Dagan v.

Philippine Racing Commission

G.R. No. 175220

POINT OF THE CASE:

The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a
Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provisions on
initiative and referendum.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

On August 11, 2004, Philracom issued a directive directing the Manila Jockey Club, Inc. and
Philippines Racing Club, Inc. to immediately come up with their respective Club’s House Rule to address
Equine Infectious Anemia (EIA) problem and to rid their facilities of horse infected with EIA. Said directive
was issued pursuant to Administrative Order No. 5 dated March 28, 1994 by the Department of
Agriculture declaring it unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to ship, drive or transport horses from
any locality or place except when accompanied by a certificate issued by the authority of the Director of
the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI).
In compliance with the directive, MJCI and PRCI ordered the owner’s of racehorses stable in their
establishment to submit the horses to blood sampling and administration of the Coggin Test to determine
whether they are afflicted with the EIA virus. Subsequently on September 1, 2004, Philracom issued
copies of the guideline for monitoring and eradication of EIA.
Petitioner’s refused to comply with the directives. Despite resistance from petitioners, the blood
testing proceeded. The horses, whose owners refused to comply were banned from the races and were
removed from the actual day of race, prohibited from renewing their licenses or evicted from their stables.
Racehorse owners complained before the Office of the President which in turn issued directive instructing
the Philracom to investigate the matter. Petitioners filed for a TRO with the RTC. However, the RTC
denied the petition because the issue is already obsolete since almost all racehorse owners complied
with the directive and it is a valid exercise of police power. Upon appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC
decision.

ISSUE:

Whether or not there is valid delegation of legislative power to Philracom.

RULING:

Yes. The validity of an administrative issuance, such as the assailed guidelines, hinges on
compliance with the following requisites:

1. Its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature.

2. It must be promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
3. It must be within the scope of the authority given by the legislature.
4. It must be reasonable.

All the prescribed requisites are met as regards the questioned issuances. Philracom’s authority
drawn from P.D. No. 420. The delegation made in the presidential decree is valid. Philracom did not
exceed its authority. And the issuances are fair and valid.