In re: Cunanan

Charles Tito R. Aguilar 2014-66922-1

JD-RESTHES | JD4103 July 10, 2014

CASE BRIEF In re: Cunanan, 94 Phil 534, March 18, 1954 FACTS: Under the Rules of Court, a bar candidate is deemed to have passed if they obtain a general average of 75% in all subjects without falling below 50% in any subject. The Supreme Court changed the passing average since 1946 in consideration of the varying difficulties and the varying degree of strictness with which the papers were graded: 72% in 1946, 69% in 1947, 70 % in 1948, 74% in 1949, and 75% in 1950 to 1953. On June 21, 1953, Republic Act No. 972 (Bar Flunkers’ Act of 1953) was enacted without Executive approval. Many of the unsuccessful postwar candidates filed petitions for admission to the bar invoking the new law’s provisions, while others who had pending motions for revision of their examination papers also invoked the law as grounds for admission. There are also others who simply sought reconsideration of their grades without invoking the new law. Republic Act No. 972 has for its object, according to its author, to admit to the Bar, those candidates who suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and inadequate preparation. By its declared objective, the law is contrary to public interest because it qualifies 1,094 law graduates who confessedly had inadequate preparation for the practice of the profession, as was evidenced by their failure in the exams. ISSUE: Whether Republic Act No. 972 (Bar Flunkers’ Act of 1953) is constitutional? RULING: No, it is not constitutional. RATIONALE: The Court found Republic Act No. 972 unconstitutional for the following reasons. 1. The law is a manifest encroachment on the constitutional responsibility of the Supreme Court to render the ultimate decision on who may be admitted and may continue in the practice of law according to existing rules. 2. It is, in effect, a judgment revoking the resolution of the Supreme Court on the petitions which only the Court may revise or alter, directly violating the Constitution. 3. Congress has exceeded its legislative power to repeal, alter and supplement the rules on admission to the Bar by the disputed law. 4. It is a class legislation. 5. Article 2 of Republic Act No. 972 is not embraced in the title of the law, contrary to what the Constitution enjoins, and being inseparable from the provisions of article 1, the entire law is void.