This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-06-05 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| It is apparent that although the complaint was denominated as one for declaratory relief/annulment of contracts, the allegations therein reveal otherwise. It should be stressed that respondents neither asked for the interpretation of the questioned by-laws nor did they allege that the same is doubtful or ambiguous and require judicial construction. In fact, what respondents really seek to accomplish is to have a particular provision of the MLPAI's by-laws nullified and thereafter absolve them from any violations of the same.[23] In Kawasaki Port Service Corporation v. Amores,[24] the rule was stated: . . . where a declaratory judgment as to a disputed fact would be determinative of issues rather than a construction of definite stated rights, status and other relations, commonly expressed in written instrument, the case is not one for declaratory judgment.[25] | |||||