QC court not likely to extend halt order vs Uber, Grab

The Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 84 is not keen on issuing a restraining order against the operation of transportation network vehicle services (TNVS) Uber and Grab.

During Wednesday’s hearing, transport group Angat Tsuper Samahan ng mga Tsuper at Operator ng Pilipinas Genuine Organization (Stop and Go) urged the court to extend the restraining order, noting that Uber and Grab have been adversely affecting the income of their members.

“Are they impleaded as parties?” Judge Luisito Cortez asked, to which Stop and Go lawyer David Erro answered in the negative.

“How come they are not impleaded as party if their operation is adversely affecting the income of petitioners?” Judge Cortez asked.

Erro said they are questioning the Department Orders issued by the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) allowing TNVS to ply the streets.

READ: Uber, GrabCar foe wants TRO extended

The court, however, pointed out that the DOTC has already given authority for TNVS to operate.

“It will constitute a violation of contracts of government without impleading those parties,” Cortez explained.

He added that assuming that the DOTC followed the restraining order previously issued by QCRTC Branch 217 last year, the government agency would be susceptible of being sued for violation of the contract.

“So, it would be better that the court’s hand’s can also reach Uber and Grab,” Judge Cortez said.

He pointed out that assuming that the court issues a writ of preliminary injunction without impleading Uber and Grab “no way in heaven’s name can the court enjoin them to stop operating.”

“That is very basic in the Rules of Civil Procedure whether they are indispensable, necessary or nominal party because they are the ones operating, not the DOTC,” said the court judge, but added that that is his preliminary view.

QCRTC Branch 217 last year issued a 20-day restraining order against the enforcement of the government order and circular allowing the existing operation of TNVS.

READ: QCRTC stops DOTC, LTFRB from issuing permits to operate Uber, GrabCar

QCRTC Branch 217 Judge Santiago Arenas, however, inhibited from the case, and the restraining order has lapsed.

The government lawyer also opposed the extension or renewal of the restraining order noting that the jurisprudence prohibits it citing the case of Lago against a Gingoog RTC judge.

In the said ruling, the Supreme Court said that an already expired TRO can no longer be extended.

Last month, Uber announced that the Land Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB) has agreed to resume acceptance and processing of the TNVS applications.