View full case

ANA THERESIA “RISA” IVEROS-BARAQUEL v. TOLL REGULATORY BOARD

FACTS:

The Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) was established on March 31, 1977, by Presidential Decree No. 1112 to supervise and regulate the collection of toll fees and the operation of toll facilities by private entities. On the same date, Presidential Decree No. 1113 was issued, granting the Construction and Development Corporation of the Philippines (later known as Philippine National Construction Corporation or PNCC) the authority to construct, operate, and maintain toll facilities in the North and South Luzon Toll Expressways for 30 years starting from May 1, 1977. TRB and PNCC entered into a Toll Operation Agreement detailing the terms of this grant. Presidential Decree No. 1894 later amended P.D. 1113, extending PNCC’s rights to the North Luzon, South Luzon, and Metro Manila Expressways.

On September 22, 1993, PNCC entered into an agreement with PT Citra Lamtoro Gung Persada (CITRA), an Indonesian company, for a pre-feasibility study on the proposed Metro Manila Expressway (MME) project. This agreement was supplemented in February 1994, leading CITRA to provide feasibility studies on the Metro Manila Skyways (MMS) project—a system of elevated roads in Metro Manila. Subsequent agreements committed CITRA to financing and updating studies for the projects, culminating in a Joint Investment Proposal (JIP) submitted to the TRB.

Citra Metro Manila Tollways Corporation (CMMTC) was established from a joint venture between PNCC and CITRA on August 30, 1995, to facilitate the construction and development of the project. A Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (STOA) was signed on November 27, 1995, designating CMMTC to handle the design and construction, while PNCC’s wholly owned subsidiary, PNCC Skyway Corporation (PSC), would operate and maintain the toll roads.

On July 18, 2007, the Republic of the Philippines, through TRB, CMMTC, and PNCC, signed the Amendment to the Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (ASTOA), involving the design and construction of Stage 2 of the South Metro Manila Skyway and transferring operation and maintenance responsibilities from PSC to Skyway O & M Corporation (SOMCO). Thereafter, approval from the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) Secretary, Leandro Mendoza, was secured on July 20, 2007.

On December 21, 2007, PNCC, PSC, and CMMTC executed a Memorandum of Agreement facilitating SOMCO’s assumption of operations and maintenance of Stage 1. As a result, PSC received PHP 320 million to settle its liabilities from retrenching its employees. The TRB issued a Toll Operation Certificate (TOC) to SOMCO on December 28, 2007, effective December 31, 2007, at 10:00 p.m.

Petitioner PNCC Traffic Management and Security Department Workers Organization (PTMSDWO) filed a Notice of Strike against PSC for unfair labor practices on December 28, 2007. The Secretary of Labor and Employment assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute. On January 3, 2008, PTMSDWO and PNCC Skyway Corporation Employees Union (PSCEU) filed a complaint for injunction and prohibition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), seeking to nullify the ASTOA and the MOA, effectively prohibiting SOMCO from taking over toll operations. The RTC denied the request for a temporary restraining order on January 23, 2008, citing the consummated nature of the acts sought to be restrained.

Petitioner PSCEU and PTMSDWO filed a notice of dismissal on January 28, 2008, and the RTC dismissed the case without prejudice. The petitioners filed an original petition for certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 directly with the Supreme Court on February 4, 2008, challenging the ASTOA and related agreements as unconstitutional, contrary to law, and grossly disadvantageous to the government. Respondents countered, questioning the petitioners' legal standing and alleging forum shopping. They defended the legality and regularity of the ASTOA, MOA, and TOC and justified the approval process and transfer of operations to SOMCO.

ISSUES:

  1. Standing: Whether petitioners have standing to sue.

  2. Forum-Shopping: Whether petitioners are guilty of forum-shopping.

  3. TRB's Authority: Whether the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) has the power to grant authority to operate a toll facility.

  4. TOC Validity: Whether the Toll Operation Certificate (TOC) issued to SOMCO is valid.

  5. ASTOA Approval: Whether the approval of the Amended and Restated Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (ASTOA) by the Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) is valid.

  6. Disadvantage to the Government: Whether the assumption of toll operations by SOMCO is disadvantageous to the government.

RULING:

  1. Not all petitioners have standing: The court ruled that not all petitioners had the personality to sue. Only the labor unions PSCEU and PTMSDWO, as real parties in interest, were accorded standing.

  2. No forum-shopping: The court found that PSCEU and PTMSDWO were not guilty of forum-shopping. The cases filed by them at various times were distinct in nature and did not involve identical rights or relief prayed for.

  3. TRB has authority: The court affirmed that the TRB has the power to grant authority to operate a toll facility.

  4. TOC Valid: The TOC issued to SOMCO was not irregular or invalid. The court found that the requisite conditions and processes were followed.

  5. ASTOA Approval: The approval of the ASTOA by the DOTC Secretary was deemed as valid approval by the President under the doctrine of qualified political agency.

  6. No gross disadvantage: Petitioners failed to demonstrate that the transfer of toll operations to SOMCO was grossly disadvantageous to the government.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Standing: A party must show a personal and substantial interest in the case, such that they have a right to be protected or a wrong to be remedied, to maintain a lawsuit.

  • Forum-shopping: The act of filing multiple suits in different forums based on the same facts and issues to secure a favorable decision is prohibited.

  • Delegated Power: Congress may delegate to administrative agencies the authority to issue licenses or franchises for specific public utilities unless a specific law provides otherwise.

  • Qualified Political Agency: Acts of cabinet members within their executive functions are presumed to be acts of the President unless repudiated by the latter.

  • Management Prerogative: Franchisees can exercise management prerogatives in joint ventures and partnerships without necessitating public bidding, in accordance with their franchise rights.

  • Gross Disadvantage: Mere speculation or apprehension does not equate to a showing that an action is grossly disadvantageous; clear evidence must demonstrate such impact.