THE Court of Appeals has allowed the Department of Transportation and Communications to buy 48 new light-rail vehicles for the Metro Rail Transit 3, worth P3.76 billion, despite the appeal of the firm that failed to upgrade the train line.
The CA’s Twelfth Division, through Associate Justice Maria Elisa Sempio Diy, ruled that petitioners Metro Rail Transit Corp. and MRT Holdings II failed to prove that it would suffer “grave injustice and irreparable injury” if the DoTC is allowed to buy the train cars from the Dalian Locomotive and Rolling Stock of China.
The appellate court stressed that MRTC’s arguments are merely “self-serving and uncorroborated” by independent witnesses.
“Thus, MRTC’s assertion that the procurement of additional LRVs by the DoTC constitutes irreparable injury and not compensable by damages is highly speculative and conjectural. [On the contrary], any damage and/or injury that petitioners may suffer due to the continued procurement of additional LRVs, is in fact, quantifiable and if proven, is fully compensable as damages,” the CA ruled.
The private owners of the MRT-3 had asked the Makati City Regional Trial Court for an injunction to protect their interests, while an arbitration is ongoing between them and the DoTC for allegedly violating the 1997 build-lease-transfer agreement on the MRT-3.
The arbitration is set to thresh out the conflict on whether MRT’s private owners can still invoke their right to first refusal to prevent the government from entering into a third-part supply contract with Dalian.
However, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the lower court that under Republic Act No. 8975, or the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, only the Supreme Court can stop government infrastructure projects from proceeding.
The purchase of 48 LRVs from Dalian is considered a national government project, because it was included in the Investment Priorities Plan approved by Congress.
According to the appellate court, the Makati City court may grant injunctive relief if the matter is of extreme urgency involving a constitutional issue.
“Bare allegations or invocation that MRTC suffered grave injustice and irreparable injury considering that is constitutionally protected rights were violated will not automatically result in the issuance of an injunctive relief,” the CA held.
The appellate court said its decision is limited to the issue of the injunction as interim relief, as the main dispute remains pending before the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.