Practice question
May an ordinary preliminary injunction be granted without prior notice and hearing merely because the court calls it temporary?
- Yes; the word temporary deletes all safeguards.
- Yes; every preliminary injunction is identical to an extreme-urgency TRO.
- No.
- Yes; the opponent’s right to notice is categorically irrelevant.
- Yes; a private urgency claim is always conclusive.
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.