G.R. No. L-30063 - JULY 1983 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. No. L-30063July 2, 1983 Goodyear Tire vs. Teofilo Reyes, Sr. G.R. No. L-45946July 5, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Bernat G.R. No. L-51182July 5, 1983 Helmut Dosch vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-57875July 5, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto T. Suñga G.R. No. L-58199July 5, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Federico B. Belmonte G.R. No. L-58910July 5, 1983 Robert Dollar Company vs. Juan C. Tuvera, et al. G.R. No. L-62114July 5, 1983 Isidro Bernardo vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. L-32794July 15, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Juanito B. Calixtro, et al. A.M. No. 779-Ret.July 20, 1983 Retirement of Atty. Marcelo D. Mendiola G.R. No. L-28632July 20, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Abdula Bernardo, et al. G.R. No. L-31103July 20, 1983 The People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto Z. Lakandula G.R. No. L-34382July 20, 1983 Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern Shipping Lines, et al. G.R. No. L-36847July 20, 1983 Serafin B. Yngson vs. Sec. of Agriculture and Natural Resources, et al. G.R. No. L-59611July 20, 1983 The Local Civil Registrar of Cebu City vs. Hon. Rafael T. Mendoza A.C. No. 1700July 25, 1983 Oscar R. Manahan vs. Gregorio F. Ortega A.C. No. 2311July 25, 1983 Jaime Pelejo vs. Paterno C. Zaballero A.C. No. 2315July 25, 1983 Rosela C. Lu vs. Lamberto Llamera G.R. No. L-29182-83July 25, 1983 Esso Standard Eastern Inc. vs. Alfonso Lim G.R. No. L-29230July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Diosdado Alvarado, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-32072July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Alfonso Aquiatan, et al. G.R. No. L-35102July 25, 1983 Antonio Borlongan vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-35273July 25, 1983 Iglesia Ni Cristo vs. Branch I Cfi of Nueva Ecija G.R. No. L-36488July 25, 1983 Capital Insurance & Surety Co., Inc. vs. Ronquillo Trading, et al. G.R. No. L-36789July 25, 1983 Felipa Cordero vs. Victoria P. Cabral, et al. G.R. No. L-38495July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Wilfredo Toledo G.R. No. L-39235July 25, 1983 The People of the Philippines vs. Juanito Galicia G.R. No. L-40310July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Sergio R. Pospos G.R. No. L-42571-72July 25, 1983 Vicente De La Cruz, et al. vs. Edgardo L. Paras, et al. G.R. No. L-47136-39July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Romeo O. Manalang G.R. No. L-48319-20July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Efreniano Balane, et al. G.R. No. L-50638July 25, 1983 Loreto J. Solinap vs. Amelia K. Del Rosario G.R. No. L-53741July 25, 1983 Samahan Ng Mga Manggagawa Sa Firestone vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-55373July 25, 1983 Gliceria Carandang-Collantes et al. vs. Felix Capuno, et al. G.R. No. L-55413July 25, 1983 Dole Philippines, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission G.R. No. L-55674July 25, 1983 La Suerte Cigar vs. Dir. of the Bureau of Labor Relations, et al. G.R. No. L-56441July 25, 1983 Clemencio C. Ramirez vs. Sandiganbayan G.R. No. L-56450July 25, 1983 Rodolfo T. Ganzon vs. Sancho Y. Inserto G.R. No. L-56655July 25, 1983 Datu Tagoranao Benito vs. Securities and Exchange Commission G.R. No. L-59546July 25, 1983 People of the Philippines vs. Vicente Casas, et al. G.R. No. L-61349July 25, 1983 Angelina Javier vs. Employees Compensation Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-62097July 25, 1983 Rodolfo "Rod" Rivera vs. J. Willelmo C. Fortun, et al. G.R. No. L-62810July 25, 1983 Eulalia Martin vs. Gen. Fabian Ver, et al. G.R. No. L-63531July 25, 1983 Heirs of Feliciano Nantes vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-64033July 25, 1983 Proceso Sidro vs. Commision on Elections, et al. A.C. No. 1251July 29, 1983 Lily Langbid vs. Atty. Felix Tiangco G.R. No. L-29407July 29, 1983 Amadeo Matute Olave vs. Manases G. Reyes G.R. No. L-31352July 29, 1983 Jorge Delector vs. Antonio M. Ogayan G.R. No. L-40504July 29, 1983 Fortunato Recentes, et al. vs. Cfi of Zamboanga Del Norte, Branch I G.R. No. L-47410July 29, 1983 Policarpio Castro vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-52831July 29, 1983 Manuel R. Dulay vs. J. Glicerio V. Carriaga G.R. No. L-60129July 29, 1983 Leonor J. Vda. De Javellana vs. Court of Appeals, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Goodyear Tire vs. Teofilo Reyes, Sr. People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Bernat Helmut Dosch vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto T. Suñga People of the Philippines vs. Federico B. Belmonte Robert Dollar Company vs. Juan C. Tuvera, et al. Isidro Bernardo vs. People of the Philippines People of the Philippines vs. Juanito B. Calixtro, et al. Retirement of Atty. Marcelo D. Mendiola People of the Philippines vs. Abdula Bernardo, et al. The People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto Z. Lakandula Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern Shipping Lines, et al. Serafin B. Yngson vs. Sec. of Agriculture and Natural Resources, et al. The Local Civil Registrar of Cebu City vs. Hon. Rafael T. Mendoza Oscar R. Manahan vs. Gregorio F. Ortega Jaime Pelejo vs. Paterno C. Zaballero Rosela C. Lu vs. Lamberto Llamera Esso Standard Eastern Inc. vs. Alfonso Lim People of the Philippines vs. Diosdado Alvarado, Jr., et al. People of the Philippines vs. Alfonso Aquiatan, et al. Antonio Borlongan vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Iglesia Ni Cristo vs. Branch I Cfi of Nueva Ecija Capital Insurance & Surety Co., Inc. vs. Ronquillo Trading, et al. Felipa Cordero vs. Victoria P. Cabral, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Wilfredo Toledo The People of the Philippines vs. Juanito Galicia People of the Philippines vs. Sergio R. Pospos Vicente De La Cruz, et al. vs. Edgardo L. Paras, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Romeo O. Manalang People of the Philippines vs. Efreniano Balane, et al. Loreto J. Solinap vs. Amelia K. Del Rosario Samahan Ng Mga Manggagawa Sa Firestone vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Gliceria Carandang-Collantes et al. vs. Felix Capuno, et al. Dole Philippines, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission La Suerte Cigar vs. Dir. of the Bureau of Labor Relations, et al. Clemencio C. Ramirez vs. Sandiganbayan Rodolfo T. Ganzon vs. Sancho Y. Inserto Datu Tagoranao Benito vs. Securities and Exchange Commission People of the Philippines vs. Vicente Casas, et al. Angelina Javier vs. Employees Compensation Commission, et al. Rodolfo "Rod" Rivera vs. J. Willelmo C. Fortun, et al. Eulalia Martin vs. Gen. Fabian Ver, et al. Heirs of Feliciano Nantes vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Proceso Sidro vs. Commision on Elections, et al. Lily Langbid vs. Atty. Felix Tiangco Amadeo Matute Olave vs. Manases G. Reyes Jorge Delector vs. Antonio M. Ogayan Fortunato Recentes, et al. vs. Cfi of Zamboanga Del Norte, Branch I Policarpio Castro vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Manuel R. Dulay vs. J. Glicerio V. Carriaga Leonor J. Vda. De Javellana vs. Court of Appeals, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-30063 July 2, 1983
THE GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER CO. OF THE PHILIPPINES, LTD.,petitioner-appellant,
vs.
THE HONORABLE TEOFILO REYES, SR., in his capacity as Acting Secretary of Commerce and Industry, respondent-appellee, FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO. OF THE PHILIPPINES,intervenor-appellant.
Siguion Reyna, Montecillo, Belo & Ongria Law Office for petitioner- appellant.
The Solicitor General for Acting Secretary of Commerce and Industry.
Ortigas & Ortigas Law Office for Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. of the Phils.
FERNANDO,C.J.:
In this appeal by both petitioners Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. of the Philippines and intervenor Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. of the Philippines,1the lower court holding that as to certain customers, "proprietory planters, persons engaged in the exploitation of natural resources," and "employees and officers of the petitioner," they are engaged in retail business, the legal question raised was set at rest by Presidential Decree No. 7142amending the Retail Trade Nationalization Law which took effect without presidential approval.3As originally worded, the term "retail business" covers "any act, occupation or calling of habitually selling direct to the general public merchandise, commodities or goods for consumption, but shall not include: (a) a manufacturer, processor, laborer or worker selling to the general public the products manufactured, processed or produced by him if his capital does not exceed five thousand pesos, or (b) a farmer or agriculturist selling the product of his farm."4Under the aforesaid Presidential Decree, which took effect on May 28, 1975, two more paragraphs were included. They are: "(c) a manufacturer or processor selling to the industrial and commercial users or consumers who use the products bought by them to render service to the general public and/or to produce or manufacture goods which are in turn sold to them; (d) a hotel-owner or keeper operating a restaurant irrespective of the amount of capital, provided that the restaurant is necessarily included in, or incidental to, the hotel business."5
Petitioner Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company of the Philippines as well as intervenor Firestone Tire and Rubber Company of the Philippines, as noted in the decision now on appeal, sold their rubber products to certain types or class of customers as follows: "(a) The Government of the Republic of the Philippines and all its instrumentalities and/or agencies, who use the Rubber Products to render essential services to the country and to the general public. (b) Public utilities, such as bus fleets, taxi fleets, jeepney fleets, freight lines, etc., and power and communications companies, who use Rubber Products to render essential services to third parties and the general public for compensation. (c) Agricultural enterprises, proprietary planters, agricultural processing plants, and agricultural cooperatives, who use the Rubber Products to perform essential services to third parties and to the general public for valuable consideration and profit. (d) Logging, mining, and other entities and persons engaged in the exploitation of natural resources. (e) Automotive assembly plants, who buy the Rubber Products in bulk for use in the assembly of automotive equipment, and who resell the same to third parties and to the general public without alteration or change at a profit as the assembled automotive equipment and vehicles are sold. (f) Industrial and Commercial enterprises, engaged in manufacturing and sales of prime and essential commodities to third parties and the general public for a profit, who buy the Rubber Products for use in their manufacturing and sales operations. (g) Employees and officers of the petitioner-intervenor."6
To repeat as to the above-named customers, the court a quo held that petitioner and intervenor were not exempt from the provisions of Republic Act No. 1180, although ruling in their favor insofar as the other customers were concerned, thus making permanent the preliminary injunction issued.ℒαwρhi৷Respondent Acting Secretary of Commerce and Industry likewise appealed.
As the facts in Goodrich are not dissimilar both as to the nature of the business and the customers, a similar conclusion is indicated. This Court in that decision categorically stated: "It is clear from the above that proprietary planters and persons engaged in the exploration of natural resources are included within the aforesaid amendment. The lower court decision, however, is in accordance with law insofar as employees and officers of petitioner are concerned. As thus modified, the decision calls for affirmance."7We do so again.
WHEREFORE,the lower court decision is affirmed declaring that petitioner and intervenor are not engaged in retail business within the purview of Section 4 of Republic Act No. 1180 and Presidential Decree No. 714, except as to its sales to its employees and officers. The injunction issued is likewise made permanent but subject to the above qualification. No costs.
Teehankee, Aquino, Concepcion Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, Plana, Escolin, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ., concur.
Makasiar, J., took no part.
Melencio-Herrera and Vasquez, De Castro, JJ., are on leave.
Footnotes