case 3 gma vs abs

1
GMA NETWORK, INC. V. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORP. 470 SCRA 727 [2005] First Division; Ynares-Santiago, J.; FACTS: Petitioner filed on May 6, 2003 before the RTC of Quezon City a complaint for damages against respondents Sky Cable, Home Cable and Sun Cable. In its complaint, GMA alleged that respondents engaged in unfair competition when the cable companies arbitrarily rechanneled petitioner’s cable television broadcast on February 1, 2003, in order to arrest and destroy its upswing performance in the television industry. Respondents on the other hand claimed that NTC has jurisdiction over the case and not the courts. ISSUE: Whether or not the NTC has jurisdiction over the case and not the courts RULING: Yes. NTC has jurisdiction over the case. GMA’s complaint for damages is based on the alleged arbitrary re-channelling of its broadcast over the cable companies’ television systems, hereby resulting in the distortion and degradation of its video and audio signals. The wrongful acts complained of and upon which the damages prayed for are based have to do with the operations and ownership of the cable companies. These factual matters undoubtedly pertain to the NTC and not the regular courts.

Upload: janlucifer-rahl

Post on 28-Apr-2015

68 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Case 3 GMA vs ABS

GMA NETWORK, INC. V. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORP.470 SCRA 727 [2005] First Division; Ynares-Santiago, J.;

FACTS:Petitioner filed on May 6, 2003 before the RTC of Quezon City a complaint for damages

against respondents Sky Cable, Home Cable and Sun Cable. In its complaint, GMA alleged that respondents engaged in unfair competition when the cable companies arbitrarily rechanneled petitioner’s cable television broadcast on February 1, 2003, in order to arrest and destroy its upswing performance in the television industry. Respondents on the other hand claimed that NTC has jurisdiction over the case and not the courts.

ISSUE:Whether or not the NTC has jurisdiction over the case and not the courts

RULING:Yes. NTC has jurisdiction over the case. GMA’s complaint for damages is based on the

alleged arbitrary re-channelling of its broadcast over the cable companies’ television systems, hereby resulting in the distortion and degradation of its video and audio signals. The wrongful acts complained of and upon which the damages prayed for are based have to do with the operations and ownership of the cable companies. These factual matters undoubtedly pertain to the NTC and not the regular courts.