Scribd
Upload
46 views

Malaga V Penachos

The document discusses a case involving the Iloilo State College of Fisheries (ISCOF) and its rejection of pre-qualification documents from petitioners for a construction project due to alleged late submission. The petitioners argued ISCOF was not subject to Presidential Decree 1818, which prohibits courts from interfering with government infrastructure projects. However, the court ruled that as a state college established to pursue government policy and receiving public funds, ISCOF qualified as a government instrumentality under administrative law and was therefore subject to PD 1818.

Uploaded by

Kyle Jamili
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
46 views

Malaga V Penachos

The document discusses a case involving the Iloilo State College of Fisheries (ISCOF) and its rejection of pre-qualification documents from petitioners for a construction project due to alleged late submission. The petitioners argued ISCOF was not subject to Presidential Decree 1818, which prohibits courts from interfering with government infrastructure projects. However, the court ruled that as a state college established to pursue government policy and receiving public funds, ISCOF qualified as a government instrumentality under administrative law and was therefore subject to PD 1818.

Uploaded by

Kyle Jamili
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

MALAGA V PENACHOS

FACTS:
 The Iloilo State College of Fisheries (ISCOF) through its Pre-qualifications, Bids and
Awards Committee (PBAC) caused the publication of Invitation to Bid for the
construction of a Micro Laboratory Building at ISCOF.
 The notice announced that the last day for the submission of pre-qualification
requirements was on December 2, 1988, and that the bids would be received and opened
on December 12, 1988 at 3 o'clock in the afternoon.
 Petitioners Maria Elena Malaga and Josieleen Najarro, respectively doing business under
the name of B.E. Construction and Best Built Construction, submitted their pre-
qualification documents at two o'clock in the afternoon of December 2, 1988. Petitioner
Jose Occeana submitted his own PRE-C1 on December 5, 1988.
 All three of them were not allowed to participate in the bidding because their documents
were considered late, having been submitted after the cut-off time of ten o'clock in the
morning of December 2, 1988.
 Petitioner filed a complaint claiming that they have submitted their documents on time,
the PBAC refused without just cause to accept them. On the same date Judge Lebaquin
issued a restraining order prohibiting PBAC from conducting the bidding and awarding
the project. The plaintiffs argued the inapplicability of PD 1818 which state that no court
shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order xxx, pointing out that while ISCOF
was a state college, it had its own charter and separate existence and was not part of the
national government.
 The trial court lifted the restraining order and denied the petition for preliminary
injunction. It declared that the building sought to be constructed at the ISCOF was an
infrastructure project of the government falling within the coverage of P.D. 1818.

ISSUE: WON ISCOF is a government instrumentality subject to the provisions of PD 1818.

The decree reads pertinently as follows:

Section 1.  NO Court in the Philippines shall have jurisdiction to issue any


restraining order, preliminary injunction, or preliminary mandatory injunction in
any case, dispute, or controversy involving an infrastructure project, or a mining,
fishery, forest or other natural resource development project of the government, or
any public utility operated by the government, including among others public
utilities for the transport of the goods or commodities, stevedoring and arrastre
contracts, to prohibit any person or persons, entity or government official from
proceeding with, or continuing the execution or implementation of any such
project, or the operation of such public utility, or pursuing any lawful activity
necessary for such execution, implementation or operation.
HELD:

The 1987 Administrative Code defines a government instrumentality as follows:


Instrumentality refers to any agency of the National Government, not integrated within the
department framework, vested with special functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with
some if not all corporate powers, administering special funds, and enjoying operational
autonomy, usually through a charter. This term includes regulatory agencies, chartered
institutions, and government-owned or controlled corporations.

The same Code describes a chartered institution thus: Chartered institution - refers
to any agency organized or operating under a special charter, and vested by law with
functions relating to specific constitutional policies or objectives. This term includes the
state universities and colleges, and the monetary authority of the state.

It is clear from the above definitions that ISCOF is a chartered institution and is
therefore covered by P.D. 1818.

There are also indications in its charter that ISCOF is a government instrumentality.


First, it was created in pursuance of the integrated fisheries development policy of the State, a
priority program of the government to effect the socio-economic life of the nation. Second, the
Treasurer of the Republic of the Philippines shall also be the ex-officio Treasurer of the state
college with its accounts and expenses to be audited by the Commission on Audit or its duly
authorized representative. Third, heads of bureaus and offices of the National Government are
authorized to loan or transfer to it, upon request of the president of the state college, such
apparatus, equipment, or supplies and even the services of such employees as can be spared
without serious detriment to public service. Lastly, an additional amount of P1.5M had been
appropriated out of the funds of the National Treasury and it was also decreed in its charter that
the funds and maintenance of the state college would henceforth be included in the General
Appropriations Law.

You might also like