GR L 455; (October, 1947) (Digest)

G.R. No. L-455. October 30, 1947.
JOAQUIN MA. JOSON, petitioner, vs. ILDEFONSO SANTOS, respondent.

FACTS

Prior to the Pacific War, petitioner Joaquin Ma. Joson operated ice plants in Orani, Samal, Balanga, and Orion, Bataan, under valid certificates of public convenience. These plants were destroyed during the war, except the Orani plant, which was heavily damaged. On August 6, 1945, respondent Ildefonso Santos, a Filipino, applied for a certificate to install and operate a five-ton daily ice plant in Orion, selling ice in Orion and other Bataan municipalities. Joson opposed, citing his prior certificate for the territory, lack of public necessity, and that a new plant would prejudice his protected prior rights. The Public Service Commission, on February 14, 1946, granted Santos a temporary certificate valid until the end of 1948. The Commission found evidence showing a great demand for ice in Bataan, especially from fishermen, and that the current supply from Joson’s Orani plant was insufficient. It noted Santos had complete machinery ready for immediate installation, whereas Joson had only placed an order for new equipment with an uncertain delivery date. The Commission held that public need justified a temporary permit and that Joson’s prior rights would be protected as the permit was temporary.

ISSUE

Whether the Public Service Commission’s order granting a temporary certificate of public convenience to respondent Santos was reasonably supported by the evidence and not contrary to law.

RULING

The Supreme Court sustained the order of the Public Service Commission. The Court held that its review is limited to whether the order is reasonably justified by the evidence, absent jurisdictional issues or conflict with law. The Court found the Commission’s order was reasonably supported by evidence, including testimony from fishermen and a fish trader establishing inadequate ice supply and public need. The Court noted Santos was ready to install his plant immediately, while Joson’s plans were uncertain. It ruled that in the post-war reconstruction period, public convenience is paramount, and pre-war operators cannot oppose services they cannot immediately provide. The temporary nature of the permit protected Joson’s prior rights, as normalcy would allow for recognition of those rights upon expiration. The Court rejected arguments about lack of emergency, denial of protection, or violation of policy, finding no error in the Commission’s decision. Costs were awarded against the petitioner.