Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COURT OF APPEALS
FACT:
Thecourtorderforthehearingofthecaseanddirectedforthepublicationinnewspaperofge
neralcirculationandserviceofsaidordertothepetitionerarmialbaasstatedinthebirthcerti
ficate.
Thecourto
Thecourtgrantthepetitioninwhicharmifiledapetitionoftheannulmentofjudgementconte
ndingthatthecourtdidnotacquirejurisdictionovertheirperson.
Issue:
Whetherornotthecourtacquiredjurisdictionoverthepetitioner
Ruling:
Thecaseatbarisaninremproceedingthus,toacquirejurisdictionovertheres,itonlyneedspublicationin
anewspaperofgeneralcirculationaand The service of summons or notice to the defendant is not
for the purpose of vesting the court with jurisdiction but merely for satisfying the due process
requirements
Petitionisdenied
E. B. VILLAROSA & PARTNER CO., LTD., petitioner, vs. HON. HERMINIO I. BENITO,
in his capacity as Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 132, Makati City and IMPERIAL
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, respondent
facts
Summonswereserveduponvillarosatoitsbranchofficethroughitsbranchmanager.villaro
samovedforthedismissalofthecaseonthegroundoflackofjurisdictionduetosummonswa
snotproperlyserve
issue
whetherornotthesummonservedtoitsbranchmanagerofvillarosaisavalidserviceunder1
3, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court
ruling:
Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides that:
Service of summons upon persons other than those mentioned in Section 11 of Rule
14 has been held as improper.
The purpose is to render it reasonably certain that the corporation will receive
prompt and proper notice in an action against it or to insure that the summons be
served on a representative so integrated with the corporation that such person will
know what to do with the legal papers served on him. In other words, to bring
home to the corporation notice of the filing of the action.
Facts:
Spouses amarillo conveyed a parcel of land in favor of phua.after a decade the Heirs
of Pacaa claimed that the subject lot was originallyissued to the late pacana filed a
Complaint[1]for Declaration of Nullity of Title and Annulment of the Deed of Sale.
Summons together with copy of the complaint was served to the therein defendants Spouses
Amarillo but not to Phua who was unknown at his given address. Heirs of pacana filed a motion
to effect summons by publication which was granted by court.however it was not a newspaper
of general circulation and it was not supported by an affidavit setting forth the grounds
relied upon by plaintiffs to effect such service. And absence of proof of service by the
said summon by publication
T hecourtgrantedthecomplaintinwhichphuafiledapetitiontoannulthejudgement.
Issue:
Whetherornotthepublicationofnewspaperinlocalnotsupportedbyaffidavitofserviceisav
alid
Ruling:
Facts:
Petitioner Quijano siblings children of angela acance on her first marriage filed a
complaint to annul the Extra-Judicial Settlement of the Estate of Deceased Jesus P. Acance
and Waiver of Rights executed by the latter in favor of her children in second marriage the
defendant acance sibling who resided abroad.
Petitioner contended that the said lot was a conjugal property of angela and their
father and questioned the veracity of the document. They filed a motion to declare
the defendant in default for failure to file an answer in which the court
granted.defendant filed a motion to lift the judgement of default.the court denied
the motion and contending that it acquire jurisdiction when it caused a publication
againts the defendant
Whetherornotthecourtacquirejurisdictionoverthepersonofthedefendant
Whetherthecaisocorrectindismissingthecomplaintduetoitsfailuretoobseretherules
Ruling:
It appears that the CA committed reversible error in dismissing outright the petition
for certiorari for failure of the petitioners to move for a reconsideration of the default order when
it had been sufficiently shown that the need for relief was extremely urgent. The procedural
requirement that a motion for reconsideration must first be filed before resorting to the special
civil action ofcertiorari may be glossed over to prevent a miscarriage of justice and, among other
recognized instances, when the need for relief is extremely urgent and certiorari is the only
adequate and speedy remedy available.
Facts:
Theycontendedthattheyarenotawareofthesaidcircularconsideringthatnocopyfiledintheiroffice
Issue:
Whetherornottheexplanationgivenbyjudgeedadesandclerkofcourtwarrantsjustificationnottoimpos
esanction
Ruling:
The Court finds the above explanations unacceptable. It cannot allow such
misconduct to pass without sanction. Respondents pretended ignorance of the
existence of such circular because no copy was on file or that the Judge was appointed
much later than the date of issuance of said circular cannot be a valid excuse.
The role of justices and judges in the administration of justice requires a continuous
study of the law and jurisprudence. Respondent judge in this case failed to meet
this requirement and standard