Filled Under: ,

Ollada vs. Central Bank Case Digest

Civil Procedure Case Digests Declaratory Relief

Facts: Felipe B. Ollada is a certified public accountant, accredited to practice accountancy in the office of the Central Bank of the Philippines. In December 1955, by reason of a requirement of the Import-Export Department of said bank that CPAs submit to an accreditation under oath before they could certify financial statements of their clients applying for import dollar allocations with its office, Ollada's previous accreditation was nullified. Ollada thus filed a petition for declaratory relief before the trial court to nullify said accreditation requirement. He alleges that because of these requirements he had suffered serious injury, and that such enforcement has resulted in the unlawful restraint in the practice of CPAs in the Office of the Central Bank.

Issue: Will the petition for declaratory relief prosper?

Held: The complaint for declaratory relief will not prosper if filed after a contract, statute or right has been breached or violated. In the present case such is precisely the situation arising from the facts alleged in the petition for declaratory relief. As vigorously claimed by petitioner himself, respondent had already invaded or violated his right and caused him injury — all these giving him a complete cause of action enforceable in an appropriate ordinary civil action or proceeding.

An action for declaratory relief should be filed before there has been a breach of a contract, statutes or right, and that it is sufficient to bar such action, that there had been a breach — which would constitute actionable violation. The rule is that an action for Declaratory Relief is proper only if adequate relief is not available through the means of other existing forms of action or proceeding. (Ollada vs. Central Bank, G.R. No. L-11357, May 31, 1962)

 

Copyright © Remedial Law Notes™ is a registered trademark.
Blogger Templates Designed by Templateism. Hosted on Blogger Platform.