JUSTICE MARTIN VILLLARAMA, JR.: MOOT AND ACADEMIC CASE

In Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas vs. Orient Commercial Banking Corporation, the Supreme Court held that with the final settlement of the claims of petitioner against herein respondents, the issues raised in the present petition regarding the propriety of the issuance of writ of attachment by the trial court and the grave abuse of discretion allegedly committed by the appellate court in reversing the orders of the trial court, have now become moot and academic.

“A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value” (See Lacson v. MJ Lacson Development Company, Inc., G.R. No. 168840, December 8, 2010, p. 10, citing Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Atienza, G.R. No. 175241, February 24, 2010, 613 SCRA 510, 522-523). x x x  In such cases, there is no actual substantial relief to which petitioner would be entitled to and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition (Chuidian v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 156383 & 160723, July 31, 2006, 497 SCRA 327 cited in Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas vs. Orient Commercial Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 148483, June 29, 2011, VILLARAMA, JR., J.).