MANILA – The Court of Appeals has granted the petition filed by the Export and Industry Bank Inc. stopping the seizure of its properties.

This by making permanent the writ of preliminary injunction it issued against the two orders of the Makati City Regional Trial Court holding EIB liable for unauthorized sale of P32,180,000 DMCI shares of several private corporations.

In a ruling written by Associate Justice Mario Lopez dated April 26, 2012, the CA's Special Division of Five under the CA former 14th Division, with a vote of 3-2, nullified the orders dated July 29, 2011 and Aug. 26, 2011 of the Makati City RTC Branch 66.

The RTC decision ordered the acquisition of the amount of shares of stock from the Philippine Stock Exchange at the cost of EIB Securities, Inc. and Export and Industry Bank, Inc. and to deliver these to the plaintiffs.

Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Amy Lazaro-Javier and Vicente Veloso while Associate Justices Magdangal De Leon and Socorro Inting dissented.

The CA said the RTC ruling issued by Makati City Judge Joselito Villarosa by saying that it has no authority to declare the invalidity of the orders/resolutions of a Higher Court.

"The disquisition of the RTC, which is a declaration against the validity of a high court's order, is a blatant disregard of the principle of hierarchy of courts," the CA ruling said.

The case was filed by Pacific Rehouse Corporation; Pacific Concorde Corporation; Mizpah Holdings, Inc.; Forum Holdings Corporation; and East Asia Oil Company, Inc. for unauthorized sale of said DMCI shares made by E-Securities.

These companies became the private respondents to the case.

In its ruling, the CA said, "From the antecedents, it is manifest that the RTC, desiring to cause the execution of its final and executory resolution dated October 18, 2005, arrogated unto itself the authority to rule against the validity of this court's WPI to justify the issuance of a notice of levy against petitioner's property."

The CA clarified that despite the lack of ratification, its WPI is valid until it is revoked.

"Therefore, pending the process of evocation/ratification, the WPI stands and has full force and effect," the CA said.

It also said that "the proper procedure is for the private respondents (RTC, et al.) to directly assail the validity of the WPI with this division or the Supreme Court."

"Thus, the supervening orders of the RTC in contravention of the WPI are void," the CA said.*PNA

back to top