REMEDIAL LAW | Gios-Samar Inc. vs DoTC G.R. No. 217158, March 12, 2019

Gios-Samar Inc. vs DoTC

G.R. No. 217158, March 12, 2019


FACTS The Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC) and the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP) posted an invitation for competitive bidding for the development, operations, and maintenance of several airports (Bacolod-Silay, Davao, Iloilo, Laguindingan, New Bohol [Panglao], and Puerto Princesa) to improve services. GIOS-SAMAR, Inc., a non-governmental organization, filed a petition for prohibition against the bidding, citing constitutional violations. Despite DOTC and CAAP's counterarguments regarding prematurity and lack of standing, GIOS-SAMAR argued the issue's transcendental importance and potential harm to public welfare. GIOS-SAMAR filed a direct petition for prohibition in the Supreme Court, bypassing lower courts. The respondents raised procedural objections, including prematurity, lack of legal standing, and improper bypassing of the hierarchical court system. Was direct recourse to the Supreme Court justified?

 

RULING NO. he Supreme Court dismissed the petition due to insufficient cause of action and the need for factual determination. The principle of hierarchy of courts mandates respect for the established judicial structure, requiring litigants to initiate actions in lower courts unless exceptional circumstances justify direct recourse to the Supreme Court. Transcendental importance does not automatically allow bypassing the hierarchy of courts, especially in cases needing factual determinations. The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts and generally will not entertain petitions requiring factual adjudication.








Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ DELOS SANTOS VS. JARRA/ G. R. NO. L-4150/ 10 FEBRUARY 1910/ 15 PHIL. 147