The Court of Appeals (CA) has junked the plea of the so-called Yanson 4 siblings seeking to compel the Office of the Justice Secretary to resolve pending petitions related to their long-running dispute over the control and management of their family’s bus companies.

In a two-page resolution, the CA’s Fifth Division ruled that petitioners Roy V. Yanson, Emily V. Yanson, Ma. Lourdes Celina Y. Lopez, and Ricardo V. Yanson failed to raise new arguments that would justify reversing its 9 June 2025 decision.

Associate Justice Ramon Cruz, who penned the 9 June ruling, denied the petition for mandamus filed by the Yanson 4, which sought to compel the Department of Justice secretary to resolve their petitions for review and motions for reconsideration within a specific period.

In its 18 December 2025 resolution, the CA stated: “For resolution is the motion for reconsideration filed by petitioner of Our Decision dated June 9, 2025. A perusal of the motion for reconsideration, however, elicits no new arguments that have not already been previously taken up and judiciously passed upon in the Decision sought to be reconsidered.

“Thus, to make another disquisition would be a superfluity. Wherefore, the motion for reconsideration is denied for lack of merit,” the appellate court added.

In its earlier 9 June decision, the CA said ordering the Justice Secretary to act would constitute judicial interference in the exercise of executive discretion and violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

In their petition for mandamus, the Yanson 4 claimed they are the incumbent corporate officers and members of the board of directors of Goldstar Bus Transit Inc. and Vallacar Transit Inc., both part of the Yanson Group of Bus Companies.

They told the court they are locked in a protracted legal battle with other surviving heirs over control of the group, resulting in multiple criminal, civil, and intra-corporate cases.

The petitioners also said that 23 petitions for review and motions for reconsideration remain pending before the Office of then Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin C. Remulla, who now serves as Ombudsman.

“The Secretary of Justice is expressly granted the authority to decide how or when to exercise the duty to review resolutions issued by subordinates. In other words, the Secretary retains full discretion in handling cases elevated to his or her office,” the CA said.