Scribd
Upload
257 views1 page

Lovina V Morena, G.R. No. L-17821, November 29, 1963

The plaintiffs argued that Republic Act No. 2056 was unconstitutional because it granted the Secretary of Public Works and Communications unchecked authority to determine if a river or stream was public and navigable. However, the court ruled that RA No. 2056 only empowered the Secretary to remove unauthorized obstructions from public streams, which private individuals have no right to construct in. While the Secretary's decisions under the Act involve factual determinations, these functions are incidental to removing obstructions from navigable waters, as the Act requires an affected party be given a chance to be heard. Therefore, the objections that RA No. 2056 amounted to an unlawful delegation of judicial power or was unreasonable were not valid.

Uploaded by

Lyle Bucol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
257 views1 page

Lovina V Morena, G.R. No. L-17821, November 29, 1963

The plaintiffs argued that Republic Act No. 2056 was unconstitutional because it granted the Secretary of Public Works and Communications unchecked authority to determine if a river or stream was public and navigable. However, the court ruled that RA No. 2056 only empowered the Secretary to remove unauthorized obstructions from public streams, which private individuals have no right to construct in. While the Secretary's decisions under the Act involve factual determinations, these functions are incidental to removing obstructions from navigable waters, as the Act requires an affected party be given a chance to be heard. Therefore, the objections that RA No. 2056 amounted to an unlawful delegation of judicial power or was unreasonable were not valid.

Uploaded by

Lyle Bucol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Lovina v Morena, G.R. No.

L-17821, November 29, 1963

Facts: The position of the plaintiffs-appellees was that Republic Act No. 2056 is unconstitutional
because it invests the Secretary of Public Works and Communications with sweeping, unrestrained, final
and unappealable authority to pass upon the issues of whether a river or stream is public and navigable,
thereby Constituting an alleged unlawful delegation of judicial power to the Secretary of Public Works
and Communications.

Issue: Whether or not the objections to the unconstitutionality of RA No. 2056, not only as an undue
delegation of judicial power to the Secretary of Public Works but also for being unreasonable and
arbitrary, tenable.

Ruling: NO. It will be noted that R.A. 2056 merely empowers the Secretary to remove unauthorized
obstructions or encroachments upon public streams, constructions that no private person was anyway
entitled to make, because the bed of navigable streams is public property, and ownership thereof is not
acquirable by adverse possession.

It is true that the exercise of the Secretary's power under the Act necessarily involves the determination
of some questions of fact, such as the existence of the stream and its previous navigable character; but
these functions, whether judicial or quasi-judicial, are merely incidental to the exercise of the power
granted by law to clear navigable streams of unauthorized obstructions or encroachments, and
authorities are clear that they are, validly conferrable upon executive officials provided the party
affected is given opportunity to be heard, as is expressly required by Republic Act No. 2056, section 2

You might also like