Buyco v. Baraquia
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondent Nelson Baraquia filed a complaint against Dominico and Clemente Buyco for the establishment of a permanent right of way, injunction, and damages, seeking to enjoin the Buycos from closing a private road used to access his poultry farm. The Buycos died during the pendency of the case and were substituted by petitioner Purisimo Buyco and his brother Gonzalo. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iloilo City initially granted respondent's application for a preliminary injunction. However, by Decision dated February 14, 2007, the RTC dismissed respondent's complaint for failure to establish the requisites for an easement of right of way and lifted the writ of preliminary injunction. Respondent appealed this decision. Subsequently, respondent filed a motion to cite petitioner and his brother for contempt, alleging they closed the subject road in violation of the writ. The RTC, in a Resolution dated March 13, 2007, held petitioner and his brother in contempt, noting the decision had not yet become final and executory. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, arguing the injunction ceased to exist upon quashal and contempt could not be initiated by mere motion. The RTC, by Resolution dated April 18, 2007, set aside its March 13, 2007 Resolution, ruling that contempt could not be initiated by mere motion and that the validity of a writ of preliminary injunction after its quashal was not firmly entrenched in jurisprudence. The RTC cited Lee v. Court of Appeals regarding the subsisting validity of an injunction pending appeal. The Petition: Petitioner filed a petition for review, raising the question of law as to whether the lifting of a writ of preliminary injunction due to the dismissal of the complaint is immediately executory, notwithstanding the pending appeal.
Issue(s)
Whether the writ of preliminary injunction issued by the trial court was automatically dissolved upon the dismissal of the main case, despite the pendency of an appeal. Whether the trial court erred in holding petitioner and his brother in indirect contempt of court.
Ruling
The petition is meritorious. The Resolution dated April 18, 2007 of the trial court is REVERSED. The writ of preliminary injunction which Branch 39 of the Iloilo Regional Trial Court issued on December 1, 1999 was automatically dissolved upon its dismissal by Decision of February 14, 2007 of Civil Case No. 26015.
Ratio Decidendi
On the automatic dissolution of the writ of preliminary injunction: The Supreme Court held that a writ of preliminary injunction is merely a provisional remedy, ancillary to the main case, and is dependent on the outcome of the main action. Its sole object is to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be heard. In this case, the lower court found that respondent was not entitled to the easement of right of way prayed for, and consequently, the writ of preliminary injunction was lifted. The Court emphasized that the present case having been heard and found dismissible, the writ of preliminary injunction is deemed lifted, its purpose as a provisional remedy having been served, the appeal therefrom notwithstanding. The Court cited Unionbank v. Court of Appeals, which states that a dismissal of an action in which a temporary injunction has been granted operates as a dissolution of the injunction, regardless of whether an appeal has been taken. The rationale is that an appeal from a judgment dismissing an action on the merits does not suspend the judgment, and thus the general rule that a temporary injunction terminates automatically upon dismissal of the action applies. On the contempt charge: Since the writ of preliminary injunction was automatically dissolved upon the dismissal of the main case, the act of closing the road thereafter could not constitute indirect contempt of court for violating a subsisting writ. The trial court's citation of Lee v. Court of Appeals was deemed misplaced because, in that case, the original complaint had not yet been decided on the merits, unlike in the present case where the complaint was dismissed after trial. Therefore, the trial court erred in holding petitioner and his brother in contempt.
Main Doctrine
A writ of preliminary injunction is automatically dissolved upon the dismissal of the main case, even if the dismissal is pending appeal, as its purpose as a provisional remedy has been served.