Constitutional Law Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. vs.

City Mayor of Manila 20 SCRA 849, July 31, 1967 FACTS: The Municipal Board of the City of Manila enacted Ordinance No. 4760. The ordinance sought to regulate motels by imposing exorbitant fees, by requiring the owners/managers to refrain from accepting customers without letting them first fill up a prescribed form, by requiring certain minimum facilities, and by stipulating that the premises of the hotels, motels and lodging houses would be open for inspection. The petitioners contended that the said ordinance is unconstitutional and void on the ground that it violates due process for being arbitrary, unreasonable and oppressive. ISSUE: Whether or not the ordinance is unconstitutional. RULING: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the ordinance by declaring it to be a valid exercise of police power. The standard of due process is its responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Arbitrariness is ruled out and unfairness avoided. It is hostile to any official action marked by lack of reasonableness. It is the embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play. The provisions assailed by the petitioners cannot be viewed as a transgression against the command of due process. It could not be arbitrary nor unreasonable. It is neither oppressive when there appears a correspondence between the undeniable existence of an undesirable situation and the legislative attempt at correction. The ordinance constitutes a valid exercise of police power. Police power is the inherent and plenary power in the state which enables it to prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort, safety, and welfare of the society. It is the power to prescribe regulations to promote health, morals, peace, good order, safety and general welfare of the people. The challenged ordinance was enacted to minimize certain practices hurtful to public morals. The facts reveal that during that time there was an alarming increase of prostitution, adultery and fornication in Manila traceable in great part to the existence of motels which provide a necessary atmosphere for clandestine entry, presence and exit, thus becoming the ideal haven for prostitutes and thrill-seekers. The challenged ordinance then proposes to check the clandestine harboring of transients and guests of these establishments by requiring these transients and guests to fill up a registration form. The increase in license fees was intended to discourage establishments of the kind from operating for purposes other than legal and at the same time to increase the income of the city government. Licenses are incidental to the exercise of police power and the right to exact a fee may be implied from the power to license and regulate. Taxation may be made to implement the states police power.

Constitutional Law Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. vs. City Mayor of Manila 20 SCRA 849, July 31, 1967 FACTS: The Municipal Board of the City of Manila enacted Ordinance No. 4760. The ordinance sought to regulate motels by imposing exorbitant fees, by requiring the owners/managers to refrain from accepting customers without letting them first fill up a prescribed form, by requiring certain minimum facilities, and by stipulating that the premises of the hotels, motels and lodging houses would be open for inspection. The petitioners contended that the said ordinance is unconstitutional and void on the ground that it violates due process for being arbitrary, unreasonable and oppressive. ISSUE: Whether or not the ordinance is unconstitutional. RULING: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the ordinance by declaring it to be a valid exercise of police power. The standard of due process is its responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Arbitrariness is ruled out and unfairness avoided. It is hostile to any official action marked by lack of reasonableness. It is the embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play. The provisions assailed by the petitioners cannot be viewed as a transgression against the command of due process. It could not be arbitrary nor unreasonable. It is neither oppressive when there appears a correspondence between the undeniable existence of an undesirable situation and the legislative attempt at correction. The ordinance constitutes a valid exercise of police power. Police power is the inherent and plenary power in the state which enables it to prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort, safety, and welfare of the society. It is the power to prescribe regulations to promote health, morals, peace, good order, safety and general welfare of the people. The challenged ordinance was enacted to minimize certain practices hurtful to public morals. The facts reveal that during that time there was an alarming increase of prostitution, adultery and fornication in Manila traceable in great part to the existence of motels which provide a necessary atmosphere for clandestine entry, presence and exit, thus becoming the ideal haven for prostitutes and thrill-seekers. The challenged ordinance then proposes to check the clandestine harboring of transients and guests of these establishments by requiring these transients and guests to fill up a registration form. The increase in license fees was intended to discourage establishments of the kind from operating for purposes other than legal and at the same time to increase the income of the city government. Licenses are incidental to the exercise of police power and the right to exact a fee may be implied from the power to license and regulate. Taxation may be made to implement the states police power.

Luzell

Luzell