Title
Supreme Court
Philippine Ports Authority vs. Nasipit Integrated Arrastre and Stevedoring Services, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 214864
Decision Date
Mar 22, 2017
PPA awarded NIASSI a 10-year cargo-handling contract, revoked it due to poor service, and took over operations. NIASSI sued; courts ruled a perfected contract existed but deemed the case moot as the term expired.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 214864)

Case Background

The dispute arises from a cargo-handling contract awarded to NIASSI by PPA, which was intended to operate solely at the Nasipit Port in Agusan del Norte. The case follows a series of events after NIASSI was awarded the contract through a public bidding process. Initially, NIASSI was declared as the winning bidder, but the second-highest bidder, Concord Arrastre and Stevedoring Corporation (CASCOR), raised concerns regarding NIASSI's stockholders, who were alleged to be legislators prohibited from holding financial interests in government contracts. Despite these allegations, on December 21, 2000, PPA issued a Notice of Award to NIASSI, which was accepted by the latter on January 3, 2001, though a formal contract was never executed. Instead, NIASSI requested a Hold-Over Authority (HOA), which allowed provisional cargo handling operations.

Court Proceedings and Injunctions

Disputes arose due to poor service quality associated with NIASSI, leading PPA to take over operations on December 10, 2004. Subsequently, NIASSI filed a Petition for Mandamus with a prayer for a writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction to compel PPA to execute the contract formally and to regain control over cargo handling operations. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) initially granted an injunction in favor of NIASSI but later reversed this decision.

Court of Appeals Decision

NIASSI appealed the RTC's reversal to the Court of Appeals (CA), which found that a perfected contract existed between NIASSI and PPA, despite the absence of a signed document. The CA determined that the HOA and its extensions represented partial fulfillment of the contract. It concluded that NIASSI had a clear legal right to operate the cargo-handling services at the port, and thus reinstated the initial injunction, allowing NIASSI to resume operations.

Supreme Court Ruling

PPA subsequently filed a Petition for Review, arguing that the CA's decision rendered the Amended Petition moot and academic. The Supreme Court held that the 10-year cargo-handling contract had indeed been perfected, with the condition that NIASSI's operations during the HOA constituted partial fulfillment of that contract. The Court clarified that PPA's attempts to take over the operation were in violation of NIASSI's rights under the existing contract.

However, it ultimately ruled that the 10-year contract's term had expired by the time of the petition, given NIASSI's operational history combined with the events dictati

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.