SC asked to reverse CA ruling vs GSIS takeover of CTPL business

MANILA, Philippines - The government has asked the Supreme Court to stop the Court of Appeals from implementing an order preventing the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) from taking over the compulsory insurance business for motor vehicle owners. In its motion, the Office of the Solicitor General asked SC to reverse the October 24, 2008 resolution of the CA’s Special 17th Division that stopped the implementation of the Compulsory Third-Party Liability (CTPL) insurance for motor vehicle owners. The OSG was representing Transportation Secretary Leandro Mendoza, who was joined in his petition by Alberto Suansing, chief of the Land Transportation Office (LTO), which is an attached agency of the Department of Transportation and Communication. CTPL is an insurance policy that shoulders any possible damage resulting from a person’s use of his car. The GSIS had initially planned to start its integrated CTPL program at the LTO last August 1. The assailed CA resolution granted the petition for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction sought by a coalition of insurance agents and brokers. In its resolution, the CA through Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin held that the DOTC order constitutes a “virtual monopolistic take-over” of the CTPL insurance business and displaced thousands of private insurance agents. According to Mendoza, the CA committed grave abuse of discretion when it tolerated the “deplorable conduct of private respondents engaging in forum-shopping.” He also accused the private respondents of submitting falsified documents. Petitioners said that private respondents commenced a number of cases one after the other in the CA with the same purpose of thwarting the implementation of Department Order 2007-08, issued on July 5, 2007, which provides for the CTPL insurance for private motor vehicles. “These cases are identical not only because of the uniformity of their purpose as already mentioned, but more importantly because their nature are similar, the parties matched, the issues and arguments are common, the forms of relief prayed for are alike, and they have the same subject matter,” Mendoza’s motion said. The DOTC further said that when the application for TRO was denied by the CA on July 23, 2007, respondents “cunningly” withdrew their petition. The appellate court approved the withdrawal on August 31, 2007. Mendoza said the alleged falsification was borne by the fact that the secretary’s certificate submitted in the CA contained an erasure using a snowpake, and on top of which was the handwritten name of respondent Jubert Maun, in lieu of Elton Herrera, who was originally authorized to sign the verification and certification of non-forum shopping. “This act of private respondents, or at least, one of them, is not only felonious but it evinces an utter lack of respect for our judicial institution and processes. Faced with such an assault on its authority, the CA had no alternative but to summarily dismiss the case. Unfortunately, the CA looked the other way and rewarded private respondents with a writ of preliminary injunction,” petitioners said. Petitioners also alleged that the respondents are not the real party-in-interest, and that they have failed to establish legal right to entitle them to protection by the writ of preliminary injunction. - GMANews.TV