Case Digest (G.R. No. 91023)
Facts:
Metropolitan Traffic Command West Traffic District v. Hon. Arsenio M. Gonong, in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 8 at Manila, and Dante S. David, G.R. No. 91023, July 13, 1990, Supreme Court En Banc, Cruz, J., writing for the Court.
The petitioner is the Metropolitan Traffic Command West Traffic District; the private respondent is Dante S. David; Hon. Arsenio M. Gonong was the trial judge who issued the injunction. On August 10, 1989, David filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court (Manila, Branch 8) alleging that the petitioner removed his car’s rear license plate while the vehicle was parked on Escolta. He contended the act lacked legal or ordinance authority and sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin the practice.
Judge Gonong issued a TRO on August 14, 1989, and after hearings on August 18, 23 and 25, 1989, granted the writ of preliminary injunction on August 25, 1989. The parties agreed to submit the case on the single issue whether any law or ordinance authorized removal of license plates; they filed memoranda. The trial court held that LOI 43 did not empower removal/confiscation of plates for the situation at bar, found LOI 43 repealed by PD 1605, and noted absence of MMC rules or city ordinances authorizing the practice; the court also criticized alleged abuses by traffic agents.
Although the petition should have been filed first with the Court of Appeals (concurrent jurisdiction over R.T.C. decisions involving questions of law), the petitioner brought the matter to the Supreme Court under Rule 65. This Court issued a TRO on February 6, 1990, enjoining enforcement of the trial court decision pending resolution and required comments and reply briefs from the parties.
The petitioner argued LOI 43 remained in force and could be applied alongside PD 1605 (no implied repeal; LOI 43 a special law on illegal parking as opposed to the general PD 1605), and that plate removal does not constitute a taking of property requiring due process. The private respondent countered that PD 1605 had superseded LOI 43 within Metro Manil...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Supreme Court properly take cognizance of and decide this matter under Rule 65 despite the Court of Appeals’ concurrent jurisdiction over R.T.C. decisions involving questions of law?
- Does LOI 43 authorize the removal and confiscation of the license plates of vehicles deliberately parked in violation of traffic laws?
- Did PD 1605 repeal or preclude enforcement of LOI 43 or otherwise authorize removal/confiscation of license plates for deliberately illegally parked vehicles?
- Does removal/confiscation of a vehicle’s li...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)