631 LANDERIO City of Naga v. Agna

CITY OF NAGA v. AGNA (RIGGZ) 3. Respondents alleged that the Ordinance no.
4 Section 3 (as ammeneded by

May 31, 1976 | Martin, J. | Pari Materia Ordinance n0. 360) did not take effect in the year approved (which is 1970),
rather it took effect on 1971. Therefore, the taxes paid in 1970 were illegal
PETITIONER: City of Naga and should be refunded.
RESPONDENTS: Catalino Agna, et al.
4. City Treasurer denied the claim. Respondents, filed a complaint with CFI of
SUMMARY: In 1970 City of Naga enacted a tax ordinance (Ordinance 360). 1971,
a year after, respondents with the City Treasurer of Naga filed a claim for refund for Naga seeking Ordinance No. 360 declared effective only after the year of its
amount of tax paid during the July to September quarter of the year. Respondents approval; to have Sections 4, 6, and 8 null and void; to require petioners to
claims that the Ordinance did not take effect in the year approved (which is 1970), refund the sums being claimed with interests.
rather it took effect on 1971. Therefore, the taxes paid in 1970 were illegal and
should be refunded. City Treasurer denied the claim. Respondents, filed a complaint 5. CFI: declared Ordinance No. 360 enforceable in the year after it was
with CFI of Naga seeking Ordinance No. 360 declared effective only after the year
approved (1971). CFI also claimed under R.A. 305 Section 14 (charter of
of its approval.
the City of Naga), each approved ordinance "shall take effect and be
enforced on and after the 10th day following its passage unless otherwise
CFI: declared Ordinance No. 360 enforceable in the year after it was approved
(1971). CFI also claimed under R.A. 305 Section 14 (charter of the City of Naga), stated in the ordinance"; that likewise under Section 2 of Republic Act No.
2264 (Local Autonomy Act) a tax ordinance "shall go into effect on the
each approved ordinance "shall take effect and be enforced on and after the 10th day
following its passage unless otherwise stated in the ordinance"; that likewise under 15th day after its passage unless the ordinance shall provide otherwise."
Section 2 of Republic Act No. 2264 (Local Autonomy Act) a tax ordinance "shall
go into effect on the 15th day after its passage unless the ordinance shall provide 6. SC dismissed petition: ruling RA 2304 of the Revised Administrative
otherwise." SC dismissed petition: ruling RA 2304 of the Revised Administrative Code can be reconciled with RA 2264 Local Autonomy Act by applying a
Code can be reconciled with RA 2264 Local Autonomy Act by applying a clause on clause on those Acts depending on the case at hand. In this case, RA 2304
those Acts depending on the case at hand. In this case, RA 2304 referring to the referring to the “effectivity of an ordinance changing or repealing a
“effectivity of an ordinance changing or repealing a municipal license tax already in municipal license tax already in existence” is applicable. Therefore,
existence” is applicable. Therefore, Ordiance No. 360 should be effective and Ordiance No. 360 should be effective and enforceable in the next
enforceable in the next succeeding year after the year of its approval or in 1971. succeeding year after the year of its approval or in 1971.
DOCTRINE: When statutes are in pari materia, the rule of statutory construction ISSUE/s: WON case holding that Section 2309 of the Revised Administrative Code
dictates that they should be construed together. and Section 2 of the Local Autonomy (Republic Act No. 2264) can be reconciled by
applying the first clause of Section 2309 of the Revised Administrative Code – YES
FACTS: RULING: IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the instant petition is hereby

1. 1970 - City of Naga enacted Ordinance No. 360 changing and amending the dismissed. SO ORDERED
graduated tax on quarterly gross sales of merchants prescribed Ordinance
No. 4 of the City of Naga to percentage tax on gross sales provided for in
RATIO:
Section 2 thereof.
1. SC dismissed petition, ruling that RA 2304 of the Revised Administrative
Code and RA 2264 Local Autonomy Act can be reconciled by applying
2. 1971 - respondents filed with the City Treasurer of the City of Naga a claim the first clause of Section 2309 of the Revised Administrative Code
for refund of amounts paid, together with interests from the date of when the problem refers to the effectivity of an ordinance changing or
payments paid to the City of Naga the taxes on their gross sales, for the repealing a municipal license tax already in existence. But where the
quarter from July to September of 1970 problem refers to effectivity of an ordinance creating an entirely new tax,
let Section 2 of Republic Act No. 2264 (Local Autonomy Act) govern.
2. Both Republict Acts refer to the same subject matter when it comes to their
provisions on enactment and effectivity of tax Ordiance. Therefore, In this
respect they can be considered in pari materia, which are statutes that
relate to the same person or thing, or to the same class of persons or
things, or have the same purpose or object. When statutes are in pari
materia, the rule of statutory construction dictates that they should be
construed together. This is because all enactments of the same legislature
on the same subject matter are supposed to form part of one uniform
system; that later statutes are supplementary or complimentary to the
earlier enactments.
3. Accordingly Ordinance No. 360 should be effective and enforceable in
the next succeeding year after the year of its approval or in 1971 and
private respondents should be refunded of the taxes they have paid to the
petitioners on their gross sales for the quarter from July 1, 1970 to
September 30, 1970 plus the corresponding interests from the filing of the
complaint until reimbursement of the amount.

631 LANDERIO City of Naga v. Agna

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

631 LANDERIO City of Naga v. Agna

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CITY OF NAGA v. AGNA (RIGGZ) 3. Respondents alleged that the Ordinance no.

4 Section 3 (as ammeneded by

FACTS: RULING: IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the instant petition is hereby

You might also like