ABELLA, Ma.

Kiana | AGUILAR, Yna Marei | ARCILLA, Ericka Anne

TOPIC: Art VIII; Sec 1 CASE TITLE: Kilosbayan v Morato

DATE: November 16, 1995 GR NO.: A.M. No. 1312-CFI

DOCTRINE: RULE ON REAL PARTY-IN-INTEREST SUBORDINATE TO DOCTRINE OF LOCUS

STANDI. — In public law the rule of real party-in-interest is subordinated to the doctrine of locus
standi. The majority opinion declares that the real issue in this case is not whether the petitioners
have locus standi but whether they are the real parties-ininterest

FACTS:
 Based on the ruling of G.R. No. 113375 (Kilosbayan, Incorporated v. Guingona, 232 SCRA 110 (1994)
invalidating the Contract of Lease between the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) and the
Philippine Gaming Management Corp. (PGMC)
 The parties entered into negotiations for a new agreement that would be "consistent with the latter's
[PCSO] charter . . . and conformable to this Honorable Court's aforesaid Decision."
 The PGMC leased on-line lottery equipment and accessories to the PCSO in consideration of a rental equivalent
to 4.3 % of the gross amount of ticket sale derived by the PCSO from the operation of the lottery which in no
case shall be less than an annual rental computed at P35,000.00 per terminal in Commercial Operation,
through an ELA signed by the parties.
 A suit was then filed by the petitioner asking to declare the lease invalid because it is substantially the same as
the Contract of Lease nullified in the first case.
 The PCSO and PGMC led a separate comment in which they question the petitioners' standing to bring suit.
They maintain (1) that the ELA is a different lease contract with none of the vestiges of a joint venture in the
Contract of Lease nullified in the prior case; (2) that the ELA did not have to be submitted to a public bidding
because it fell within the exception provided in E.O. No. 301, Sec. 1 (e); (3) that the power to determine whether
the ELA is advantageous to the government is vested in the Board of Directors of the PCSO; (4) that for the lack
of funds the PCSO cannot purchase its own on-line lottery equipment and has had to enter into a lease contract;
(5) that what petitioners are actually seeking in this suit is to further their moral crusade and political agenda,
using the Court as their forum.
 For the reason set forth below, the court held that petitioners have no cause against respondents and therefore
their petition should be dismissed.

ISSUE:
WON Kilosbayan has a legal standing to sue in this case

HELD and RATIO:

No
 Respondents question the right of petitioners to bring this suit on the ground that, not being parties to the
contract of lease which they seek to nullify, they have no personal and substantial interest likely to be
injured by the enforcement of the contract. Petitioners on the other hand contend that the ruling in the
previous case sustaining their standing to challenge the validity of the contract for the operation of lottery is
now the "law of the case" and therefore the question of their standing can no longer be reopened.
 Stare decisis is usually the wise policy. But in this case, concern for stability in decisional law does not call
for adherence to what has recently been laid down as the rule. The previous ruling sustaining petitioners'
intervention may itself be considered a departure from settled rulings on "real parties in interest" because
no constitutional issues were actually involved.
 Petitioners argue that inquiry into their right to bring this suit is barred by the doctrine of "law of the case."
The court does not think this doctrine is applicable considering the fact that while this case is a sequel to
G.R. No. 113375, it is not its continuation: The doctrine applies only when a case is before a court a second
time after a ruling by an appellate court.

DISPOSITIVE:

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, the motion for reconsideration of petitioners is DENIED with finality.
 ABELLA, Ma. Kiana | AGUILAR, Yna Marei | ARCILLA, Ericka Anne

SO ORDERED.