Constitutional Law: Shipside Inc v Court of Appeals.

GR 143377, February 20, 2001

SHIPSIDE INCORPORATED, petitioner,

vs.

THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS [Special Former Twelfth Division], HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH
26(San Fernando City, La Union) & The REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

Facts: The petitioner filed a certiorari with the CA containing the requisite certification on non-forum
shopping but failed to attach proof that the person signing the certification was authorized to do so. The
CA dismissed the petition. The petitioner submits a motion for reconsideration which attached a
secretary’s certificate attesting to the signatory’s authority to sign certificates against forum shopping
on behalf of the petitioner. When the court of CA denied the motion, the petitioner sought relief with
the SC.

Issue: Whether the CA erred in dismissing the petition of Shipside Inc.

Ruling: Yes, the CA erred in the dismissal of the petition. The SC revised the decision of CA recognizing
the belated filing of the certifications against forum shopping as permitted in exceptional circumstances.
It further held that with more reason should a petition be given due course when this incorporates a
certification on non-forum shopping without evidence that the person signing the certifications was an
authorized signatory and the petitioner subsequently submits a secretary’s certificate attesting to the
signatory’s authority in its motion for consideration. The court allows belated submission of
certifications showing proof of the signatory’s authority in signing the certification of forum shopping.

Nature: Petition

Facts:

Rafael Galvez had 4 parcels of land

o he sold lots No. 1 and No. 4 to Mamaril et al.

Mamaril , Llana, Bustos, Balatbat sold the lands to Lepanto Consolidated

Mining Company

Court of First Instance of La Union declared that the deed of transfer from Galvez to
Mamaril et al. is void and null. (Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company did not know it

was null and void).

o Affirmed by Court of Appeals

Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company sold lots No. 1 and No. 4 to the Shipside Inc.

o Latter started exercising proprietary rights.

In the meantime, Rafael Galvez filed his motion for reconsideration against the order

issued by the trial court declaring OCT No. 0-381 null and void. The motion was denied

on January 25, 1965. On appeal, the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Republic of

the Philippines in a Resolution promulgated on August 14, 1973 in CA-G. R. No. 36061-

R.

Thereafter, the Court of Appeals issued an Entry of Judgment, certifying that its decision

dated August 14, 1973 became final and executory on October 23, 1973.

Shipside Inc. filed a motion to dismiss

o No cause of action cause only final and executor judgments may be subject to an

action for revival of judgment

o No action for revival of judgement may happen after 10 years the judgement has

been made