SC denies Sumifru plea for injunction against banana farmers
The Supreme Court (SC) has denied the plea of Sumifru Philippines Corporation for an injunction to prevent a banana-growing couple from selling their produce to other buyers.
In a recent 9-page decision, the SC 2nd Division noted Sumifru no longer had any right to be protected by an injunction because the Growers Exclusive Production and Sales Agreement (GEPASA) with Danilo and Cerina Cereño already expired in 2015.
“Considering that Sumifru admitted that the GEPASAs on which it anchors its right expired in 2015, there is even more reason not to issue the writ prayed for,” read the decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.
The SC stressed that “no court can compel a party to agree to a continuation of an admittedly expired contract through the instrumentality of a writ of preliminary injunction.”
The SC also noted the injury that could be caused to Sumifru could be “measured with reasonable accuracy” and compensated later, should the Davao City Regional Trial Court (RTC) rule in favor of its complaint against the Cereños.
In its complaint, Sumifru accused the Cereños of violating the Production and Purchase Agreement and the GEPASAs by harvesting bananas from their land without Sumifru’s consent and selling them to other buyers despite the exclusive agreement.
See related story: