Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2009 > January 2009 Resolutions > [G.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144 : January 19, 2009] HANJIN HEAVY INDUSTRIES & CONSTRUCTION CO., LTD. V. DYNAMICS & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 19 January 2009

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

Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co., Ltd. (Hanjin), in its VERY URGENT MOTION (With Application for the Immediate Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order) dated January 14, 2009, prays that the Arbitral Tribunal of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) be enjoined from executing and implementing the undated Writ of Execution issued in the above-entitled case. In support of its urgent plea, Hanjin alleges the following:

(1) The Arbitrial Tribunal and CIAC's computation of the final award in favor of Dynamic Planners & Construction Corp. (DPCC) is replete with mathematical and/or clerical error, such as but not limited to "double entry" of the retention money and erroneous application of the peso-dollar exchange rate, and does not confirm with the Court of Appeal's (CA's) resolution of August 31, 2005, as affirmed with modification by this Court case per its Decision dated April 30, 2008;

(2) Hanjin has protested the above irregularities but the corresponding motions were never heard by the CIAC; and

(3) The Arbitral Tribunal, the CIAC, and DPCC threaten to proceed with the execution without legal basis.

The Decision of the Court in G.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144 dated April 30, 2008 pursuant to which the assailed writ of execution was issued is now final and executory. An Entry of Judgment has in fact been made thereon.

Accordingly, the desired issuance of a temporary restraining order cannot be favorably acted upon for want of jurisdiction and is DENIED.

And in view of the finality of the Court's Decision adverted to, Hanjin's related Urgent Motion for leave (To File and Admit Motion for Clarification) and Urgent Motion for Clarification both dated January 12, 2009 are both noted without further action. As it were, Hanjin, in this twin motions, seeks clarification on whether or not the separate endorsements of the Chief Justice to Associate Justice Leonardo A. Quisumbing, as Chairperson of the Court's Second Division, of the October 13, 2008 and November 25, 2008 letters of Mr. Myung Goo Kwon of Hanjin to the Court have in effect made G.R. Nos. 169408 & 170144 still active and should have effectively suspended all proceedings in the CIAC inclusive of the execution of judgment thereon. Such is not the case in view of the finality of the April 30, 2008 Decision.

The foregoing notwithstanding, and considering the seriousness of the allegations of impropriety in the execution of an award which is estimated to involve more than a billion pesos, the Court resolves to treat the VERY URGENT MOTION (With Application for the Immediate Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order) dated January 14, 2009 as a certiorari petition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court to nullify the assailed writ of execution thus issued by the CIAC, and hereby transfers the case to the CA for consideration and resolution.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the VERY URGENT MOTION (With Application for the Immediate Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order) dated January 14, 2009 is hereby treated as a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court to nullify the undated Writ of Execution issued by the Arbitral Tribunal of the CIAC in this case and remanded to the CA for appropriate action. The Clerk of this Court is hereby directed to transmit to the CA all relevant pleadings and records of hte case for its appropriate disposition.

Hanjin's Urgent Motion for Leave (To File and Admit Motion for Clarification) and Urgent Motion for Clarification both dated January 12, 2009 are both NOTED without further action.

SO ORDERED.