Case Digest (G.R. No. 160399)
Facts:
The City of Iloilo, represented by Hon. Mayor Jerry P. Trenas, petitioner, G.R. No. 160399, December 09, 2015, First Division, Bersamin, J., writing for the Court. This petition for certiorari assails two interlocutory orders of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 29, Iloilo City dated June 24, 2003 and August 15, 2003, which granted and thereafter sustained a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction in Civil Case No. 03-27648.
The controversy arose after the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) promulgated Department Order No. 2002-31 (Aug. 20, 2002) authorizing private emission testing centers (PETCs) and prescribing a guideline that “one PETC lane shall be authorized for every 15,000 registered vehicles in an LTO Registering District.” JPV Motor Vehicle Emission Testing and Car Care Center (JPV), a partnership authorized to operate a PETC in Iloilo City, held authorization for four lanes (capacity claimed at 60,000 vehicles). When JPV filed Civil Case No. 03-27648 seeking to prevent the City from acting on another applicant’s request to operate a PETC, the city had 53,647 registered motor vehicles; JPV thus asserted it could serve the city’s entire vehicle population under DOTC 2002-31.
The City of Iloilo (petitioner) opposed the injunctive relief, arguing the writ would create a monopoly, improperly restrain the Mayor’s discretionary authority to issue business permits, and that JPV had not shown an existing right in esse to justify injunctive relief. On June 18, 2003, Grahar Emission Testing Center (Grahar) — another prospective PETC operator — sought leave to intervene. The RTC allowed Grahar to intervene on June 24, 2003 but on that same date granted JPV’s application for a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction enjoining the City from issuing a mayor’s permit to operate a PETC, conditioned to dissolve if DOTC authorized another PETC; JPV was directed to post a P100,000 injunction bond.
The City moved for reconsideration; Grahar moved for reconsideration as well, pointing out that DOTC had issued Department Order No. 2003-24 (Apr. 10, 2003) amending DOTC 2002-31 to reduce the vehicle-per-lane requirement from 15,000 to 12,000. On August 15, 2003 the RTC denied the City’s motion for reconsideration and affirmed the June 24 injunction order, explaining that permitting another PETC would result in unhealthy competition contrary to DOTC 2002-31. The City then filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court on November 5, 2003, contending the RTC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing and sustaining the injunction and in treating DOTC 2002-31 as a basis for the writ. Th...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Regional Trial Court commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by issuing the writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction on June 24, 2003 and denying the City’s motion for reconsideration on August 15, 2003?
- Was the issuance of the preliminary injunction justified under Section 3, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court and related authorities — i.e., did JPV establish the requisites for such interlocuto...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)