Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12K views

    1.caltex v. Palomar Digest

    Uploaded by

    VanityHugh
    (1) This case involves a petition for declaratory relief filed by Caltex Philippines against the Postmaster General regarding Caltex's "Hooded Pump Contest" promotion. (2) The promotion allows participants to estimate the amount of gas that will be pumped at Caltex stations over a period, with no purchase or fee required. The Postmaster General refused to clear the contest, claiming it violates anti-lottery laws. (3) The Court ruled the contest does not violate anti-lottery laws as it lacks the element of consideration, a requirement to pay to participate. As no purchase or payment is needed, the promotion is not a lottery and does not violate the Postal Law. The Post

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    1.caltex v. Palomar Digest

    Uploaded by

    VanityHugh
    12K views2 pages
    (1) This case involves a petition for declaratory relief filed by Caltex Philippines against the Postmaster General regarding Caltex's "Hooded Pump Contest" promotion. (2) The promotion allows participants to estimate the amount of gas that will be pumped at Caltex stations over a period, with no purchase or fee required. The Postmaster General refused to clear the contest, claiming it violates anti-lottery laws. (3) The Court ruled the contest does not violate anti-lottery laws as it lacks the element of consideration, a requirement to pay to participate. As no purchase or payment is needed, the promotion is not a lottery and does not violate the Postal Law. The Post

    Original Description:

    1.Caltex v. Palomar Digest

    Original Title

    1.Caltex v. Palomar Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    (1) This case involves a petition for declaratory relief filed by Caltex Philippines against the Postmaster General regarding Caltex's "Hooded Pump Contest" promotion. (2) The promotion allows participants to estimate the amount of gas that will be pumped at Caltex stations over a period, with no purchase or fee required. The Postmaster General refused to clear the contest, claiming it violates anti-lottery laws. (3) The Court ruled the contest does not violate anti-lottery laws as it lacks the element of consideration, a requirement to pay to participate. As no purchase or payment is needed, the promotion is not a lottery and does not violate the Postal Law. The Post

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    12K views2 pages

    1.caltex v. Palomar Digest

    Uploaded by

    VanityHugh
    (1) This case involves a petition for declaratory relief filed by Caltex Philippines against the Postmaster General regarding Caltex's "Hooded Pump Contest" promotion. (2) The promotion allows participants to estimate the amount of gas that will be pumped at Caltex stations over a period, with no purchase or fee required. The Postmaster General refused to clear the contest, claiming it violates anti-lottery laws. (3) The Court ruled the contest does not violate anti-lottery laws as it lacks the element of consideration, a requirement to pay to participate. As no purchase or payment is needed, the promotion is not a lottery and does not violate the Postal Law. The Post

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    1. CALTEX V.

    PALOMAR

    Second Division
    CALTEX v. PALOMAR
    G.R. No. L-19650. September 29, 1966
    Castro, J.

    FACTS:
    This is a petition of declaratory relief filed by Petitioner Caltex Philippines, Inc.
    against Respondent Postmaster General Enrico Palomar.

    In 1960, the Petitioner devised a contest to increase patronage for their products
    called “Caltex Hooded Pump Contest”, in which participants are to estimate the number
    of liters a hooded gas pump at each Caltex station will dispense during a specified
    period. No fee nor purchase is required to join the contest – participants must only
    secure a form available upon request at stations. Foreseeing the extensive use of mail
    for the contest, Caltex, through a representative, attempted to secure clearance for
    mailing, on the grounds that their contest does not violate the anti-lottery provisions of
    the Postal Law. Respondent, however, declined the grant, prompting the petitioner to
    seek reconsideration. Respondent then maintained that if the contest was pursued, a
    fraud order will be issued against Caltex.

    ISSUE:
    (1) Whether or not petition has sufficient cause for declaratory relief.

    (2) Whether or not the Caltex Hooded Pump contest is violative of the anti-lottery
    provision of the Postal Law as provided by Section 1954 (a) of the Revised
    Administrative Code

    RULING:

    (1) Yes. Per Section 1 Rule 66 of the old Rules of Court, declaratory relief is available
    to any person “whose rights are affected by statute… to determine any question of
    construction or validity arising under the… statute and for a declaration of his rights
    thereunder”. This is the case here, as the question of the promo violating the Postal
    Law requires an inquiry to the intent of the legislation, which is the act of
    construction – the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and
    intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case,
    where that intention is rendered doubtful, amongst other, by reason of the fact that
    the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law (Black, Interpretation of Laws).
    This petition, then, warrants a declaratory relief.

    (2) No. The Court held that the contest does not violate the anti-lottery provision, which
    makes absolutely non-mailable “any information concerning any lottery, gift
    enterprise or similar scheme depending in whole or in part upon a lot or chance, or
    any scheme, device, or enterprise for obtaining any money or property of any kind by
    means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises”. Lottery in this
    case was described as having three (3) requisites: consideration, chance, and prize;
    1. CALTEX V. PALOMAR

    chance and prize being clear as is, while consideration referring to the need of
    participants to pay for a chance to win. The term “gift enterprise” was disputed but
    resolved by applying the principle of “noscitur a sociis” in which terms under
    construction shall be understood by the words preceding and following it. In this
    case, promo does not qualify as a lottery nor a gift enterprise for lack of element of
    consideration.

    CONCLUSION:

    Caltex Hooded Pump Contest does not violate the Postal Law. The decision
    appealed from is AFFIRMED.

    You might also like