This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-11-26 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Neither could Chiok be validly granted a writ of injunction against Metrobank and Global Bank to enjoin said banks from honoring the subject manager's and cashier's checks. It is elementary that "(a)n injunction should never issue when an action for damages would adequately compensate the injuries caused. The very foundation of the jurisdiction to issue the writ of injunction rests in the fact that the damages caused are irreparable and that damages would not adequately compensate."[45] Chiok could have and should have proceeded directly against Nuguid to claim damages for breach of contract and to have the very account where he deposited the subject checks garnished under Section 7(d)[46] and Section 8,[47] Rule 57 of the Rules of Court. Instead, Chiok filed an action to enjoin Metrobank and Global Bank from complying with their primary obligation under checks in which they are liable as both drawer and drawee. | |||||