Court stops MMDA waiting shed demolition

The Quezon City Regional Trial Court issued a preliminary injunction order stopping the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) from demolishing waiting sheds maintained by two private advertising companies.

MMDA teams were barred from dismantling passenger waiting areas erected by High Desert Philippines and High Desert Stop-Overs Inc. that carry small and medium-sized advertising billboards.

In a four-page resolution, Judge Henry Jean-Paul Inting said MMDA Chairman Bayani Fernando is restrained from implementing the demolition order on waiting sheds constructed, operated, and maintained by both firms.

He also barred the dismantling of advertising materials posted or displayed in the passenger stations "until further orders from this court."

Inting ordered the petitioners to post a P1 million bond for the preliminary injunction order in addition to the P1 million bond it paid for the issuance of the 20-day temporary restraining order that expired yesterday.

Rita Linda Jimeno, High Desert’s lawyer, said the preliminary injunction lasts longer than a restraining order because it stays in effect until the main petition for the issuance of a permanent injunction is resolved.

"A TRO lasts for only 20 days while a court hears a motion for the issuance of a preliminary injunction," she told The Star in an interview. "Once a preliminary injunction order is issued, it stays in effect until the final determination of the merits of the case."

Judge Inting, in his order, said evidence shows that High Desert’s waiting sheds were constructed by virtue of three separate memoranda implemented in April 1992, January 1994, and September 1996.

However, Fernando junked all three last Aug. 8 with a letter of rescission and the demolition started on Oct. 13.

High Desert sued the MMDA on Oct. 19, arguing that the rescission was invalid because the MMDA did not even cite any violation of provisions in the memoranda.

The firms told the court that they would be held liable for breach of agreement with a number of local government units as well as their advertisers if their waiting sheds were demolished.

High Desert argued that contrary to Fernando’s pronouncements, their passenger stations were not eyesores or a nuisance to motorists and commuters.

The advertising companies admitted that they put up advertising materials in their waiting sheds to recover investment, operating, and maintenance expenses in the construction of the waiting sheds.

Inting said High Desert "clearly established their right" to construct and maintain waiting sheds and display commercial advertisements to recoup their investment pursuant to their memoranda of agreement with the MMDA.

"The acts of the defendant in unilaterally rescinding the memoranda and demolishing the waiting sheds constructed by virtue of the memoranda violate plaintiffs’ right which, as alleged by the plaintiffs in their position paper, is clearly guarded by no less than the Constitution which guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law," he said.