Title
Independent Electricity Market Operator of the Philippines, Inc. vs. Energy Regulatory Commission
Case
G.R. No. 254440
Decision Date
Mar 23, 2022
IEMOP, as the recognized Independent Market Operator, sought mandamus to compel ERC to act on its 2021 Market Fees Application, citing grave abuse of discretion and unlawful neglect. Supreme Court ruled in favor, ordering ERC to resolve the application.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 254440)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Enactment and Structure of WESM
    • Republic Act No. 9136 (EPIRA, 2001) created the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) and mandated a Market Operator with equitable representation (Autonomous Group Market Operator, AGMO), to transition within one year to an Independent Market Operator (IMO).
    • EPIRA and its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) assigned to the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) the duty to enforce WESM rules and approve market fees to recover Market Operator costs.
  • Formation and Transition to IEMOP
    • 2003–2006: The Department of Energy (DOE) initiated and PEMC incorporated as AGMO; WESM began commercial operations in Luzon (2006), Visayas (2010), and Mindanao (2017).
    • January–February 2018: DOE issued Department Circular DC2018-01-0002 and PEMC adopted the IMO Transition Plan, providing for a separate non-stock, non-profit IMO entity.
    • September 2018: IEMOP incorporated and PEMC and IEMOP executed an Operating Agreement; on 26 September 2018, IEMOP assumed all Market Operator functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities.
  • Filing and Non-action on Market Fees Application
    • 18 August 2020: IEMOP filed its Market Fees Application for CY 2021 with ERC, submitting all pre-filing documents under ERC Rule 6. ERC acknowledged receipt but deferred acceptance pending technical pre-filing.
    • 1 September 2020: ERC’s Market Operations Service returned the application “as directed by superiors,” instructing that PEMC be the applicant and providing a pre-filing checklist.
    • September–October 2020: IEMOP submitted Manifestations and Supplemental Submissions, requested certification of technical pre-filing; ERC did not respond.
    • November 2020–January 2021: IEMOP sent multiple follow-up letters. On 11 December 2020, it filed a Petition for Mandamus under Rule 65, alleging ERC’s unlawful neglect.
    • May 2021: ERC filed its Comment, asserting application deficiencies and that PEMC remained Market Operator. IEMOP replied, reaffirming its IMO status.
    • February–May 2021: ERC’s Market Operations Service reiterated that only PEMC applications would be acted upon; DOE Secretary and PEMC wrote ERC confirming IEMOP as IMO and entitled to file market fees.

Issues:

  • Jurisdiction and Proper Remedy
    • Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction under Section 78 of EPIRA to entertain IEMOP’s direct Petition for Mandamus.
    • Whether mandamus is the proper remedy to compel ERC to act on IEMOP’s Market Fees Application.
  • Merits of Mandamus
    • Whether IEMOP has a clear legal right to demand ERC action on its application.
    • Whether ERC has a ministerial duty to process the application and unlawfully neglected that duty.
    • Whether there is any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy available.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.