QC judge quits Uber, GrabCar case

The Quezon City judge who last week suspended a government order on app-enabled transport services like Uber and GrabCar has backed out of the case.

Judge Santiago Arenas angered commuters and reaped an online firestorm with that ruling. But in a Dec. 9 order released to the media on Friday, he said he decided to step aside because the petitioner had questioned his impartiality.

“The judge, after an intense reflection that he should desist from sitting in the petition because his motives or fairness are being seriously impugned, resolves to voluntarily inhibit himself from the case,” Arenas said.

The Office of the Clerk of Court on Friday issued a notice setting for Monday the electronic re-raffle of the petition for injunction filed by Stop and Go transport coalition against the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).

Issued in May, the DOTC order created new transport categories that cover the likes of Uber and GrabCar, allowing their accreditation as Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) with the LTFRB.

Arenas, who presides over Branch 217 of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, said “the petitioner (Stop and Go) strongly questioned and vehemently objected” to the temporary restraining order (TRO) he issued in their favor.

He was referring to the 20-day TRO released Friday last week stopping the DOTC and the LTFRB from implementing the guidelines and memorandum circulars concerning TNCs, as requested in the petition.

In a hearing on Dec. 8, Stop and Go’s lawyer David Erro insisted that the TRO should cover the current operations of Uber and GrabCar and not just future permit applications.

But Arenas, in the order announcing his inhibition from the case, maintained that the court “could not include Uber and GrabCar because they are not impleaded as indispensable parties in the petition.”

“The court and the counsel could not understand and agree with each other on this issue while the latter was arguing in a high pitched voice in the court room and he raised his voice several times insisting on his demand,” he added.

For Arenas, Erro’s actions implied that the lawyer has lost trust and faith in his fair action and impartiality. With a report from Krizia Jamille Yap