Civil Procedure Cases (Until Pre-Trial)

7/24/2019 Civil Procedure Cases (Until Pre-Trial)

1/315

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 145022 September 23, 2005

ARMAND NOCUM an T!E P!"#"PP"NE DA"#$ "N%U"RER, "NC.,Petitioners,vs.

&'.#UC"O TAN, Re'ponent.

D E C " S " O N

C!"CO(NA)AR"O, J.*

A''a+e +n a Pet+t+on -or Re&+e on Certiorari/ner R/e 45 o- te 1 R/e' o- C+&+Proe/re are te e+'+on1o- te Co/rt o- Appea' ate 1 Apr+ 2000 tat a--+rme teorer o- te Re+ona Tr+a Co/rt RTC6 o- Ma7at+ C+t8, 9ran 5:, +n C+&+ Ca'e No. ;(22;;, ate 1 Apr+ 1, am+tt+n re'ponent #/+o Tan


2/315

o- te amene ompa+nt. "npar. 2.1.1o- te amene ompa+nt, +t +' aee tat +hisarticle "as printed and first pu%lished in the Cit of a/ati p. 53, Roo, CA(G.R. SP No.55126, an +n par. 2.04.1, tat +his caricature "as printed and first pu%lished in the Citof a/atip. 55, +.6.

Te oer o/rt, a-ter a&+n te a'e +'m+''e -or +mproper &en/e, am+tte teamene ompa+nt an eeme 'et a'+e te pre&+o/' orer o- +'m+''a, supra,'tat+n, inter alia, tat*

BTe m+'ta7e or e-++en8 +n te or++na ompa+nt appear' no to a&e been /re +nte Amene Compa+nt + an 't+ be proper8 am+tte, p/r'/ant to R/e 10 o- te1 R/e' o- C+&+ Proe/re, +na'm/ a' te Orer o- +'m+''a +' not 8et -+na.9e'+e', tere +' no '/b'tant+a amenment +n te Amene Compa+nt + o/a--et te e-enant'< e-en'e' an te+r An'er'. Te Amenment +' mere8 -orma,ontrar8 to te ontent+on o- te e-enant' tat +t +' '/b'tant+a.B

D+''at+'-+e, pet+t+oner', toeter +t e-enant' Capt. ?oreno Uma+ an te A+r+neP+ot' A''o+at+on o- te P++pp+ne', "n. A#PAP6, appeae te RTC e+'+on to teCo/rt o- Appea'. To pet+t+on' -or certiorari ere -+e, one -+e b8 pet+t+oner' + a'o7ete a' CA(G.R. SP No. 5512, an te oter b8 e-enant' Uma+ an A#PAP +a' o7ete a' CA(G.R. SP No. 54;4. Te to pet+t+on' ere on'o+ate.

On 1 Apr+ 2000, te Co/rt o- Appea' renere +t' e+'+on te +'po'+t+&e port+on o-+ rea'*

!ERE?ORE, prem+'e' on'+ere, te pet+t+on +' ereb8 DEN"ED DUE COURSE anD"SM"SSED -or a7 o- mer+t. Te Orer o- te o/rt a $uo+' ereb8 A??"RMED.

Te mot+on' -or reon'+erat+on -+e b8 pet+t+oner' an b8 e-enant' Uma+ an A#PAPere +7e+'e en+e +n a re'o/t+on ate 15 September 2000.

9ot pet+t+oner' an e-enant' Uma+ an A#PAP appeae to t+' Co/rt. Uneron'+erat+on +' te pet+t+on -or re&+e -+e b8 pet+t+oner'.

On 11 Deember 2000, te Co/rt re=/+re re'ponent Tan to omment on te pet+t+on -+eb8 pet+t+oner'.3

Re'ponent -+e +' omment on 22 an/ar8 20014to + pet+t+oner' -+e a rep8 on 2:Apr+ 2001.5

"n a Man+-e'tat+on -+e on 1 ?ebr/ar8 2001, re'ponent 'tate tat te pet+t+on:-+e b8e-enant' Uma+ an A#PAP a' area8 been en+e b8 te Co/rt +n a re'o/t+on ate1 an/ar8 2001.

On 20 A//'t 2003, te Co/rt re'o&e to +&e /e o/r'e to te pet+t+on an re=/+re tepart+e' to '/bm+t te+r re'pet+&e memorana +t+n t+rt8 306 a8' -rom not+e.;9otpet+t+oner' an re'ponent omp+e.

Pet+t+oner' a''+ne te -oo+n a' error'*

A. T!E COURT O? APPEA#S ERRED "N RU#"NG 16 T!AT T!E #OER COURT !ADUR"SD"CT"ON OER T!E CASE ON T!E 9AS"S O? T!E OR"G"NA# COMP#A"NT6
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt9


3/315

NOT"T!STAND"NG T!E ?ACT T!AT T!E #OER COURT !AD EAR#"ER D"SM"SSEDT!E OR"G"NA# COMP#A"NT ?OR "TS ?A"#URE TO CON?ER UR"SD"CT"ON UPON T!ECOURTF AND 26 T!AT T!E AMENDED COMP#A"NT AS PROPER#$ A##OED ORADM"TTED 9ECAUSE T!E #OER COURT AS BNEER D"ESTEDB O? UR"SD"CT"ONOER T!E CASEF

9. T!E COURT O? APPEA#S ERRED "N NOT RU#"NG T!AT T!E OR"G"NA# COMP#A"NTO? RESPONDENT AS AMENDED PURPOSE#$ TO CON?ER UPON T!E #OER COURTUR"SD"CT"ON OER T!E CASE.10

Pet+t+oner' 'tate tat Art+e 3:0 o- te Re&+'e Pena Coe &e't' /r+'+t+on o&er a +&+an r+m+na ompa+nt' -or +be on te RTC o- te pae* 16 ere te +beo/' art+ea' pr+nte an -+r't p/b+'eF or 26 ere te ompa+nant, +- a pr+&ate per'on, re'+e'For 36 ere te ompa+nant, +- a p/b+ o--++a, o' o--+e. Te8 ar/e tat '+ne teor++na ompa+nt on8 onta+ne te o--+e are'' o- re'ponent an not te atter


4/315

"n *a$uian v. 0altaar,15t+' Co/rt on'tr/e te term B/r+'+t+onB +n Art+e 3:0 o- teRe&+'e Pena Coe a' re-err+n to te pae ere at+on' -or +be 'a be -+e orB&en/e.B

"n scri%ano v. vila,1:p/r'/ant to Rep/b+ At No. 43:3,1e a+ on te -oo+n

r/e' on te &en/e o- te r+m+na an +&+ at+on' +n r+tten e-amat+on'.

1. Genera r/e* Te at+on ma8 be -+e +n te Co/rt o- ?+r't "n'tane o- te pro&+ne or+t8 ere te +beo/' art+e +' pr+nte an -+r't p/b+'e or ere an8 o- te o--enepart+e' at/a8 re'+e' at te t+me o- te omm+''+on o- te o--en'e.

2. "- te o--ene part8 +' a p/b+ o--+er +t o--+e +n Man+a at te t+me te o--en'e a'omm+tte, te &en/e +' Man+a or te +t8 or pro&+ne ere te +beo/' art+e +' pr+ntean -+r't p/b+'e.

3. ere an o--ene part8 +' a p/b+ o--++a +t o--+e o/t'+e o- Man+a, te &en/e +'te pro&+ne or te +t8 ere e e o--+e at te t+me o- te omm+''+on o- te o--en'eor ere te +beo/' art+e +' pr+nte an -+r't p/b+'e.

4. "- an o--ene part8 +' a pr+&ate per'on, te &en/e +' +' pae o- re'+ene at te t+meo- te omm+''+on o- te o--en'e or ere te +beo/' art+e +' pr+nte an -+r'tp/b+'e.

Te ommon -eat/re o- te -oreo+n r/e' +' tat eter te o--ene part8 +' a p/b+o--+er or a pr+&ate per'on, e a' aa8' te opt+on to -+e te at+on +n te Co/rt o- ?+r't"n'tane o- te pro&+ne or +t8 ere te +beo/' art+e +' pr+nte or -+r't p/b+'e.

e -/rter re'tate1;te r/e' on &en/e +n Art+e 3:0 a' -oo'*

1. eter te o--ene part8 +' a p/b+ o--++a or a pr+&ate per'on, te r+m+na at+onma8 be -+e +n te Co/rt o- ?+r't "n'tane o- te pro&+ne or +t8 ere te +beo/' art+e+' pr+nte an -+r't p/b+'e.

2. "- te o--ene part8 +' a pr+&ate +n+&+/a, te r+m+na at+on ma8 a'o be -+e +n teCo/rt o- ?+r't "n'tane o- te pro&+ne ere e at/a8 re'+e at te t+me o- teomm+''+on o- te o--en'e.

3. "- te o--ene part8 +' a p/b+ o--+er o'e o--+e +' +n Man+a at te t+me o- teomm+''+on o- te o--en'e, te at+on ma8 be -+e +n te Co/rt o- ?+r't "n'tane o- Man+a.

4. "- te o--ene part8 +' a p/b+ o--+er o+n o--+e o/t'+e o- Man+a, te at+on ma8be -+e +n te Co/rt o- ?+r't "n'tane o- te pro&+ne or +t8 ere e e o--+e at tet+me o- te omm+''+on o- te o--en'e.

e -/8 aree +t te Co/rt o- Appea' en +t r/e*

e note tat te amene ompa+nt or amenment to te ompa+nt a' not +ntene to&e't /r+'+t+on to te oer o/rt, ere or++na8 +t a none. Te amenment a'mere8 to e'tab+' te proper &en/e -or te at+on. "t +' a e(e'tab+'e r/e tat &en/ea' not+n to o +t /r+'+t+on, e@ept +n r+m+na at+on'. A''/m+n tat &en/e ere

proper8 a+ +n te o/rt ere te at+on a' +n't+t/te, tat o/ be proe/ra, not a/r+'+t+ona +mpe+ment. "n -at, +n +&+ a'e', &en/e ma8 be a+&e.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt18


5/315

Con'e=/ent8, b8 +'m+''+n te a'e on te ro/n o- +mproper &en/e, te oer o/rta /r+'+t+on o&er te a'e. Apparent8, te ere+n pet+t+oner' reon+>e t+'/r+'+t+on b8 -++n te+r an'er' to te ompa+nt, al%eit, =/e't+on+n te propr+et8 o-&en/e, +n'tea o- a mot+on to +'m+''.

. . .

e 'o o tat +'m+''a o- te ompa+nt b8 te oer o/rt a' proper on'+er+n tatte ompa+nt, +nee, on +t' -ae, -a+e to aee ne+ter te re'+ene o- te ompa+nantnor te pae ere te +beo/' art+e a' pr+nte an -+r't p/b+'e. Ne&ertee'',be-ore te -+na+t8 o- te +'m+''a, te 'ame ma8 't+ be amene a' +n -at te ameneompa+nt a' am+tte, +n &+e o- te o/rt a $uo's/r+'+t+on, o- + +t a' ne&er+&e'te. "n 'o o+n, te o/rt ate proper8 an +to/t an8 ra&e ab/'e o-+'ret+on.1

"t +' eementar8 tat obet+on' to &en/e +n C""# ACT"ONS ar+'+n -rom +be ma8 bea+&e '+ne te8 o not +n&o&e a =/e't+on o- /r+'+t+on. Te a8+n o- &en/e +'proe/ra rater tan '/b'tant+&e, reat+n a' +t oe' to /r+'+t+on o- te o/rt o&er teper'on rater tan te '/bet matter. en/e reate' to tr+a an not to /r+'+t+on.20"t +' aproe/ra, not a /r+'+t+ona, matter. "t reate' to te pae o- tr+a or eorap+aoat+on +n + an at+on or proee+n 'o/ be bro/t an not to te /r+'+t+on o-te o/rt.21"t +' meant to pro&+e on&en+ene to te part+e', rater tan re'tr+t te+rae'' to te o/rt' a' +t reate' to te pae o- tr+a.22"n ontra't, +n r+m+na at+on', +t +'-/namenta tat &en/e +' /r+'+t+ona +t be+n an e''ent+a eement o- /r+'+t+on.23

Pet+t+oner'< ar/ment tat te oer o/rt a' no /r+'+t+on o&er te a'e bea/'ere'ponent -a+e to aee te pae ere te +beo/' art+e' ere pr+nte an -+r'tp/b+'e o/ a&e been tenabe +- te a'e -+e ere a r+m+na a'e. Te -a+/re o- te

or++na ompa+nt to onta+n '/ +n-ormat+on o/ be -ata bea/'e t+' -at +n&o&e'te +''/e o- &en/e + oe' +nto te terr+tor+a /r+'+t+on o- te o/rt. +his is not to %e%ecause the case %efore us is a civil action "here venue is not 3urisdictional.

Te a'e'24+te b8 pet+t+oner' are not app+abe ere. Te'e a'e' +n&o&e amenment'on ompa+nt' tat on-er /r+'+t+on on o/rt' o&er + te8 or++na8 a none. T+'+' not tr/e +n te a'e at bar. A' +'/''e abo&e, te RTC a=/+re /r+'+t+on o&er te'/bet matter /pon te -++n o- te or++na ompa+nt. "t + not o'e /r+'+t+on o&er te'ame en +t +'m+''e +t on te ro/n o- +mproper &en/e. Te amenment mere8 a+on te proper &en/e o- te a'e.

!ERE?ORE, te -oreo+n on'+ere, te e+'+on o- te Co/rt o- Appea' ate 1Apr+ 2000 +' A??"RMED in toto.No o't'.

SO ORDERED.


SUPREME COURTManila

SPECIA SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 101; Apr+ 1, 2013
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/sep2005/gr_145022_2005.html#fnt24


6/315

PA%#AUM MANAGEMENT I DEE#OPMENT CORP. an !EA#T! MARJET"NGTEC!NO#OG"ES, "NC.,Petitioners,vs.

UN"ON 9ANJ O? T!E P!"#"PP"NES, NOTAR$ PU9#"C O!N DOE, an REG"STER O?DEEDS o- Ceb/ C+t8 an Ceb/ Pro&+ne, Respon!ents,

. J"NG I SONS CO., "NC., Intervenor.

R E S O " # I O N

SERENO, CJ.4

"nion $an% file! this Motion for Reconsi!eration fro& our Decision '!ate! '( )une *+'*. or thefirst ti&e, it raises three ne- aru&ents. irst, it states that the '' Dece&ber '//( Restructurin

Aree&ent is null an! voi!, because the con!ition prece!ent 0 that the borro-er shoul! not be in!efault0 -as not co&plie! -ith. #hus, the nullit1 of the aree&ent revive! the Real Estate

Mortaes, -hich have a !ifferent venue stipulation.*Secon!, assu&in aruen!o that the

Restructurin Aree&ent is enforceable, it -as onl1 bet-een 2ealth #ech an! "nion $an%.

PA3A"M -as a part1 onl1 to the Real Estate Mortaes !ate! '' ebruar1 '//4 an! ** April

'//(, an! not to the Restructurin Aree&ent. #herefore, the venue insofar as it is concerne! is

e5clusivel1 in Cebu Cit1 pursuant to the venue stipulation in the &ortae contracts. 6 #hir!, the

Co&plaint bein an accion reivin!icatoria, the assesse! value of the real propert1 as state!

therein !eter&ines -hich court has e5clusive 7uris!iction over the case. 2ence, as the Co&plaint!oes not sho- on its face the assesse! value of the parcels of lan!, the Reional #rial Court8s

9R#C8s: assu&ption of 7uris!iction over the case -as -ithout basis.4

"nion $an% also reiterates its aru&ent in its Co&&ent ;that the Restructurin Aree&ent is

entirel1 separate an! !istinct fro& the Real Estate Mortaes. Accor!inl1, since the Co&plaintrelate e5clusivel1 to the &ortae! properties, the venue stipulation in the Real Estate

Mortaes shoul! appl1.Nevertheless, there

is no coent reason to -arrant a reconsi!eration or &o!ification of our '( )une *+'* Decision.

"nion $an% raises three ne- issues that re?uire a factual !eter&ination that is not -ithin the

province of this Court.(#hese ?uestions can be brouht to an! resolve! b1 the R#C as it is the

proper avenue in -hich to raise factual issues an! to present evi!ence in support of these

clai&s.

Anent "nion $an%8s last contention, there is no nee! for the Court to !iscuss an! revisit the

issue, bein a &ere rehash of -hat -e have alrea!1 resolve! in our Decision. 1wphi1

=2EREORE, in vie- of the foreoin, -e DEN@ the Motion for Reconsi!eration -ith

INAI#@.

SO ORDERED.


SUPREME COURTManila
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/apr2013/gr_179018_2013.html#fnt8


7/315

SECOND D""S"ON

G.R. No. 1;:3 A//'t 22, 2012

T!EODORE an NANC$ ANG, repre'ente b8 E#DR"GE MAR"N 9. ACERON, Petitioners,

vs.SPOUSES A#AN an EM ANG, Respon!ents.

VEASCO, )R.,

EONARDO0DE CAS#RO,

D E C " S " O N

RE$ES, J.4

$efore this Court is a petition for revie- on certiorariun!er Rule 4; of the Rules of Court see%into annul an! set asi!e the Decision'!ate! Auust *(, *++( an! the Resolution*!ate! ebruar1

*+, *++/ ren!ere! b1 the Court of Appeals 9CA: in CA03.R. SP No. '+'';/. #he assaile!

!ecision annulle! an! set asi!e the Or!ers !ate! April '*, *++>6an! Auust *>, *++>4issue! b1the Reional #rial Court 9R#C: of Bueon Cit1, $ranch (' in Civil Case No. B0+


8/315

Te RTC Orer'

On April '*, *++>, the R#C of Bueon Cit1 issue! an Or!er/-hich, inter alia, !enie! the

respon!entsF &otion to !is&iss. In rulin aainst the respon!entsF clai& of i&proper venue, the

court e5plaine! thatG

Attache! to the co&plaint is the Special Po-er of Attorne1 5 5 5 -hich clearl1 states that plaintiff

Nanc1 An constitute! Att1. El!rie Marvin Aceron as her !ul1 appointe! attorne10in0fact to

prosecute her clai& aainst herein !efen!ants. Consi!erin that the a!!ress iven b1 Att1.Aceron is in Bueon Cit1, hence, bein the plaintiff, venue of the action &a1 lie -here he resi!es

as provi!e! in Section *, Rule 4 of the '//> Rules of Civil Proce!ure. '+

#he respon!ents souht reconsi!eration of the R#C Or!er !ate! April '*, *++>, assertin that

there is no la- -hich allo-s the filin of a co&plaint in the court of the place -here therepresentative, -ho -as appointe! as such b1 the plaintiffs throuh a Special Po-er of Attorne1,

resi!es.''

#he respon!entsF &otion for reconsi!eration -as !enie! b1 the R#C of Bueon Cit1 in its

Or!er'*!ate! Auust *>, *++>.

#he respon!ents then file! -ith the CA a petition for certiorari'6allein in the &ain that, pursuant

to Section *, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, the petitionersF co&plaint &a1 onl1 be file! in the court

of the place -here the1 or the petitioners resi!e. Consi!erin that the petitioners resi!e in os

Aneles, California, "SA, the respon!ents assert that the co&plaint belo- &a1 onl1 be file! in

the R#C of $acolo! Cit1, the court of the place -here the1 resi!e in the Philippines.

#he respon!ents further clai&e! that, the petitionersF rant of Special Po-er of Attorne1 in favor

of Att1. Aceron not-ithstan!in, the sai! co&plaint &a1 not be file! in the court of the place

-here Att1. Aceron resi!es, i.e., R#C of Bueon Cit1. #he1 e5plaine! that Att1. Aceron, bein&erel1 a representative of the petitioners, is not the real part1 in interest in the case belo-H

accor!inl1, his resi!ence shoul! not be consi!ere! in !eter&inin the proper venue of the sai!co&plaint.

Te CA De+'+on

On Auust *(, *++(, the CA ren!ere! the herein Decision, '4-hich annulle! an! set asi!e the

Or!ers !ate! April '*, *++> an! Auust *>, *++> of the R#C of Bueon Cit1 an!, accor!inl1,!irecte! the !is&issal of the co&plaint file! b1 the petitioners. #he CA hel! that the co&plaint

belo- shoul! have been file! in $acolo! Cit1 an! not in Bueon Cit1. #husG

As &a1be clearl1 leane! fro& the foreoin, the place of resi!ence of the plaintiffFs attorne10in0

fact is of no &o&ent -hen it co&es to ascertainin the venue of cases file! in behalf of the

principal since -hat shoul! be consi!ere! is the resi!ence of the real parties in interest, i.e., the

plaintiff or the !efen!ant, as the case &a1 be. Resi!ence is the per&anent ho&e the place to

-hich, -henever absent for business or pleasure, one inten!s to return. Resi!ence is vital -hen

!ealin -ith venue. Plaintiffs, herein private respon!ents, bein resi!ents of os Aneles,

California, ".S.A., -hich is be1on! the territorial 7uris!iction of Philippine courts, the case shoul!

have been file! in $acolo! Cit1 -here the !efen!ants, herein petitioners, resi!e. Since the case

-as file! in Bueon Cit1, -here the representative of the plaintiffs resi!es, contrar1 to Sec. * of

Rule 4 of the '//> Rules of Court, the trial court shoul! have !is&isse! the case for i&proper

venue.';
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/aug2012/gr_186993_2012.html#fnt15


9/315

#he petitioners souht a reconsi!eration of the Decision !ate! Auust *(, *++(, but it -as

!enie! b1 the CA in its Resolution !ate! ebruar1 *+, *++/.'6, =e restraine! respon!ent )u!e fro& procee!in

further -ith the case an! re?uire! respon!ent to co&&ent. On )anuar1 '(, '/>4, =e ave !uecourse to the petition an! re?uire! respon!ent to ans-er. ;#hereafter, the parties sub&itte! theirrespesctive &e&oran!a in support of their respective contentions.

Presente! thus for Our resolution is a ?uestion is a?uestion -hich, to all appearances, is one of

first i&pression, to -it L Is Con!ition No. '4 printe! at the bac% of the petitioner8s passae


16/315

tic%ets purchase! b1 private respon!ents, -hich li&its the venue of actions arisin fro& the

contract of carriae to theCourt of irst Instance of Cebu, vali! an! enforceable Other-ise

state!, &a1 a co&&on carrier enae! in inter0islan! shippin stipulate thru con!ition printe! atthe bac% of passae tic%ets to its vessels that an1 an! all actions arisin out of the ocntract of

carriae shoul! be file! onl1 in a particular province or cit1, in this case the Cit1 of Cebu, to the

e5clusion of all others

Petitioner conten!s that1 Con!ition No. '4 is vali! an! enforceable, since private respn!entsacce!e! to tit -hen the1 purchase! passae tic%ets at its Caa1an !e Oro branch office an!

too% its vessel MS JS-eet #o-nJ for passae to #abilaran, $ohol L that the con!ition of thevenue of actions in the Cit1 of Cebu is proper since venue &a1 be vali!l1 -aive!, citin

casesH 10that is an effective -aiver of venue, vali! an! bin!in as such, since it is printe! in bol! an!capital letters an! not in fine print an! &erel1 assins the place -here the action sin fro& thecontract is institution li%e-ise citin casesH 11an! that con!ition No. '4 is une?uivocal an! &an!ator1,the -or!s an! phrases Jan1 an! allJ, Jirrespective of -here it is issue!,J an! JshaJ leave no !oubtthat the intention of Con!ition No. '4 is to fi5 the venue in the Cit1 of Cebu, to the e5clusion of otherplacesH that the or!ers of the respon!ent )u!e are an un-arrante! !eparture fro& establishe!

7urispru!ence overnin the caseH an! that he acte! -ithout or in e5cess of his 7uris!iction in is theor!ers co&plaine! of. 12

On the other han!, private respon!ents clai& that Con!ition No. '4 is not vali!, that the sa&e isnot an essential ele&ent of the contract of carriae, bein in itself a !ifferent aree&ent -hich

re?uires the &utual consent of the parties to itH that the1 ha! no sa1 in its preparation, thee5istence of -hich the1 coul! not refuse, hence, the1 ha! no choice but to pa1 for the tic%ets an!

to avail of petitioner8s shippin facilities out of necessit1H that the carrier Jhas been e5actin too&uch fro& the public b1 insertin i&positions in the passae tic%ets too bur!enso&e to bear,J

that the con!ition -hich -as printe! in fine letters is an i&position on the ri!in public an! !oes

not bin! respon!ents, citin casesH 13that -hile venue


17/315

al&ost all the provisions of -hich have been !rafte! onl1 b1 one part1, usuall1 a corporation.

Such contracts are calle! contracts of adhesion, because the onl1 participation of the part1 is the

sinin of his sinature or his 8a!hesion8 thereto. Insurance contracts, bills of la!in, contracts of&a%e of lots on the install&ent plan fall into this cateor1J 1:

$1 the peculiar circu&stances un!er -hich contracts of a!hesion are entere! into L na&el1, thatit is !rafte! onl1 b1 one part1, usuall1 the corporation, an! is souht to be accepte! or a!here! to

b1 the other part1, in this instance the passeners, private respon!ents, -ho cannot chane thesa&e an! -ho are thus &a!e to a!here thereto on the Jta%e it or leave itJ basis L certain

ui!elines in the !eter&ination of their vali!it1 an!or enforceabilit1 have been for&ulate! inor!er to that 7ustice an! fan pla1 characterie the relationship of the contractin parties. #hus,

this Court spea%in throuh )ustice ).$.. Re1es in 4ua Chee 3an v. aw 'nion and RocInsurance Co., 1an! later throuh )ustice ernan!o in /ield!an Insurance v. ar%as, 1;hel! L

#he courts cannot inore that no-a!a1s, &onopolies, cartels an! concentration

of capital en!o-e! -ith over-hel& econo&ic po-er, &anae to i&pose upon

parties ! -ith the& 1 prepare! 8aree&ents8 that the -ea%er part1 &a1 not

chane one -hit his participation in the 8aree&ent8 bein re!uce! to the

alternative 8to ta%e it or leave it,8 labelle! since Ra1&on! Saleilles 8contracts b1

a!herence8 9contracts d5 adhesion: in contrast to those entere! into b1 parties

barainin on an e?ual footin. Such contracts 9of -hich policies of insurancean! international bill of la!in are pri&e e5a&ples: obviousl1 cap for reater

strictness an! viilance on the part of the courts of 7ustice -ith a vie- toprotectin the -ea%er part1 fro& abuses an! i&position, an! prevent their

beco&in traps for the un-ar1.

#o the sa&e effect an! i&port, an!, in reconition of the character of contracts of this %in!, the

protection of the !isa!vantae! is e5pressl1 en7oine! b1 the Ne- Civil Co!e L

In all contractual propert1 or other relations, -hen one of the parties is at a

!isa!vantae on account of his &oral !epen!ence, inorance in!ience, &ental

-ea%ness, ten!er ae an! other han!icap, the courts &ust be viilant for his

protection. 1

Consi!ere! in the liht Of the foreoin nor&s an! in the conte5t Of circu&stances Prevailin in

the inter0islan! ship. pin in!ustr1 in the countr1 to!a1, =e fin! an! hol! that Con!ition No. '4

printe! at the bac% of the passae tic%ets shoul! be hel! as voi! an! unenforceable for the

follo-in reasons first, un!er circu&stances obliation in the inter0islan! ship. pin in!ustr1, it is

not 7ust an! fair to bin! passeners to the ter&s of the con!itions printe! at the bac% of the

passae tic%ets, on -hich Con!ition No. '4 is Printe! in fine letters, an! secon!, Con!ition No.'4 subverts the public polic1 on transfer of venue of procee!ins of this nature, since the sa&e

-ill pre7u!ice rihts an! interests of innu&erable passeners in !ifferent s of the countr1 -ho,un!er Con!ition No. '4, -ill have to file suits aainst petitioner onl1 in the Cit1 of Cebu.

'. It is a &atter of public %no-le!e, of -hich =e can ta%e 7u!icial notice, that there is a !earth ofan! acute shortae in inter0 islan! vessels pl1in bet-een the countr18s several islan!s, an! the

facilities the1 offer leave &uch to be !esire!. #hus, even un!er or!inar1 circu&stances, the piers

are coneste! -ith passeners an! their caro -aitin to be transporte!. #he con!itions are

even -orse at pea% an!or the rain1 seasons, -hen Passeners literall1 scra&ble to -hatever

acco&&o!ations &a1 be availe! of, even throuh circuitous routes, an!or at the ris% of their

safet1 L their i&&e!iate concern, for the &o&ent, bein to be able to boar! vessels -ith the

hope of reachin their !estinations. #he sche!ules are L as often as not if not &ore so L

!ela1e! or altere!. #his -as precisel1 the e5perience of private respon!ents -hen the1 -ere


18/315

relocate! to MS JS-eet #o-nJ fro& MS JS-eet 2opeJ an! then an1 to the scorchin heat of the

sun an! the !ust co&in fro& the ship8s caro of corn rits, J because even the latter -as file! to

capacit1.

"n!er these circu&stances, it is har!l1 7ust an! proper to e5pect the passeners to e5a&ine their

tic%ets receive! fro& cro-!e!coneste! counters, &ore often than not !urin rush hours, forcon!itions that &a1 be printe! &uch chare the& -ith havin consente! to the con!itions, so

printe!, especiall1 if there are a nu&ber of such con!itions & fine print, as in this case. 20

Aain, it shoul! be note! that Con!ition No. '4 -as prepare! solel1 at the &s of the petitioner,

respon!ents ha! no sa1 in its preparation. Neither !i! the latter have the opportunit1 to ta%e theinto account prior to the purpose chase of their tic%ets. or, unli%e the s&all print provisions of

contracts L the co&&on e5a&ple of contracts of a!herence L -hich are entere! into b1 the

insure! in his a-areness of sai! con!itions, since the insure! is affor!e! the op to an! co the

sa&e, passeners of inter0islan! v !o not have the sa&e chance, since their allee! a!hesion is

presu&e! onl1 fro& the fact that the1 purpose chase! the tic%ets.

It shoul! also be stresse! that slappin co&panies are franchise hol!ers of certificates of public

convenience an! therefore, posses a virtual &onopol1 over the business of transportin

passeners bet-een the ports covere! b1 their franchise. #his bein so, shippin co&panies,

li%e petitioner, enae! in inter0islan! shippin, have a virtual &onopol1 of the business of

transportin passeners an! &a1 thus !ictate their ter&s of passae, leavin passeners -ithno choice but to bu1 their tic%ets an! avail of their vessels an! facilities. inall1, 7u!icial notice

&a1 be ta%en of the fact that the bul% of those -ho boar! these inter0islan! veste! co&e fro&the lo-0inco&e roups an! are less literate, an! -ho have little or no choice but to avail of

petitioner8s vessels.

*. Con!ition No. '4 is subversive of public polic1 on transfers of venue of actions. or, althouh

venue &a1 be chane! or transferre! fro& one province to another b1 aree&ent of the partiesin -ritin t to Rule 4, Section 6, of the Rules of Court, such an aree&ent -ill not be hel! vali!

-here it practicall1 neates the action of the clai&ants, such as the private respon!ents herein.

#he philosoph1 un!erl1in the provisions on transfer of venue of actions is the convenience of

the plaintiffs as -ell as his -itnesses an! to pro&ote 21the en!s of 7ustice. Consi!erin thee5pense an! trouble a passener resi!in outsi!e of Cebu Cit1 -oul! incur to prosecute a clai& inthe Cit1 of Cebu, he -oul! &ost probabl1 !eci!e not to file the action at all. #he con!ition -ill thus!efeat, instea! of enhance, the en!s of 7ustice. "pon the other han!, petitioner has branches oroffices in the respective ports of call of its vessels an! can affor! to litiate in an1 of these places.2ence, the filin of the suit in the CI of Misa&is Oriental, as -as !one in the instant case, -ill notcause inconvenience to, &uch less pre7u!ice, petitioner.

Public polic1 is J. . . that principle of the la- -hich hol!s that no sub7ect or citien can la-full1 !othat -hich has a ten!enc1 to be in7urious to the public or aainst the public oo! ... 22"n!er thisprincipleJ ... free!o& of contract or private !ealin is restricte! b1 la- for the oo! of thepublic. 23Clearl1, Con!ition No. '4, if enforce!, -ill be subversive of the public oo! or interest, sinceit -ill frustrate in &eritorious cases, actions of passener cants outsi!e of Cebu Cit1, thus placinpetitioner co&pan1 at a !eci!e! a!vantae over sai! persons, -ho &a1 have perfectl1 leiti&ateclai&s aainst it. #he sai! con!ition shoul!, therefore, be !eclare! voi! an! unenforceable, ascontrar1 to public polic1 L to &a%e the courts accessible to all -ho &a1 have nee! of their services.

=2EREORE, the petition for prohibition is DISMISS. ED. #he restrainin or!er issue! on

Nove&ber *+, '/>6, is hereb1 I#ED an! SE# ASIDE. Costs aainst petitioner.

/ernando 6Chair!an7, 8uino, Concepcion, +r., ++., concur.


19/315

ntonio, +., reserves his vote.

Separate Op+n+on'

9ARREDO, J., concurrinG

I concur in the !is&issal of the instant petition.

Onl1 a fe- !a1s ao, in *oechst Philippines, Inc. vs. /rancisco Torres, et al., 3. R. No. 0446;',

pro&ulate! Ma1 '(, '/>(, =e &a!e it clear that althouh enerall1, aree&ents rear!in

chane of venue are enforceable, there &a1 be instances -here for e?uitable consi!erationsan! in the better interest of 7ustice, a court &a1 7ustif1 the la1in of, the venue in the place fi5e!

b1 the rules instea! of follo-in -ritten stipulation of the parties.

In the particular case at bar, there is actuall1 no -ritten aree&ent as to venue bet-een the

parties in the sense conte&plate! in Section 6 of Rule 4, -hich overns the &atter. I ta%e it that

the i&portance that a stipulation rear!in chane of the venue fi5e! b1 la- entails is such thatnothin less than &utuall1 conscious aree&ent as to it &ust be -hat the rule &eans. In the

instant case, as -ell pointe! out in the &ain opinion, the tic%et issue! to private respon!ents b1petitioner constitutes at best a Jcontract of a!hesionJ. In other -or!s, it is not that %in! of a

contract -here the parties sit !o-n to !eliberate, !iscuss an! aree specificall1 on all its ter&s,but rather, one -hich respon!ents too% no part at all in preparin, since it -as 7ust i&pose! upon

the& -hen the1 pai! for the fare for the freiht the1 -ante! to ship. It is co&&on %no-le!e that

in!ivi!uals -ho avail of co&&on carriers har!l1 rea! the fine prints on such tic%ets to note

an1thin &ore than the price thereof an! the !estination !esinate! therein.

"n!er these circu&stances, it -oul! see& that, since this case is alrea!1 in respon!ent court

an! there is no sho-in that, -ith its &ore or less %no-n resources as o-ner of several inter0

islan! vessels pl1in bet-een the !ifferent ports of the Philippines for so&eti&e alrea!1,

petitioner -oul! be reatl1 inconvenience! b1 sub&ittin to the 7uris!iction of sai! respon!ent

court, it is best to allo- the procee!ins therein to continue. I cannot conceive of an1 7uri!ical

in7ur1 such a step can cause to an1one concerne!. I vote to !is&iss the petition.

Separate Op+n+on'

9ARREDO, J., concurrinG

I concur in the !is&issal of the instant petition.

Onl1 a fe- !a1s ao, in *oechst Philippines, Inc. vs. /rancisco Torres, et al., 3. R. No. 0446;',

pro&ulate! Ma1 '(, '/>(, =e &a!e it clear that althouh enerall1, aree&ents rear!inchane of venue are enforceable, there &a1 be instances -here for e?uitable consi!erations


20/315

an! in the better interest of 7ustice, a court &a1 7ustif1 the la1in of, the venue in the place fi5e!

b1 the rules instea! of follo-in -ritten stipulation of the parties.

In the particular case at bar, there is actuall1 no -ritten aree&ent as to venue bet-een the

parties in the sense conte&plate! in Section 6 of Rule 4, -hich overns the &atter. I ta%e it that

the i&portance that a stipulation rear!in chane of the venue fi5e! b1 la- entails is such thatnothin less than &utuall1 conscious aree&ent as to it &ust be -hat the rule &eans. In the

instant case, as -ell pointe! out in the &ain opinion, the tic%et issue! to private respon!ents b1petitioner constitutes at best a Jcontract of a!hesionJ. In other -or!s, it is not that %in! of a

contract -here the parties sit !o-n to !eliberate, !iscuss an! aree specificall1 on all its ter&s,but rather, one -hich respon!ents too% no part at all in preparin, since it -as 7ust i&pose! upon

the& -hen the1 pai! for the fare for the freiht the1 -ante! to ship. It is co&&on %no-le!e that

in!ivi!uals -ho avail of co&&on carriers har!l1 rea! the fine prints on such tic%ets to note

an1thin &ore than the price thereof an! the !estination !esinate! therein.

"n!er these circu&stances, it -oul! see& that, since this case is alrea!1 in respon!ent court

an! there is no sho-in that, -ith its &ore or less %no-n resources as o-ner of several inter0

islan! vessels pl1in bet-een the !ifferent ports of the Philippines for so&eti&e alrea!1,

petitioner -oul! be reatl1 inconvenience! b1 sub&ittin to the 7uris!iction of sai! respon!ent

court, it is best to allo- the procee!ins therein to continue. I cannot conceive of an1 7uri!ical

in7ur1 such a step can cause to an1one concerne!. I vote to !is&iss the petition.

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

EN $ANC

G.R. No. 152154 /8 15, 2003

REPU9#"C O? T!E P!"#"PP"NES, petitioner,vs.!ONORA9#E SAND"GAN9A$AN SPEC"A# ?"RST D""S"ON6, ?ERD"NAND E. MARCOSREPRESENTED 9$ !"S ESTATEK!E"RS* "ME#DA R. MARCOS, MAR"A "ME#DA L"MEEMARCOS(MANOTOC, ?ERD"NAND R. MARCOS, R. AND "RENE MARCOS(ARANETA6 AND"ME#DA ROMUA#DE) MARCOS, respon!ents.

CORONA, J.G

#his is a petition for certiorari un!er Rule /'in relation to E5ecutive Or!er Nos. ',**,6'44an! '40A.;


21/315

In sai! case, petitioner souht the !eclaration of the areate a&ount of "S6;< &illion 9no-esti&ate! to be &ore than "S, '//; for theapproval of sai! aree&ents an! for the enforce&ent thereof.

#he 3eneral Aree&entSupple&ental Aree&ents souht to i!entif1, collate, cause theinventor1 of an! !istribute all assets presu&e! to be o-ne! b1 the Marcos fa&il1 un!er thecon!itions containe! therein. #he afore&entione! 3eneral Aree&ent specifie! in one of itspre&ises or J-hereas clausesJ the fact that petitioner Jobtaine! a 7u!&ent fro& the S-isse!eral #ribunal on Dece&ber *', '//+, that the #hree 2un!re! ift10si5 Million ".S. !ollars9"S6;< &illion: belons in principle to the Republic of the Philippines provi!e! certaincon!itionalities are &et 5 5 5.J #he sai! !ecision of the S-iss e!eral Supre&e Court affir&e!the !ecision of urich District Attorne1 Peter Consan!e1, rantin petitioner8s re?uest for lealassistance.>Consan!e1 !eclare! the various !eposits in the na&e of the enu&erate!foun!ations to be of illeal provenance an! or!ere! that the1 be froen to a-ait the final ver!ictin favor of the parties entitle! to restitution.

2earins -ere con!ucte! b1 the San!ianba1an on the &otion to approve the3eneralSupple&ental Aree&ents. Respon!ent er!inan!, )r. -as presente! as -itness for thepurpose of establishin the partial i&ple&entation of sai! aree&ents.

On October '(, '//


22/315

Respon!ent Mrs. Marcos file! a &anifestation on Ma1 *, uphel! the rulin of the District Attorne1 of urich rantinthe re?uest for the transfer of the fun!s. In '//(, the fun!s -ere re&itte! to the Philippines inescro-. Subse?uentl1, respon!ent Marcos chil!ren &ove! that the fun!s be place! in custodiale%is because the !eposit in escro- in the PN$ -as allee!l1 in !aner of !issipation b1petitioner. #he San!ianba1an, in its resolution !ate! Septe&ber (, '//(, rante! the &otion.

After the pre0trial an! the issuance of the pre0trial or!er an! supple&ental pre0trial or!er !ate!October *(, '/// an! )anuar1 *', *+++, respectivel1, the case -as set for trial. After severalresettins, petitioner, on March '+, *+++, file! another &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent pertaininto the forfeiture of the "S6;< &illion, base! on the follo-in roun!sG

I

#2E ESSEN#IA AC#S =2IC2 =ARRAN# #2E OREI#"RE O #2E "NDSS"$)EC# O #2E PE#I#ION "NDER R.A. NO. '6>/ ARE ADMI##ED $@RESPONDEN#S IN #2EIR PEADIN3S AND O#2ER S"$MISSIONS MADE IN #2ECO"RSE O #2E PROCEEDIN3.

II

RESPONDEN#S8 ADMISSION MADE D"RIN3 #2E PRE0#RIA #2A# #2E@ DO NO#2AVE AN@ IN#ERES# OR O=NERS2IP OVER #2E "NDS S"$)EC# O #2E

AC#ION OR OREI#"RE #ENDERS NO 3EN"INE ISS"E OR CON#ROVERS@ AS#O AN@ MA#ERIA AC# IN #2E PRESEN# AC#ION, #2"S =ARRAN#IN3 #2ERENDI#ION O S"MMAR@ )"D3MEN#.(

Petitioner conten!e! that, after the pre0trial conference, certain facts -ere establishe!,-arrantin a su&&ar1 7u!&ent on the fun!s souht to be forfeite!.

Respon!ent Mrs. Marcos file! her opposition to the petitioner8s &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent,-hich opposition -as later a!opte! b1 her co0respon!ents Mrs. Manotoc, Mrs. Araneta an!er!inan!, )r.

On March *4, *+++, a hearin on the &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent -as con!ucte!.

In a !ecision/!ate! Septe&ber '/, *+++, the San!ianba1an rante! petitioner8s &otion forsu&&ar1 7u!&entG

CONC"SION

#here is no issue of fact -hich calls for the presentation of evi!ence.

#he Motion for Su&&ar1 )u!&ent is hereb1 rante!.

#he S-iss !eposits -hich -ere trans&itte! to an! no- hel! in escro- at the PN$ are!ee&e! unla-full1 ac?uire! as ill0otten -ealth.

DISPOSI#ION


23/315

=2EREORE, 7u!&ent is hereb1 ren!ere! in favor of the Republic of the Philippinesan! aainst the respon!ents, !eclarin the S-iss !eposits -hich -ere transferre! to an!no- !eposite! in escro- at the Philippine National $an% in the total areate valuee?uivalent to "S,


24/315

6. ADMISSION IN A MANIES#A#ION O PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#IMEDA R. MARCOS AND IN #2E MO#ION #O PACE #2E RES INC"S#ODIA E3ISH AND

4. ADMISSION IN #2E "NDER#AQIN3 #O PA@ #2E 2"MAN RI32#SVIC#IMS.

C. PE#I#IONER 2AS PROVED #2E E#EN# O #2E E3I#IMA#E INCOMEO ERDINAND E. MARCOS AND IMEDA R. MARCOS AS P"$ICOICIAS.

D. PE#I#IONER 2AS ES#A$IS2ED A PRI" /CI$PRES"MP#ION O"NA="@ ACB"IRED =EA#2.

II

S"MMAR@ )"D3MEN# IS PROPER SINCE PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#S 2AVE NO#

RAISED AN@ 3EN"INE ISS"E O AC# CONSIDERIN3 #2A#G

A. PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#S8 DEENSE #2A# S=ISS DEPOSI#S =EREA="@ ACB"IRED DOES NO# ON@ AI #O #ENDER AN ISS"E $"# ISCEAR@ A S2AMH AND

$. IN S"$SEB"EN#@ DISCAIMIN3 O=NERS2IP O #2E S=ISSDEPOSI#S, PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#S A$ANDONED #2EIR S2AM DEENSEO E3I#IMA#E ACB"ISI#ION, AND #2IS "R#2ER )"S#IIED #2ERENDI#ION O A S"MMAR@ )"D3MEN#.

III

#2E OREI3N O"NDA#IONS NEED NO# $E IMPEADED.

I

#2E 2ONORA$E PRESIDIN3 )"S#ICE COMMI##ED 3RAVE A$"SE ODISCRE#ION IN REVERSIN3 2IMSE ON #2E 3RO"ND #2A# ORI3INA COPIESO #2E A"#2EN#ICA#ED S=ISS DECISIONS AND #2EIR JA"#2EN#ICA#ED#RANSA#IONSJ 2AVE NO# $EEN S"$MI##ED #O #2E CO"R#, =2EN EARIER#2E SANDI3AN$A@AN 2AS B"O#ED E#ENSIVE@ A POR#ION O #2E#RANSA#ION O ONE O #2ESE S=ISS DECISIONS IN 2IS JPONENCIAJ DA#ED)"@ */, '/// =2EN I# DENIED #2E MO#ION #O REEASE ONE 2"NDRED I#@

MIION "S DOARS 9';+,+++,+++.++: #O #2E 2"MAN RI32#S VIC#IMS.

PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#S ARE DEEMED #O 2AVE =AIVED #2EIR O$)EC#ION #O#2E A"#2EN#ICI#@ O #2E S=ISS EDERA S"PREME CO"R# DECISIONS.'6

Petitioner, in the &ain, asserts that no-here in the respon!ents8 &otions for reconsi!eration an!supple&ental &otion for reconsi!eration -ere the authenticit1, accurac1 an! a!&issibilit1 of theS-iss !ecisions ever challene!. Other-ise state!, it -as incorrect for the San!ianba1an touse the issue of lac% of authenticate! translations of the !ecisions of the S-iss e!eral Supre&eCourt as the basis for reversin itself because respondents the!selves never raised this issuein

their &otions for reconsi!eration an! supple&ental &otion for reconsi!eration. urther&ore, thisparticular issue relatin to the translation of the S-iss court !ecisions coul! not be resurrecte!


25/315

an1&ore because sai! !ecisions ha! been previousl1 utilie! b1 the San!ianba1an itself inresolvin a J!ecisive issueJ before it.

Petitioner faults the San!ianba1an for ?uestionin the non0pro!uction of the authenticate!translations of the S-iss e!eral Supre&e Court !ecisions as this -as a &arinal an! technical&atter that !i! not !i&inish b1 an1 &easure the conclusiveness an! strenth of -hat ha! beenproven an! a!&itte! before the San!ianba1an, that is, that the fun!s !eposite! b1 theMarcoses constitute! ill0otten -ealth an! thus belone! to the ilipino people.

In co&pliance -ith the or!er of this Court, Mrs. Marcos file! her co&&ent to the petition on Ma1**, *++*. After several &otions for e5tension -hich -ere all rante!, the co&&ent of Mrs.Manotoc an! er!inan!, )r. an! the separate co&&ent of Mrs. Araneta -ere file! on Ma1 *>,*++*.

Mrs. Marcos asserts that the petition shoul! be !enie! on the follo-in roun!sG

A.

PE#I#IONER 2AS A PAIN, SPEED@, AND ADEB"A#E REMED@ A# #2ESANDI3AN$A@AN.

$.

#2E SANDI3AN$A@AN DID NO# A$"SE I#S DISCRE#ION IN SE##IN3 #2E CASEOR "R#2ER PROCEEDIN3S.'4

Mrs. Marcos conten!s that petitioner has a plain, spee!1 an! a!e?uate re&e!1 in the or!inar1course of la- in vie- of the resolution of the San!ianba1an !ate! )anuar1 6', *+++ !irectinpetitioner to sub&it the authenticate! translations of the S-iss !ecisions. Instea! of availin of

sai! re&e!1, petitioner no- elevates the &atter to this Court. Accor!in to Mrs. Marcos, apetition for certiorari -hich !oes not co&pl1 -ith the re?uire&ents of the rules &a1 be !is&isse!.Since petitioner has a plain, spee!1 an! a!e?uate re&e!1, that is, to procee! to trial an! sub&itauthenticate! translations of the S-iss !ecisions, its petition before this Court &ust be!is&isse!. Corollaril1, the San!ianba1an8s rulin to set the case for further procee!ins cannotan! shoul! not be consi!ere! a capricious an! -hi&sical e5ercise of 7u!&ent.

i%e-ise, Mrs. Manotoc an! er!inan!, )r., in their co&&ent, pra1e! for the !is&issal of thepetition on the roun!s thatG

9A:

$@ #2E #IME PE#I#IONER IED I#S MO#ION OR S"MMAR@ )"D3MEN# ON '+MARC2 *+++, I# =AS AREAD@ $ARRED ROM DOIN3 SO.

9': #he Motion for Su&&ar1 )u!&ent -as base! on private respon!ents8 Ans-er an!other !ocu&ents that ha! lon been in the recor!s of the case. #hus, b1 the ti&e theMotion -as file! on '+ March *+++, estoppel b1 laches ha! alrea!1 set in aainstpetitioner.

9*: $1 its positive acts an! e5press a!&issions prior to filin the Motion for Su&&ar1)u!&ent on '+ March '//+, petitioner ha! leall1 boun! itself to o to trial on the basisof e5istin issues. #hus, it clearl1 -aive! -hatever riht it ha! to &ove for su&&ar17u!&ent.

9$:


26/315

EVEN ASS"MIN3 #2A# PE#I#IONER =AS NO# E3A@ $ARRED ROM IIN3#2E MO#ION OR S"MMAR@ )"D3MEN#, #2E SANDI3AN$A@AN IS CORREC# INR"IN3 #2A# PE#I#IONER 2AS NO# @E# ES#A$IS2ED A PRIMA ACIE CASEOR #2E OREI#"RE O #2E S=ISS "NDS.

9': Republic Act No. '6>/, the applicable la-, is a penal statute. As such, its provisions,particularl1 the essential ele&ents state! in section 6 thereof, are &an!ator1 in nature.#hese shoul! be strictl1 construe! aainst petitioner an! liberall1 in favor of privaterespon!ents.

9*: Petitioner has faile! to establish the thir! an! fourth essential ele&ents in Section 6 ofR.A. '6>/ -ith respect to the i!entification, o-nership, an! appro5i&ate a&ount of thepropert1 -hich the Marcos couple allee!l1 Jac?uire! !urin their incu&benc1J.

9a: Petitioner has faile! to prove that the Marcos couple Jac?uire!J or o-n theS-iss fun!s.

9b: Even assu&in, for the sa%e of aru&ent, that the fact of ac?uisition has beenproven, petitioner has cateoricall1 a!&itte! that it has no evi!ence sho-in ho-&uch of the S-iss fun!s -as ac?uire! J!urin the incu&benc1J of the Marcoscouple fro& 6' Dece&ber '//,petitioner has faile! to establish the other proper earnins an! inco&e fro&leiti&atel1 ac?uire! propert1 of the Marcos couple over an! above theirovern&ent salaries.

94: Since petitioner faile! to prove the three essential ele&ents provi!e! in pararaphs9c:';9!:,'/, the inescapable conclusion is that the pri&a

facie presu&ption of unla-ful ac?uisition of the S-iss fun!s has not 1et attache!. #herecan, therefore, be no pre&ature forfeiture of the fun!s.

9C:

I# =AS ON@ $@ AR$I#RARI@ ISOA#IN3 AND #2EN #AQIN3 CER#AINS#A#EMEN#S MADE $@ PRIVA#E RESPONDEN#S O"# O CON#E# #2A#PE#I#IONER =AS A$E #O #REA# #2ESE AS J)"DICIA ADMISSIONSJS"ICIEN# #O ES#A$IS2 A PRIMA ACIE AND #2EREA#ER A CONC"SIVECASE #O )"S#I@ #2E OREI#"RE O #2E S=ISS "NDS.

9': "n!er Section *>, Rule '6+ of the Rules of Court, the 3eneral an! Supple&ental

Aree&ents, as -ell as the other -ritten an! testi&onial state&ents sub&itte! in relationthereto, are e5pressl1 barre! fro& bein a!&issible in evi!ence aainst privaterespon!ents.

9*: 2a! petitioner bothere! to -eih the allee! a!&issions toether -ith the otherstate&ents on recor!, there -oul! be a !e&onstrable sho-in that no such J7u!iciala!&issionsJ -ere &a!e b1 private respon!ents.

9D:

SINCE PE#I#IONER 2AS NO# 9@E#: PROVEN A #2E ESSEN#IA EEMEN#S #OES#A$IS2 A PRIMA ACIE CASE OR OREI#"RE, AND PRIVA#E

RESPONDEN#S 2AVE NO# MADE AN@ )"DICIA ADMISSION #2A# =O"D 2AVEREED I# ROM I#S $"RDEN O PROO, #2E SANDI3AN$A@AN DID NO# COMMI#


27/315

3RAVE A$"SE O DISCRE#ION IN DEN@IN3 #2E MO#ION OR S"MMAR@)"D3MEN#. CER#IORARI, #2EREORE, DOES NO# IE, ESPECIA@ AS #2ISCO"R# IS NO# A #RIER O AC#S.'(

or her part, Mrs. Araneta, in her co&&ent to the petition, clai&s that obviousl1 petitioner isunable to co&pl1 -ith a ver1 plain re?uire&ent of respon!ent San!ianba1an. #he instantpetition is allee!l1 an atte&pt to elevate to this Court &atters, issues an! inci!ents -hich shoul!be properl1 threshe! out at the San!ianba1an. #o respon!ent Mrs. Araneta, all other &atters,save that pertainin to the authentication of the translate! S-iss Court !ecisions, are irrelevantan! i&pertinent as far as this Court is concerne!. Respon!ent Mrs. Araneta &anifests that she isas eaer as respon!ent San!ianba1an or an1 intereste! person to have the S-iss Court!ecisions officiall1 translate! in our %no-n lanuae. She sa1s the authenticate! official Enlishversion of the S-iss Court !ecisions shoul! be presente!. #his shoul! stop all speculations on-hat in!ee! is containe! therein. #hus, respon!ent Mrs. Araneta pra1s that the petition be!enie! for lac% of &erit an! for raisin &atters -hich, in elaborate! fashion, are i&pertinent an!i&proper before this Court.

PROPR"ET$ O? PET"T"ONERHS ACT"ON ?OR CERT"ORAR"

$ut before this Court !iscusses the &ore relevant issues, the ?uestion rear!in the propriet1 ofpetitioner Republic8s action for certiorari un!er Rule Rules of Civil Proce!ureassailin the San!ianba1an Resolution !ate! )anuar1 *', *++* shoul! be threshe! out.

At the outset, -e -oul! li%e to stress that -e are treatin this case as an e5ception to the eneralrule overnin petitions for certiorari. Nor&all1, !ecisions of the San!ianba1an are brouhtbefore this Court un!er Rule 4;, not Rule


28/315

other assets be finall1 !eter&ine! an! resolve! -ith !ispatch, free fro& all the !ela1intechnicalities an! anno1in proce!ural si!etrac%s.*6

=e thus ta%e coniance of this case an! settle -ith finalit1 all the issues therein.

"SSUES 9E?ORE T!"S COURT

#he crucial issues -hich this Court &ust resolve areG 9': -hether or not respon!ents raise! an1enuine issue of fact -hich -oul! either 7ustif1 or neate su&&ar1 7u!&entH an! 9*: -hether ornot petitioner Republic -as able to prove its case for forfeiture in accor!ance -ith Sections * an!6 of RA '6>/.

16 T!E PROPR"ET$ O? SUMMAR$ UDGMENT

=e hol! that respon!ent Marcoses faile! to raise an1 enuine issue of fact in their plea!ins.#hus, on &otion of petitioner Republic, su&&ar1 7u!&ent shoul! ta%e place as a &atter of riht.

In the earl1 case ofu!an vs. $stenzo*4

, su&&ar1 7u!&ent -as !escribe! as a 7u!&ent-hich a court &a1 ren!er before trial but after both parties have plea!e!. It is or!ere! b1 thecourt upon application b1 one part1, supporte! b1 affi!avits, !epositions or other !ocu&ents, -ithnotice upon the a!verse part1 -ho &a1 in turn file an opposition supporte! also b1 affi!avits,!epositions or other !ocu&ents. #his is after the court su&&aril1 hears both parties -ith theirrespective proofs an! fin!s that there is no enuine issue bet-een the&. Su&&ar1 7u!&ent issanctione! in this 7uris!iction b1 Section ', Rule 6; of the '//> Rules of Civil Proce!ureG

SEC#ION '. Su&&ar1 7u!&ent for clai&ant.0 A part1 see%in to recover upon a clai&,counterclai&, or cross0clai& or to obtain a !eclarator1 relief &a1, at an1 ti&e after theplea!in in ans-er thereto has been serve!, &ove -ith supportin affi!avits, !epositionsor a!&issions for a su&&ar1 7u!&ent in his favor upon all or an1 part thereof. *;

Su&&ar1 7u!&ent is proper -hen there is clearl1 no enuine issue as to an1 &aterial fact in theaction.*


29/315

''. At the outset, ho-ever, it &ust be pointe! out that base! on the Official Report of theMinister of $u!et, the total salaries of for&er Presi!ent Marcos as Presi!ent for& '/> to '/(;, P'++,+++ a 1earH -hile that of thefor&er irst a!1, I&el!a R. Marcos, as Minister of 2u&an Settle&ents fro& )une '/>' in Va!u. =alter essler an! Ernst Scheller, also of SQA ealService, an! Dr. 2el&uth Merlin fro& Schaan -ere !esinate! as &e&bers of the$oar! of #rustees of the sai! foun!ation. er!inan! Marcos -as na&e! first beneficiar1an! the Marcos oun!ation, Inc. -as secon! beneficiar1. On Nove&ber '*, '/>', Maain issue! another -ritten or!er na&in Austrahil P#@ t!. In S1!ne1, Australia, as thefoun!ation8s first an! sole beneficiar1. #his -as recor!e! on Dece&ber '4, '/>'.

*;. In an un!ate! instru&ent, Marcos chane! the first an! sole beneficiar1 to C2ARISO"NDA#ION. #his chane -as recor!e! on Dece&ber 4, '/>*.

*


32/315

of ebruar1 *>, '/(' -ith that of VI$"R O"NDA#ION as of Dece&ber 6', '/(' rea!il1reveals that e5actl1 the sa&e securities -ere liste!.

*(. "n!er the foreoin circu&stances, it is certain that the VI$"R O"NDA#ION is thebeneficial successor of VERSO O"NDA#ION.

*/. On March '(, '/(+. In the han!-ritten Reulations sine! b1 the Marcoscouple as -ell as in the t1pe0-ritten Reulations sine! b1 Mar%us 3eel both !ate!ebruar1 '6, '/>+, the Marcos spouses -ere na&e! the first beneficiaries, the survivinspouse as the secon! beneficiar1 an! the Marcos chil!ren I&ee, er!inan!, )r.9$onbon: an! Irene as e?ual thir! beneficiaries.

6;. #he AND@ O"NDA#ION -as rena&e! =IN#ROP O"NDA#ION on Auust */,'/>(. #he $oar! of #rustees re&aine! the sa&e at the outset. 2o-ever, on March *>,'/(+, Souviron -as replace! b1 Dr. Peter Ritter. On March '+. '/(', er!inan! an!I&el!a Marcos issue! a -ritten or!er to the $oar! of =introp to li?ui!ate the foun!ation


33/315

an! transfer all its assets to $an% 2of&ann in urich in favor of IDES #R"S#COMPAN@. ater, =IN#ROP O"NDA#ION -as !issolve!.

6'.=alter essler an! Ernst Scheller of SQA an! Dr. Peter Ritter -ere na&e! as !irectors.Dr. #heo $ertheau, SQA leal counsel, acte! as foun!in !irector in behalf of M b1virtue of the &an!ate an! aree&ent !ate! Nove&ber '*, '/>'. M hi&self -as na&e!the first beneficiar1 an! an!1 oun!ation as secon! beneficiar1 in accor!ance -ith thehan!-ritten instructions of M on Nove&ber '*, '/>' an! the Reulations. M ave a

po-er of attorne1 to Roberto S. $ene!icto on ebruar1 ';, '/>* to act in his behalf -ithrear! to Charis oun!ation.

6/. On Dece&ber '6, '/>4, Charis oun!ation -as rena&e! Scolari oun!ation but the!irectors re&aine! the sa&e. On March '', '/(' M or!ere! in -ritin that the Vala&ooun!ation be li?ui!ate! an! all its assets be transferre! to $an% 2of&ann, A3 in favorof i!es #rust Co&pan1 un!er the account JReference OMAJ. #he $oar! of Directors!eci!e! on the i&&e!iate !issolution of Vala&o oun!ation on )une *;, '/('.

4+ #he SPIN"S O"NDA#ION -as establishe! on Ma1 '6, '/(' in Va!u -ith Att1. Ivo$ec% an! i&a Manae&ent, a -holl10o-ne! subsi!iar1 of i!es #rust Co., as&e&bers of the oun!ation8s $oar! of Directors. #he account -as officiall1 opene! -ith

SQA on Septe&ber '+, '/('. #he beneficial o-ner of the foun!ation -as not &a!e%no-n to the ban% since i!es #rust Co. acte! as fi!uciar1. 2o-ever, the list of securitiesin the safe !eposit reister of Vala&o oun!ation as of Dece&ber 6', '/(+ arepracticall1 the sa&e -ith those liste! in the safe !eposit reister of Spinus oun!ation asof Dece&ber 6', '/('. "n!er the circu&stances, it is certain that the Spinus oun!ationis the beneficial successor of the Vala&o oun!ation.

4'. On Septe&ber


34/315

). TR"N"DAD(RA$9$(PA#M$ ?OUNDAT"ON ACCOUNTS

4*. #he #rini!a! oun!ation -as oranie! on Auust *+.#he reulations as -ell as the aree&ent, both !ate! Auust *(, '/>+ -ere li%e-isesine! b1 I&el!a. I&el!a -as na&e! the first beneficiar1 an! her chil!ren I&el!a 9I&ee:,er!inan!, )r. 9$onbon: an!, Irene -ere na&e! as e?ual secon! beneficiaries.

46. Ra1b1 oun!ation -as establishe! on )une **, '/>6 in Va!u -ith essler, Schelleran! Ritter as &e&bers of the boar! of !irectors. I&el!a issue! a -ritten &an!ate to Dr.#heo $ertheau to establish the foun!ation -ith a note that the foun!ation8s capitaliationas -ell as the cost of establishin it be !ebite! aainst the account of #rini!a!oun!ation. I&el!a -as na&e! the first an! onl1 beneficiar1 of Ra1b1 foun!ation.Accor!in to -ritten infor&ation fro& SQA !ate! Nove&ber *(, '/((, I&el!a apparentl1ha! the intention in '/>6 to transfer part of the assets of #rini!a! oun!ation to anotherfoun!ation, thus the establish&ent of Ra1b1 oun!ation. 2o-ever, transfer of assetsnever too% place. On March '+, '/(', I&el!a issue! a -ritten or!er to transfer all the

assets of Ra1b1 oun!ation to #rini!a! oun!ation an! to subse?uentl1 li?ui!ate Ra1b1.On the sa&e !ate, she issue! a -ritten or!er to the boar! of #rini!a! to !issolve thefoun!ation an! transfer all its assets to $an% 2of&ann in favor of i!es #rust Co. "n!erthe account JReference Di!o,J Ra1b1 -as !issolve! on April ,*'4,46*.++.

4. Rosal1s oun!ation -as establishe! in '/>' -ith M as the beneficiar1. Its Articles ofIncorporation -as e5ecute! on Septe&ber *4, '/>' an! its $10a-s on October 6, '/>'.#his foun!ation &aintaine! several accounts -ith S-iss $an% Corporation 9S$C: un!erthe eneral account ;'/


35/315

oun!ation -as the sa&e b10la- applie! to Aua&ina Corporation Account No. ;66++.#he1 further confir&e! that no chane of beneficial o-ner -as involve! -hile transferrinthe assets of Rosal1s to Aua&ina. 2ence, M re&ains the beneficiar1 of Aua&inaCorporation Account No. ;66++.

As of Auust 6+, '//', the en!in balance of Account No. ;66++ a&ounte! to(+,;


36/315

;. Respon!ents specificall1 !en1 pararaph ; of the Petition in so far as it states thatsu&&ons an! other court processes &a1 be serve! on Respon!ent I&el!a R. Marcos atthe state! a!!ress the truth of the &atter bein that Respon!ent I&el!a R. Marcos &a1be serve! -ith su&&ons an! other processes at No. '+0$ $el Air Con!o&iniu& ;+** P.$uros Street, Ma%ati, Metro Manila, an! ADMI# the rest.

555 555 555

'+. Respon!ents ADMI# pararaph '' of the Petition.

''. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '* of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!esufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!ents -ere notpriv1 to the transactions an! that the1 cannot re&e&ber e5actl1 the truth as to the&atters allee!.

'*. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '6 of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!ents

cannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs an! $alance Sheet.

'6. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '4 of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

'4. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '; of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

';. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '< of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!ents

cannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

'. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '( of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

'(. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph '/ of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs an! that the1 are notpriv1 to the activities of the $IR.

'/. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph *+ of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

*+. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph *' of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!ents

cannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.


37/315

*'. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph ** of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e orinfor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleation since Respon!entscannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the contents of the allee! I#Rs.

**. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaph *6 insofar as it allees that Respon!entsclan!estinel1 stashe! the countr18s -ealth in S-iterlan! an! hi! the sa&e un!er la1ersan! la1ers of foun!ation an! corporate entities for bein false, the truth bein thatRespon!ents aforesai! properties -ere la-full1 ac?uire!.

*6. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaphs *4, *;, *, *(, */ an! 6+ of thePetition for lac% of %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth ofthe alleation since Respon!ents -ere not priv1 to the transactions rear!in the allee!Aio0Verso0Vibur oun!ation accounts, e5cept that as to Respon!ent I&el!a R. Marcosshe specificall1 re&e&bers that the fun!s involve! -ere la-full1 ac?uire!.

*4. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaphs 6', 6*, 66, 64, 6;, 6, 6(, 6/, 4+, an!4' of the Petition for lac% of %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to thetruth of the alleations since Respon!ents are not priv1 to the transactions an! as tosuch transaction the1 -ere priv1 to the1 cannot re&e&ber -ith e5actitu!e the sa&ehavin occurre! a lon ti&e ao, e5cept that as to Respon!ent I&el!a R. Marcos shespecificall1 re&e&bers that the fun!s involve! -ere la-full1 ac?uire!.

*;. Respon!ents specificall1 DEN@ pararaphs 4*, 46, 44, 4;, an! 4


38/315

9c: Opposition to Motion for Su&&ar1 )u!&ent !ate! March *', *+++, file! b1 Mrs.Marcos -hich the other respon!ents 9Marcos chil!ren: a!opte!H

9!: De&urrer to Evi!ence !ate! Ma1 *, *+++ file! b1 Mrs. Marcos an! a!opte! b1 theMarcos chil!renH

9e: Motion for Reconsi!eration !ate! Septe&ber *, *+++ of the Marcos chil!renH

9: Manifestation !ate! Ma1 * Rules of Civil Proce!ure, provi!esG

A !efen!ant &ust specif1 each &aterial alleation of fact the truth of -hich he !oes nota!&it an!, -henever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the &atters upon -hichhe relies to support his !enial. =here a !efen!ant !esires to !en1 onl1 a part of anaver&ent, he shall specif1 so &uch of it as is true an! &aterial an! shall !en1 there&ain!er. =here a !efen!ant is -ithout %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& abelief as to the truth of a &aterial aver&ent &a!e in the co&plaint, he shall so state, an!this shall have the effect of a !enial.*(

#he purpose of re?uirin respon!ents to &a%e a specific !enial is to &a%e the& !isclose facts-hich -ill !isprove the alleations of petitioner at the trial, toether -ith the &atters the1 rel1upon in support of such !enial. Our 7uris!iction a!heres to this rule to avoi! an! prevent

unnecessar1 e5penses an! -aste of ti&e b1 co&pellin both parties to la1 their car!s on thetable, thus re!ucin the controvers1 to its true ter&s. As e5plaine! inlonso vs. illa!or,*/

A litiation is not a a&e of technicalities in -hich one, &ore !eepl1 schoole! an! s%ille!in the subtle art of &ove&ent an! position, entraps an! !estro1s the other. It is rather acontest in -hich each conten!in part1 full1 an! fairl1 la1s before the court the facts inissue an! then, brushin asi!e as -holl1 trivial an! in!ecisive all i&perfections of for&an! technicalities of proce!ure, as%s that 7ustice be !one upon the &erits. a-suits,unli%e !uels, are not to be -on b1 a rapier8s thrust.

On the part of Mrs. Marcos, she clai&e! that the fun!s -ere la-full1 ac?uire!. 2o-ever, shefaile! to particularl1 state the ulti&ate facts surroun!in the la-ful &anner or &o!e of ac?uisition

of the sub7ect fun!s. Si&pl1 put, she &erel1 state! in her ans-er -ith the other respon!ents thatthe fun!s -ere Jla-full1 ac?uire!J -ithout !etailin ho- e5actl1 these fun!s -ere suppose!l1


39/315

ac?uire! leall1 b1 the&. Even in this case before us, her assertion that the fun!s -ere la-full1ac?uire! re&ains bare an! unacco&panie! b1 an1 factual support -hich can prove, b1 thepresentation of evi!ence at a hearin, that in!ee! the fun!s -ere ac?uire! leiti&atel1 b1 theMarcos fa&il1.

Respon!ents8 !enials in their ans-er at the San!ianba1an -ere base! on their allee! lac% of%no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleations of thepetition.

It is true that one of the &o!es of specific !enial un!er the rules is a !enial throuh a state&entthat the !efen!ant is -ithout %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth ofthe &aterial aver&ent in the co&plaint. #he ?uestion, ho-ever, is -hether the %in! of !enial inrespon!ents8 ans-er ?ualifies as the specific !enial calle! for b1 the rules. =e !o not thin% so. InMorales vs. Court of Appeals,6+this Court rule! that if an alleation !irectl1 an! specificall1chares a part1 -ith havin !one, perfor&e! or co&&itte! a particular act -hich the latter !i! notin fact !o, perfor& or co&&it, a cateorical an! e5press !enial &ust be &a!e.

2ere, !espite the serious an! specific alleations aainst the&, the Marcoses respon!e! b1si&pl1 sa1in that the1 ha! no %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truthof such alleations. Such a eneral, self0servin clai& of inorance of the facts allee! in thepetition for forfeiture -as insufficient to raise an issue. Respon!ent Marcoses shoul! havepositivel1 state! ho- it -as that the1 -ere suppose!l1 inorant of the facts allee!. 6'

#o eluci!ate, the alleation of petitioner Republic in pararaph *6 of the petition for forfeiturestate!G

*6. #he follo-in presentation ver1 clearl1 an! over-hel&inl1 sho- in !etail ho- bothrespon!ents clan!estinel1 stashe! a-a1 the countr18s -ealth to S-iterlan! an! hi! thesa&e un!er la1ers upon la1ers of foun!ations an! other corporate entities to prevent its!etection. #hrouh their !u&&iesno&inees, fronts or aents -ho for&e! thosefoun!ations or corporate entities, the1 opene! an! &aintaine! nu&erous ban% accounts.$ut !ue to the !ifficult1 if not the i&possibilit1 of !etectin an! !ocu&entin all thosesecret accounts as -ell as the enor&it1 of the !eposits therein hi!!en, the follo-inpresentation is confine! to five i!entifie! accounts roups, -ith balances a&ountin toabout 6;


40/315

pararaph ** of the ans-er -as focuse! on the aver&ent in pararaph *6 of the petition forforfeiture that JRespon!ents clan!estinel1 stashe! the countr18s -ealth in S-iterlan! an! hi!the sa&e un!er la1ers an! la1ers of foun!ations an! corporate entities.J Pararaph ** of therespon!ents8 ans-er -as thus a !enial prenant -ith a!&issions of the follo-in substantialfactsG

9': the S-iss ban% !eposits e5iste! an!

9*: that the esti&ate! su& thereof -as "S6;< &illion as of Dece&ber, '//+.

#herefore, the alleations in the petition for forfeiture on the e5istence of the S-iss ban% !epositsin the su& of about "S6;< &illion, not havin been specificall1 !enie! b1 respon!ents in theirans-er, -ere !ee&e! a!&itte! b1 the& pursuant to Section '', Rule ( of the '//> Revise!Rules on Civil Proce!ureG

Material aver&ent in the co&plaint, 555 shall be !ee&e! a!&itte! -hen not specificall1!enie!. 555.66>an! 4(6(of the petition for forfeiture referrin to the creationan! a&ount of the !eposits of the Rosal1s0Aua&ina oun!ation as -ell as the aver&ent inpararaph ;*0a6/of the sai! petition -ith respect to the su& of the S-iss ban% !epositsesti&ate! to be "S6;< &illion -ere aain not specificall1 !enie! b1 respon!ents in theirans-er. #he respon!ents !i! not at all respon! to the issues raise! in these pararaphs an! thee5istence, nature an! a&ount of the S-iss fun!s -ere therefore !ee&e! a!&itte! b1 the&. As

hel! in 3alofa vs. Nee #on &in%,4+if a !efen!ant8s !enial is a neative prenant, it is e?uivalentto an a!&ission.

Moreover, respon!ents8 !enial of the alleations in the petition for forfeiture Jfor lac% of%no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleations sincerespon!ents -ere not priv1 to the transactionsJ -as 7ust a pretense. Mrs. Marcos8 privit1 to thetransactions -as in fact evi!ent fro& her sinatures on so&e of the vital !ocu&ents 4'attache! tothe petition for forfeiture -hich Mrs. Marcos faile! to specificall1 !en1 as re?uire! b1 the rules. 4*

It is -orth1 to note that the pertinent !ocu&ents attache! to the petition for forfeiture -ere evensine! personall1 b1 respon!ent Mrs. Marcos an! her late husban!, er!inan! E. Marcos,in!icatin that sai! !ocu&ents -ere -ithin their %no-le!e. As correctl1 pointe! out b1

San!ianba1an )ustice rancisco Villaru, )r. in his !issentin opinionG

#he pattern ofG ': creatin foun!ations, *: use of pseu!on1&s an! !u&&ies, 6:approvin reulations of the oun!ations for the !istribution of capital an! inco&e of theoun!ations to the irst an! Secon! beneficiar1 9-ho are no other than M an! hisfa&il1:, 4: openin of ban% accounts for the oun!ations, ;: chanin the na&es of theoun!ations, : li?ui!ation of the oun!ations as substantiate! b1 the Anne5es " to "0'


42/315

petition are reall) bein% challen%ed: nor should it be !ade for the purpose of dela).4Respon!ents8ineffective !enial thus faile! to properl1 ten!er an issue an! the aver&ents containe! in thepetition for forfeiture -ere !ee&e! 7u!iciall1 a!&itte! b1 the&.

As hel! in ).P. )uan Sons, Inc. vs. iana In!ustries, Inc.G

Its Jspecific !enialJ of the &aterial alleation of the petition -ithout settin forth thesubstance of the &atters relie! upon to support its eneral !enial, -hen such &atters-ere plainl1 -ithin its %no-le!e an! it coul! not loicall1 preten! inorance as to thesa&e, therefore, faile! to properl1 ten!er on issue.4(

#hus, the eneral !enial of the Marcos chil!ren of the alleations in the petition for forfeiture Jfor

lac% of %no-le!e or infor&ation sufficient to for& a belief as to the truth of the alleations sincethe1 -ere not priv1 to the transactionsJ cannot rihtfull1 be accepte! as a !efense because the1are the leal heirs an! successors0in0interest of er!inan! E. Marcos an! are therefore boun! b1the acts of their father vis0a0vis the S-iss fun!s.

PRE(TR"A# 9R"E? DATED OCTO9ER 1;, 13

#he pre0trial brief of Mrs. Marcos -as a!opte! b1 the three Marcos chil!ren. In sai! brief, Mrs.Marcos stresse! that the fun!s involve! -ere la-full1 ac?uire!. $ut, as in their ans-er, the1faile! to state an! substantiate ho- these fun!s -ere ac?uire! la-full1. #he1 faile! to presentan! attach even a sinle !ocu&ent that -oul! sho- an! prove the truth of their alleations.Section Rules of Civil Proce!ure provi!esG

#he parties shall file -ith the court an! serve on the a!verse part1, 5 5 5 their respective pre0trialbriefs -hich shall contain, a&on othersG

5 5 5

9!: the !ocu&ents or e5hibits to be presente!, statin the purpose thereofH

5 5 5

9f: the nu&ber an! na&es of the -itnesses, an! the substance of their respectivetesti&onies.4/

It is un?uestionabl1 -ithin the court8s po-er to re?uire the parties to sub&it their pre0trial briefsan! to state the nu&ber of -itnesses inten!e! to be calle! to the stan!, an! a brief su&&ar1 ofthe evi!ence each of the& is e5pecte! to ive as -ell as to !isclose the nu&ber of !ocu&ents tobe sub&itte! -ith a !escription of the nature of each. #he tenor an! character of the testi&on1 ofthe -itnesses an! of the !ocu&ents to be !e!uce! at the trial thus &a!e %no-n, in a!!ition tothe particular issues of fact an! la-, it beco&es apparent if enuine issues are bein put for-ar!necessitatin the hol!in of a trial. i%e-ise, the parties are oblie! not onl1 to &a%e a for&ali!entification an! specification of the issues an! their proofs, an! to put these &atters in -ritinan! sub&it the& to the court -ithin the specifie! perio! for the pro&pt !isposition of the action. ;+

#he pre0trial brief of Mrs. Marcos, as subse?uentl1 a!opte! b1 respon!ent Marcos chil!ren,

&erel1 state!G


43/315

5 5 5

=I#NESSES

4.' Respon!ent I&el!a -ill present herself as a -itness an! reserves the riht to presenta!!itional -itnesses as &a1 be necessar1 in the course of the trial.

5 5 5

DOC"MEN#AR@ EVIDENCE

;.' Respon!ent I&el!a reserves the riht to present an! intro!uce in evi!ence!ocu&ents as &a1 be necessar1 in the course of the trial.

Mrs. Marcos !i! not enu&erate an! !escribe the !ocu&ents constitutin her evi!ence. Neitherthe na&es of -itnesses nor the nature of their testi&on1 -as state!. =hat alone appeare!certain -as the testi&on1 of Mrs. Marcos onl1 -ho in fact ha! previousl1 clai&e! inorance an!

lac% of %no-le!e. An! even then, the substance of her testi&on1, as re?uire! b1 the rules, -asnot &a!e %no-n either. Such cunnin tactics of respon!ents are totall1 unacceptable to thisCourt. =e hol! that, since no enuine issue -as raise!, the case beca&e ripe for su&&ar17u!&ent.

OPPOS"T"ON TO MOT"ON ?OR SUMMAR$ UDGMENT DATED MARC! 21, 2000

#he opposition file! b1 Mrs. Marcos to the &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent !ate! March *', *+++of petitioner Republic -as &erel1 a!opte! b1 the Marcos chil!ren as their o-n opposition to thesai! &otion. 2o-ever, it -as aain not acco&panie! b1 affi!avits, !epositions or a!&issions asre?uire! b1 Section 6, Rule 6; of the '//> Rules on Civil Proce!ureG

5 5 5 #he a!verse part1 &a1 serve opposin affi!avits, !epositions, or a!&issions atleast three 96: !a1s before hearin. After hearin, the 7u!&ent souht shall be ren!ere!forth-ith if the plea!ins, supportin affi!avits, !epositions, an! a!&issions on file, sho-that, e5cept as to the a&ount of !a&aes, there is no enuine issue as to an1 &aterialfact an! that the &ovin part1 is entitle! to a 7u!&ent as a &atter of la-. ;'

#he absence of opposin affi!avits, !epositions an! a!&issions to contra!ict the s-orn!eclarations in the Republic8s &otion onl1 !e&onstrate! that the aver&ents of such opposition-ere not enuine an! therefore un-orth1 of belief.

Dem/rrer to E&+ene ate Ma8 2, 2000F ;*

Mot+on' -or Reon'+erat+onF;6an Memorana o- Mr'. Maro' an te Maro' +ren;4

All these plea!ins aain containe! no alleations of facts sho-in their la-ful ac?uisition of thefun!s. Once &ore, respon!ents &erel1 &a!e eneral !enials -ithout allein facts -hich -oul!have been a!&issible in evi!ence at the hearin, thereb1 failin to raise enuine issues of fact.

Mrs. Marcos insists in her &e&oran!u& !ate! October *', *++* that, !urin the pre0trial, hercounsel state! that his client -as 7ust a beneficiar1 of the fun!s, contrar1 to petitioner Republic8salleation that Mrs. Marcos !isclai&e! o-nership of or interest in the fun!s.

#his is 1et another in!ication that respon!ents presente! a fictitious !efense because, !urin the

pre0trial, Mrs. Marcos an! the Marcos chil!ren deniedo-nership of or interest in the S-iss fun!sG


44/315

P) 3architorenaG

Ma%e of recor! that as far as I&el!a Marcos is concerne! throuh the state&entof Att1. Ar&an!o M. Marcelo that the "S6


45/315

!eposits or that the1 coul! no loner re&e&ber an1thin as it happene! a lon ti&e ao. As toMrs. Marcos, she re&e&bere! that it -as la-full1 ac?uire!.

In her Manifestation !ate! Ma1 *


46/315

!eposits. In their ans-er an! other subse?uent plea!ins, ho-ever, the Marcoses &erel1 &a!eeneral !enials of the alleations aainst the& -ithout statin facts a!&issible in evi!ence at thehearin, thereb1 failin to raise an1 enuine issues of fact.

"n!er these circu&stances, a trial -oul! have serve! no purpose at all an! -oul! have beentotall1 unnecessar1, thus 7ustif1in a su&&ar1 7u!&ent on the petition for forfeiture. #here -ereno opposin affi!avits to contra!ict the s-orn !eclarations of the -itnesses of petitionerRepublic, lea!in to the inescapable conclusion that the &atters raise! in the Marcoses8 ans-er-ere false.

#i&e an! aain, this Court has encountere! cases li%e this -hich are either onl1 half0hearte!l1!efen!e! or, if the se&blance of a !efense is interpose! at all, it is onl1 to !ela1 !isposition an!ain ti&e. It is certainl1 not in the interest of 7ustice to allo- respon!ent Marcoses to avail of theappellate re&e!ies accor!e! b1 the Rules of Court to litiants in oo! faith, to the pre7u!ice ofthe Republic an! ulti&atel1 of the ilipino people. ro& the beinnin, a can!i! !e&onstration ofrespon!ents8 oo! faith shoul! have been &a!e to the court belo-. =ithout the !eceptivereasonin an! aru&entation, this protracte! litiation coul! have en!e! a lon ti&e ao.

Since '//', -hen the petition for forfeiture -as first file!, up to the present, all respon!ents haveoffere! are fo51 responses li%e Jlac% of sufficient %no-le!e or lac% of privit1J or Jthe1 cannotrecall because it happene! a lon ti&e aoJ or, as to Mrs. Marcos, Jthe fun!s -ere la-full1ac?uire!.J $ut, -henever it suits the&, the1 also clai& o-nership of /+ of the fun!s an! alleethat onl1 '+ belons to the Marcos estate. It has been an incre!ible chara!e fro& beinnin toen!.

In the hope of convincin this Court to rule other-ise, respon!ents Maria I&el!a Marcos0Manotoc an! er!inan! R. Marcos )r. conten! that Jb1 its positive acts an! e5press a!&issionsprior to filin the &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent on March '+, *+++, petitioner Republic ha!boun! itself to o to trial on the basis of e5istin issues. #hus, it ha! leall1 -aive! -hateverriht it ha! to &ove for su&&ar1 7u!&ent.J


47/315

#his issue is actuall1 one of first i&pression. No local 7urispru!ence or authoritative -or% hastouche! upon this &atter. #his bein so, an e5a&ination of forein la-s an! 7urispru!ence,particularl1 those of the "nite! States -here &an1 of our la-s an! rules -ere copie!, is in or!er.

Rule ;< of the e!eral Rules of Civil Proce!ure provi!es that a part1 see%in to recover upon aclai&, counterclai& or cross0clai& &a1 &ove for su&&ar1 7u!&ent at an) ti!e after thee;piration of


48/315

In the case at bar, petitioner &ove! for su&&ar1 7u!&ent after pre0trial an! before itssche!ule! !ate for presentation of evi!ence. Respon!ent Marcoses arue that, b1 areein toprocee! to trial !urin the pre0trial conference, petitioner J-aive!J its riht to su&&ar1 7u!&ent.

#his aru&ent &ust fail in the liht of the Ne- @or% Supre&e Court rulin -hich -e appl1 b1analo1 to this case. In $cer,the !efen!ant oppose! the &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent on aroun! si&ilar to that raise! b1 the Marcoses, that is, Jthat plaintiff ha! -aive! her riht tosu&&ar1 7u!&entJ b1 her act of procee!in to trial. If, as correctl1 rule! b1 the Ne- @or% court,plaintiff -as allo-e! to &ove for su&&ar1 7u!&ent even aftertrial an! sub&ission of the casefor resolution, &ore so shoul! -e per&it it in the present case -here petitioner &ove! forsu&&ar1 7u!&ent beforetrial.

#herefore, the phrase Jan1ti&e after the plea!in in ans-er thereto has been serve!J in Section', Rule 6; of our Rules of Civil Proce!ure &eans Jat an1 stae of the litiation.J =henever itbeco&es evi!ent at an1 stae of the litiation that no triable issue e5ists, or that the !efensesraise! b1 the !efen!ant9s: are sha& or frivolous, plaintiff &a1 &ove for su&&ar1 7u!&ent. Acontrar1 interpretation -oul! o aainst the ver1 ob7ective of the Rule on Su&&ar1 )u!&ent-hich is to J-ee! out sha& clai&s or !efenses thereb1 avoi!in the e5pense an! loss of ti&e

involve! in a trial.J


49/315

Petitioner Republic initiall1 file! its &otion for su&&ar1 7u!&ent on October '(, '//*

#his, respon!ents faile! to bear out. In fact, !urin the pre0trial conference, the Marcoses!isclai&e! o-nership of the S-iss !eposits. Not bein the o-ners, as the1 clai&e!, respon!ents!i! not have an1 veste! riht or interest -hich coul! be a!versel1 affecte! b1 petitioner8s allee!inaction.

$ut even assu&in for the sa%e of aru&ent that laches ha! alrea!1 set in, the !octrine ofestoppel or laches !oes not appl1 -hen the overn&ent sues as a soverein or assertsovern&ental rihts.>6Nor can estoppel vali!ate an act that contravenes la- or public polic1.>4

As a final point, it &ust be e&phasie! that laches is not a &ere ?uestion of ti&e but isprincipall1 a ?uestion of the ine?uit1 or unfairness of per&ittin a riht or clai& to be enforce! orasserte!.>;E?uit1 !e&an!s that petitioner Republic shoul! not be barre! fro& pursuin thepeople8s case aainst the Marcoses.

9*: #he Propriet1 of orfeiture

#he &atter of su&&ar1 7u!&ent havin been thus settle!, the issue of -hether or not petitioner

Republic -as able to prove its case for forfeiture in accor!ance -ith the re?uisites of Sections *an! 6 of RA '6>/ nota%es center stae.

#he la- raises thepri!a faciepresu&ption that a propert1 is unla-full1 ac?uire!, hence sub7ectto forfeiture, if its a&ount or value is &anifestl1 !isproportionate to the official salar1 an! otherla-ful inco&e of the public officer -ho o-ns it. 2ence, Sections * an! < of RA '6>/>


50/315

ro& the above0?uote! provisions of the la-, the follo-in facts &ust be establishe! in or!er thatforfeiture or seiure of the S-iss !eposits &a1 be effecte!G

9': o-nership b1 the public officer of &one1 or propert1 ac?uire! !urin his incu&benc1,-hether it be in his na&e or other-ise, an!

9*:

Documents

Civil Procedure Cases (Until Pre-Trial)