SPOUSES SOLLER vs. HON. ROGELIO SINGSON
G.R. NO. 215547 | FEBRUARY 3, 2020
REYES, J. JR., J.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the RTC has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case.
RULING:
Yes. The SC cited Section 3 of R.A. No. 8975 which vested jurisdiction to the
Supreme Court to issue any injunction against the government in order to restrain, prohibit
or compel a certain act. In the case of Philco Aero vs. Sec. Tugade, the Court ruled that
the prohibition covers only temporary or preliminary restraining orders or writs but it does
not include decisions on the merits granting permanent injunctions.
A complaint for injunction is within the jurisdiction of the RTC. This is because the
RTC has jurisdiction over all civil cases in which the subject matter of the litigation is
incapable of pecuniary estimation, pursuant to Section 19 of B.P. 129, and as provided
by jurisprudence, a complaint for injunction is one which is incapable of pecuniary
estimation.
The allegations and the prayer of the petitioners in this case was to prevent or
prohibit the elevation project, thus, such is an action for injunction and therefore within
the jurisdiction of the RTC. A provisional or ancillary remedy of preliminary injunction is
different from the principal action for injunction because the provisional or ancillary
remedy of preliminary injunction cannot exist only as part or an incident of an independent
action or proceeding. In this case, the complaint is for injunction with a prayer for the
issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. What is controlling in determining whether
the RTC has jurisdiction or not is the principal action and not the ancillary remedy which
is merely incidental to the principal action.