CAGAYAN VALLEY ENTERPRISES, INC. v.

CA Cagayan contended that the bottles they are using are not the registered bottles of
November 8, 1989 | Regalado, J. | Use of associated words LTI since the former was using the bottles marked with “La Tondeña, Inc.” and
“Ginebra San Miguel” but without the words “property of” indicated in said
PETITIONER: Cagayan Valley Enterprises, Inc. bottles as stated in the sworn statement attached to the certificate of registration of
RESPONDENTS: Court of Appeals and La Tondeña, Inc. LTI for said bottles.
SUMMARY: Petitioner faces a civil case for reusing bottles of La Tondeña,
Inc., which the latter registered with Philippine Patent Office. This is in violation LTI filed motions for contempt against Cagayan, but the trial court rendered
of RA 623, granting protection for licensed bottle manufacturers of beverages. judgment in favor of the latter. The judgment also awarded damages in favor of
The law provides that registered bottles cannot be used without the written Cagayan. LTI appealed to the CA. The CA set aside the judgment and
consent of the manufacturer. Petitioner argues that LTI is not protected by this permanently enjoined Cagayan, its officers and agents from using the 350 c.c.
law because (1) hard liquor is not covered in Sec. 1 of RA 623 and (2) the white flint bottles. Cagayan filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied.
marked bottles used by petitioner do not say “property of” contrary to the
registration of LTI. CA and SC rejected these arguments. Republic Act No. 623, as amended by Republic Act No. 5700, provides:
DOCTRINE: SECTION 1. Persons engaged or licensed to engage in the manufacture,
The rule of ejusdem generis cannot be applied in this case. To limit the coverage bottling, or selling of soda water, mineral or aerated waters, cider, milk,
of the law only to those enumerated or of the same kind or class as those cream or other lawful beverages in bottles, boxes, casks, kegs, or barrels,
specifically mentioned will defeat the very purpose of the law and other similar containers, or in the manufacturing, compressing or
The rule of ejusdem generis is to be resorted to only for the purpose of selling of gases such as xxx, or other marks of ownership stamped or
determining what the intent of the legislature was in enacting the law. If marked thereon, may register with the Philippine Patent Office a description
that intent clearly appears from other parts of the law, and such intent thus of the names or marks, and the purpose for which the containers so marked
clearly manifested is contrary to the result which would be reached by the and used by them, under the same conditions, rules, and regulations, made
appreciation of the rule of ejusdem generis, the latter must give way. applicable by law or regulation to the issuance of trademarks.
SEC. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person, without the written consent of
the manufacturer, bottler, or seller, who has successfully registered the
FACTS: marks of ownership in accordance with the provisions of the next
La Tondeña, Inc. (LTI) registered with the Philippine Patent Office pursuant to preceding section, to fill such bottles, boxes, kegs, barrels, steel cylinders,
Republic Act No. 623 the 350 c.c. white flint bottles it has been using for its gin tanks, flasks, accumulators or other similar containers so marked or
popularly known as “Ginebra San Miguel”. stamped, for the purpose of sale, or to sell, disposed of, buy or traffic in,
or wantonly destroy the same, whether filled or not, to use the same, for
LTI filed a civil case against Cagayan Valley Enterprises, Inc. (Cagayan) for using drinking vessels or glasses or drain pipes, foundation pipes, for any other
the 350 c.c., white flint bottles with the mark “La Tondeña, Inc.” and “Ginebra San purpose than that registered by the manufacturer, bottler or seller. Any
Miguel” stamped or blown-in therein by filling the same with Cagayan’s liquor violation of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one
product bearing the label “Sonny Boy” for commercial sale and distribution, without thousand pesos or imprisonment of not more than one year or both.
LTI’s written consent and in violation of Section 2 of Republic Act No. 623, as
amended by Republic Act No. 5700. LTI further filed a petition for issuance of writ SEC. 3. The use by any person other than the registered manufacturer,
of preliminary injuction against Cagayan. The court issued a TRO from using the bottler or seller, without written permission of the latter of any such bottle,
350 c.c. bottled with the marks “La Tondeña, Inc.” and “Ginebra San Miguel”. cask, barrel, keg, box, steel cylinders, tanks, flask, accumulators, or other
Among Cagayan’s defenses are the ff: similar containers, or the possession thereof without written permission of
1. LTI has no cause of action due to its failure to comply with Section 21 of the manufacturer, by any junk dealer or dealer in casks, barrels, kegs, boxes,
Republic Act No. 166 which requires the giving of notice that its aforesaid steel cylinders, tanks, flasks, accumulators or other similar containers, the
marks are registered by displaying and printing the words “Registered in the same being duly marked or stamped and registered as herein provided, shall
Phil. Patent Office” or “Reg. Phil. Pat. Off.” give rise to a prima facie presumption that such use or possession is
2. LTI is not entitled to any protection under Republic Act No. 623, as unlawful.
amended by Republic Act No. 5700, because its products, consisting of
hard liquor, not among those contemplated therein. (refer to Sec. 1 of The abovementioned provisions grant protection to a qualified manufacturer who
cited provision) successfully registered with the Philippine Patent Office its duly stamped or marked
bottles, boxes, casks and other similar containers. The mere use of registered bottles applied in this case. To limit the coverage of the law only to those
or containers without the written consent of the manufacturer is prohibited. enumerated or of the same kind or class as those specifically mentioned will
defeat the very purpose of the law. Such rule of ejusdem generis is to be
ISSUE/s: resorted to only for the purpose of determining what the intent of the
1. WoN the bottles without the words “property of” are registered bottles of legislature was in enacting the law. If that intent clearly appears from
LTI – YES other parts of the law, and such intent thus clearly manifested is
2. WoN LTI’s bottles for Ginebra San Miguel are covered by the protection of contrary to the result which would be reached by the appreciation of
RA 623 as amended by RA 5700 – YES the rule of ejusdem generis, the latter must give way.

(Note: I did not include unrelated issues regarding damages, liability as a juridical As an additional proof, the Philippine Patent Office, which is the proper and
person, and contempt) competent government agency vested with the authority to enforce and
implement Republic Act No. 623, registered the bottles of respondent LTI
RULING: DENYING the petition in this case and AFFIRMING the decision of as containers for gin and issued in its name a certificate of registration with
respondent Court of Appeals. Petitioner is hereby declared in contempt of court and the following findings:
ORDERED to pay a fine of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00), with costs. “It appearing upon due examination that the applicant is entitled to
have the said MARKS OR NAMES registered under R.A. No. 623,
RATIO: the said marks or names have been duly registered this day in the
1. Republic Act No. 623, which governs the registration of marked bottles and PATENT OFFICE under the said Act, for gin, Ginebra San
containers merely requires that the bottles, in order to be eligible for Miguel.”
registration, must be stamped or marked with the names of the
manufacturers or the names of their principals or products, or other marks
of ownership. (Unrelated to the topic but it cited a provision from the pertinent law in this case)
The term “Name or Other Mark of Ownership” means the name of the
applicant or the name of his principal, or of the product, or other mark of Additional issues: WoN Cagayan can be cited for contempt (yes) and a contempt
ownership. The second set of bottles of LTI without the words proceeding gives rise to double jeopardy in this case (no)
“property of” substantially complied with the requirements of Republic
Act No. 623, as amended, since they bear the name of the principal, La The contempt involved in this case is civil and constructive in nature, it having arisen
Tondeña, Inc., and of its product, Ginebra San Miguel. The omitted from the act of Cagayan in violating the writ of preliminary injunction of the
words “property of” are not of such vital indispensability such that the lower court, enjoining it from using the bottles.
omission thereof will remove the bottles from the protection of the law.
The words “La Tondeña. Inc.” and “Ginebra San Miguel” stamped on
We reject the argument of petitioner that an appeal from a verdict of acquittal in a
the bottles, even without the words “property of” are sufficient notice
to the public that those bottles so marked are owned by LTI. contempt proceeding constitutes double jeopardy. A failure to do something ordered
by the court for the benefit of a party constitutes civil contempt.
2. The claim of petitioner that hard liquor is not included under the term “other Section 3 of Republic Act No. 623, as amended, creates a prima facie
lawful beverages” as provided in Section 1 of Republic Act No. 623, as presumption against Cagayan for its unlawful use of the bottles registered in the
amended by Republic Act No. 5700, is without merit. The words “other name of LTI. Corollarily, the writ of injunction directing petitioner to desist from
lawful beverages” is used in its general sense, referring to all beverages using the subject bottles was properly issued by the trial court. Hence, said writ
not prohibited by law. Beverage is defined as a liquor or liquid for could not be simply disregarded by Cagayan without adducing proof sufficient
drinking. Hard liquor, although regulated, is not prohibited by law, hence it to overcome the aforesaid presumption.
is within the purview and coverage of Republic Act No. 623, as amended.
Based on the findings of the trial court, petitioner can be adjudged guilty of contempt
Republic Act No. 623, as amended, has for its purpose, the protection of the and imposed a sanction in this appeal since it is a cherished rule of procedure for this
health of the general public and the prevention of the spread of contagious Court to always strive to settle the entire controversy in a single proceeding. We so
diseases. It further seeks to safeguard the property rights of an important impose such penalty concordant with the preservative principle and as demanded by
sector of Philippine industry. The rule of ejusdem generis cannot be
the respect due the orders, writs and processes of the courts of justice.