SC stands by ruling on 2-day notice before power disconnection

In a statement, Meralco said it is yet to receive a copy of the SC decision but that it has since been implementing the 48-hour notice rule for disconnection. (PNA photo by Rey Baniquet)

MANILA – The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday said it has turned down an appeal filed by power firm Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) with the tribunal stressing that the law requires that a consumer be informed at least two days prior notice before actual disconnection of a power line.

In a statement, Meralco said it is yet to receive a copy of the SC decision but that it has since been implementing the 48-hour notice rule for disconnection.

“We have not officially received a copy of the SC decision. In any case, we will respect and abide by the said decision. We note that the incident in question happened in 1999. It has been Meralco’s policy to serve 48-hour prior notice before disconnecting any service to comply with the due process requirements,” Meralco said in its statement.

Meanwhile, Presidential Adviser for Poverty Alleviation Larry Gadon said the 48 hours notice rule may need to be reviewed since it may not be enough in some cases such as those involving poor consumers.

“Forty-eight hours is too short, kasi two days lang yan (that is just two days). Dapat man lang five days para makagawa ng paraan ang subscriber. Napakamahal ng kuryente, syempre inuuna muna ang ibang gastusin para sa pagkain, gamot, edukasyon (It should be at least five days for the subscriber to find a way. Electricity is very expensive, of course other expenses for food, medicine, education come first),” Gadon told the Philippine News Agency.

The SC ruling denying the Meralco petition was announced Friday by the tribunal where the high court affirmed the Court of Appeals (CA) decision which said the electric firm violated Republic Act 7832, or the Anti-Electricity and Electric Transmission Lines/Materials Pilferage Act of 1994, for cutting off the electricity supply of a consumer without prior notice.

In her complaint for damages before the regional trial court (RTC) against Meralco, consumer Lucy Lu alleged that on Dec. 9, 1999, representatives from the power firm forcibly entered the premises of the New Supersonic Industrial Corporation (NSIC) in Valenzuela City, which her family owned.

After the inspection, Meralco representatives issued a notice of disconnection and immediately disconnected the electricity supply of NSIC’s factory and Yu’s residence.

Yu then filed a complaint for damages before the Valenzuela City RTC Branch 172, that ruled in her favor prompting the utility firm to elevate the case to the CA, which affirmed the RTC ruling with modification. Meralco then appealed before the high court.

In denying Meralco’s petition for review on certiorari, it ruled that before it can disconnect the electric service of a consumer on grounds cited under Section 4(a) of RA 7832, there must be prior written notice to the consumer to disconnect.

The court emphasized that the said written notice must be given at least 48 hours prior to the disconnection, pursuant to due process requirements. Thus, the act of Meralco in cutting off the respondent’s electricity on the same day the disconnection notice was given to the consumer was violative of due process requirements.

The court also said Meralco is presumed to be in bad faith for its failure to follow the due notice requirement under RA 7832 during the disconnection of Yu’s electric service.

In denying the power firm’s petition for review and affirmed the decision of the CA dated Nov. 26, 2020, the high tribunal ruled that the award of temperate damages will be reduced to PHP50,000; the award of moral damages will deleted for lack of basis; and the award of exemplary damages will be reduced to PHP100,000. The Court also ordered that the rest of the CA ruling stands.