Facts: Grand
Air applied for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity with the
Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB). The Chief Hearing Officer issued a notice of
hearing directing Grand Air to serve a copy of the application and notice to
all scheduled Philippine Domestic operators. Grand Air filed its compliance and
requested for a Temporary Operating Permit (TOP). PAL filed an opposition to
the application on the ground that the CAB had no jurisdiction to hear the
application until Grand Air first obtains a franchise to operate from Congress.
The Chief Hearing Officer denied the opposition and the CAB approved the
issuance of the TOP for a period of 3 months. The opposition for the TOP was
likewise denied. The CAB justified its assumption of jurisdiction over Grand
Air’s application on the basis of Republic Act 776 which gives it the specific
power to issue any TOP or Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity.
Issue: Whether or not
the CAB can issue a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity or TOP even
though the prospective operator does not have a legislative franchise?
Held: Yes, as
mentioned by the CAB, it is duly authorized to do so under Republic Act 776 and
a legislative franchise is not necessary before it may do so, since Congress
has delegated the authority to authorize the operation of domestic air
transport services to the CAB, an administrative agency. The delegation of such
authority is not without limits since Congress had set specific standard and
limitations on how such authority should be exercised.
Public convenience and necessity exists when the proposed
facility will meet a reasonable want of the public and supply a need which the
existing facilities do not adequately afford.
Thus, the Board should be allowed to continue hearing the
application, since it has jurisdiction over it provided that the applicant
meets all the requirements of the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment