BAGUIO CITY – A local court ordered the local government and the contractor of the multi-million Gibraltar satellite market to surrender to the displaced vendors the 992-square meter lot located at Gibraltar within thirty days.
Further, the local and contractor were also required to pay to the court the lawful fees for the services of the ordered execution and pay the amount so collected by the same to the affected vendors in the said action, except the amount of the fees and return the writ to the court with the lawful fees within the prescribed period.
In a 2-age writ of execution dated May 13, 2025, Judge Ruth Bongalos Bawayan of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) Branch 6 granted the issuance of a writ of execution for the enforcement of an earlier decision that was rendered on a civil case that is now on appeal following the motion for the issuance of a writ of execution filed by the affected vendors for the immediate enforcement of the earlier decision.
On January 5, 2025, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 3 issued a decision on a civil case that is now on appeal which ordered the contractor and the local government to vacate and surrender to the vendors the said property in Gibraltar.
However, the denial of the claims of damages by the vendors not having been raised in the assignment of the error stays.
On January 16, 2025, a motion for reconsideration was filed by the local government and on January 22, 2025, the contractor also filed a motion for reconsideration relative to the earlier decision.
On January 24, 2025, the RTC Branch 3 issued an order denying the two motions for reconsideration of the local government and the contractor for lack of merit.
On March 14, 2025, a certificate of finality was issued by lawyer Gail Bacbac-Del-isen, Clerk of Court, stating that the decision rendered in the earlier civil case dated January 5, 2025 has become final and executory and unappealable pursuant to the rules on expedited procedure and that the local government assailed the said decision in a petition for certiorari under the rules of civil procedure filed with the Court of Appeals after the denial of both parties respective motions for reconsideration as per court order dated January 24, 2025.
Despite the filing of an appeal before the CA, the local government was not able to secure a 60-day temporary restraining order nor a writ of preliminary injunction from the appellate court.
Earlier, the local government filed an omnibus motion that sought to seek reconsideration on the court’s resolution dated May 13, 2025; motion for the conduct of an ocular inspection; an implied for the vendors to reimburse the local government the amount of P16.8 million and an implied motion for the city to post bond.
The city argued that public interest is at stake and there will be grave injury to the local government.
Moreover, the city wants to reopen and re-litigate the said case but the affected vendors claimed that the local government can no longer raise the same arguments before the court in the said motion and before the CA for its application for provisional remedies and that the same may cause chaos in the country’s judicial system and that the last thing that can happen will be the rendering of a conflicting rulings.
The petitioners stipulated that the local government raised the same issues against them in the filing of its appeal before the appellate court.
The city is currently implementing a multi-million project that seeks to upgrade the current state of the satellite market and make the same a multipurpose facility for the welfare of the vendors and the public wanting to purchase goods in the said area. By HENT
