In re Grcia 2 scra 1984

In re Grcia

2 scra 1984

Facts: Arturo Garcia has applied for admission to the practice of law in the Philippines without submitting to the required bar examination.  His petition is based on the Treaty of Academic Degree and the exercise of professins between the phillipines and spain where he finished his studies.  he likewise avers that he is a filoipino citizen born in negros occidental and filipino parentage.


Isues: whether or not garcia may practice law without taking the bar exams in the philippines.


held: no. a filipino citizen who had finished the law course in spain may not be allowed to practice law in the philippines without passing the bar examination.  the aforementioned treaty could not hve been intended to modify the law governing the admission to the practice of law for this reason is an encroachment of the constitutional preprogative ofthe suprme court to prmulgate rulesin the practice of law in the philippies.

Tanada vs angara GR 118295

Tanada vs angara

GR 118295

Facts:  the instant case is a petition for certiorari,prohibition and mandamus filed bby petitioner to contest the constitutionality of joinuing the WTO which was concurred upon by majority of the Senate.  Petioner contends that it is in conflict with the provisions of our constitution, specifically Art,11 sec 19, and art 12, sec 10. 

Issue: whether or not such affiliation is prohibited by our constitution

Held:  art 2 of the constitution, the principles stated herein are not self-executingg.  They are used by the judiciary as aids or as guidelines in the exercise of its power of judicial review, and by the legislature in its enactments of laws.  They are not sources for causes of action.

Furthermore, the treaty is in harmony with the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and the adherence of the amity with all nations.  The deliberation and voting of the senate, voluntarily and overwhelmingly gave its consent to the WTO agreement, thereby making it a part of the law of the land.

The petition is dismissed for lack of merit.

Gonzales vs exec secretary L-21897

Gonzales vs exec secretary

L-21897

FACTS: petitioner herein filed a case for prohibition with preliminary injunction contending that the respondednts herein acted without or in excess of jurisdiction because RA 3452 which repealed RA 2207 explicitly prohibits the importation of rice and corn.  The petitioners argue tht he should be given preference over the importers of the abovementioned commodity as he is a local grower of the same.

ISSUE: whether or not the respondednt committed grave buse of discretion amounting to lck or excess of jurisdiction in importing rice.

HELD  The contracts for the purcse of ice and corn by the phillipines is a valid executive agreement under the international law.  The conflict between RA 3452 nd RA 2207 on one hand and the contracts with Burma and Vietnam on the other, must be treated in favor of one which is the latest.  However, such jurisprudence is not applicable in the cse at bar.  The rule ofmajority should aply.  The majority of the justices in the SC favored the respondent.  Invoking othe power of the SC to decide the invslidation of the international agreement. 

Hence, petition is denied for lack of the requisite of majority.

INCHONG VS HERNANDEZ GR 7995

INCHONG VS HERNANDEZ

GR 7995

FACTS: RA 1180 entitled “An act regulting Retail Business” was promulgated by Congress to protect andpromote retailers from foreign retailers who are dominating the industry.  Herein petitioners agrue that it is unconstitutional and is in violation of the treaty obligations of the Philippines. 

ISSUE: Whether or not RA 1180 is unconstitutional and violative of the threaty obligations of the Philippines.

HLED: no. the sttute is a valid exercise of th state’s police power.  Power to protect and promote  the welfare of local retailers.  It is not violaive of the treaty obligations.

Co kim chan vs valdez tankeh Gr L5

Co kim chan vs valdez tankeh

Gr L5

FACTS: a petition for mandamus was flied by herein petitioner.  Seeking to continue the proceedings  in civil case #3012 which the judge of CFI in manila refused to continue on the ground the proclamation issued by gen. douglasmacarthur had the effect of invalidating and nullifying all the judicial proceedings nd judgments of the court of the Philippines under thejapanese rule.

ISSUE: whether or not the proclamation of gen.MacArthur nullifies the judicial proceedings.

HELD:no. the proclamation intends only to nullify their laws, whether legislature or judicial which has political complexion.