OSG asks court to junk GI makers’ complaint
November 24, 2000 | 12:00am
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has asked the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) to junk a case filed by local galvanized iron (GI) sheets manufacturers questioning the legality of a government drive against sub-standard and low quality construction materials.
Assistant Solicitor General Antonio Villamor and Associate Solicitor Alexander Salvador, in a motion opposing Sonic Steel Industry’s petition for preliminary injunction, maintained that the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Bureau of Product Standards (BPS) were mandated by the Constitution and the laws to "establish and enforce product and quality standards for the protection of the consumers," as embodied in RA 77394 also known as the Consumer Act of the Philippines.
The OSG lawyers pointed out that roofing materials are consumer products that affect the life, health and safety of the general public.
They argued that all manufacturers of GI sheets are equally subject to the rules and regulations on product quality and mandatory standards set by the government through the DTI and the BPS.
They also noted that Sonic Steel obtained its license and sell pure zinc coated sheets in 1992 and for a period of nine years, it continued from usage of such license.
The OSG lawyers added that after being administratively charged for repeated violation of its license, Sonic Steel "cannot now question the legality and validity of Department Administrative Order (DAO) No. 7 and PNS 67 as amended under the principle of Estoppel."
"What is reprehensible is that after being caught violating the product standards law and regulations for several times, Sonic Industries came to the Court to frustrate the end of justice. Evidently, petitioner Sonic came to the Court with unclean hands and its plea for injunction should be denied," the OSG stressed.
In filing for preliminary injunction against the DTI and BPS, Sonic claimed, among others, that the "discriminatory standards applied to the petitioners violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution."
Sonic also alleged that the Consumer Act does not make mandatory all standards set by the BPS.
Sonic’s lawyers clarified, however, that while the standards set by the PNS constitute a valid regulation, they are questioning the legality of the amendments and the inclusion of PNS 67 in the mandatory list, saying it violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
The case, now pending at the sale of Manila RTC Judge Rosemarie Carandang, stemmed from the campaign launched by DTI Undersecretary Ernesto Ordonez, involving rigid market monitoring of GI sheets following mounting complaints that sub-standard products flooded the local market.
A joint team of DTI and BPS investigators conducted last September a random sampling of GI sheets in Metro Manila as part of their monitoring. Subsequent laboratory tests conducted by the Metal Institute for Research and Development, an attached agency of the Department of Science and Technology, on the sample of GI sheets manufactured by Sonic Steel and Tower Steel showed that the products did not meet mandatory standards.
The BPS summoned Sonic Steel to a DTI hearing on the findings, but the company opted instead to take the case to the court.
Assistant Solicitor General Antonio Villamor and Associate Solicitor Alexander Salvador, in a motion opposing Sonic Steel Industry’s petition for preliminary injunction, maintained that the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Bureau of Product Standards (BPS) were mandated by the Constitution and the laws to "establish and enforce product and quality standards for the protection of the consumers," as embodied in RA 77394 also known as the Consumer Act of the Philippines.
The OSG lawyers pointed out that roofing materials are consumer products that affect the life, health and safety of the general public.
They argued that all manufacturers of GI sheets are equally subject to the rules and regulations on product quality and mandatory standards set by the government through the DTI and the BPS.
They also noted that Sonic Steel obtained its license and sell pure zinc coated sheets in 1992 and for a period of nine years, it continued from usage of such license.
The OSG lawyers added that after being administratively charged for repeated violation of its license, Sonic Steel "cannot now question the legality and validity of Department Administrative Order (DAO) No. 7 and PNS 67 as amended under the principle of Estoppel."
"What is reprehensible is that after being caught violating the product standards law and regulations for several times, Sonic Industries came to the Court to frustrate the end of justice. Evidently, petitioner Sonic came to the Court with unclean hands and its plea for injunction should be denied," the OSG stressed.
In filing for preliminary injunction against the DTI and BPS, Sonic claimed, among others, that the "discriminatory standards applied to the petitioners violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution."
Sonic also alleged that the Consumer Act does not make mandatory all standards set by the BPS.
Sonic’s lawyers clarified, however, that while the standards set by the PNS constitute a valid regulation, they are questioning the legality of the amendments and the inclusion of PNS 67 in the mandatory list, saying it violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
The case, now pending at the sale of Manila RTC Judge Rosemarie Carandang, stemmed from the campaign launched by DTI Undersecretary Ernesto Ordonez, involving rigid market monitoring of GI sheets following mounting complaints that sub-standard products flooded the local market.
A joint team of DTI and BPS investigators conducted last September a random sampling of GI sheets in Metro Manila as part of their monitoring. Subsequent laboratory tests conducted by the Metal Institute for Research and Development, an attached agency of the Department of Science and Technology, on the sample of GI sheets manufactured by Sonic Steel and Tower Steel showed that the products did not meet mandatory standards.
The BPS summoned Sonic Steel to a DTI hearing on the findings, but the company opted instead to take the case to the court.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
Latest
Recommended
November 25, 2024 - 12:00am
November 24, 2024 - 12:00am
November 24, 2024 - 12:00am