The People of the Philippines v. Torrijos

A smoker was accused of violating a Davos City ordinance prohibiting smoking in enclosed public spaces.  The smoker argued that the city ordinance was superseded by the subsequent federal Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003.  He argued the new act contained a definition of enclosed spaces that did not coincide with the circumstances of his arrest.  The court found that there was a conflict between the two laws with the municipal law being vague and that the restaurant where the smoker was caught did not meet the enclosed spaces definition of the new law. The smoker was thus found not to have violated the law.

Philippines v. Torrijos Case No. 114,961-G-2003

  • Philippines
  • Apr 16, 2004
  • Municipal Trial Court, 11th Judicial Region, Branch 7
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff The People of The Philippines

Defendant Gilbert A. Torrijos, Attorney

Legislation Cited

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

None

"This Court finds merit in the contention of the accused that the definition of an enclosed space in the CASO is vague at best. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that due to the vagueness of the said definition, the local government of Davao City has used the rule of thumb that any place with a roof is deemed to be an enclosed space. Under this definition, Cynthia's Lechon House, where the accused is claimed to have been caught smoking, would definitely be an enclosed space and thus, his alleged actions would have been covered by the ordinance. On the other hand, an enclosed space is defined under the Implementing Rules of RA 92111 as: "Rule III, Section 1.8- Enclosed Area - refers to an area that is physically separated from adjacent areas by walls or partitions and a roof or ceiling. The walls or partitions must be continuous, interrupted only by doors and windows. The mere presence of a roof or ceiling over the structure, but without walls or partitions surrounding said structure, does not constitute an enclosed area." Under this definition, it could be said that Cynthia's Lechon House could be said to be not enclosed. Thus, the alleged actions of the accused would not be considered criminal. ln view of this disparity between the CASO and RA9211, which disparity is determinative of the existence or non-existence of criminal liability, this Court cannot help but to conclude that there is indeed an irreconcilable conflict between the two laws which, as stated above, will necessarily result to the repeal of the penal provisions of the CASO under which the accused is charged."