Court extends TRO in PSALM dispute with San Miguel Corp. unit

A REGIONAL trial court has extended the temporary restraining order stopping the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. (PSALM) from terminating its contract with a subsidiary of SMC Global Power Holdings Corp.

The dispute between the state-run power firm and South Premiere Power Corp. ( SPPC) stemmed from the alleged failure of SMC Global’s subsidiary to settle financial obligations worth over P6 billion.

The Mandaluyong Regional Trial Court on Sept. 8 issued a 72- hour temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of SPPC, effectively stopping PSALM from terminating their independent power producer administrator ( IPPA) contract covering the 1,200- megawatt ( MW) Ilijan combined cycle plant in Batangas.

“After careful review of the arguments raised by the parties vis-a-vis the records of the instant case, the Court find its proper for the temporary restraining order to be extended to another 17 days if only to preserve the status quo and to afford the Court opportunity to hear the merits of the controversy...” the order dated Sept. 11 read.

PSALM contested the authority of the regional court to issue a status quo ante order, saying the court has no jurisdiction to grant the injunctive relief sought by SPPC.

“The TRO against PSALM runs contrary to the provisions of Republic Act No. 9136, the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA),” PSALM said in a statement yesterday.

PSALM argued that under Section 78 of the EPIRA, only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to restrain or enjoin the implementation of the provisions of the EPIRA, which includes PSALM’s implementation of its mandate.

But in its latest order, the court said: “As perceived, what is sought to be prohibited is to restrain the implementation of its provision of which only the Honorable Supreme Court can entertain.”

“Here, what is believed to be the dispute is not to prohibit its implementation, rather to shed a light to a contract wherein the parties have dissimilar interpretation of provisions with the end of implementing the EPIRA law,” the order read.—