G.R. No. L-7012; March 26, 1913
The Iloilo Ice and Cold Storage Company vs. The Municipal Council of Iloilo, et al.

FACTS

The Iloilo Ice and Cold Storage Company constructed and operated an ice and cold storage plant in Iloilo under authority granted by the Municipal Council. Nearby residents complained that the smoke from the plant’s smokestacks was injurious to health and comfort. After an investigation, the Municipal Council passed a resolution granting the company one month to elevate its smokestacks, threatening to order the closure of the plant if not complied with. The company filed an action in the Court of First Instance to enjoin the Municipal Council from enforcing the resolution, alleging the Council intended to enforce it administratively and by force without court intervention. The Council’s answer admitted the resolution but denied the intent to act without judicial intervention, and alleged the plant was in a populated area, the smoke was a nuisance prejudicial to health, and the company violated its license conditions. The company demurred to the answer. The trial court sustained the demurrer, ordering the Council to amend its answer or face a permanent injunction. The Council appealed.

ISSUE

Whether a municipal council, under its power to declare and abate nuisances, can extrajudicially determine that a lawful business (not a nuisance per se) is a nuisance and order its closure without a judicial hearing.

RULING

No. The order of the trial court is reversed. The case is remanded for trial. A municipal council’s power to “declare and abate nuisances” under the Municipal Code does not include the unrestrained power to declare anything a nuisance. An ice plant is not a nuisance per se; it is a legitimate industry. Whether it constitutes a nuisance per accidens due to its manner of operation is a question of fact that must be determined by a judicial tribunal in a fair and impartial hearing. The municipal council cannot authorize the extrajudicial condemnation and destruction of something that is not a nuisance per se. The resolution of the case depends on whether the municipal officials intend to proceed with abatement through orderly judicial proceedings, as denied in their answer, or through arbitrary administrative action, as alleged by the company. The injunction, if warranted, should be limited to prohibiting administrative closure without judicial intervention.