Table of Remedies in Environmental Law Cases
Strategic Lawsuit Against Public
Participation (SLAPP)
Definition Any action whether civil, criminal or
administrative, brought against any
person, institution or any government
agency or local government unit or its
officials and employees, with the
intent to harass, vex, exert undue
pressure or stifle any legal recourse
that such person, institution or
government agency has taken or may
take in the enforcement of
environmental laws, protection of the
environment or assertion of
environmental rights.
Who May 1. Private individual/entity
File 2. Government entities and their
officials
As long as they are enforcing
environmental rights or implementing
duties therefor.
Against 1. Private individual/entity
Whom 2. Government entities or their
officials
Where
Filed Where the alleged SLAPP is pending
Grounds Lawsuit against applicant by reason of
his:
1. Enforcement of environmental
laws
2. Protection of the environment
3. Assertion of environmental
rights
Other For APPLICANT: Show substantial
notes, if any evidence that his act is for the
enforcement of environmental law is a
legitimate cause of action.
For DEFENDANT: Show
preponderance of evidence that their
action is not a SLAPP, but a valid
claim.
Writ of Continuing
Writ of Kalikasan
An extraordinary remedy which
may be issued depending on the
magnitude of the environmental
damage – must be one which
prejudices the life, health or
property of inhabitants in 2 or
more cities or provinces, or that
which transcends political and
territorial boundaries.
1. Natural or juridical persons
2. Entities authorized by law
3. People’s organizations,
NGOs, etc.
On behalf of persons violated
1. Government or officer
2. Private individual/entity
Supreme Court or any station of
the Court of Appeals
1. Great environmental
damage affecting the life,
health or property of
inhabitants of 2 or more
cities or provinces.
2. Right to information
regarding environment.
EXEMPTED from paying
docket fees as a necessary
consequence of exempting the
award of damages in the reliefs
that may be granted.
NONETHELESS, applicant may
file a separate action for
damages.
Environmental Protection
Preliminary-Final Injunction
Mandamus Order (EPO)
A writ issued by a court in an An order issued by the court An order granted at any stage of
environmental law case directing or enjoining any person an action or proceeding prior to
directing any agency or or government agency to perform the judgement or final order,
instrumentality of the or desist from performing an act requiring a party or a court,
government, or officer thereof in order to protect, preserve, or agency or a person to refrain
to perform an act or series of rehabilitate the environment. from a particular act or acts. It
acts decreed by final judgment may also require the performance
which shall remain effective Temporary Environmental of a particular act or acts, in
until judgment is fully Protection Order (TEPO) – which case it shall be known
satisfied. available in environmental cases, as a preliminary mandatory
especially under the Writ of injunction.
Kalikasan and Writ of
Continuing Mandamus.
1. ANY person personally 1. Private individual/entity 1. Private individual/entity
aggrieved by the 2. Government entities or their 2. Government entities or their
unlawful act or omission. officials officials
1. Government entities or 1. Private individual/entity 1. Private individual/entity
their officials 2. Government entities or their 2. Government entities or their
officials officials
General Rule: Supreme Court – because of presumption of
regularity enjoyed by government agencies and personnel.
Exception: When the applicant/s override such presumption.
1. Defendant’s: 1. Extreme urgency 1. Applicant seems entitled to
a. Unlawful omission 2. Applicant will suffer grave the relief demanded
to perform a duty injustice and irreparable 2. Continuation of the acts
required by law. injury complained of during
b. Unlawful exclusion litigation would work
of another from the injustice to applicant
exercise of a right. 3. Continuation of the acts
AND complained of pending
2. No other plain, speedy litigation would render
and adequate remedy. judgment ineffectual.
The Court may issue a TEPO Safeguards for TEPO: PERIODS:
for: 1. Limited to 72 hours from 1. Lower court – 20 days only,
1. Expedition of issuance including 72-hour TEPO.
proceedings; AND 2. Constant monitoring by the 2. CA – 60 days from notice to
2. Preserve the rights of the court of existence of subject adverse party.
parties pending matter of TEPO 3. SC – until final order.
litigation.
Becomes PEMANENT if the Final Injunction granted after
court deems it so warranted. trial, if Court deems it warranted.
YAP, K. | ATENEO LAW