Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2009 > February 2009 Resolutions > [G.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144 : February 09, 2009] HANJIN HEAVY INDUSTRIES & CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD. V. DYNAMIC PLANNERS & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court-dated 09 February 2009:

G.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144 (Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co., Ltd. v. Dynamic Planners & Construction Corporation)

In its VERY URGENT MOTION (With Application for the Immediate Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order) dated January 14, 2009, Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co., Ltd. (Hanjin) prayed that the Arbitral Tribunal of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) be enjoined from executing and implementing the undated Writ of Execution the CIAC issued pursuant to the Decision of this Court dated April 30, 2008 m Cy.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144. Hanjin alleged serious impropriety in the execution process, inclusive of the errors committed in the computation of the award.

Considering the finality of the aforementioned April 30, 2008 Decision, the Court, by Resolution dated January 19, 2009, treated Hanjm's motion as a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 to nullify the undated writ of execution in question and remanded the petition, together with relevant pleadings, to the Court of Appeals for consideration and resolution.

Dynamic Planners & Construction Corporation (DPCC) has moved for reconsideration of the January 19, 2009 Resolution, stating that the alleged errors Hanjin pointed out were not really errors as they have seasonably been corrected, adding that Hanjin, by its urgent motion adverted to, violated the "no further pleadings shall be entertained" warning set forth in the Court's Resolution of August 27, 2008.

After a circumspect study of the grounds proffered in support of DPCC's motion, the Court finds them without merit and, thus, denies the motion. Hanjin's urgent motion is not covered by the caveat on "no further pleadings" relating as it did to the execution aspect of the case, not to the substantive merits of its underlying petition for review on certiorari.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant motion for reconsideration of DPCC is hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

WITNESS the Honorable Leonardo A. Quisumbing. Chairperson. Honorable Conchita Carpio Morales, Dante O. Tinga, Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. and Arturo D. Brion. Members. Second Division, this 9^th day of February. 2009.