Scotys Department Store, et al. v. Micaller (1956) 9.

Micaller filed charges of unfair labor practice

Bautista Angelo, J. against her employers alleging that she was
Plaintiff: Scotys Department Store et al. dismissed because of her membership in the
Respondent: Nena Micaller National Labor Union and that prior to her
Concept: Imposition of Fines and Penalties dismissal, they had been questioning their
employees regarding their membership in the
Brief facts: Micaller was dismissed from employment union which amounts to an interference in their
by the owners of Scotys Department Store for her right to organize.
membership in the National Labor Union. Micaller filed 10. The Court of Industrial Relations found them guilty
a complaint for Unfair Labor Practice against the of unfair labor practice and ordered them to pay a
owners in the CIR. CIR found them guilty and imposed fine of P100.
a penalty of P100. Petitioners question the propriety of 11. Petitioners raise the following errors:
judgment and the jurisdiction of the CIR to impose the a. CIR erred in finding that Micaller was
penalty. dismissed because of her membership in
the National Labor Union
Doctrine: The power to impose penalties provided in b. CIR erred in finding that they have
Sec 25 of RA 875 is lodged in the ordinary courts and committed unfair labor practice
not in the CIR, notwithstanding of the definition of the c. CIR erred in finding that they can be legally
word court contained in Section 2(a). punished for a fine of P100
SC: Issues a and b cannot be resolved by the court
Administrative Body: Court of Industrial Relations because they involve questions of fact. CIR has made a
Law Involved: Section 25 of RA 875 (An Act to careful analysis of the evidence and has found
Promote Industrial Peace and For Other Purposes) petitioners guilty. Such finding is binding upon the
court. Only resolution of error c is in order.
FACTS:
1. Nena Micaller was employed as a salesgirl in the ISSUE:
Scotys Department Store which was owned and WON the CIR has jurisdiction to impose the penalties
operated by Yu Ki Lam, Richard Yang, Yu Si Kiao, prescribed in Section 25 of RA 875. (NO)
and Helen Yang.
2. A week before October 12, 1953, Micaller RATIO:
organized a union among the employees of the Petitioners: Section 25 of RA 875 (An Act to Promote
store which was later affiliated with the National Industrial Peace and For Other Purposes) being penal in
Labor Union. character should be strictly construed in favor of the
3. Later, the National Labor Union sent a petition to accused and in that sense, their guilt can only be
the store containing 10 demands, so Micaller was established by clear and positive evidence and not
called by the management for questioning. Owners merely presumptions or inferences as was done by the
of the store asked her who the members of the CIR.
union were, but she pretended not to know them.
4. Richard Yang and Yu Si Kiao together with a Section 25. Penalties. Any person who violates the
brother-in-law, went to her house to question her provisions of section 3 of this Act shall be punished
regarding the union membership. A day later, by a fine of not less than P100 not more than
Micaller was brought by her employers to the P1000, or by imprisonment of not less than 1
house of their counsel and was again questioned. month nor more than 1 year, or by both such fine
She was even made to sign a paper of withdrawal and imprisonment, in the discretion of the
from the union. Court.
5. On October 19, 1953, Yu Ki Lam (manager), asked
each and every employee whether they were SC: The above provision is general in nature for it
members of the union, threatening to close the doesnt specify which court that may act when the
store if they wouldnt dissolve the union. violation charged calls for the imposition of the
6. On October 31, the union gave a notice to strike. penalties.
Upon receipt of such notice, management hired -said provision notwithstanding, the Court referred
temporary employees equal in number to the old. to in Sec 25 cannot be the CIR for to give that
The new employees were affiliated with another meaning would be violative of the safeguards
labor union. guaranteed to every accused by our Constitution.
7. The following were filed against Micaller by the o No person shall be held to answer for a
management: criminal offense without due process of
a. Information for threatsdismissed law
b. Information for slandersentenced to pay -the procedure laid down by law to be observed by
a fine of P50appealed the CIR in dealing with unfair labor practice cases
c. Another information for slaner negates the constitutional guarantees to the
8. On November 30, she was dismissed for insulting accused (the right to be hear by himself and
the owner of the store and for talking to the girls counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of
inside the store during business hours. the accusation, to have a speedy and public trial,
to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have

TIMELESS REVIEWERS B2017 | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | DEAN SALVADOR CARLOTA |1

 compulsory process to secure the attendance of power of the Collector of Customs to fix the penalty as
witnesses on his behalf), because the law provides an undue delegation of legislative power.
that the rules of evidence prevailing in courts of
law or equity shall not be controlling and it is the Doctrine: Where the sovereign power of the State has
intention of this act to ascertain facts in each located the authority, there it must remain; and by the
case speedily and objectively and without regard constitutional agency alone the laws must be made
to technicalities of law and procedure until the constitution itself is changed. The power to
-this means that the accused may be tried without whose judgment, wisdom, and patriotism this high
the right to confront witnesses face to face and prerogative has been entrusted cannot relieve itself of
may be convicted merely on preponderance of the responsibility by choosing other agencies upon
evidence and not beyond reasonable doubt which the power shall be developed, nor can it
-it may be argued that this gap may be subserved substitute the judgment, wisdom, and patriotism of any
by requiring the CIR to observe strictly the rules other body for those to which alone the people have
applicable to criminal cases to meet the seen it fit to confide this sovereign trust.
requirements of the Constitution, but this would be
tantamount to amending the law which isnt within Administrative Body: Collector of Customs
the province of the judiciary Law Involved: Paragraphs 70 and 83 of Circular No.
-RA 875 may be compared with RA 1267 (affect the 397; Act No. 355 as amended by Act. 1235 which
Court of Agrarian Relations) which provides that grants the power to the Collector to make suitable
criminal proceedings should be prosecuted as in regulations, but also to fix penalties in violation
ordinary cases thereof, not exceeding a fine of P500.
o Clear indication that when Congress
intends to confer criminal jurisdiction upon FACTS:
an administrative court, it expressly says 1. Aniceto Barrias was charged with a violation of
so in an unmistakable language paragraphs 70 and 83 of Circular No. 397
o Congress made its intention clear when it promulgated by the Insular Collector of Customs.
amended the law by eliminating entirely He was caught, as captain of the lighter (small
this criminal jurisdiction originally ship/boat) Maude, moving the vessel which was
conferred upon the Court of Agrarian heavily laden by bamboo poles without steam,
Relations sail, or any other external power in the Pasig River.
-court looked at the deliberations made on the bill o Paragraph 70: No heavily loaded casco,
which eliminated that criminal jurisdiction, showing lighter, or other similar craft shall be
that the intent of Congress was to place the Court permitted to move in the Pasig River
of Agrarian Relations on equal footing as the Public without being towed by steam or moves by
Service Commission and CIR other adequate power.
-the power to impose penalties provided in Sec 25 o Paragraph 83: For the violation of any of
of RA 875 is lodged in the ordinary courts and not the foregoing regulations, the person
in the CIR, notwithstanding of the definition of the offending shall be liable to a fine of not less
word court contained in Section 2(a). Hence, the than P5 and not more than P500, in the
decision of the CIR insofar as it imposes a fine of discretion of the court.
P100 is illegal and should be nullified. 2. Barrias attacks the validity of paragraphs 70 on 2
grounds:
DISPOSITIVE: Decision appealed from is modified by a. It is unauthorized by Section 19 of Act No.
eliminating the fine of P100 imposed upon petitioners. 355
In all other respects, the same is affirmed, without b. That if the Acts of the Philippine
pronouncement as to costs. Commission bear the interpretation of
authorizing the Collector to promulgate
such a law, they are void, as constituting
United States v. Aniceto Barrias (1908) Tracey, J. an illegal delegation of legislative power
Plaintiff: The United States 3. The complaint was framed with reference, as its
Respondent: Aniceto Barrias authority, to Sections 311 and 319 of Act No. 355
Concept: Imposition of Fines and Penalties of the Philippine Customs Administrative Act, as
amended by Acts No. 1235 and 1480.
Brief Facts: Aniceto Barrias was charged with a o Under Act No. 1235, the Collector is not
violation of paragraphs 70 and 83 of Circular No. 397 only empowered to make suitable
promulgated by the Insular Collector of Customs. The regulations, but also to fix penalties in
complaint was framed with reference, as its authority, violation thereof, not exceeding a fine of
to Sections 311 and 319 of Act No. 355 of the P500.
Philippine Customs Administrative Act, as amended by
Acts No. 1235 and 1480. Under Act No. 1235, the ISSUE: WON the Insular Collector of Customs can fix
Collector is not only empowered to make suitable the penalty of the law. (NO)
regulations, but also to fix penalties in violation
thereof, not exceeding a fine of P500. He questions the RATIO:

TIMELESS REVIEWERS B2017 | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | DEAN SALVADOR CARLOTA |2

Although the Collector of Customs can make and of Customs is authorized to license craft engaged
publish rules and regulations, it cannot exercise in the lighterage or other exclusively harbor
the duty of the legislature to fix the penalty of a business of ports.
certain law. o Section 5: The Collector of Customs of the
-One of the settled maxims in constitutional law is Philippine Islands is hereby authorized,
that the power conferred upon the legislature to empowered, and directed to promptly
make laws cannot be delegated by that make and publish suitable rules and
department to any other body or authority. Where regulations to carry this law into effect and
the sovereign power of the State has located the to regulate the business herein licensed
authority, there it must remain; and by the o Section 8: Any person who shall violate the
constitutional agency alone the laws must be made provisions of this Act, or of any rule or
until the constitution itself is changed. The power regulation made and issued by the
to whose judgment, wisdom, and patriotism this Collector of Customs for the Philippine
high prerogative has been entrusted cannot relieve Islands, under and by authority of this Act,
itself of the responsibility by choosing other shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor,
agencies upon which the power shall be developed, and upon conviction shall be punished by
nor can it substitute the judgment, wisdom, and imprisonment for not more than 6 months,
patriotism of any other body for those to which or by a fine of not more than $100
alone the people have seen it fit to confide this -Having sustained that Act No. 1136 is valid, so far
sovereign trust. as Sections 5 and 8 are concerned, and is sufficient
-This doctrine is based on the ethical principle to sustain this prosecution, it is unnecessary for
that such a delegated power constitutes not only this court to pass on the questions discussed in the
a right but a duty to be performed by the delegate briefs as to the extent of the validity of other acts.
by the instrumentality of his own judgment acting - Since the grant of authority to fix the penalties is
immediately upon the matter of legislation and not invalid, the conviction under Act 1235 is revoked.
through the intervening mind of another. However, he is guilty of misdemeanor under Act
-Board of harbor Commissioners of the port of 1136 is punished by a fine of $25.
Eureka v. Excelsior Redwood Company: Conceding
that the legislature could delegate to the plaintiff DISPOSITIVE: So much of the judgment of the CFI as
the authority to make rules and regulations with convicts the defendant of violation of Act Nos. 355 and
reference to the navigation of Humboldt Bay, the 1235 is hereby revoked, and he is hereby convicted of
penalty for the violation of such rules and a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of $25, with
regulations is a matter purely in the hands of the costs of both instances.
legislature.
-Under Act. 1136 (which was not referred to on
the argument or in the original briefs), the Collector

TIMELESS REVIEWERS B2017 | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | DEAN SALVADOR CARLOTA |3