|
THE
Regional Trial Court in
Pasig City
ordered the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) on
Monday to immediately dismantle its posters and banners
from Edsa MRT-3 structures after the transit’s
advertising arm complained of illegal occupation on its
privately owned advertising structures.
In a
decision, Judge Luis Tongco of Branch 155 said: “The
court hereby directs the immediate dismantling and
removal of the subject MMDA banners and other similar
MMDA paraphernalia installed or to be installed along
any Edsa MRT-3 structure and on petitioner’s advertising
structures along the entire stretch of Edsa MRT-3, in reiteration of this court’s cease and desist order …”
The MMDA
had installed banners warning that, “Bawal maglagay
ng anumang anunsiyong pangkalakal [commercial
advertisements] billboards signages sa daanang pang
publiko [public roads],” in April at the MRT-3
posts.
The
Court said the MMDA installed such banners on various
structures of the Edsa MRT-3 and even on the privately
owned advertising structures of the petitioner
Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, Vending and
Promotions Inc. without its consent.
Trackworks claimed that these acts of the MMDA
constitute another violation of the court’s preliminary
injunction dated March 25, 2002, permanent injunction
under its decision dated October 1, 2005 and its cease-
and-desist order dated September 12, 2006.
The MRTC
entered into an exclusive contract for advertising
services with Trackworks in 1998.
Trackworks sought a second cease-and-desist order
against the MMDA under its Third Addendum filed on May
7.
In its
first cease-and-desist order dated September 12, 2006,
the RTC in Pasig enjoined MMDA from “partially or fully
dismantling, removing, taking, confiscating, destroying,
preventing, obstructing or otherwise interfering with
directly or indirectly or under other pretences, the
outdoor advertising materials of petitioner installed or
to be installed on the interior and exterior structures
of Edsa MRT-3.”
The
complained act of respondents in installing MMDA banners
on Edsa MRT-3 and even on petitioner’s own advertising
structures without the latter’s consent is tantamount to
interfering with outdoor advertising materials of the
petitioner.
Upon
scrutiny of the records and relative documents attached
to the Third Addendum, the Court found sufficient proof
that respondents and the MMDA had defied and disobeyed
the Court’s cease-and-desist order dated September 12,
2006 and other orders related to its preliminary and
permanent injunctions.
“In
order not to render said order inutile and pursuant to
Section 5c, Rule 135 of the Rules of Court which
provides that every court has the inherent and coercive
power “to compel obedience to its judgments, orders and
processes, and the lawful orders of a judge out of
court, in a case pending therein,” the order said.
|
