Practice question
A proposed order would require a party to begin a new affirmative activity never part of the last peaceable state. Counsel calls it status quo ante and claims no analysis of mandatory relief is needed. Which is correct?
- Every new obligation is automatically an old uncontested condition.
- The actual command must be assessed; a label cannot turn a new affirmative arrangement into mere preservation.
- The chosen label is conclusive regardless of facts.
- A party may create all required historical facts by caption.
- Mandatory relief has no prerequisites.
Legal references
- Rules of Court, Rules 57-61, provisional-remedy purposes and the particular provisions identified in each explanation: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html
- Megaworld Properties and Holdings, Inc. v. Majestic Finance and Investment Co., Inc., G.R. No. 169694, December 9, 2015, main decision, actual provisional command and last peaceable state: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/dec2015/gr_169694_2015.html
- Duterte Youth Party-List v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 261123 and 261876, August 20, 2024, en banc main decision, TRO preserving the pre-substitution state and effect on later acts: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/aug2024/gr_261123_2024.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.