Case Digest (G.R. No. 45961)
Facts:
- Luzon Brokerage Corporation (LUZON) filed a case against Manila Banking Corporation (MANILABANK), Pacific Copra Export Co., Inc. (PACOCO), and the Provincial Sheriff of Surigao del Norte.
- LUZON entered into a warehouse storage agreement with PACOCO and leased two warehouses from PACOCO to deposit copra.
- MANILABANK requested the Provincial Sheriff to sell the copra at public auction without satisfying LUZON's lien.
- LUZON filed a complaint for injunction to prevent the sale of the copra and claimed superior liens.
- The Trial Court dismissed the complaint, ruling that LUZON failed to state a cause of action.
- The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings.
- MANILABANK appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The complaint for injunction filed by LUZON does not set out a cause of action.
- The Trial Court's ...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- An action for injunction is a recognized remedy in the Philippines, but it is distinct from the provisional remedy of preliminary injunction.
- A complaint for injunction seeks to permanently enjoin the defendant from the commission or continuance of a specific act or to compel the defendant to continue the performance of a particular act.
- In this case, the acts sought to be restrained by LUZON's complaint, namely ...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 45961)
Facts:
The case of Manila Banking Corp. v. Court of Appeals involves a complaint for injunction filed by Luzon Brokerage Corporation against Manila Banking Corporation (MANILABANK), Pacific Copra Export Co., Inc. (PACOCO), and the Provincial Sheriff of Surigao del Norte. The complaint alleged that Luzon entered into a warehouse storage agreement with PACOCO and later leased two warehouses from PACOCO to deposit copra. MANILABANK then requested the Provincial Sheriff to sell the copra at public auction without satisfying Luzon's warehouseman's lien. Luzon filed the complaint to prevent the sale and sought a writ of preliminary injunction, as well as other reliefs. The Trial Court issued a temporary restraining order and set the application for preliminary injunction for hearing. However, the Court eventually dismissed the complaint, stating that it failed to state a cause of action and that the copra had already been sold at public auction. Luzon appealed to the Court of Appeals, which set aside the dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings. MANILABANK appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that an injunction cannot be issued against consummated acts and that the case had become moot and academic.
...