G.R. No.
189185, August 16, 2016
WILFREDO MOSQUEDA, et al Petitioners, v. PILIPINO BANANA GROWERS & EXPORTERS
ASSOCIATION, INC, et al Respondents.
FACTS:
After several committee hearings and consultations with various stakeholders, the Sangguniang
Panlungsod of Davao City enacted Ordinance No. 0309, Series of 2007, to impose a ban against
aerial spraying as an agricultural practice by all agricultural entities within Davao City.
The Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association, Inc. (PBGEA) and two of its members,
namely: Davao Fruits Corporation and Lapanday Agricultural and Development Corporation
(PBGEA, et al.), filed their petition in the RTC to challenge the constitutionality of the ordinance, and
to seek the issuance of provisional reliefs through a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or writ of
a preliminary injunction. On June 20, 2007, the RTC granted the prayer for the issuance of the writ of
preliminary injunction, and subsequently issued the writ.
ISSUE:
Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that Ordinance No. 0309-07 is violative of the equal
protection clause of the constitution
RULING:
Yes, Ordinance No. 0309-07 is violative of the equal protection clause of the constitution.
ANALYSIS:
Equal treatment neither requires universal application of laws to all persons or things without
distinction, nor intends to prohibit legislation by limiting the object to which it is directed or by the
territory in which it is to operate. The guaranty of equal protection envisions equality among equals
determined according to a valid classification. If the groupings are characterized by substantial
distinctions that make real differences, one class may be treated and regulated differently from
another. In other word, a valid classification must be: (1) based on substantial distinctions; (2)
germane to the purposes of the law; (3) not limited to existing conditions only; and (4) equally
applicable to all members of the class.
Applying the test, the established classification under Ordinance No. 0309-07 is to be viewed in
relation to the group of individuals similarly situated with respect to the avowed purpose. This gives
rise to two classes, namely: (1) the classification under Ordinance No. 0309-07 (legislative
classification); and (2) the classification based on purpose (elimination of the mischief). The
legislative classification found in Section 4 of the ordinance refers to "all agricultural entities" within
Davao City.
CONCLUSION:
The Court DENIES the consolidated petitions for review on certiorari for their lack of
merit; AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on January 9, 2009 in C.A.-G.R. CV No. 01389-MIN.
declaring Ordinance No. 0309-07 UNCONSTITUTIONAL; PERMANENTLY ENJOINS respondent
City of Davao, and all persons or entities acting in its behalf or under its authority, from enforcing and
implementing Ordinance No. 0309-07; and ORDERS the petitioners to pay the costs of suit.
