Powered by Blogger.

About this blog

These are all original case digests or case briefs done while the author was studying law school in the Philippines.

Hopefully these digested cases will help you get a good grasp of the salient facts and rulings of the Supreme Court in order to have a better understanding of Philippine Jurisprudence.

Please forgive any typo/grammatical errors as these were done while trying to keep up with the hectic demands brought about by the study of law.

God bless!

UPDATE:
Since the author is now a lawyer, this blog will now include templates of Philippine legal forms for your easy reference. This blog will be updated daily.

Thank you for the almost 500k views :)

Translate to your language

P.S.

If this blog post as helped you in any way, kindly click on any of the blog sponsors' advertisements. It won't cost you a thing. This would help tremendously.

Thank you for your time.

Saturday, June 13, 2015

PEP v De Ocampo (1995)


PEP v De Ocampo
GR No 115931, October 30, 1995


FACTS:
RA 7716 seeks to widen the tax base of existing VAT system and enhance its administration by amending the NIRC.

There are various suits challenging its constitutionality. One contention is that the law violates the impairment clause and the rule that taxes should be uniform and equitable and that Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.

ISSUE:
Is the law constitutional?


RULING:
Yes. Contracts must be understood as having been made in reference to the possible exercise of rightful authority of the

government and no obligation of contract can extend to defeat that authority. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Treat yourself