Case Digest (G.R. No. 108869)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines (Department of Education, Culture and Sports) v. Salvador Silerio, in his capacity as Presiding Judge, Branch 8, Regional Trial Court of Legazpi City, and Big Bertha Construction, as represented by Pedro Lim, G.R. No. 108869, May 06, 1997, Supreme Court Second Division, Romero, J., writing for the Court.The Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS), through its Regional Pre-qualification Bid and Awards Committee (RPBAC), conducted a public bidding for restoration, repair, electrical and civil works at the Sorsogon College of Arts and Trades under the PATVEP project. Prospective bidders were instructed to submit two sealed envelopes: Envelope A (documentary requirements) and Envelope B (bid price), and the bidding rules required that bid documents be submitted in three copies (original, duplicate, triplicate).
Big Bertha Construction, represented by Pedro Lim, submitted Envelope A and Envelope B on October 20, 1992; when its Envelope A was opened it initially appeared to contain required documents and Envelope B was being opened, but the Technical Committee informed the Chairman that Envelope A contained only the original copy (not the required duplicate and triplicate). The RPBAC declared Big Bertha “non-complying” under Section I, IB 10.3 of Presidential Decree No. 1594 and refused to announce or consider its bid. Mr. Lim, who briefly stepped out during opening, publicly announced his bid of P3,030,000 and later filed a formal protest with the RPBAC on October 26, 1992.
Because no action was taken on the protest, Big Bertha filed suit in the Regional Trial Court (Civil Case No. 8666, Branch 8, Legazpi City) on November 20, 1992 for specific performance, injunction (with prayer for a temporary restraining order), and damages. That same day the RTC issued a twenty-day temporary restraining order directing the PBAC to refrain from declaring another bidder winner or awarding the project. On December 11, 1992 the RTC granted a writ of preliminary injunction (upon bond) enjoining defendants from awarding the contract; on December 15, 1992 the RTC approved the injunction bond and issued a preliminary mandatory injunction directing the PBAC to declare Big Bertha the winning bidder and to award the contract. DECS’ motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC on January 27, 1993.
The Republic elevated the case to the Supreme Court by a petition for certiorari, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the RTC for issuing the injunctive writs in an infrastructure project, contrary to Presidential Decree No. 1818, and arguing that the RPBAC properly exercised its discretion under P.D. No. 1594 to disqualify non-complying bids. The Republic also filed an urgent motion for a restraining or...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Regional Trial Court have jurisdiction to issue the temporary restraining order, the preliminary injunction and the preliminary mandatory injunction in a dispute involving an infrastructure project, given Presidential Decree No. 1818?
- Were the preliminary injunction and preliminary mandatory injunction properly granted on the merits where Big Bertha Construction failed to submit the required duplicate and triplicate copies of its bid under the bidd...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)