In People v. Superior Court (Dyke Water Co.) (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 515, the commission ordered a water utility to terminate a rate increase and directed it to submit a refund plan for the excess charges. Without submitting the required plan, the utility filed suit for declaratory relief, asking the superior court to determine "the rights and duties of the parties under the decisions and orders of the commission." ( Id. at p. 517.) In response, the commission sought prohibition barring further superior court proceedings by the utility in the declaratory relief action, invoking section 1759. Granting the writ, the Chief Justice wrote that "had the water company complied with the commission's order to formulate a plan for making refunds to its customers and secured the commission's approval thereof, the appropriate trial courts would have jurisdiction to adjudicate any disputes between the water company and third parties arising under the plan. By giving proper effect to an approved refund plan, the courts in such action would be acting not in derogation but in aid of the commission's jurisdiction. . . .The controlling facts are that the whole matter of how refunds are to be made is still pending and undecided before the commission. . . . Under these circumstances section 1759 precludes the superior court from adjudicating . . . the very issues that will necessarily be presented to the commission in the continuing exercise of its jurisdiction in the refund proceedings." ( Id. at pp. 517-518.)