Case Digest (G.R. No. 130360)
Facts:
Wilson Ong Ching Kian Chuan v. Hon. Court of Appeals and Lorenzo Tan, G.R. No. 130360, August 15, 2001, Supreme Court Second Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Wilson Ong Ching Kian Chuan (Ong) imported vermicelli from China National Cereals Oils and Foodstuffs Import and Export Corporation and repackaged the product in cellophane wrappers bearing a two‑dragon design and the TOWER trademark; he obtained a Certificate of Copyright Registration from the National Library for that design on June 9, 1993. Ong later discovered that respondent Lorenzo Tan repacked vermicelli from a related Chinese supplier using a nearly identical wrapper.
On September 16, 1993 Ong filed a verified complaint for copyright infringement with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 94, praying for damages and a temporary restraining order (TRO) or writ of preliminary injunction; the trial court issued a TRO the same day. Tan opposed the injunction and counter‑applied for a writ against Ong, asserting that the Pagoda and Lungkow trademarks and labels were owned and first used by Ceroilfood Shandong (China National Cereal’s Shandong branch), that Tan was the Philippines’ exclusive distributor, and that Ong’s registered wrapper lacked originality because he copied Ceroilfood Shandong’s design.
After Ong’s reply, the RTC issued the writ of preliminary injunction in Ong’s favor on October 13, 1993 upon Ong’s filing of a P100,000 bond. Tan moved to dissolve the writ; the RTC denied the motion on December 15, 1993 and denied reconsideration on March 1, 1994. Tan then sought relief from the Court of Appeals (CA) by way of a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65, praying for a TRO and/or writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin enforcement of the RTC injunction.
The CA initially rendered a decision on August 8, 1994 setting aside the RTC’s October 13, 1993 order and related orders for grave abuse of discretion. On January 3, 1995 it modified that resolution by deleting language expressly characterizing the RTC action as grave abuse and, instead, ordered that a writ of preliminary injunction issue in favor of Tan enjoining enforcement of the RTC writ upon Tan’s posting of a P200,000 bond. The CA directed elevation of records and allowed the parties to file memoranda. After submission, the CA promulgated a decision on August 27, 1997 which set aside the RTC resolutions dated October 13 and December 15, 1993 and the March 1, 1994 RTC order, and made the CA’s injunction permanent.
On October 17, 1997 Ong filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court challenging the CA rulings. On...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction proper?
- Did the Court of Appeals commit grave abuse of discretion by setting aside the RTC’s orders and issuing a judgment that touched on the merits of the copyright infrin...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)