Case Digest (G.R. No. 179736)
Facts:
Spouses Bill and Victoria Hing v. Alexander Choachuy, Sr. and Allan Choachuy, G.R. No. 179736, June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court Second Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners Spouses Bill and Victoria Hing filed a Complaint for Injunction and Damages with a prayer for a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction/Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaue City on August 23, 2005, docketed as Civil Case No. MAN-5223 (Branch 28). They alleged ownership of Lot 1900-B (TCT No. 42817) in Barangay Basak, Mandaue City, and claimed that respondents Alexander Choachuy, Sr. and Allan Choachuy (identified by petitioners as owners/actors behind Aldo Development & Resources, Inc. (Aldo) on adjacent lots) installed video surveillance cameras on Aldo’s building that faced and recorded petitioners’ property without consent, and that respondents’ employees took pictures of petitioners’ ongoing construction.On October 18, 2005, the RTC (Judge Marilyn Lagura‑Yap) issued a TRO/preliminary injunction ordering respondents to remove a revolving camera and to transfer its operation so it would no longer view petitioners’ property, conditioned on bond. The RTC found petitioners had a reasonable expectation of privacy and that the cameras spanned a significant portion of their lot. Respondents moved for reconsideration, which the RTC denied in an order dated February 6, 2006.
Respondents then filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 with the Court of Appeals (CA), which, in a Decision dated July 10, 2007 (penalized by Associate Justice Isaias P. Dicdican), granted certiorari and annulled and set aside the RTC orders on the grounds that petitioners had not shown a clear and unmistakable right to injunctive relief, Article 26(1) of the Civil Code protects only residences (and the subject property was not residential), and that respondents, as mere stockholders and not owners of Aldo’s building, were not proper parties. The CA’s fallo annulled the RTC orders. A Resolution of the CA dated September 11, 2007 reaffirmed that disposition.
Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court by a Petition for Review ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals commit reversible error when it annulled the RTC’s issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction by finding no violation of petitioners’ right to privacy?
- Were respondents Alexander Choachuy, Sr. and Allan Choachuy proper parties to the action despite Aldo Development & Resources, Inc. being the registered owner of the building wher...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)