Abiera v.

Court of Appeals, 45 SCRA 314

Doctrine of non-interference via injuction, when applicable; exception

Doctrine: No court has power to interfere by injunction with the judgments or decrees of
a court of concurrent or coordinate jurisdiction having equal power to grant the relief
sought by injunction. The injunction issued by one court must interfere with the
judgment or decree issued by another court of equal or coordinate jurisdiction and the
relief sought by such injunction must be one which could be granted by the court which
rendered the judgment or issued the decree.
However, a third person who claims property levied upon on execution may vindicate
such claim by action. A judgment rendered in his/her favor – declaring him/her to be the
owner of the property – would not constitute interference with the powers or processes
of the court which rendered the judgment to enforce which the execution was levied. It
that be so – and it is so because the property, being that of a stranger, is not subject to
levy – then an interlocutory order, such as injucntion, upon a claim and prima facie
showing of ownership by the cliamant, cannot be considered as such interference
either.

Unionbank v. Court of Appeals, 311 SCRA 795

Effect of dismissal of the main action on temporary injunction; when injunction is
resorted to

Doctrine: Even in cases where an appeal is takenfrom a judgment dismissing an action

on the merits, the appeal does ot suspend the judgment, hence the general rule applies
that a temporary injunction terminates automatically on the dismissal of the action.
When the act sought to be prevented had long been consummated, the remedy of
injunction can no longer be entrtained due to the impossibilty of restraining the
performance of consummated acts by the issuance of the prohibitory injunction.
Injunction is resorted to only when there is a pressing necessity to avoid injurious
consequences which cannot be remedied under any standard compensation.

Lukang v. Pagbilao Development Corporation, 718 SCRA 299

Purpose of injunction; when one is enttiled to such relief, elements; bond required

Doctrine: The purpose of injunction is to prevent threatened or continuous irremediable

injury to the partiesbefore their claims can be thoroughly studied and educated. Its sole
aim is to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case are fully heard. To be
entitled to the writ of preliminary injunction, it is sufficient that the complainant shows
that he/she has an ostensible right to the final relief prayed for in his/her
complaint. The essential requisites are: (1) the invasion of right sought to be protected
is material and substantial; (2) the right of the complainant is clear and unmistakable;
(3) there is an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage.
Its grant or denial rests upon the sound discretion of the court. Posting of the bond is a
condition sine qua non before a writ of preliminary injunction may issue.