Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 282 views

    Lucero vs. City Government of Pasig

    Uploaded by

    Zia Bastero
    The Lucero brothers and Tenorio had been leasing stalls in the public market of Pasig since 1983. In 1993, Pasig renovated the market and passed an ordinance requiring all stall occupants to apply for new leases. The Luceros and Tenorio refused to apply. Pasig filed an ejectment case against them. The MTC ruled in favor of the Luceros but was reversed by higher courts. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1983 leases did not give the Luceros irrefutable rights to the stalls and that operating a market stall is subject to the city government's police power to require lease applications.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lucero vs. City Government of Pasig

    Uploaded by

    Zia Bastero
    282 views1 page
    The Lucero brothers and Tenorio had been leasing stalls in the public market of Pasig since 1983. In 1993, Pasig renovated the market and passed an ordinance requiring all stall occupants to apply for new leases. The Luceros and Tenorio refused to apply. Pasig filed an ejectment case against them. The MTC ruled in favor of the Luceros but was reversed by higher courts. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1983 leases did not give the Luceros irrefutable rights to the stalls and that operating a market stall is subject to the city government's police power to require lease applications.

    Original Description:

    digest

    Original Title

    Lucero vs. city government of pasig

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Lucero brothers and Tenorio had been leasing stalls in the public market of Pasig since 1983. In 1993, Pasig renovated the market and passed an ordinance requiring all stall occupants to apply for new leases. The Luceros and Tenorio refused to apply. Pasig filed an ejectment case against them. The MTC ruled in favor of the Luceros but was reversed by higher courts. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1983 leases did not give the Luceros irrefutable rights to the stalls and that operating a market stall is subject to the city government's police power to require lease applications.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    282 views1 page

    Lucero vs. City Government of Pasig

    Uploaded by

    Zia Bastero
    The Lucero brothers and Tenorio had been leasing stalls in the public market of Pasig since 1983. In 1993, Pasig renovated the market and passed an ordinance requiring all stall occupants to apply for new leases. The Luceros and Tenorio refused to apply. Pasig filed an ejectment case against them. The MTC ruled in favor of the Luceros but was reversed by higher courts. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1983 leases did not give the Luceros irrefutable rights to the stalls and that operating a market stall is subject to the city government's police power to require lease applications.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Lucero v. City Government of PasigGR No.

    13283424 November 2006 Facts: The brothers Lucero and one Tenorio were granted lease contracts to occupy stalls in the public market if Pasig in 1983. In1993, Pasig renovated its marketfacilities and passed MunicipalOrdinance No. 56 which mandated all stall occupants to fill up and submit application forms which would serve as their lease contracts if approved. The Luceros and Tenorio,however, refused to apply for anew lease on their stalls. ThePasig government filed a case for ejectment against them.The MTC ruled in favor of theLuceros, but was reversed by theRTC and the CA. ISSUE: W/N the Luceros may claim a vested right to the market stalls they were occupying. W/N the Municipal Ordinance was a valid exercise of police power.

    RULING: NO. The 1983 lease contracts did not give petitioners irrefutable rights to the market stalls. They were mere grantees of a privilege to occupy and operate such booths.

    YES. The operation of a market stall by virtue of a license is always subject to the police power of a city government. An application for this privilege may be granted or refused for reasons of public policy and sound public administration. A public market is one dedicatedto the service of the general public and operated under government control andsupervision as a public utility. Hence, the operation of a public market and its facilities is imbued with public interest.

    You might also like