ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 143964. September 20, 2004]

GLOBE vs. NTC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEP 20 2004 .

G.R. No. 143964 (Globe Telecom, Inc. vs. The National Telecommunications Commission, et al. and Smart Communications, Inc.)

Private respondent Smart Communications, Inc. (Smart), through Motion for Modification of Dispositive Portion of Decision, moves that the dispositive portion of our Decision dated 26 July 2004 be amended by declaring that the assailed Decision and Order of the Court of Appeals and the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), respectively, are set aside "only insofar as the finding of the NTC that Globe lacked the authority to provide SMS and its imposition of a fine on Globe are concerned." Smart points out that the portion of the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals ordering the interconnection of the Short Messaging Service Systems (SMS) of Smart and petitioner Globe Telecom, Inc. (Globe) was not challenged by Globe in its Petition for Review to this Court.

While the concerns of Smart are understandable, there is neither sense nor purpose to amend our Decision. Globe's petition specifically challenged only the portion of the assailed rulings of the NTC and the Court of Appeals which found Globe guilty of providing SMS without prior NTC authority and imposed a fine for such violation. Globe explicitly opted not to question the Decision of the Court of Appeals ordering the interconnection of Globe and Smart.

Long before Globe filed its petition before this Court, the interconnection was a fait accompli already. Thus, the parties have fought out this case before this Court both totally cognizant and fully enjoying the state of interconnection as an accomplished fact.

Inevitably, the dispositive portion of the Court's Decision had to be confined to the relief explicitly sought by Globe. As the matter of interconnection was a non-issue, it had no place in the fallo .

The Motion for Modification of Dispositive Portion of Decision is DENIED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE