Friday, December 20, 2024

Iron and Steel Authority (ISA) v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 102976 [October 25, 1995]

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Iron and Steel Authority (ISA) v. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 102976 [October 25, 1995]

THIRD DIVISION, FELICIANO, J.

 

Ultra Vires Powers

 

Government agencies are strictly limited to the powers expressly conferred upon them by their enabling statutes. Any act or contract entered into beyond the scope of such powers is ultra vires and void.

 

The Iron and Steel Authority (ISA) entered into a loan agreement with Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corporation (MCFC), a private entity engaged in fertilizer production. Under the agreement, ISA provided a loan to MCFC to finance the purchase of equipment and other operational needs. MCFC failed to repay the loan upon maturity, prompting ISA to file a collection case against MCFC. 

MCFC, in its defense, argued that the loan agreement was void for being ultra vires, claiming that ISA, as a government agency, lacked the authority to grant loans. The trial court ruled in favor of MCFC, declaring the loan agreement void. ISA appealed to the Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court’s decision. ISA then elevated the case to the Supreme Court.

 

Whether the loan agreement entered into by the Iron and Steel Authority with Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corporation is valid and binding. 

NO. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Court of Appeals and Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corporation, affirming the nullity of the loan agreement. The Court emphasized that government agencies like the Iron and Steel Authority must strictly adhere to their statutory mandates. ISA’s enabling law did not grant it the authority to engage in lending activities or act as a financial intermediary. Thus, the loan agreement was ultra vires and void. 

The Court noted that while ISA had the mandate to develop the iron and steel industry, lending money to private entities was not within the scope of its legal powers. Any act performed beyond the authority granted by law is considered ultra vires and has no legal effect. 

Furthermore, the Court stressed that contracts entered into by government agencies must conform to their statutory powers to avoid overreach and ensure accountability. In this case, the absence of explicit authority for ISA to grant loans rendered the agreement unenforceable.

 

 CLICK HERE TO READ FULL TEXT


 

 

 

 

 

 

 


No comments:

Post a Comment

Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King, G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005

 CASE DIGEST Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005 THIRD DIVISION, CORONA J.     C...