Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

WILSON ONG CHING KIAN CHUAN v. CA

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 169802 2007-06-08	OVERSEAS WORKERS WELFARE ADMINISTRATION v. ATTY. CESAR L. CHAVEZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
A preliminary injunction is granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior to the judgment or final order.[35] It persists until it is dissolved or until the termination of the action without the court issuing a final injunction.[36] To be entitled to an injunctive writ, petitioner must show, inter alia, the existence of a clear and unmistakable right and an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage.[37] A writ of preliminary injunction is generally based solely on initial and incomplete evidence.[38] The evidence submitted during the hearing on an application for a writ of preliminary injunction is not conclusive or complete for only a "sampling" is needed to give the trial court an idea of the justification for the preliminary injunction pending the decision of the case on the merits.[39] In fact, the evidence required to justify the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction in the hearing thereon need not be conclusive or complete.[40] It must also be stressed that it does not necessarily proceed that when a writ of preliminary injunction is issued, a final injunction will follow.[41]
	GR NO. 167434 2007-02-19	SPS. RAMON M. NISCE v. EQUITABLE PCI BANK CALLEJO, SR., J.
As will be shown later, the March 24, 2003 Order of the trial court granting petitioner's plea for a writ of preliminary injunction was issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction and thus a nullity. If the trial court issues a writ of preliminary injunction despite the absence of proof of a legal right and the injury sustained by the plaintiff, the writ is a nullity.[57]
	GR NO. 144755 2005-06-08	SPS. ELISEO F. ESTARES AND ROSENDA P. ESTARES v. CA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The Estares spouses had the burden in the trial court to establish the following requirements for them to be entitled to injunctive relief: (a) the existence of their right to be protected; and (b) that the acts against which the injunction is to be directed are violative of such right.[33] To be entitled to an injunctive writ, the petitioner must show, inter alia, the existence of a clear and unmistakable right and an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage.[34] Thus, an injunctive remedy may only be resorted to when there is a pressing necessity to avoid injurious consequences which cannot be remedied under any standard compensation.[35]