G.R. No. L-20024 June 30, 1967
THE EMBROIDERY AND APPAREL CONTROL AND INSPECTION BOARD and THE SECRETARY OF FINANCE, petitioners, vs. GAUDENCIO CLORIBEL and CECILIO RAFAEL, respondents.

FACTS

Republic Act No. 3137 created the Embroidery and Apparel Control and Inspection Board (the Board). The Board, exercising its powers, wrote to respondent Cecilio Rafael, doing business as “El Barato Alce Company,” requesting a license application and a remittance of P200.00 pursuant to the Act. To test the constitutionality of RA 3137, Rafael filed a petition for prohibition with preliminary injunction (Civil Case No. 49087) in the Court of First Instance of Manila against the Board, the Secretary of Finance, and the Philippine Association of Embroidery and Apparel Exporters, Inc., praying for the law to be declared unconstitutional and for a preliminary injunction to stop its enforcement. After a hearing, the respondent Judge rendered a decision on March 31, 1962, declaring Section 2 of RA 3137 unconstitutional, the Board illegally constituted, and perpetually enjoining the petitioners from enforcing Section 2. The decision did not mention a preliminary injunction pending appeal. On April 24, 1962, the Solicitor General, representing the petitioners (the Board and the Secretary of Finance), filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court. The respondent Judge granted the notice of appeal on April 26, 1962. Subsequently, on April 30, 1962, respondent Rafael filed a motion for clarification and/or for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction pending appeal. Despite the petitioners’ opposition that the court had lost jurisdiction due to the perfected appeal, the respondent Judge, on June 22, 1962, ordered the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction pending appeal upon Rafael’s posting of a P10,000.00 bond, which was issued on June 27, 1962. The petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied on June 30, 1962. The petitioners then filed the present original action for certiorari and prohibition before the Supreme Court, seeking to annul the said orders and writ.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent Judge had jurisdiction, or acted with abuse of discretion, in issuing the orders of June 22 and June 30, 1962, and the writ of preliminary injunction pending appeal, after the petitioners had perfected their appeal from the decision in the special civil action for prohibition.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the writ of certiorari and prohibition. It ruled that the respondent Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the motion for a writ of preliminary injunction pending appeal and to issue the said writ. The appeal from the decision in the special civil action for prohibition was perfected upon the mere filing of the notice of appeal by the petitioners on April 24, 1962, which was granted by the lower court on April 26, 1962. Since the appeal was from a special civil action, no record on appeal was necessary, and as the appellants were sued in their official capacities, no appeal bond was required. Upon perfection of the appeal, the trial court lost jurisdiction over the case, except for matters not involved in the appeal, such as orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties. The respondent Judge was therefore divested of jurisdiction to act on the motion for preliminary injunction filed after the appeal was perfected. Consequently, the orders dated June 22 and 30, 1962, and the writ of preliminary injunction issued pursuant thereto, were declared null and void for having been issued without, or in excess of, jurisdiction and with grave abuse of discretion. The preliminary injunction issued by the Supreme Court in this case was made permanent.