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.