Friday, November 15, 2013

Nerwin v. PNOC, G.R. No. 167057, April 11, 2012

FACTS: In 1999, National Electrification Administration (NEA) published an invitation to pre-qualify and to bid for a contract known as IPB No. 80 for the supply and delivery of about 60,000 pieces of wood poles and 20,000 of cross-arms. Nerwin was one of the bidders The contract was awarded to him being the lowest bidder. However, NEA’s board of directors passed a resolution reducing by 50% the material requirements for IPB 80 to which Nerwin protested. A losing bidder, Tri State and Pacific Synergy filed a complaint alleging the documents Nerwin submitted during the pre-qualification bid were falsified. Finding a way to nullify the bid, NEA sought the opinion of Gov’t Corporate Counsel who upheld the eligibility of Nerwin. NEA allegedly held negotiations with other bidders for IPB 80 contract. As a result, Nerwin filed a complaint with prayer of injunction which was grabted by RTC Manila. PNOC – Energy Dev’t Corp issued an invitation to pre-qualify and bid for O-ILAW project. Nerwin filed a civil action in RTC alleging that it was an attempt to subject portions of IPB 80 to another bidding. He prayed for TRO to enjoin respondents to the proposed bidding. Respondents averred that this is in violation of a rule that government infrastructure are not subject to TROs. RTC granted TRO nevertheless. CA ruled in favor of respondents. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: W/N CA erred in dismissing the case pursuant to RA 8975 which prohibits issuance of TRO except SC to gov’t projects


HELD: Decision of CA affirmed. Sec 3 of RA 8975 clearly prohibits issuance of TRO, preliminary injunctions, and preliminary mandatory injunctions against gov’t.

No comments:

Post a Comment