Scribd
Upload
135 views2 pages

MUSTANG LUMBER v. CA

The Supreme Court held that lumber is not different from timber under the Revised Forestry Code. While timber is specifically included in the definition of forest products, lumber is defined as processed forest raw material. Lumber is commonly understood to mean timber or logs after being prepared for market. Therefore, in the absence of a legislative intent to distinguish the two, lumber should be considered processed timber. As such, the possession of lumber without proper documents is penalized under Section 68 of P.D. No. 705, just as the possession of unprocessed timber would be.

Uploaded by

Candelaria Quezon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
135 views2 pages

MUSTANG LUMBER v. CA

The Supreme Court held that lumber is not different from timber under the Revised Forestry Code. While timber is specifically included in the definition of forest products, lumber is defined as processed forest raw material. Lumber is commonly understood to mean timber or logs after being prepared for market. Therefore, in the absence of a legislative intent to distinguish the two, lumber should be considered processed timber. As such, the possession of lumber without proper documents is penalized under Section 68 of P.D. No. 705, just as the possession of unprocessed timber would be.

Uploaded by

Candelaria Quezon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

MUSTANG LUMBER v.

CA

MUSTANG LUMBER v. CA
G.R Nos. 104988, 106424, 123784

Ponente: J. Davide Jr.

FACTS:
On 1 April 1990, acting on an information that a huge stockpile of narra flitches, shorts, and slabs were seen inside
the lumberyard of the petitioner in Valenzuela, Metro Manila, DENR organized a team of foresters and policemen
and sent it to conduct surveillance at the said lumberyard. In the course thereof, the team members saw coming
out from the lumberyard the petitioner's truck, loaded with lauan and almaciga lumber of assorted sizes and
dimensions. Since the driver could not produce the required invoices and transport documents, the team seized
the truck together with its cargo and impounded them at the DENR compound at Visayas Avenue, Quezon City.
The team was not able to gain entry into the premises because of the refusal of the owner.

On 3 April 1990, the team was able to secure a search warrant from Executive Judge Adriano R. Osorio of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Valenzuela, Metro Manila. By virtue thereof, the team seized on that date from the
petitioner's lumberyard four truckloads of narra shorts, trimmings, and slabs; a negligible number of narra lumber;
and approximately 200,000 board feet of lumber and shorts of various species including almaciga and supa.

On 4 April 1990, the team returned to the premises of the petitioner's lumberyard in Valenzuela and placed under
administrative seizure the remaining stockpile of almaciga, supa, and lauan lumber with a total volume of 311,000
board feet because the petitioner failed to produce upon demand the corresponding certificate of lumber origin,
auxiliary invoices, tally sheets, and delivery receipts from the source of the invoices covering the lumber to prove
the legitimacy of their source and origin.

The petitioner's question the seizure contending that the possession of lumber, as opposed to timber, is not
penalized in Section 68 of P.D. No. 705, as amended, and even granting arguendo that lumber falls within the
purview of the said section, the same may not be used in evidence against him for they were taken by virtue of an
illegal seizure.

ISSUE:
Whether the contention of the petitioner is correct that lumber is different from timber

HELD:
No,

The Supreme Court held that the Revised Forestry Code contains no definition of either timber or lumber.

While the former is included in forest products as defined in paragraph (q) of Section 3, the latter is found in
paragraph (aa) of the same section in the definition of "Processing plant."

Lumber is a processed log or processed forest raw material.

The Code uses the term lumber in its ordinary or common usage. In the 1993 copyright edition of Webster's Third
New International Dictionary, lumber is defined, inter alia, as "timber or logs after being prepared for the market."

Simply put, lumber is a processed log or timber. It is settled that in the absence of legislative intent to the contrary,
words and phrases used in a statute should be given their plain, ordinary, and common usage meaning.

And insofar as possession of timber without the required legal documents is concerned, Section 68 of P.D. No. 705,
as amended, makes no distinction between raw or processed timber. Neither should we.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy