Anda di halaman 1dari 3

ARTICLE 7 SECTION 20 CASE 2 OF 3 a.

CMMTC: Had primary and exclusive privilege and


HONTIVEROS-BARAQUEL vs. TOLL REGULATORY BOARD responsibility of design and construction of project roads
b. PNCC Skyway Corp (PSC), subsidiary of PNCC which
IMPORTANT RULING RELATED TO THE PROVISION/DOCTRINE: undertook and performed latters obligations under STOA
(NOT A RULING BUT LITERALLY THE ONLY THING ABOUT SEC 20) i. Had primary and exclusive privilege and
In Constantino v Cuisia, the Court upheld the authority of the Secretary of responsibility of operation and maintenance
Finance to execute debt-relief contracts. The authority emanates from the c. Stage 1 of South MMS completed and now under PNC
power of the President to contract foreign loans under ART 7 SEC 20 9. Amendment to Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (ASTOA):
incorporated amendments, revisions, and modifications necessary to
FACTS: cover design and construction of Stage 2 of South MMS (July 2007)
1. PD 1112: Creating the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) to supervise and a. Skyway O & M Corp (SOMCO): replaced PNC
regulate, on behalf of the govt, the collection of toll fees and operation b. ASTOA approved by DOTC Sec Leandro Mendoza
of toll facilities by the private sector c. NOTE: this is where problems on case start
2. PD 1113: granting Phil. Natl Construction Co (PNCC) the right, 10. Memo of Agreement (MOA): PNCC +PSC + CMMTC for SOMCOs
privilege, and authority to construct, operate, and maintain toll assumption of operations/maintenance of Stage 1 of South MMS
facilities in North and South Luzon Toll Expressways for 30 yrs a. Toll Operation Certificate (TOC): issued by TRB to SOMCO
3. Toll Operation Agreement: TRB + PNCC for operating conditions for operation and maintenance effective Dec 31, 2007
4. PD 1894: amended PD 1113 adding Metro Manila Expressway (MME) 11. PNCC Traffic Mgt & Security Dept Workers Org (PTMSDWO): filed
a. 30 yrs commencing from date of completion of PD 1113 proj Notice of Strike against PSC for unfair labor practice (union busting)
5. PNCC entered into agreement with PT Citra Lamtoro Gung Persada a. Sec of DOLE assumed jurisdiction (initial hearing Jan 2, 2008)
(CITRA), ltd organized and established under laws of Indonesia 12. RTC Complaint: by PTMSDWO + PCSEU (union) against TRB +
a. CITRA: to provide PNCC with pre-feasibility study for MME PNCC + PSC + CMMT + SOMCO (omfg anuna daming abbrevi8)
b. Feb 1994: agreement supplemented to provide preliminary a. Sought to prohibit implementation of ASTOA and MOA as
feasibility study on Metro Manila Skyways (MMS) project well as the assumption of toll operations by SOMCO
6. Second Agreement: CITRA committed to finance and undertake b. Alleged contrary to law
prep, updating, and revalidation of previous studies on construction, i. Did not indicate conditions that shall be imposed
operation, and maintenance of MME and MMS projects ii. None of the reqs on public bidding, negotiations, or
a. Joint Investment Proposal (JIP): result of studies, submitted publication complied with before issuance of TOC
by PNCC + CITRA through TRB (who approved JIP) iii. SOMCO not qualified as facility operator (applying
i. Implementation schedule for financing, design, and grandfather rule)
construction of MMS in THREE STAGES iv. No public notices or hearings conducted after transfer
1. South MMS v. DOTC approval could not take place of pres approval
2. North MMS required under PD 1113 + PD 1894 re PNCC franchise
3. Central MMS c. Also alleged grossly disadvantageous to govt
7. Business and Joint Venture Agreement: PNCC + CITRA creating i. With capital investment of P2.5M, SOMCO stands to
Citra Metro MNL Tollways Corp (CMMTC), channel through which earn P400M gross revenue
CITRA shall participate in construction and devt of the project ii. SOMCO would not be able to cover direct overhead
8. Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (STOA): by Philippines for personal services in amt of P226M
(thru TRB) as grantor and CMMTC as investor (Aug 1995) iii. Net revenue would go to private shareholders
iv. Poor delivery of toll services (no proven track record)
v. PSC only received P320M as settlement for transfer a. Vexation + possibility of conflicting decisions: pivotal in FS
d. Amended Complaint: addtl prayer that PSC be allowed to b. ELEMENTS OF FORUM SHOPPING:
continue toll operations (TRB only one w/o Opposition filed) i. Identity of parties or at least such parties that
13. RTC denied petition represent the same interests in both actions
a. RA 8975: lower courts are prohibited from issuing TRO or ii. Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the
preliminary injunction against the govt (or any entity acting relief founded on the same facts
under govt direction) to restrain execution, implementation, iii. Identity of 2 preceding particulars, that any judgment
or operation of any such contract or project rendered in one action will amount to res judicata
b. Could no longer issue same since act sought to be restrained c. NOTICE OF STRIKE v RT COMPLAINT
already consummated Dec 31, 2007 (petition was Jan 2008) i. Unfair labor practice involving right to self-organize
ii. Unconstitutional, contrary to law, disadv to govt
ISSUES:
1. Procedural Issues: 3. TRB, by explicit provision, given power to grant administrative
a. W/N petitioners have legal standing Unions do but not legis franchise for toll facility projects
b. W/N petitioners are guilty of forum shopping NO a. FRANCISCO JR v TRB: abundantly clear that PD 1112 SEC
2. Substantive Issues: 3(a) + (e) in re to PD 1894 SEC 4 have invested in TRB with
a. W/N TRB has power to grant auth. to operate toll facility YES sufficient power to grant a qualified person or entity with
b. W/N TOC to SOMCO valid YES authority to construct, maintain and operate a toll facility and
c. W/N approval of ASTOA by DOTC Sec valid YES to issue the corresponding toll operating permit or TOC
d. W/N assumption of toll ops disadvantageous to govt NO b. Re: FRANCHISE FOR TOLL OPERATIONS TO PNCC
i. Nothing in PD 1113 or PD 1894 that states that
RULING: franchise granted to PNCC is exclusion of all others
1. PSCEU + PTMSDWO have legal standing but not legislators ii. Operation and maintenance of project roads were
a. Re: Legislators primary and exclusive privilege and responsibility of
i. Standing only if unmistakable showing that PNCC thru PSC under STOA and not law
challenged official act affects/impairs A. Just decided differently in ASTOA
rights/prerogatives as legislators iii. TRB empowered to modify, amend and impose
ii. Petitioners allege that issuance of TOC infringes on addtl conditions on franchise of PNCC in an
power of Congress who has sole authority to grant appropriate contract, particularly when public
franchise for operation of public utilities, but they interest calls for it (PD 1113 SEC 3 + PD 1894 SEC 6)
only do if law specifically requires franchise.
A. Raises no issue of constitutional import 4. Impliedly written into every TOC are the conditions prescribed
b. Re: Labor unions PSCEU + PTMSDWO a. Pets allege conditions provided under PD 1112 SEC 3(e) not
i. Filed as peoples organizations invested with a imposed on SOMCO because they do not appear on TOC
public duty to defend the rule of law i. TOC subject to govts control insofar as grant affects
ii. Existence of unions would terminate with dissolution or concerns the public, subject to terms, conditions,
of its employer and separation of its members and limitations under existing laws and agreements
A. Right to self-preservation b. FRANCISCO CASE: no need for public bidding in choosing
partners as such process was done in the exercise of mgt
2. Two cases are distinct and dissimilar in nature and character prerogatives and in pursuit of its right of delectur personae.
i. PNCC (franchisee) merely exercised mgt prerogative
when it decided to undertake construction, operation, 6. Failed to show that transfer of toll operations to SOMCO was
and maintenance of roads through companies which GROSSLY disadvantageous to the govt
are products of joint ventures with chosen partners
c. Public notice and public hearing also unnecessary concerning NOTE RE LOWER COURT JURISDICTION (RA 8975):
matters within its prerogative RA 8975 does not bar lower courts from assuming jurisdiction over
d. Re: NATIONALITY REQ FOR CORP (grandfather rule) complaints that seek nullification or implementation of natl govt
i. Lack of evidence; only aver in petition that 40% of infrastructure projects as ultimate relief (:. within RTC jurisdiction)
SOMCO is owned by CMMTC, a foreign company, WRONG FOR PETITIONERS TO COME DIRECTLY BEFORE SC FOR
while the rest owned by: SOLE REASON THAT LOWER COURTS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO
A. Toll Road Operation and Maintenance GRANT PRAYER FOR ISSUANCE OF TRO/INJUNC
Venture Corporation (TROMVC)
a. 40% owned by Singaporean co.
B. Assetvalues Holding Company, Inc (AHCI)
a. 40% Dutch-owned
C. Metro Strategic Infrastructure Holdings Inc
a. 40% by Metro Pacific Corp,
ownership/nationality not specified
ii. ART 12 SEC 11: at least 60% of whose capital must be
owned by PH citizen (which respondent showed)

5. Approval by DOTC Sec not in connection with franchise of PNCC


but in connection with powers of TRB to enter into contracts on
behalf of govt
a. DOCTRINE OF QUALIFIED POLITICAL AGENCY: act
presumptively acts of the Pres unless disapproved by latter
b. EO 497: President specifically delegated the DOTC Sec the
authority to approve contracts entered into by the TRB
c. Re: ERRORS OF PETITIONERS STAND
i. Power to grant franchises/issue authorizations for
operation not exclusive to Congress
ii. Except for special classes demanding exclusive and
personal exercise by President of constitutionally
vested power, President acts through alter ego whose
acts are as if the Chief Executives own
iii. No lease, transfer, grant of usufruct, sale, or
assignment of franchise by PNCC or its merger with
another company took place
A. PNCC contributed franchise it possesses and
partner contributes financing