Case Digest (G.R. No. 183173)
Facts:
The Chairman and Executive Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development, and the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development v. Ejercito Lim, G.R. No. 183173, August 24, 2016, First Division, Bersamin, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioners are Winston G. Arzaga and Vicente A. Sandoval, respectively the Executive Director and Chairman of the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), and the PCSD itself; respondent is Ejercito Lim, doing business as Bonanza Air Services (represented by an attorney-in-fact). The PCSD issued Administrative Order No. 00-05 (A.O. No. 00-05) on February 25, 2002, requiring accreditation by the PCSD of traders and carriers transporting live fish from Palawan, and later adopted Resolution No. 03-211, which expanded the definition of “carrier” and reiterated the accreditation requirement. The respondent operated a nonscheduled air taxi service transporting live fish out of Palawan and continued operations without PCSD accreditation.
After the PCSD issued a Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order alleging that the respondent made 19 flights in October 2002 without accreditation and threatening sanctions, the respondent filed a petition for prohibition in the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA granted a temporary restraining order, and—after petitioners failed to timely comment—issued a writ of preliminary injunction upon the respondent’s posting of a P50,000 bond. The CA, in a decision promulgated May 28, 2008, granted the petition for prohibition and declared A.O. No. 00-05, Resolution No. 03-211, their revisions, and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order null and void, and made the injunction permanent.
The respondent also filed a supplemental petition alleging that Resolution No. 03-211 was adopted to circumvent the CA injunction and that enforcement resul...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in declaring A.O. No. 00-05, Series of 2002; Resolution No. 03-211; and the Notice of Violation and Show Cause Order null and void for being issued in excess of the PCSD's...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)