RTC denies plea to stop vessels from docking at south port

CEBU, Philippines — A Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Cebu has denied the application of Oriental Port & Allied Services Corp. (OPASCOR) for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction against the Cebu Port Authority (CPA) and Cebu South Harbor & Container Terminal Corp. (CSHCTC), for lack of merit.

In an eight-page order dated September 25, 2026, RTC 20 Presiding Judge Leah I. Geraldez denied OPASCOR’s plea to stop the CPA from allowing vessels to dock and unload at CSHCTC, and to prevent the private port operator from accepting foreign vessels and cargoes.

OPASCOR had asked the court to enjoin the CPA from issuing, allowing, honoring, or implementing berthing, docking, and unloading permissions at CSHCTC, except in cases of emergency, necessity, or congestion at the government port.

It also sought to stop CSHCTC from accepting and handling foreign vessels and cargoes and operating as a general cargo port without a written order from the CPA and other clearances.

The case stemmed from OPASCOR’s contention that the CPA’s decision to allow vessels to call at CSHCTC violated the regulations governing private commercial ports.

OPASCOR cited Section 4 of CPA Administrative Order No. 02-2010, which provides that a private commercial port should not operate as a general cargo port and should not duplicate facilities provided by a government port, or another authorized private port.

OPASCOR also claimed that the transfer of Maersk’s domestic and foreign cargo operations and CMA-CGM’s foreign cargo operations to CSHCTC resulted in a decline in cargo volume at the Cebu International Port (CIP), affecting OPASCOR’s revenues and remittances to the CPA.

The CPA and CSHCTC, however, opposed the application, arguing that OPASCOR failed to establish a clear and unmistakable legal right that had been violated.

In denying the application, Geraldez said the court could not determine at this stage that the CPA violated Administrative Order No. 02-2010 and the relevant Cebu Port Commission resolutions, or that CSHCTC had acted beyond the terms of its permit.

The judge noted that these matters remain disputed not only in the case before the court but also in a compliance review pending before the Department of Transportation (DOTr).

“OPASCOR has failed to establish the first requisite for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction,” the order stated.

The court emphasized that a preliminary injunction requires, among others, the existence of a clear and unmistakable right that needs protection.

While the court recognized that OPASCOR has an exclusive right to provide cargo-handling services at the CIP, Geraldez said the court would first have to resolve the disputed regulatory issues before determining whether OPASCOR’s claimed right had been violated.

The court also found that OPASCOR failed to establish the urgency required to issue an injunction.

According to the order, OPASCOR stated that Maersk had transferred its foreign cargo operations to CSHCTC by July 2024, but the company sought injunctive relief only more than two years later.

“This belies its claim of urgency,” the judge said.

Geraldez also rejected OPASCOR’s claim of irreparable damage, noting that the company’s alleged losses were expressed in measurable financial terms, including reduced cargo volume and revenues.

Under the rules, the court said, damages are considered irreparable for purposes of an injunction when there is no reasonable standard by which their amount can be measured.

The court further held that granting the requested injunction could effectively resolve the merits of the case before a full trial.

OPASCOR had alternatively asked the court to issue a status quo ante order, arguing that the last actual, peaceable and uncontested state of affairs was when vessels and cargoes were handled at the CIP.

The court rejected this position.

Geraldez said OPASCOR’s proposed status quo ante had no support in jurisprudence, noting that the status quo ante litem refers to the state of affairs existing when the case was filed.

At the time OPASCOR filed the case, Maersk and CMA-CGM had already relocated operations to CSHCTC, the court noted.

The court therefore denied OPASCOR’s application for a TRO and writ of preliminary injunction “for lack of merit.”  — (FREEMAN)