Ermita

Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators vs.
City of Manila – July 31, 1967- Police Power
Facts:
The petition for prohibition against Ordinance No. 4760 was filed on July
5, 1963 by the petitioners, Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators
Association, one of its members, Hotel del Mar, Inc., and a certain Go
Chiu, who is "the president and general manager... of the second
petitioner" against the respondent Mayor of the City of Manila who was
sued in his capacity as such "charged with the general power and duty to
enforce ordinances of the City of Manila and to give the necessary orders
for the faithful execution and enforcement of... such ordinances." (par.
1). It was alleged that the petitioner non-stock corporation is dedicated
to the promotion and protection of the interest of its eighteen (18)
members "operating hotels and motels, characterized as legitimate
businesses duly licensed by... both national and city authorities regularly
paying taxes, employing and giving livelihood to not less than 2,500
persons and representing an investment of more than P3 million."[1] (par.
2). It was then alleged... that on June 13, 1963, the Municipal Board of
the City of Manila enacted Ordinance No. 4760, approved on June 14,
1963 by the then Vice-Mayor Herminio Astorga, who was at the time
acting as Mayor of the City of Manila. (par. 3).
After which the alleged grievances against the ordinance were set forth
in detail. There was the assertion of its being beyond the powers of the
Municipal Board of the City of Manila to enact insofar as it would regulate
motels, on the ground that in the... revised charter of the City of Manila or
in any other law, no reference is made to motels; that Section 1 of the
challenged ordinance is unconstitutional and void for being unreasonable
and violative of due process insofar as it would impose P6,000.00 fee per
annum... for first class motels and P4,500.00 for second class motels; that
the provision in the same section which would require the owner,
manager, keeper or duly authorized representative of a hotel, motel, or
lodging house to refrain from entertaining or accepting any guest or...
customer or letting any room or other quarter to any person or persons
without his filling up the prescribed form
Section 2 of the challenged ordinance classifying motels into two classes

and requiring the maintenance... of certain minimum facilities in first
class motels such as a telephone in each room, a dining room or
restaurant and laundry similarly offends against the due process clause
for being arbitrary,... the provision of Section 2 of the challenged
ordinance prohibiting a person less than 18 years old from being accepted
in such hotels, motels, lodging houses, tavern or common inn unless
accompanied by parents... or a lawful guardian and making it unlawful for
the owner, manager, keeper or duly authorized representative of such
establishments to lease any room or portion thereof more than twice
every 24 hours,... in Section 4 of the challenged ordinance for a
subsequent conviction would cause the automatic cancellation of the
license of the offended party, in effect causing the destruction of... the
business and loss of its investments, there is once again a transgression
of the due process clause.
There was a plea for the issuance of preliminary injunction and for a final
judgment declaring the above ordinance null and void and
unenforceable. The lower court on July 6, 1963 issued a writ of
preliminary injunction ordering respondent Mayor to refrain... from
enforcing said Ordinance No. 4760 from and after July 8, 1963.
Issues:
How justify then the allegation of a denial of due process?
Ruling:
WHEREFORE, the judgment of the lower court is reversed and the

injunction issued lifted forthwith. With costs
Principles:
It would appear from a recital in the petition itself that what seems to be
the gravamen of the alleged... grievance is that the provisions are too
detailed and specific rather than vague or uncertain. Petitioners,
however, point to the requirement that a guest should give the name,
relationship, age and sex of the companion or companions as indefinite
and... uncertain in view of the necessity for determining whether the
companion or companions referred to are those arriving with the
customer or guest at the time of the registry or entering the room with
him at about the same time or coming at any indefinite time later to join
him; a... proviso in one of its sections which cast doubt as to whether the
maintenance of a restaurant in a motel is dependent upon the discretion
of its owners or operators; another proviso which from their standpoint
would require a guess as to whether the "full rate of payment" to be...
charged for every such lease thereof means a full day's or merely a half-
day's rate. It may be asked, do these allegations suffice to render the
ordinance void on its face for alleged vagueness or uncertainty? To ask
the question is to... answer it. From Connally v. General Construction Co.
[33] to Adderley v. Florida,[34] the principle has been consistently upheld
that what... makes a statute susceptible to such a charge is an
enactment either forbidding or requiring the doing of an act that men of
common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as
to its application. Is this the situation before... us? A citation from
Justice Holmes would prove illuminating: "We agree to all the
generalities about not supplying criminal laws with what they omit, but
there is no canon against using common sense in construing laws as
saying what they... obviously mean."[35]

Ermita

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Ermita

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators vs.

City of Manila – July 31, 1967- Police Power

Section 2 of the challenged ordinance classifying motels into two classes

How justify then the allegation of a denial of due process?

WHEREFORE, the judgment of the lower court is reversed and the

You might also like