Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 257 views

    117

    Uploaded by

    Marry Lasheras
    The Court of Appeals committed reversible error in directing the Regional Trial Court to issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of a closure order issued by the municipal mayor to close down a poultry farm. To be entitled to injunctive relief like a TRO, the applicant must clearly show that they have a right that will be violated and will suffer irreparable damage. However, the owner of the poultry farm failed to sufficiently establish these requirements. Courts may only issue injunctions against acts of public officials if the applicant proves the act is invalid or irregular, which was not shown. The decision of the lower courts on injunctive relief is discretionary and will not be interfered with unless there is grave

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    117

    Uploaded by

    Marry Lasheras
    257 views1 page
    The Court of Appeals committed reversible error in directing the Regional Trial Court to issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of a closure order issued by the municipal mayor to close down a poultry farm. To be entitled to injunctive relief like a TRO, the applicant must clearly show that they have a right that will be violated and will suffer irreparable damage. However, the owner of the poultry farm failed to sufficiently establish these requirements. Courts may only issue injunctions against acts of public officials if the applicant proves the act is invalid or irregular, which was not shown. The decision of the lower courts on injunctive relief is discretionary and will not be interfered with unless there is grave

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Court of Appeals committed reversible error in directing the Regional Trial Court to issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of a closure order issued by the municipal mayor to close down a poultry farm. To be entitled to injunctive relief like a TRO, the applicant must clearly show that they have a right that will be violated and will suffer irreparable damage. However, the owner of the poultry farm failed to sufficiently establish these requirements. Courts may only issue injunctions against acts of public officials if the applicant proves the act is invalid or irregular, which was not shown. The decision of the lower courts on injunctive relief is discretionary and will not be interfered with unless there is grave

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    257 views1 page

    117

    Uploaded by

    Marry Lasheras
    The Court of Appeals committed reversible error in directing the Regional Trial Court to issue a temporary restraining order against the implementation of a closure order issued by the municipal mayor to close down a poultry farm. To be entitled to injunctive relief like a TRO, the applicant must clearly show that they have a right that will be violated and will suffer irreparable damage. However, the owner of the poultry farm failed to sufficiently establish these requirements. Courts may only issue injunctions against acts of public officials if the applicant proves the act is invalid or irregular, which was not shown. The decision of the lower courts on injunctive relief is discretionary and will not be interfered with unless there is grave

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Case no.

    117- INJUNCTION judicial discretion by a court in injunctive matters must not


    be interfered with, except when there is grave abuse of
    G. R. No. 223862, July 10, 2017 - HON. MYLYN P. discretion." The burden is, thus, on the applicant to show
    CAYABYAB, IN HER CAPACITY AS THE MUNICIPAL that there is meritorious ground for the issuance of a TRO
    MAYOR OF LUBAO, PAMPANGA, AND ANGELITO L. in his favor,38 since an application for injunctive relief is
    DAVID, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE BARANGAY construed strictly against him. Here, Dimson failed to
    CHAIRMAN OF PRADO SIONGCO, LUBAO, sufficiently show the presence of the requisites to warrant
    PAMPANGA, REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-IN- the issuance of a TRO against the CDO and the Closure
    FACT, EMMANUEL SANTOS, Petitioners, v. JAIME C. Order of Mayor Cayabyab.
    DIMSON, REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEYS-IN-
    FACT, CARMELA R. DIMSON AND IRENE R. DIMSON, In fine, it was grave error for the CA to order the issuance
    Respondent. of a TRO against the implementation of the CDO and the
    Closure Order of Mayor Cayabyab. A court may issue
    FACTS injunctive relief against acts of public officers only when
    the applicant has made out a case of invalidity or
    Dimson filed a Petition for Certiorari, Mandamus, irregularity strong enough to overcome the presumption of
    Prohibition (With Application for Preliminary Mandatory validity or regularity, and has established a clear legal
    Injunction) and prayed for the issuance of a TRO against right to the remedy sought, which was not shown here.
    Mayor Cayabyab and Chairman David (petitioners) before
    the RTC of Guagua, Pampanga, docketed as Sp. Civil
    Case No. G-14-685, which was raffled to Branch 52. He
    maintained that his poultry farm is not a nuisance per se
    that can be summarily abated; hence, respondents
    grossly abused their discretion when they withheld his
    permits, and issued the CDO and Closure Order.

    the RTC denied Dimson's application for TRO for failure to


    establish a clear and unmistakable right to the said
    issuance and to show that he will suffer irreparable injury.
    It likewise ruled that the TRO can no longer serve its
    purpose as the act sought to be restrained was already
    fait accompli, since a notice of closure was already posted
    on the concrete wall of the subject poultry farm effective
    September 29, 2014.

    Dimson filed a motion for reconsideration which was,


    however, denied. Unperturbed, Dimson filed a petition for
    certiorari before the CA, seeking to set aside the Orders
    dated October 2, 2014 and December 22, 2014, docketed
    as CA-G.R. SP No. 138699.

    the CA granted the petition, and directed the RTC to issue


    a TRO against the implementation of the CDO and the
    Closure Order of Mayor Cayabyab.

    Dissatisfied, petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration,


    which was, however, denied in a Resolution dated March
    21, 2016; hence, the instant petition.

    ISSUE

    whether or not the CA committed reversible error in


    directing the issuance of a TRO against the
    implementation of the CDO and the Closure Order of
    Mayor Cayabyab.

    RULING

    YES the CA committed reversible error. The Court grants


    the petition.

    "A writ of preliminary injunction and a TRO are injunctive


    reliefs and preservative remedies for the protection of
    substantive rights and interests." To be entitled to the
    injunctive writ, the applicant must show that: (a) there
    exists a clear and unmistakable right to be protected; (b)
    this right is directly threatened by an act sought to be
    enjoined; (c) the invasion of the right is material and
    substantial; and (d) there is an urgent and paramount
    necessity for the writ to prevent serious and irreparable
    damage. The grant or denial of an injunctive relief in a
    pending case rests on the sound discretion of the court
    since the assessment and evaluation of evidence towards
    that end involve findings of fact left for the conclusive
    determination of the said court. "Hence, the exercise of

    You might also like