Topic: Verifcation; Rule 45 petition; petition; Jurisdictional Jurisdictional error; Certiorari; Certiorari; Judicial courtesy courtesy Ponente: Justice Arturo D. Brion Juan Trajano . !ni"ide #ales $are%ouse $are%ouse Clu&' (.R. )o. *+,-5' June **' -,*4 /acts: Uniwide fled a complaint to get the reund o the total value o misdeliv misdelivere ered, d, unsalea unsaleable, ble, deectiv deective e and/or and/or damaged damaged goods, goods, and to enjoin enjoin Golden Sea and Trajano rom encashing the remaining post-dated checks in their their possessio possession n The complain complaint, t, docketed docketed as !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$, #$-#%&$, was ra'ed to (T! o )ara*a+ue ranch %., which was presided b0 1udge 2ortunito 3adrona 4n 5ugust 66, %##$, the (T! issued a writ o preliminar0 injunction prohibiting Golden Sea and Trajano rom encashing the postdated checks Trajano moved to reconsider the issuance o the writ or lack o actual basis
4n 7ecember %%, %##$, the (T! issued an order sustaining the issuance o the writ o prelimi preliminar0 nar0 injunct injunction ion 4n 1anuar0 1anuar0 66, %##&, Golden Golden Sea and Trajano Trajano separatel0 moved or the voluntar0 voluntar0 inhibition inhibition o 1udge 3adrona 3adrona or his alleged alleged bias towards towards Uniwide Uniwide 4n 2ebrua 2ebruar0 r0 6$, %##&, 1udge 1udge 3adrona 3adrona recus ecused ed hims himsel el rom rom the the case case,, but but Uniw Uniwid ide e mo move ved d to recon econsi side derr his his volu volunt ntar ar0 0 inhi inhibi biti tion on Ther Therea eat ter er,, the the case case wa was s re-ra e-ra'e 'ed d to the the (T! o )ara* ara*a+ a+ue ue ran ranch ch 68$, 68$, whic which h wa was s pres presid ided ed b0 1udg 1udge e 5ida 5ida 9str 9strel ella la 3acapagal Uniwide contested the re-ra'ing o the case due to its pending motion or reconsideration o 1udge 3adrona:s voluntar0 inhibition 4n 1une ;#, %##&, 1udge 3adrona denied Uniwide:s motion or reconsideration and the records o the case were subse+uentl0 transerred to ranch 68$ 4n 3arch 6., %##&, Trajano fled a petition or certiorari with pra0er or the issuance o a temporar0 restraining order and a writ o preliminar0 injunction docketed as !5-G( S) "o 8;8% beore the !5 cient ground or 1udge 3adrona:s inhibition The (T (T! held that the issue o whether 1udge 3adrona 3adrona should hear hear !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$ presented a jurisdictional +uestion that prevented ranch 68$
rom resolving Trajano:s pending motions ?ence, Trajano fled a petition or certiorari assailing the orders o the (T! beore the !5 The case was docketed as !5-G( S) "o 6#6=6$ The !5 upheld the (T! rulings deerring the resolution o Trajano:s motions and suspending the proceedings in !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$ during the pendenc0 o !5-G( S) "o 8$==$ The !5 ruled that judicial courtes0 prompted the (T! to await the fnal determination o !5-G( S) "o 8$==$ beore taking cogni@ance o Trajano:s motions and continuing with the proceedings in !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$;$
B6C Dhether the petition lacks proper verifcationE B%C Dhether the petition availed o the proper remed0 in appealing the !5 decision dated 1anuar0 ;, %##= and resolution dated 4ctober %=, %##8E B;C Dhether the !5 erred in not fnding that the (T! committed grave abuse o discretion in suspending the proceedings in !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$ Rulin1: )etition partl0 meritorious *. T%e petition is not procedurally infr2 as it contains proper erifcation The records o the case show that the petition:s verifcation page contains Trajano:s competent evidence o identit0 Trajano:s ailure to urnish Uniwide a cop0 o the petition containing his competent evidence o identit0 is a minor error that this !ourt ma0 and chooses to brush aside in the interest o substantial justice
5 petition or review on certiorari under (ule $ o the (ules o !ourt invokes the !ourt:s appellate jurisdiction over +uestions o law that has been decided b0 the lower courts with fnalit0 The !5 decision assailed b0 the present petition involves its fnal order regarding the alleged grave abuse o discretion involved in the (T!:s interlocutor0 orders This !5 decision should not be conused with the (T!:s interlocutor0 orders that had been disputed beore the !5, which was correctl0 contested b0 Trajano through a petition or certiorari Thus, Trajano correctl0 fled a petition or certiorari beore the !5 in order to strike down the (T!:s interlocutor0 orders that he claims to have been issued with grave abuse o discretion
The mere pendenc0 o a special civil action or certiorari commenced in relation to a case pending beore a lower court does not automaticall0 interrupt the proceedings in the lower court 5 petition or certiorari does not divest the lower courts o jurisdiction validl0 ac+uired over the case pending beore them 5 petition or certiorari, unlike an appeal, is an original actionE it is not a continuation o the proceedings in the lower court cac0 o Section ., (ule &$ o the (ules o !ourt, and held that the principle o judicial courtes0 applies onl0 Fi there is a strong probabilit0 that the issues beore the higher court would be rendered moot and moribund as a result o the continuation o the proceedings in the lower courtF The principle o judicial courtes0 remains to be the eAception rather than the rule
2rom these perspectives, the appellate court erroneousl0 applied the principle o judicial courtes0 in the current case There is no strong probabilit0 that the issue o the propriet0 o 1udge 3adrona:s voluntar0 inhibition in !5-G( S) "o 8$==$ would be rendered moot and academic b0 the continuation o the proceedings in the trial court 2urthermore, whether 1udge 3adrona properl0 inhibited himsel rom the case does not pose an0 jurisdictional problem in resolving the issues in !ivil !ase "o #$-#%&$ 1urisdiction vests in the trial court, not in the judges 9ach o the (T!s branches is not a court separate and distinct rom the other branches Dhen a complaint is fled beore one branch or judge, jurisdiction does not attach to this branch or judge alone, to the eAclusion o the others Trial ma0 be had or proceedings ma0 continue b0 and beore another branch or judge The diHerent branches in the (T! o )ara*a+ue do not possess jurisdictions independent o and incompatible with each other
