REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Court of Appeals
MANILA

FORMER SPECIAL SIXTH DIVISION

MERIDIEN
VISTA
CORPORATION,

GAMING

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

Petitioner,
- versus -

Members:

HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, in her

ENRIQUEZ, JR., Chairperson
capacity as Secretary of
the
BATO, JR., R. M., and
Department of Justice (DOJ), HON.
*LANTION, J. A. C., JJ.
JESSE M. ROBREDO, in his capacity
as Secretary of the Department of
Interior and Local Government (DILG),
and all persons acting under their
control and direction, including the
Promulgated:
elements of the Philippine National
Police and other law enforcement
agencies
of
the
National
Government,
20 SEPTEMBER 2011
Respondents.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

RESOLUTION
ENRIQUEZ, JR., J.:
This is a special civil action for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule
65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, which seeks to
_______________________
* Vice J. Florito S. Macalino, per Office Order No. 210-11 ABR dated July 21, 2011.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

annul and set aside the (1) Opinion No. 24, Series of 2011, dated June 23,
2011, (referred to as Opinion No. 24), issued by Honorable Secretary Leila
M. De Lima (hereafter Secretary De Lima) of the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and the (2) Joint DOJ-DILG Memorandum To All Public Prosecutors,
law Enforcement Officers and Local Government Executives, dated June 27,
2011 (referred to as Joint Memorandum), issued by Secretary De Lima and
Honorable Secretary Jesse M. Robredo (hereafter Secretary Robredo) of the
Department of Interior and Local government (DILG). The respective
pertinent portions thereof are, as follows:
From the foregoing discussion, your query is answered
thus:
1. CEZA is authorized to license and grant a jai-alai franchise
to Meridien, in accordance with the final and executory October
30, 2009 Decision of the RTC of Aparri, but so authorized
Meridien to operate off-fronton betting/gaming stations only if
it is allowed by law, in accordance with CEZA's own February
2, 2009 Certification issued to Meridien.
2. However, since no law allows the operation of off-fronton
betting stations, as in fact they are prohibited and criminalized
under Sec. 5 of RA 954, Meridien can only set-up its jai-alai
betting/gaming stations within the premises of the place,
enclosure, or fronton where the basque pelota game is held,
i.e., inside its jai-alai fronton located within the Cagayan
Freeport Zone, and nowhere else outside said fronton, in
accordance with the terms and conditions of its CEZA license
as it was upheld in the cases of Meridien v. CEZA and CEZA v.
Meridien.
In light of this opinion, the following guidelines are
being issued from compliance by local executives, law
enforcers, and public prosecutors:
1. Applications for business permits filed by Meridien with the
LGUs, as well as existing LGU business permits already issued

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION
to Meridien, should be denied or cancelled, as the case may be,
pursuant to Secs. 5 and 7 of RA 54 which makes it a criminal
offense to take bets or wagers outside the jai-alai fronton where
the game is held, which necessarily includes the establishment
and operation of off-fronton betting and gaming stations, with
or without the use of a totalizator or any other device or system.
The concerned LGUs where off-fronton betting and gaming
stations have already been operating shall require the assistance
of the PNP and other law enforcement agencies in the closure of
off-fronton stations, the seizure of totalizators, devices, or
systems utilized for taking bets and wagers, as well as other
facilities used as means for committing the offense penalized
under RA 954, and the arrest of their operators and maintainers.
2. The Philippine National Police and other law enforcement
agencies of the government are directed to proceed with the
search and seizure of off-fronton betting stations, i.e., jai-alai
betting and gaming stations located outside of Meridien's
Cagayan Freeport fronton enclosure, in accordance with Rule
126 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, particularly
Section 3 thereof on Personal Property to be Seized, as well
as effect the arrest and prosecution of operators and maintainers
of off-fronton betting and gaming stations, whether or not they
are utilizing totalizators or other devices and systems, for
violation of Section 5 of RA 954.
Off-fronton betting activities conducted in flagrante delicto, or
in plain view, or openly in public, even when conducted within
private premises, are to be considered crimes being committed
or have just been committed under circumstances of personal
knowledge and probable cause, as may be applicable, in
accordance with Sec. 5 of Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure, and the necessary arrest and search and
seizure incidental to the arrest may thus be effected without
need of judicial warrants.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION
These actions shall be undertaken regardless of whether or
not the off-fronton betting stations are also being used for other
illegal gambling activities, as the maintenance and operation of
these betting stations are per se illegal and punishable by law,
but those found committing acts of illegal gambling other than
violations of RA 954 shall be separately charged with the
additional offense, in accordance with Section 13, Rule 110 of
the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
3. Public prosecutors are directed to conduct expeditiously the
necessary inquest or preliminary investigation proceedings
against those arrested for violation of Section 5 of RA 954, and
to provide the necessary support to law enforcement officials
and personnel in the prosecution of operators and maintainers
of off-fronton betting stations. In no case shall the criminal
complaint against said individuals be dismissed on the mere
ground or invocation of Meridien's CEZA license or the RTC of
Aparri's injunction order in Meridien v. GAB.
Criminal case filed or to be filed by Meridien, its officials, or
agents, or any person acting in their stead or interest, against
local executives or law enforcement officials in the course of
the latter's actions to effect the closure and seizure of Meridien's
off-fronton betting stations, or the arrest of their operators and
maintainers, are to be considered harassment cases, similar to
Strategic lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suits,
and should be dealt with expeditiously and dismissed
accordingly in accordance with Section 3 (b) of Rule 112 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as may be appropriate
under the circumstances.
All actions finding probable cause against law enforcement
officials, if any, shall be considered automatically appealed to
the Secretary of Justice and the records forwarded accordingly.
The covering memorandum forwarding the records of such
cases shall cite this guideline describing the case as a Meridien
complaint.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

Attached is a copy of DOJ Opinion No. 24, s. 2011 on the

matter at hand, for further reference and guidance of all
concerned.
Please be guided accordingly.
The factual antecedents of the case, as culled from the records are, as
follows:
On March 4, 1995, RA No. 7922, otherwise known as the Cagayan
Special Economic Zone Act of 1995 was enacted into law. The said law
established the Cagayan Freeport Economic Zone (CEZA) and authorizes it,
among others, to operate on its own, either directly or through a subsidiary
entity, or license to others, tourism-related activities, including games,
amusements, recreational and sports facilities, such as horse racing, dog
racing, gambling casinos, golf courses, and others, under priorities and
standards set by the CEZA.
The Meridien Vista Gaming Corporation (hereafter Meridien) is a
domestic corporation existing under the laws of the Philippines and currently
engaged in gaming activities within and outside the Cagayan Special
Economic Zone and Freeport. Meridien was able to conduct jai-alai gaming
operations within the freeport and establish betting stations in support
thereto through the license obtained from the Cagayan Export Zone
Authority (CEZA).
Upon inquiry received by CEZA on the feasibility of operating a jaialai fronton within the zone, on November 22, 2007, the Office of the
Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC), through Alberto Agra, issued
Opinion No. 251, Series of 2007. It pertinently provides that CEZA has the
legislative franchise to operate and/or license jai-alai, including the authority
to establish, manage and operate jai-alai betting stations located inside and
outside the Cagayan Special Economic Zone and Free Port (CSEZP).
Acting on the application of Meridien, on February 26, 2008, CEZA
issued a Provisional License effective for six (6) months qualifying Meridien
as a Cagayan Special Economic Zone and Freeport Enterprise engaged in
gaming operations.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

In March 2008, the CEZA Board granted Meridien the authority and
license to operate jai-alai and all its derivatives on an exclusive basis for a
period of twenty-five (25) years from date of actual operation. CEZA
likewise, authorized Meridien to establish and set up a jai-alai fronton within
the Freeport, and other support service facilities in connection with the
development, operation and conduct of jai-alai with the CSEZP.
On February 2, 2009, the CEZA issued a certification attesting that
Meridien is licensed by the CEZA to conduct gaming operations in the
Cagayan Freeport and set up betting stations in any place as may be allowed
by law in support of the jai-alai conducted. Meridien then set up field testing
of offsite gaming stations in the provinces of Isabela, Camarines Sur and
Nueva Vizcaya, all outside the Cagayan Freeport Area. The CEZA issued a
second certification authorizing Meridien to conduct gaming operations in
the Cagayan Freeport and set up betting stations in any place as may be
allowed by law.
On March 31, 2009, the OGCC furnished CEZA Opinion No. 67,
Series of 2009, which provides that the CEZA was not so empowered to
authorize, license, operate and regulate jai-alai. In view of the said opinion,
on April 1, 2009, CEZA ordered Meridien to immediately cease and desist
from all its business operations.
Thus, Meridien was compelled to seek judicial relief by filing a
Complaint for Mandamus (with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary
Restraining Order (TRO) and Writ of Preliminary Injunction) against CEZA
before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 7, Aparri, Cagayan, docketed
as Civil Case No. 11-4754.
In an Order dated April 8, 2009, the RTC of Aparri issued a TRO,
thus:
In the meantime, and in order to maintain the status quo
so as not to render any resolution or order of this Court in
respect with the aforementioned injunctive proceedings moot
and academic, respondent CEZA and all persons acting under

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

its control and direction including the elements of the Philippine

National Police and other law enforcement agencies of the
government, are hereby enjoined and restrained for a nonextendible period of twenty (20) days from stopping the
Gaming Operations of the petitioner, or unless any other order
is issued by this Court during said twenty (20) day period either
to pre-terminate said restraining order, or is replaced by another
writ as may be applicable.
ACCORDINGLY, as a condition for the execution and
implementation of the temporary restraining order, petitioner is
hereby directed and required to post two (2) Million Pesos bond
to the Office of the Clerk of Court, Aparri, Cagayan to answer
for any damage the respondent may suffer as a consequence of
the issuance of said writ.
SO ORDERED.
On April 22, 2009, the RTC of Aparri, likewise, granted the
application for a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, thus:
WHEREFORE, petitioner's application for the issuance
of a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction is hereby
GRANTED. Until further orders from this Court, respondent
and all persons acting under its control and direction are hereby
directed to allow the petitioner to continue with its gaming
operations including the testing of software and
telecommunication infrastructure relative thereto. The bond
earlier issued by the petition to answer for any damages that
may be sustained by the respondent if, it is later determined, the
petitioner is not entitled to injunctive relief, is hereby
maintained and to be kept in full force and effect insofar as the
Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction is concerned.
x xx
SO ORDERED.

xxx

xxx

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

After trial on the merits, on October 30, 2009, the RTC of Aparri
rendered the Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads, as follows:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is
hereby rendered in favor of the petitioner and against the
respondent. Accordingly, let a Writ of Mandamus issue
directing respondent or any other person/s acting under its
control and direction to allow the petitioner to continue with its
gaming operations in accordance with the license already
granted. The bond earlier posted by Petitioner is hereby
released in its favor.
Let a copy of this Decision be furnished the Department
of Justice, the Department of Interior and Local Government
and Philippine National Police and other law enforcement
agencies of the government for their reference and guidance.
No costs.
SO ORDERED.
The CEZA failed to appeal the above decision within the reglementary
period for failure of the handling OGCC lawyer to notify the OGCC or
CEZA of the issuance of the said decision, nor his receipt thereof.
On December 3, 2009, a copy of the Decision was handed to the
OGGC upon its manifestation.. The OGCC filed a Notice of Appeal but the
same was denied by the RTC of Aparri in the Order dated December 9,
2009.
On January 25, 2010, the CEZA, through the OGCC, filed a Petition
for Relief from Judgment of the Decision dated October 30, 2009 and the
Order dated December 3, 2009, which was however, denied in the
Resolution dated March 4, 2010. The Motion for Reconsideration thereto
was denied in the Resolution dated March 12, 2010.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

On July 19, 2010, CEZA, through the OGCC, filed a Petition for
Certiorari and Prohibition with this Court assailing the Resolution dated
March 4, 2010 and Order dated March 12, 2010.
On August 13, 2010, the then 11th Division of this Court rendered a
Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads, as follows:
WHEREFORE, the instant Petition for Certiorari and
Prohibition is hereby denied outright.
SO ORDERED.
CEZA's Motion for Reconsideration was denied in the Resolution
dated December 9, 2010, the pertinent portion of which reads, as follows:
Perforce, a mandamus to direct Petitioner CEZA, which
prevented Respondent Meridien to perform acts in accordance
with the license, is proper in order to allow Respondent
Meridien to continue operating Jai-alai within the Cagayan
Freeport and to establish betting terminals in connection
thereto.
WHEREFORE,
the
Petitioner's
Reconsideration is hereby DENIED.

Motion

for

SO ORDERED.
On February 23, 2011, the OGCC filed a Petition for Review on
Certiorari with the Supreme Court, docketed as G.R. No. 194962. Said
petition is pending resolution as of this date.
On March 3, 2011, the Games and Amusement Board (GAB) issued a
Cease and Desist Order (CDO) against Meridien and the operators of its offfronton betting stations, which were conducting their businesses without
authority from the GAB.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

10

On March 14, 2011, Meridien filed a Complaint for Injunction against

GAB with the RTC, Aparri, which was later re-raffled to Branch 7.
On March 21, 2011, the RTC, Aparri, Branch 7, issued a TRO
effective for 72 hours due to the existing extreme urgency lest Meridien
suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury should GAB's cease and desist
order be further implemented. The TRO was extended for 17 days when,
according to the RTC, Meridien was able to establish that it has the authority
in accordance with law and court decisions to pursue its gaming operations
under its legislative franchise from the CEZA.
On April 7, 2011, the RTC, Aparri, Branch 7, issued an Order
granting the application for a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, the dispositive
portion of which reads, as follows:
WHEREFORE, plaintiff's (Meridien) application for
the issuance of a Writ of Preliminary Injunction is hereby
GRANTED. Until further orders from this Court, the defendant
GAB and all persons acting under its control and supervision
are hereby directed to allow the plaintiff to continue with its
Jai-Alai under the authority of the CEZA.
SO ORDERED.
GAB filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition against Meridien
and the RTC-Aparri, Branch 7, with this Court, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No.
119842.
On June 23, 2011, the then 3rd Division of this Court issued a
Resolution, the dispositive portion of which reads, as follows:
WHEREFORE, let a temporary restraining order,
effective for sixty (60) days from service, be issued enjoining
the RTC from implementing the now assailed orders and from
conducting further proceedings in the case a quo. Pursuant
to Section 22, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court and the doctrine

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

11

enunciated in Spouses Oscar and Haydee Badillo vs Hon.

Arturo Tayag as Presiding Judge of the RTC, Branch 79,
Malolos, Bulacan and National Housing Authority, petitioner,
being a governmental instrumentality, is exempt from payment
of the bond which is otherwise required under Section 4 (b),
rule 58 of the Rules of Court.
SO ORDERED.
On June 13, 2011, Secretary Robredo sought a legal opinion from
Secretary De Lima on whether or not the franchise granted by CEZA for the
operation of jai-alai fronton in the Cagayan Freeport authorizes a franchise
to establish/operate jai-alai on line betting/gaming stations outside the
Freeport.
On June 23, 2011, Secretary De Lima issued the assailed DOJ
Opinion No. 24, Series of 2011 in the terms earlier set forth. Pursuant to
said legal opinion, the assailed Joint DOJ-DILG Memorandum Circular No.
001-2011 was issued.
Hence, this Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition.
On July 22, 2011, We granted the prayer for the issuance of a
temporary restraining order.
Meanwhile, on August 18, 2011, the Special Third Division of this
Court, rendered the decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 119842, the dispositive
portion of which reads, as follows:
WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the
instant Petition is GRANTED. The assailed Orders issued by
the RTC on March 21 and 23, April 7, and May 2, 2011 are
REVERSED AND SET ASIDE. Accordingly, MVGC's
Complaint for Injunction filed with the RTC is DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION
The present petition is anchored on the following ground:
BOTH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF
DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF
JURISDICTION IN ARROGATING UNTO ITSELF THE
EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY IN ISSUING THE
ASSAILED OPINION AND JOINT MEMORANDUM,
CONSIDERING THAT:
A) THE HONORABLE SECRETARY LEILA M.
DE LIMA OVERSTEPPED THE BOUNDARIES
ACCORDED TO HER OFFICE WHEN SHE
ISSUED OPINION NO. 24 SERIES OF 2011
AND RESOLVED THE LEGAL ISSUES WHICH
ARE STILL THE SUBJECT OF JUDICIAL
REVIEW IN G.R. NO. 194962 PENDING
BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT;
B) THE ASSAILED OPINION ISSUED BY THE
HONORABLE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE HAS
NO BASIS, IN FACT OR IN LAW, THE LAW
SOLELY RELIED UPON REPUBLIC ACT NO.
954,
WHICH
HAS ALREADY BEEN
IMPLIEDLY
REPEALED
BY
OTHER
SUBSEQUENT LAWS ALLOWING THE SETUP OF OFF-FRONTON BETTING STATIONS
OUTSIDE THE FRONTON WHERE THE
BASQUE PELOTA GAMES ARE BEING HELD;
AND
C) THE JOINT MEMORANDUM OF THE DOJDILG HAS THE FORCE AND EFFECT
OF LAW, WHICH IN EFFECT, CLEARLY

12

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

13

DEPRIVES MVGC AND ALL OF ITS

PERSONNEL TO THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.
The CEZA Board granted Meridien an authority and license to operate
jai-alai and set up betting stations in support thereto, within the Cagayan
Freeport in accordance with the legislative franchise granted to CEZA in
R.A. No 7922. When OGCC issued Opinion No. 67, Series of 2008
providing that CEZA was not empowered to license and operate jai-alai,
Meridien was ordered to immediately cease and desist from all its business
operations. Thus, Meridien sought judicial relief.
In Civil Case No. 11-4754, the RTC of Aparri, Cagayan directed
CEZA to allow Meridien to continue with its gaming operations. The
aforesaid decision of the RTC of Aparri, Cagayan was affirmed by the then
11th Division of this Court in the Decision dated August 13, 2010 in CA
G.R. SP No. 115034. Both courts ruled that pursuant to its legislative
charter granted by R.A. No. 7922, CEZA can pursue jai-alai games.
The aforesaid decision of this Court was appealed to the Supreme
Court by way of a Petition for Review on Certiorari, docketed as G.R. No.
194962. One of the issues raised therein is whether or not CEZA has the
power to operate on its own or license others to conduct jai-alai gaming
operations. According to CEZA, a reading of Section 6 of R.A. No. 7922
clearly shows that the operation or maintenance of jai-alai is not included
among the powers granted to CEZA by Congress. CEZA argues that since
it is not authorized under R.A. No. 7922 to operate or to grant any license
for jai-alai gaming operations, Meridien cannot also operate or maintain jaialai.
The issue on the legality of the authority of CEZA to operate jai-alai
and to authorize or license any entity for the operation thereof under R.A.
No. 7922, as raised in G.R. No. 194962, and the issue as to whether or not
Meridien can set-up off-fronton betting stations outside the Cagayan
Freeport, as embodied in the present petition vis-a-vis the assailed Joint

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

14

Memorandum, are closely interrelated, such that the resolution by the

Supreme Court of the Petition for Review in G.R. No. 194962 will surely
affect and/or decide the fate of the present petition.
As correctly argued by Meridien during the hearing on the application
for the issuance of a writ of Preliminary Injunction on August 10, 2011, if
the Supreme Court would grant the petition and decide that under R.A. No.
7922, CEZA does not possess the legislative franchise to operate jai-alai or
license any entity to conduct jai-alai gaming operations, the present petition
would be rendered moot because technically, there will be no more right
that can be invoked by Meridien.
An issue becomes moot and academic when it ceases to present a
justiciable controversy so that a declaration on the issue would be of no
practical use or value. In such a case, there is no actual substantial relief to
which the plaintiff would be entitled to and which would be negated by the
dismissal of the complaint (Vda. de Dabao v. Court of Appeals, 426 SCRA 91).
Indeed, We deem it judicious to await the judicial determination by
the Supreme Court of the petition filed in G.R. No. 194962, so as not to
render moot and academic the present Petition for Certiorari and
Prohibition, and in order not to preempt the Supreme Court however it will
resolve the petition pending before it. To do otherwise would be inimical
to the orderly administration of justice as it creates the possibility of
conflicting decisions being rendered by two courts on the same or
interrelated issues presented under different remedies before the same
forum and praying for exactly the same ultimate relief. We would have
thereby a judgment on a matter which cannot have any practical legal effect
upon a controversy, even if existing, and which, in the nature of things,
cannot be enforced. We must consequently abide by our consistent ruling
that where certain events or circumstances have taken place during the
pendency of the case which would render the case moot and academic, the
petition should be dismissed (Honesto B. Villarosa vs Hon. Cresenciano B. Trajano,
211 SCRA 685).

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

15

In a parallel move, judicial courtesy and respect dictate that the DOJ
and the DILG should refrain from implementing the Joint Memorandum to
pave the way for the resolution of the legal issues raised in the petition in
G.R. No. 194962 pending with the Supreme Court which are interrelated to
the present Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition so that the same would
not be rendered moot and academic. Likewise, the parties in this case are
also directed to take note of the decision of the Third Division of this Court
in CA-G.R. SP No. 119842.
Judicial courtesy applies when there is a strong probability that the
issues before the higher court would be rendered moot and moribund as a
result of the continuation of the proceedings in the lower court or court of
origin (Go vs Abrogar, 398 SCRA 166).
WHEREFORE, considering that the issues involved in the present
petition are closely interrelated with the issues raised in G.R. No. 194962
now pending before the Supreme Court, let a Writ of Preliminary Injunction
be issued enjoining the Secretary of Justice (DOJ) and the Secretary of the
Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), and their agents
and/or representatives from implementing the Joint DOJ-DILG
Memorandum To All Public Prosecutors, Law Enforcement Officers and
Local Government Executives dated June 27, 2011, upon the filing of a
bond in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00), for any
damage that may be sustained by the respondents, by reason of the
injunction, if the Court will finally decide that the petitioner is not entitled
thereto.
The parties are directed to file their respective memoranda of
authorities on the issues raised, within fifteen (15) days from notice hereof.
Thereafter, the petition will be deemed submitted for decision.
SO ORDERED.

JUAN Q. ENRIQUEZ JR.

Associate Justice

CA-G.R. SP NO. 120236

RESOLUTION

16

WE CONCUR:

RAMON M. BATO, JR.

Associate Justice
RBB/mgs

JANE AURORA C. LANTION

Associate Justice