University of the Philippines College of Law

Block F2021

Topic Due Process and Equal Protection Clause; Due Process; Police Power
Case No. G.R. No. L-22008 November 3, 1924
Case Name PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs JULIO POMAR
Ponente Johnson, J.
Case Assigned to: Doc Rey and Rean

SUMMARY
Pomar, employer of Macaria, was sentenced to pay Macarias wages for her pregnancy leave as required by Sec13
of Act3071. Pomar claimed that the said law was unconstitutional because it made him pay whereas he and
Macaria did not agree to such payments. The lower court sided with Macaria and made Pomar pay. The SC, on
the other hand, declared the law unconstitutional and an unreasonable exercise of police power since it went
against the right to contract.

RELEVANT FACTS

Main issue here is the constitutionality of Sec.131 of Act No. 3071, and Sec.15 that sets for its penalty.
Pomar was the manager of La Flor de Isabela, a Tobacco company. Said company failed to pay Macaria
Fajardo 80pesos for her pregnancy leave, a sum she was entitled to based on Sec.13 of Act No. 3071.
Pomar initially demmured to the complaint and alleged that the facts did not constitute a violation since
he and Macaria did not include such stipulation (that Pomar will pay wages during Macarias birth giving)
in their contract. His demurrer was overruled.
Eventually, at trial, Pomar admitted the accusations but contended that the basis of the complaint (Sec.13
and 15) was unconstitutional and void.
Pomar was sentenced to pay a fine of P50, in accordance with the provisions of section 15 of said Act, to
suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs.
Said section 13 was enacted by the Legislature of the Philippine Islands in the exercise of its supposed
police power, with the praiseworthy purpose of safeguarding the health of pregnant women laborers.

ISSUES
W/N the law in question was a reasonable and lawful exercise of police power. No.

RATIO DECIDENDI

Issue Ratio
W/N the law in question was No, it is not a reasonable and lawful exercise of police power.
a reasonable and lawful
exercise of police power. In determining whether a law is within police power, it becomes necessary to
1) determine that power
2) its limits
3) its scope

The case states that police power is defined on a case-to-case basis. The two following
excerpts show just this:

1
Sec.13 - Every person, firm or corporation owning or managing a factory, shop or place of labor of any description shall be
obliged to grant to any woman employed by it as laborer who may be pregnant, 30 days vacation with pay before and another
30 days after confinement
 University of the Philippines College of Law
Block F2021

A definition of the police power of the state must depend upon the particular law and
the particular facts to which it is so applied. The many definitions which have been given
by the highest courts may be examined, however, for the purpose of giving us a
compass or guide to assist us in arriving at a correct conclusion in the particular case
before us.

the police power, the power vested in the legislature by the constitution, to make,
ordain and establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes and
ordinances, either with penalties or without, not repugnant to the constitution, as they
shall judge to before the good and welfare of the commonwealth, and of the subjects
of the same."

Then, in deciding, the case says: the contracting parties may establish any
agreements, terms, and conditions they may deem advisable, provided they are not
contrary to law, morals or public policy.2 with the caveat that the right to contract
about one's affairs is a part of the liberty of the individual, protected by the "due process
of law" clause of the constitution.

Thus, the ponente saw that the law was in violation of the right to contract because
it creates a term in every contract even if the parties did not agree to such. As
worded: The law creates a term in every such contract, without the consent of the
parties. Such persons are, therefore, deprived of their liberty to contract. The
constitution of the Philippine Islands guarantees to every citizen his liberty and one of
his liberties is the liberty to contract.

*SIDENOTE: while submitting that police power cannot be defined with finality since it
is constantly growing, the case goes on to define what police power is by citing cases
to show the limits and scope of police power. Most cited is Adkins vs Childrens Hospital
which judged as unconstitutional a law which sets a minimum wage since it goes
against the employer and employees right to contract (employer could not afford to
give minimum wage set by law and was forced to fire the employee; the employee
could find no better employment and found the current pay and benefits as sufficient).

RULING

For all of the foregoing reasons, we are fully persuaded, under the facts and the law, that the provisions of section
13, of Act No. 3071 of the Philippine Legislature, are unconstitutional and void

Therefore, the sentence of the lower court is hereby revoked, the complaint is hereby dismissed, and the defendant
is hereby discharged from the custody of the law, with costs de oficio. So ordered.

2
Article 1255, Civil Code