SUBJECT: Environmental Law

CASE: Soledad Dy, petitioner vs CA & Odel Bernado Lausa, respondent

FACTS:

1. This is a petition for review of the decision of the CA setting aside two orders of the RTC of
Butuan City and the CA resolution denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration.
2. Two orders of the RTC of Butuan are 1) order granting petitioner's application for a
replevin writ 2) order denying private respondent's motion to dismiss.
3. On May 31, 1993, the Mayor of Butuan City created a Task Force Kalikasan to combat
illegal logging, log smuggling or possession of and or tansport of illegally cut or produced
logs, lumber, flitches and other forest products in the city and is composed of personnel of
the Philippine Army, PNP, DENR and office of the City Mayor of Butuan.
4. On July 1, 1993, they caught two vehicles loaded with lumber on a compound and so the
Forester Resurrection Maxilom of the DENR issued a temporary seizure order but the
caretaker of the coumpound refused to accept the seizure receipt. The seized lumber and
vehicles were then tken to the City motorpol and placed in the custody of respondent Lausa.
5. On the next day, the Maxilom submitted a report to the CENRO and on July 6, CENRO
issued a notice of confiscaiton which was duly posted for 3 days.
6. On July 29, 1993, DENR Regional Techncal Director recommended to the Secretary the
forfeiture of the lumber nd the two vehicles because of lack of claimants which was
approved and so CENRO issued on August 15, 1993 the requisite forfeiture orders.
7. More than two months after the lumber had been forfeited, petitioner who claims to be
the owner of the lumber, filed a suit for replevin in the RTC. The next day, the trial court
issued a preliminary writ of replevin.
8. October 29, 1993, respondent Lausa filed a motion for the approval of a counterbond.
Before the court could act on his motion, he moved to dismiss and/or quash the writ of
replevin on the ground that the lumber in question was under the custody of the DENR
therefore, resort should first be made to the DENR.
9. On November 29, 1993, the trial court denied respondent's application for the approval of
the counterbond as well as his motion to dismiss and/or quash the suit for replevin. For this
reason, respondent filed a petition for certiorari in the CA where he sough the approval of
his counterbond and the nullification of two orders of the RTC where his petition was
granted.
10. The decision of the CA was affirmed by the Supreme Court with the modification that the
compaint for recovery of personal property is Dismissed.

SUBJECT: Environmental Law

CASE: Soledad Dy, petitioner vs CA & Odel Bernado Lausa, respondent

SUBJECT: Environmental Law

CASE: Soledad Dy, petitioner vs CA & Odel Bernado Lausa, respondent