The document discusses the difference between a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO). A preliminary injunction is issued at any stage of a case prior to judgment and is intended to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be heard. It remains in place unless dissolved or the case ends without a final injunction. A TRO, on the other hand, is meant to preserve the status quo only until a hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction. Under the rules, a TRO expires automatically after 20 days if no preliminary injunction is issued. Lower courts often incorrectly interchange and extend TROs indefinitely instead of adhering to their limited lifespan.
The document discusses the difference between a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO). A preliminary injunction is issued at any stage of a case prior to judgment and is intended to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be heard. It remains in place unless dissolved or the case ends without a final injunction. A TRO, on the other hand, is meant to preserve the status quo only until a hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction. Under the rules, a TRO expires automatically after 20 days if no preliminary injunction is issued. Lower courts often incorrectly interchange and extend TROs indefinitely instead of adhering to their limited lifespan.
The document discusses the difference between a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO). A preliminary injunction is issued at any stage of a case prior to judgment and is intended to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be heard. It remains in place unless dissolved or the case ends without a final injunction. A TRO, on the other hand, is meant to preserve the status quo only until a hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction. Under the rules, a TRO expires automatically after 20 days if no preliminary injunction is issued. Lower courts often incorrectly interchange and extend TROs indefinitely instead of adhering to their limited lifespan.
The document discusses the difference between a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO). A preliminary injunction is issued at any stage of a case prior to judgment and is intended to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be heard. It remains in place unless dissolved or the case ends without a final injunction. A TRO, on the other hand, is meant to preserve the status quo only until a hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction. Under the rules, a TRO expires automatically after 20 days if no preliminary injunction is issued. Lower courts often incorrectly interchange and extend TROs indefinitely instead of adhering to their limited lifespan.
FIRST SARMIENTO PROPERTY HOLDINGS, INC., PETITIONER, VS. PHILIPPINE BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS, RESPONDENT.
Miriam College Foundation, Inc v. Court of Appeals[97] explained the
difference between preliminary injunction and a restraining order as follows: Preliminary injunction is an order granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior to the judgment or final order, requiring a party or a court, agency or a person to perform to refrain from performing a particular act or acts. As an extraordinary remedy, injunction is calculated to preserve or maintain the status quo of things and is generally availed of to prevent actual or threatened acts, until the merits of the case can be heard. A preliminary injunction persists until it is dissolved or until the termination of the action without the court issuing a final injunction.
The basic purpose of restraining order, on the other hand, is to preserve
the status quo until the hearing of the application for preliminary injunction. Under the former A§5, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, as amended by A§5, Batas Pambansa Blg. 224, a judge (or justice) may issue a temporary restraining order with a limited life of twenty days from date of issue. If before the expiration of the 20-day period the application for preliminary injunction is denied, the temporary order would thereby be deemed automatically vacated. If no action is taken by the judge on the application for preliminary injunction within the said 20 days, the temporary restraining order would automatically expire on the 20th day by the sheer force of law, no judicial declaration to that effect being necessary. In the instant case, no such preliminary injunction was issued; hence, the TRO earlier issued automatically expired under the aforesaid provision of the Rules of Court.[98] (Citations omitted) A temporary restraining order cannot be extended indefinitely to take the place of a writ of preliminary injunction, since a temporary restraining order is intended only to have a limited lifespan and is deemed automatically vacated upon the expiration of 72 hours or 20 days, as the case may be. As such, the temporary restraining order has long expired and, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, there was nothing to stop the sheriff from registering the certificate of sale with the Registry of Deeds.
This Court has repeatedly expounded on the nature of a temporary
restraining order[99] and a preliminary injunction.[100] Yet lower courts consistently interchange these ancillary remedies and disregard the sunset clause[101] inherent in a temporary restraining order by erroneously extending it indefinitely. Such ignorance or defiance of basic remedial measures is a gross disservice to the public, who look towards the court for legal guidance and legal remedy. More importantly, this cavalier attitude towards these injunctive reliefs might even be construed as a deliberate effort to look the other way to favor a party, which will then sully the image of the entire judiciary. Henceforth, this Court will demand stricter compliance with the rules from the members of the bench as regards their issuances of these injunctive reliefs.