G.R. No. L-16704
VICTORIAS MILLING COMPANY, INC vs.
SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION
Facts:
On October 15,1958, the Social Security Commission issued Circular No.
22 requiring all Employers in computing premiums to include in the
Employee's remuneration all bonuses and overtime pay, as well as the
cash value of other media of remuneration. Upon receipt of a copy
thereof, petitioner Victorias Milling Company, Inc., through counsel,
wrote the Social Security Commission in effect protesting against the
circular as contradictory to a previous Circular No. 7 dated October 7,
1957 expressly excluding overtime pay and bonus in the computation of
the employers' and employees' respective monthly premium contributions.
Counsel further questioned the validity of the circular for lack of
autho
rity on the part of the Social
Security Commission to promulgate it without the approval of the
President and for lack of publication in the Official Gazette.
Overruling the objections, the Social Security Commission ruled that
Circular No. 22 is not a rule or regulation that needed the approval of
the President and publication in the Official Gazette to be effective,
but a mere administrative interpretation of the statute, a mere
statement of general policy or opinion as to how the law should be
construed. Petitioner comes to Court on appeal.
Issue: Whether or
not Circular No. 22 is a rule or regulation as contemplated in Section
4(a) of Republic Act 1161 empowering the Social Security Commission.
Held:
There can be no doubt that there is a distinction between an
administrative rule or regulation and an administrative interpretation
of a law whose enforcement is entrusted to an administrative body. When
an administrative agency promulgates rules and regulations, it "makes" a
new law with the force and effect of a valid law, while when it renders
an opinion or gives a statement of policy, it merely interprets a
pre-existing law. Rules and regulations when promulgated in pursuance of
the procedure or authority conferred upon the administrative agency by
law, partake of the nature of a statute, and compliance therewith may be
enforced by a penal sanction provided therein. The details and the
manner of carrying out the law are often times left to the
administrative agency entrusted with its enforcement. In this sense, it
has been said that rules and regulations are the product of a delegated
power to create new or additional legal provisions that have the effect
of law. Therefore, Circular No. 22 purports merely to advise
employers-members of the System of what, in the light of the amendment
of the law, they should include in determining the monthly compensation
of their employees upon which the social security contributions should
be based, and that such circular did not require presidential approval
and publication in the Official Gazette for its effectivity. The
Resolution appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against
appellant. So ordered.
Issue: Whether or not Circular No. 22 is a rule or regulation as contemplated in Section 4(a) of Republic Act 1161 empowering the Social Security Commission.
Held:
There can be no doubt that there is a distinction between an administrative rule or regulation and an administrative interpretation of a law whose enforcement is entrusted to an administrative body. When an administrative agency promulgates rules and regulations, it "makes" a new law with the force and effect of a valid law, while when it renders an opinion or gives a statement of policy, it merely interprets a pre-existing law. Rules and regulations when promulgated in pursuance of the procedure or authority conferred upon the administrative agency by law, partake of the nature of a statute, and compliance therewith may be enforced by a penal sanction provided therein. The details and the manner of carrying out the law are often times left to the administrative agency entrusted with its enforcement. In this sense, it has been said that rules and regulations are the product of a delegated power to create new or additional legal provisions that have the effect of law. Therefore, Circular No. 22 purports merely to advise employers-members of the System of what, in the light of the amendment of the law, they should include in determining the monthly compensation of their employees upon which the social security contributions should be based, and that such circular did not require presidential approval and publication in the Official Gazette for its effectivity. The Resolution appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against appellant. So ordered.
No comments:
Post a Comment