Saturday, October 27, 2007

Municipal Corporations Course Syllabus

LAW ON MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
Course Syllabus

Prepared by
Atty. Diana Lynn M. Arellano


INTRODUCTION

A. Constitutional Basis

B. Innovations in the law on local governments introduced by the LGC of 1991

C. Effectivity of LGC
Evardone vs. COMELEC, 204 SCRA 464 (1991)
Secretary of Health vs. CA, 241 SCRA 688 (1995)

D. General Principles

1. Classes of corporations; definitions

2. Elements of municipal corporations

3. Dual nature of municipal corporations
Torio vs. Fontanilla
Cruz vs. CA

4. De facto municipal corporations
Mun. of Malabang vs. Benito, 27 SCRA 533 (1969)
Municipality of San Narciso vs. Mendez, 239 SCRA 11 (1994)
Camid vs. Office of the President, Jan 17, 2005 (448 SCRA 711)



I. BASIC PRINCIPLES

A. The Local Government Code; Policy and Application

1. Local autonomy for territorial and political subdivisions

Atienza vs. Villarosa (458 SCRA 385) May 10, 2005

1.1 Definitions

a. Local autonomy
b. Decentralization
c. Deconcentration
d. Devolution
e. Debureaucratization

1.2 Decentralization of administration vs. decentralization of power

Limbona vs. Mangelin, 170 SCRA 786 (1989)
Ganzon vs. CA, 200 SCRA 271 (1991)
Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties Corp. 234 SCRA 255 (1994)
2. Consultations

2.1 LGC Sec. 2(c)
2.2 LGC Sec. 26
2.3 LGC Sec. 27

Lina vs. Paño, Aug. 30, 2001
Bangus Fry Fisherfolk vs. Lanzanas, G.R. No. 131442, July 10, 2003

3. Scope of application

4. Merger of administrative regions

Abbas vs. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 (1989)
Chiongbian vs. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253 (1995)

5. Rules of interpretation

5.1 Provision on power of LGU

San Juan vs. CSC, 196 SCRA 69 (1991)
Greater Balanga Development Corp. vs. Balanga, 239 SCRA
436 (1994)

5.2 Tax ordinance/revenue measure

Basco vs. PAGCOR, 197 SCRA 52 (1991)

5.3 Tax exemption, incentive, relief granted pursuant to LGC

5.4 General welfare provisions

Tano vs. Socrates, 278 SCRA 154 (1997)

5.5 When there is a controversy arising under the LGC and there is no applicable legal provision or jurisprudence


B. creation, conversion, division, merger and consolidation, and abolition of lgus

1. Creation of LGUs

1.1 Verifiable indicators

1.2 Manner of Creation

1.3 Necessity of fixing corporate limits

a. Role
b. Who creates
c. Substantive requirements

Tobias vs. Abalos, 239 SCRA 106 (1994)
Alvarez vs. Guingona, 252 SCRA 695 (1996)
Tan vs. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727
2. Conversion of a component City into a highly-urbanized city

3. Status of sub-provinces

Griño vs. COMELEC, 213 SCRA 672 (1992)

4. Autonomous regions

Ordillo vs. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100

5. Special Metropolitan Political Subdivisions

MMDA vs. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc., G.R. No. 135962,
March 27, 2000

6. Plebiscite requirement

Padilla vs. COMELEC, 214 SCRA 735 (Oct. 19, 1992)
Cawaling vs. COMELEC, Oct. 26, 2001

7. Beginning of corporate existence of LGU’s

8. Division and Merger of LGUs

9. Abolition of LGUs

Sarangani vs. COMELEC, 334 SCRA 379 (2000)

10. Effects of Annexation/ Consolidation and Division of LGUs


C. General Power and Attributes

1. Powers in general

2. Governmental powers

2.1 General Welfare

a. What powers do LGU’s have under the general welfare clause of the LGC?

b. What duties do LGU’s have under the GWC?

c. What are the 2 branches of the GWS?

Rural Bank of Makati Inc. vs. Mun. of Makati, G.R. No. 150763,
July 2, 2004

d. Limitations

e. Ordinances/acts deemed ultra vires and void

Viray vs. City of Caloocan, 20 SCRA 791 (1967)
Balacuit vs. CFI of Agusan del Norte, 163 SCRA 182 (1988)
Villanueva vs. Castañeda 154 SCRA 142 (1987)

f. Ordinances/acts deemed valid under the GWC

Ebona vs. Mun. of Daet,
Republic vs. Gonzales
U.S. vs. Salaveria, 39 Phil 103 (1918)
Chua Huat vs. CA
Binay vs. Domingo, 201 SCRA 508 (1991)

g. Abatement of nuisances

Estate of Gregoria Francisco vs. CA, 199 SCRA 595 (1991)
Technology developers, Inc. vs. CA, 193 SCRA 147 (1991) AND
The Motion for Reconsideration
Laguna Lake Devt. Authority vs. CA, 251 SCRA 42 (1995)


2.2 Basic Services and Facilities

a. What are the basic services and facilities which LGU’s must provide to their constituents?

b. How shall these basic services and facilities be funded?

2.3 Power to Generate Revenue

What are the powers granted to LGUs under Sec. 18 of the LGC?

Basco vs. PAGCOR


2.4 Eminent Domain

What are the requisites for the exercise of eminent domain by LGUs?

Heirs of Suguitan vs. City of Mandaluyong, 328 SCRA 137 (2000)
Republic vs. Guingona (478 SCRA 474) Dec. 19, 2005
Bardillon vs. Masili, 402 SCRA 440 (2003)
City of Iloilo vs. Legaspi, G.R. No. 154614, Nov. 25, 2004


2.5 Reclassification of lands

a. What are the requisites for valid reclassification of lands by LGU’s?

b. Differentiate classification, land use conversion, and zoning.

c. What are the priorities in the acquisition of lands for socialized housing?

Province of Camarines Sur vs. CA, 222 SCRA 172 (1993)
Roxas vs. CA, 321 Scra 106 (1999)

2.6 Closure and opening of roads

a. What are the requirements for a valid permanent closure?

b. What are the requirements for a valid temporary closure?

Cabrera vs. CA, 195 SCRA 314 (1991)
Dacanay vs. Asistio, 208 SCRA 404 (1992)

2.7 Naming of LGUs, public places, streets and structures

2.8 Settlement of boundary disputes

2.9 Corporate powers

a. Requisites for entering into a contract by the LGU? (Sec. 22c)

b. Differentiate public from private/patrimonial property.

c. Ultra vires contracts

Province of Zamboanga vs. City of Zamboanga, 22 SCRA 133 (1968)
Rabuco vs. Villegas, 55 SCRA 656 (1974)


D. Municipal Liability

1. Differentiate between suability and liability.

2. Specific provisions making LGUs liable

3. Liabilities for torts

Torio vs. Fontanilla, 85 SCRA 599

4. Governmental vs. proprietary functions

5. Liability for violation of law

Moday vs. CA, 243 SCRA 152

6. Liability for contracts

7. Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability

Province of Cebu vs. IAC, 147 SCRA 447


E. Intergovernmental relations between national government and LGU’s

1. Executive Supervision

1.1 What is the Power of the President over LGU’s?
1.2 Differentiate between control and supervision.

Mondano vs. Silvosa
Ganzon vs. CA, 200 SCRA 271 (1991)

1.3 What is the nature of the power of the Secretary of Justice to review the constitutionality or legality of tax ordinance and revenue measures?

Drilon vs. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994)

1.4 What is the Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency?

Carpio vs. Executive Secretary, 206 SCRA 290 (1992)
De Leon vs. Carpio

2. General Responsibilities of National Government towards LGUs

3. Consultations

3.1 LGC Sec. 2(c)
3.2 LGC Sec. 26
3.3 LGC Sec. 27

Lina vs. Paño, Aug. 30, 2001
Bangus Fry Fisherfolk vs. Lanzanas, G.R. No. 131442, July 10,
2003

4. Relations with Philippine National Police

4.1 What is the extent of operational supervision and control of local chief executive over the PNP?

a. Provincial Governor

b. City and Municipal Mayors

4.2 Is the deputization of municipal and city Mayors as agents of the NAPOLCOM a usurpation of the power of control of the NAPOLCOM over the PNP?

Carpio vs. Executive Secretary, 206 SCRA 290 (1992)
Andaya vs. RTC, 319 SCRA 697 (1999)

5. Inter-Local Government Relations

5.1 What is the nature of the relationship of the province and the cities and municipalities within its territorial jurisdiction?

5.2 Review of Executive Orders

6. Relations with People’s and Nongovernmental Organizations

7. Local prequalification, bids and awards committee



II. ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
A. QUALIFICATIONS AND ELECTIONS

1. Qualifications

CIPRIANO vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 158830, August 10, 2004

1.1 Common Qualifications

a. Citizenship

Frivaldo vs. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 767

b. Registered Voter

Bautista vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154796-7, October 23, 2003

c. Residency

Papandayan vs. COMELEC, April 16, 2002
Coquilla vs. COMELEC, 385 SCRA 607

d. Able to read and write Filipino

1.2 Age requirement

Garvida vs. Sales

2. Disqualifications

2.1 Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (1) year imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving sentence (LGC, Sec 40 (a))

Dela Torre vs. COMELEC, 258 SCRA 483 (1996)

2.2 Those removed from office as a result of an administrative case

Malinao vs. Reyes, 255 SCRA 616 (1996)
Aguinaldo vs. Santos
*Reyes vs. COMELEC, 254 SCRA 514 (1996)

2.3 Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to the Republic (LGC Sec. 40 (c))

2.4 Those with dual citizenship (LGC Sec. 40 (d))

Mercado vs. Manzano, 307 SCRA 639 (1999)
Valles vs. COMELEC, 337 SCRA 543 (2000)

2.5 Fugitives from justice in criminal or nonpolitical cases here or abroad (LGC Sec. 40 (e)

Marquez vs. COMELEC
Rodriguez vs. COMELEC, 259 SCRA 296 (1996)

2.6 Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to avail of the same right after the effectivity of the LGC (LGC Sec. 40 (f))

2.7 The insane or feeble-minded (LGC Sec. 40 (g))

2.8 Other grounds

Nolasco vs. COMELEC, 275 SCRA 762 (1997)
Dimaporo vs. Mitra
Borja vs. COMELEC

3. Manner of election

4. Date of election

5. Term of office

5.1 3-term limit for elective officials

5.2 What constitutes term of office?

Borja vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 133495, Sept. 3, 1998
Lonzanida vs. COMELEC, 311 SCRA 602 (1999)
Adormeo vs. COMELEC, Feb. 4, 2002
Socrates vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154512, Nov. 12, 2002
Latasa vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003
Mendoza vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 149736, Dec. 17, 2002
David vs. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 90 (1997)
Monroy vs. CA, 20 SCRA 620 (1967)
Aguinaldo vs. COMELEC, 308 SCRA 770 (1999)



B. Vacancies and successions

Menzon vs. Petilla, 197 SCRA 251 (1991)
Gamboa vs. Aguirre, 310 SCRA 867 (1999)
Victoria vs. COMELEC, 229 SCRA 269 (1994)

1. When does a permanent vacancy arise?

2. Sequence for automatic succession

Fariñas vs. Barba, 256 SCRA 396
Garvide vs. Sales, 271 SCRA 767
Navarro vs. CA, March 28, 2001

3. Temporary vacancies

4. Leaves of absence


C. COMPENSATION


D. LOCAL LEGISLATION

1. Products of local legislative action

1.1 Ordinance

1.2 Resolution

2. What are the tests of a valid ordinance?

Marahomsalic vs. Lim, Jan. 26, 2000 (CA case)

3. Who exercises local legislative power?

Zamora vs. Caballero, G.R. No. 147767, Jan. 14, 2004
Perez vs. Dela Cruz, 27 SCRA 587 (1969)

4. Veto power by local chief executive

De Los Reyes vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 121215, Nov. 13, 1997

5. Review of ordinances

Hagonoy Market Vendor Assoc. vs. Mun. of Hagonoy, Feb. 6, 2002
Ortega vs. QC Govt., G.R. No. 151400, Sept. 2, 2005

6. Enforcement of disapproved ordinances/resolutions

7. Effectivity



E. Disciplinary actions

1. What are the grounds for disciplinary actions?

Regidor vs. Chiongbian, 173 SCRA 507

2. What is the procedure for administrative complaints?

3. Differentiate preventive suspension of elective local government officials under the Local Government Code and under the Ombudsman Act (RA 6770)

Hagad vs. Gozo-Dadole, G.R. No. 108072, Dec. 12, 1995

4. Differentiate between preventive suspension and suspension as a penalty.

Joson vs. Torres, 290 SCRA 279
Salalima vs. Guingona, 257 SCRA 55

5. What are the requisites for the validity of decisions in administrative complaints rendered by the pertinent Sanggunian?

6. Rights of respondent

7. Form and notice of decisions

8. Penalty

Ganzon vs. CA, 203 SCRA 399 (1991)
Valencia vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 141336, June 29, 2004
Lapid vs. CA, 334 SCRA 738 (2000)

9. Appeal

Malinao vs. Reyes, 255 SCRA 616

10. Sandiganbayan

Rios vs. Sandiganbayan, 279 SCRA 581 (1997)
Miranda vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 154098, July 27, 2005
Barriga vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 161784-6, April 26, 2005
Inding vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143047, July 14, 2004
Rodriguez vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 141710, March 3, 2004


F. Recall

1. Definition

Evardone vs. COMELEC, 204 SCRA 464

2. Nature

3. By whom exercised

4. Grounds

5. How initiated

Garcia vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 111511, Oct. 5, 1993
Malonzo vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 127066, March 11, 1997
Angobung vs. COMELEC, 269 SCRA 245 (1997)

6. Election on Recall

7. Effectivity

8. Limitations

Claudio vs. COMELEC, 331 SCRA 388 (2000)
Afiado vs. COMELEC, Sept. 18, 2000



III. Human Resources Development

A. Casual Employees

B. Limitations on Appointment and Nepotism

Debulgado vs. CSC, 237 SCRA 184 (1994)
CSC vs. Tinaya, G.R. No. 154898, Feb. 16, 2005
Dimaandal vs. Commission on Audit, 291 SCRA 322

C. Compensation

D. Resignation

Sangguniang Bayan of San Andres vs. CA, 284 SCRA 276 (1998)

E. Discipline

Macalincag vs. Chang, 208 SCRA 413 (1992)
Garcia vs. Pajaro, 394 SCRA 122 (2002)

F. recall of appointments

Mathay vs. CSC, 312 SCRA 91 (1999)
Mathay vs. CA, 320 SCRA 703 (1999)

G. Prohibited Interests

Teves vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 154182, Dec. 17, 2004

H. Practice of Profession

Javellana vs. DILG, 212 SCRA 475
Ramos vs. CA, 108 SCRA 728 (1981)
Mancenido vs. CA, April 12, 2000

I. Prohibited Appointments

Flores vs. Drilon, 223 SCRA 568 (1993)
De Rama vs. CA, 353 SCRA 94 (2001)



IV. LOCAL INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM

A. Initiative

1. Procedure

2. Limitations

3. Limitations on Sanggunian

Garcia vs. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 279 (1994)

B. Referendum

SBMA vs. COMELEC, 262 SCRA 492 (1996)

C. Authority of Courts

V. Local Government Units

A. The Barangay

1. Chief Officials and Officers

People vs. Recto, Oct. 17, 2001
Alquizola vs. Ocol, 313 SCRA 273 (1999)

2. Barangay Assembly; Powers

3. Katarungang Pambarangay

3.1 Lupong Tagapamayapa

3.2 Powers of the Lupon

3.3 Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo

3.4 Subject matter of amicable settlement

Vercide vs. Hernandez, 330 SCRA 49 (2000)

4. Sangguniang Kabataan

Marquez vs. COMELEC, 313 SCRA 103 (1999)


B. The Municipality

Olivarez vs. Sandiganbayan, 248 SCRA 700 (1995)


C. The City

Negoros Oriental II Electric Cooperative vs. Sangguniang Panlungsod ng Dumaguete, 155 SCRA 421 (1987)
Dadole vs. COA, G.R. No. 125359, Dec. 3, 2002
Gordon vs. Veridiano II, 167 SCRA 51 (1988)
Acebedo Optical vs. CA, 329 SCRA 314 (2000)
Canet vs. Dacena, G.R. No. 155344, Jan. 20, 2004


D. The Province


E. Appointive Local Officials common to all municipalities, cities, and provinces

Rapisora vs. CSC, 228 SCRA 622 (1993)


F. Leagues of LGUs and elective officials

1. Liga ng mga Barangay

Viola vs. Alunan, G.R. No. 115844, Aug. 15, 1997
Galarosa vs. Valencia, 227 SCRA 728 (1993)
Bito-on vs. Fernandez, 350 SCRA 732 (2001)

2. League of Municipalities



VI. Miscellaneous and Final Provisions


A. Provisions for implementation

B. Transitory provisions

C. Application of the code to LGUs in the autonomous regions

1. ARMM

ABBAS vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 89651, Nov. 10, 1989
DISOMANGCOP vs. SEC. OF PUBLIC WORKS & HIGHWAYS, G.R. No. 149848, Nov. 25, 2004
PANDI vs. CA, G.R. No. 116850, April 11, 2002

2. CAR

Cordillera Broad Coalition vs. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 79956, Jan. 29, 1990

D. The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority

MMDA vs. GARIN, G.R. No. 130230, April 15, 2005
MMDA vs. BEL-AIR VILLAGE ASSOC., G.R. No. 130230,
April 15, 2005
SOLICITOR GENERAL vs. MMA, G.R. No. 102782, Dec. 11, 1991

1. What is the jurisdiction of the MMDA?

2. What are the duties of the MMDA?

DLMA/6-28-07