The CA says the regional court lacked authority over the petition because the National Electrification Administration oversees and regulates electric cooperatives based on the NEA Reform ActThe CA says the regional court lacked authority over the petition because the National Electrification Administration oversees and regulates electric cooperatives based on the NEA Reform Act

CA rules local court lacked jurisdiction in Puerto Princesa power outage case

2025/12/09 09:11

MANILA, Philippines – The Court of Appeals (CA) has rejected Puerto Princesa city government’s bid to reverse the dismissal of its lawsuit against Palawan Electric Cooperative (Paleco) over frequent power outages.

In a 12-page ruling, the CA’s 14th Division, led by Associate Justice Emilio Rodolfo Legaspi III, said the petition lacked merit and should be dismissed.

The case traces back to a 2019 complaint filed by Puerto Princesa Mayor Lucilo Bayron on behalf of the local government against Paleco and its officials, including chairman Jeffrey Tan-Endriga, board members Maylene Ballares, Moises Arzaga, Marrieta Seratubias, Julieta Magbanua, Rodolfo Garceron, Rodantes Onda Sr., Nicolas Contreras, lawyer Raymund Acosta, and acting general manager Nelson Lalas.

The city government said the respondents failed to provide adequate, regular and reliable electricity to the residents of Puerto Princesa City. It sought P1 million in damages, citing frequent power interruptions that it said disrupted government services, harmed the tourism industry, and damaged household appliances.

But the Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the petition on August 28, 2020, citing lack of jurisdiction. The court also denied city hall’s motion for reconsideration in an order on September 5, 2022.

“The assailed Orders of the RTC were not shown to be patently erroneous or done in a capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment. Rather, the same were issued in obedience and consistent with pertinent rules and existing jurisprudence, thus, the court a quo cannot be said to have gravely abused its discretion,” read part of the CA ruling.  

The CA agreed that the regional court lacked authority over the petition because the National Electrification Administration (NEA) oversees and regulates electric cooperatives based on the NEA Reform Act.

It noted that city hall’s claim focused on alleged negligence and failure by Paleco to provide a stable and adequate electricity supply, which is considered an administrative matter. 

The court said the complaint should have been filed with the NEA, which sets and enforces performance standards for electric cooperatives and their officials.

The CA added that resolving these issues requires the NEA’s technical expertise, making the local court’s dismissal appropriate under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction. – Rappler.com

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

BFX Presale Raises $7.5M as Solana Holds $243 and Avalanche Eyes $1B Treasury — Best Cryptos to Buy in 2025

BFX Presale Raises $7.5M as Solana Holds $243 and Avalanche Eyes $1B Treasury — Best Cryptos to Buy in 2025

BFX presale hits $7.5M with tokens at $0.024 and 30% bonus code BLOCK30, while Solana holds $243 and Avalanche builds a $1B treasury to attract institutions.
Share
Blockchainreporter2025/09/18 01:07
OCC Findings Suggest Major U.S. Banks Restricted Access for Digital Asset Firms Amid Debanking Probe

OCC Findings Suggest Major U.S. Banks Restricted Access for Digital Asset Firms Amid Debanking Probe

The post OCC Findings Suggest Major U.S. Banks Restricted Access for Digital Asset Firms Amid Debanking Probe appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has confirmed that nine major U.S. banks engaged in debanking practices from 2020 to 2023, restricting access for digital asset firms and other sectors. This marks the first official acknowledgment of these policies, which limited services based on customer types, affecting crypto businesses significantly. OCC report highlights inappropriate distinctions by banks like JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, targeting crypto and high-risk sectors. Nine banks reviewed showed similar policies restricting customer access without objective risk assessments. Impacted industries include digital asset firms, with potential referrals to the Attorney General for unlawful practices. Discover how major U.S. banks’ debanking policies hit crypto firms hard, per OCC’s 2025 report. Learn the implications for digital assets and what regulators are doing next—stay informed on banking risks today! What Are the OCC’s Findings on Banks Debanking Crypto Firms? Banks debanking crypto firms involves major financial institutions limiting or denying services to digital asset businesses based on perceived risks, as detailed in a recent Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) report. From 2020 to 2023, nine of the largest U.S. banks implemented policies that required escalated reviews or outright restrictions for certain customers, including those in the crypto sector. This practice, now publicly confirmed, underscores ongoing tensions between traditional banking and emerging digital asset industries. How Did These Debanking Practices Affect Digital Asset Companies? The OCC’s six-page report, released on Wednesday, revealed that institutions such as JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp, Capital One, PNC Financial Services Group, Toronto-Dominion Bank, and Bank of Montreal made distinctions among customers that were deemed inappropriate. For digital asset firms, this meant heightened scrutiny or complete denial of banking services, hindering operations in an already volatile market. The regulator noted that these policies spanned…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/11 11:01