measures calculated to insure economic stability of all the
competent elements of society, through the maintenance of a
proper economic and social equilibrium in the interrelations of the
members of the community, constitutionally, through the adoption
of measures legally justifiable, or extraconstitutionally, through
the exercise of powers underlying the existence of all
governments on the time-honored principle of salus populi est
suprema lex.
Social justice, therefore, must be founded on the recognition of
the necessity of interdependence among divers and diverse units
of a society and of the protection that should be equally and
evenly extended to all groups as a combined force in our social
and economic life, consistent with the fundamental and
paramount objective of the state of promoting the health, comfort,
and quiet of all persons, and of bringing about "the greatest good
to the greatest number."
In view of the foregoing, the writ of prohibition prayed for is
hereby denied, with costs against the petitioner. So ordered.
JD1105 – Constutional Law 1
Chavez, Lorry Jean B. JD - 1B
