Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    DIGEST - Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    Uploaded by

    Lolph Manila
    The children filed a class action lawsuit to stop the government from granting timber license agreements and engaging in deforestation, invoking their right to a healthy environment. The lower court dismissed the case based on the law preventing contract impairment. However, the Supreme Court ruled the children had legal standing to file the case based on the concept of "intergenerational responsibility". Their right to a healthy environment for their generation implies an obligation to preserve the environment for future generations. The Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf of generations not yet born.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    DIGEST - Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    Uploaded by

    Lolph Manila
    2K views1 page
    The children filed a class action lawsuit to stop the government from granting timber license agreements and engaging in deforestation, invoking their right to a healthy environment. The lower court dismissed the case based on the law preventing contract impairment. However, the Supreme Court ruled the children had legal standing to file the case based on the concept of "intergenerational responsibility". Their right to a healthy environment for their generation implies an obligation to preserve the environment for future generations. The Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf of generations not yet born.

    Original Description:

    DIGEST- Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    Original Title

    DIGEST- Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The children filed a class action lawsuit to stop the government from granting timber license agreements and engaging in deforestation, invoking their right to a healthy environment. The lower court dismissed the case based on the law preventing contract impairment. However, the Supreme Court ruled the children had legal standing to file the case based on the concept of "intergenerational responsibility". Their right to a healthy environment for their generation implies an obligation to preserve the environment for future generations. The Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf of generations not yet born.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views1 page

    DIGEST - Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

    Uploaded by

    Lolph Manila
    The children filed a class action lawsuit to stop the government from granting timber license agreements and engaging in deforestation, invoking their right to a healthy environment. The lower court dismissed the case based on the law preventing contract impairment. However, the Supreme Court ruled the children had legal standing to file the case based on the concept of "intergenerational responsibility". Their right to a healthy environment for their generation implies an obligation to preserve the environment for future generations. The Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf of generations not yet born.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    DIGEST: Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No.

    101083 July 30, 1993


    FACTS: This case is unique in that it is a class suit brought by 44 children, through their parents, claiming
    that they bring the case in the name of their generation as well as those generations yet unborn.
    Aiming to stop deforestation, it was filed against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and
    Natural Resources, seeking to have him cancel all the timber license agreements (TLAs) in the country
    and to cease and desist from accepting and approving more timber license agreements. The children
    invoked their right to a balanced and healthful ecology and to protection by the State in its capacity as
    parens patriae. The petitioners claimed that the DENR Secretary's refusal to cancel the TLAs and to stop
    issuing them was "contrary to the highest law of humankind-- the natural law-- and violative of plaintiffs'
    right to self-preservation and perpetuation." The case was dismissed in the lower court, invoking the law
    on non-impairment of contracts, so it was brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari.

    ISSUE: Did the children have the legal standing to file the case?

    HELD: Yes. The Supreme Court in granting the petition ruled that the children had the legal standing to
    file the case based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility. Their right to a healthy
    environment carried with it an obligation to preserve that environment for the succeeding generations.
    In this, the Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf of future generations. Also, the Court said,
    the law on non-impairment of contracts must give way to the exercise of the police power of the state in
    the interest of public welfare.

    Yes. Petitioner-minors assert that they represent their generation as well as generations to come. The
    Supreme Court ruled that they can, for themselves, for others of their generation, and for the
    succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their personality to sue in behalf of succeeding generations is
    based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful
    ecology is concerned. Such a right considers the rhythm and harmony of nature which indispensably
    include, inter alia, the judicious disposition, utilization, management, renewal and conservation of the
    countrys forest, mineral, land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other natural resources to
    the end that their exploration, development, and utilization be equitably accessible to the present as
    well as the future generations.

    Needless to say, every generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and harmony
    for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology. Put a little differently, the minors assertion
    of their right to a sound environment constitutes at the same time, the performance of their obligation
    to ensure the protection of that right for the generations to come.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy