CITY OF MANILA vs.

SERRANO
FACTS:
The City Council of Manila enacted
Odinance No. !"## authoi$in% the
e&'o'iation of cetain 'o'eties in
Manila(s Fist )istict in Tondo. One of the
'o'eties sou%ht to *e e&'o'iated +as
that su''osedly o+ned *y es'ondents.
,etitione City of Manila -led an a.ended
co.'laint fo e&'o'iation/ doc0eted as
Civil Case No. 123!44"4/ +ith the RTC of
Manila/ a%ainst the su''osed o+nes of the
lots/ +hich included heein es'ondents
Osca/ Felicitas/ 5ose/ 6en7a.in/ Estelita/
Leonoa/ Adelaida/ all suna.ed Seano.
Res'ondents -led a consolidated ans+e/
in +hich they alle%ed that thei .othe/ the
late )e.etia )e 8uia/ had ac9uied Lot :3
C fo. Lee ;ian <ui= that they had *een
the *ona -de occu'ants of the said 'acel
of land fo .oe than 2> yeas= that the
e&'o'iation of Lot :3C +ould esult in
thei dislocation/ it *ein% the only
esidential land left to the. *y thei
deceased .othe= and that the said lot +as
e&e.'t fo. e&'o'iation *ecause
dividin% the said 'acel of land a.on%
the. +ould entitle each of the. to only
a*out ?> s9uae .etes of land.
Res'ondents/ theefoe/ 'ayed that
7ud%.ent *e endeed declain% Lot :3C
e&e.'t fo. e&'o'iation and odein%
the cancellation of the notice annotated on
the *ac0 of TCT No. 44@>2"/ e%adin% the
'endency of Civil Case No. 123!44"4 fo
e.inent do.ain -led *y 'etitione.
A'on .otion *y 'etitione/ the tial cout
issued an ode/ dated Octo*e 1/ :11"/
diectin% 'etitione to de'osit the a.ount
of ,:/"4?/42:.>> e9uivalent to the
assessed
value of the 'o'eties. Afte 'etitione had
.ade the de'osit/ the tial cout issued
anothe ode/ dated )ece.*e :?/ :11"/
diectin% the issuance of a +it of
'ossession in favo of 'etitione.
Res'ondents -led a 'etition fo cetioai
+ith the Cout of A''eals/ alle%in% that the
e&'o'iation of Lot :3C +ould ende
es'ondents/ +ho ae actual occu'ants
theeof/
landless= that Lot :3C is e&e.'t fo.
e&'o'iation *ecause R.A. No. !4!1
'ovides
that 'o'eties consistin% of esidential
lands not e&ceedin% #>> s9uae .etes in
hi%hly
u*ani$ed cities ae e&e.'t fo.
e&'o'iation= that es'ondents +ould only
eceive
aound 21 s9uae .etes each afte the
'atition of Lot :3C +hich consists of only
#2#.:> s9uae .etes= and that R.A. No.
!4!1 +as not .eant to de'ive an o+ne of
the
entie esidential land *ut only that in
e&cess of #>> s9uae .etes.

On Nove.*e :@/ :111/ the Cout of
A''eals endeed a decision holdin% that
Lot :3C
is not e&e.'t fo. e&'o'iation *ecause it
undenia*ly e&ceeds #>> s9uae .etes
+hich is no lon%e consideed a s.all
'o'ety +ithin the fa.e+o0 of R.A. No.
!4!1. <o+eve/ it held that in accodance
+ith the ulin% in Filstea. Intenational
Inc.
v. Cout of A''eals/ the othe .odes of
ac9uisition of lands enu.eated in BB13:>
of the la+ .ust -st *e tied *y the city
%oven.ent *efoe it can esot to
e&'o'iation. As 'etitione failed to sho+
that it had done so/ the Cout of A''eals
%ave 7ud%.ent fo es'ondents and
en7oined 'etitione fo. e&'o'iatin% Lot
:3C.
ISSAE:
CON the CA eed in concludin% that the
Ode of the RTC +hich authoi$es the
i..ediate enty of the City as the
e&'o'iatin% a%ency into the 'o'ety
sou%ht to *e
e&'o'iated u'on the de'osit theeof as
tanta.ount to conde.nation of the
'o'ety.
RALIN8:
YES. Rule @!/ B4 'ovides: A'on the -lin% of
the co.'laint o at any ti.e theeafte and
afte due notice to the defendant/ the
'laintiD shall have the i%ht to ta0e o ente
u'on the 'ossession of the eal 'o'ety
involved if he de'osits +ith the authoi$ed
%oven.ent de'ositay an a.ount
e9uivalent to the assessed value of the
'o'ety fo 'u'oses of ta&ation to *e held
*y such *an0 su*7ect to the odes of the
cout.
Afte such de'osit is .ade the cout shall
ode the sheiD o othe 'o'e oEce to
foth+ith 'lace the 'laintiD in 'ossession of
the 'o'ety involved and 'o.'tly su*.it
a e'ot theeof to the cout +ith sevice of
co'ies to the 'aties. Thus/ a +it of
1
e&ecution .ay *e issued *y a cout u'on
the -lin% *y the %oven.ent of
a co.'laint fo e&'o'iation suEcient in
fo. and su*stance and u'on de'osit
.ade
*y the %oven.ent of the a.ount
e9uivalent to the assessed value of the
'o'ety su*7ect to e&'o'iation. A'on
co.'liance +ith these e9uie.ents/ the
issuance of the +it of
'ossession *eco.es .inisteial. In this
case/ these e9uie.ents +ee satis-ed
and/ theefoe/ it *eca.e the .inisteial
duty of the tial cout to issue the +it of
'ossession.
The Cout of A''eals/ ho+eve/ uled that
'etitione failed to co.'ly +ith the
e9uie.ents laid do+n in BB13:> of R.A.
No. !4!1 and eiteated in the Filstea.
ulin%. This is eo. The ulin% in Filstea.
+as necessitated *ecause an ode of
conde.nation had aleady *een issued *y
the tial cout in that case. Thus/ the
7ud%.ent
in that case had aleady *eco.e -nal. In
this case/ the tial cout has not %one
*eyond
the issuance of a +it of 'ossession.
<eain% is still to *e held to dete.ine
+hethe o
not 'etitione indeed co.'lied +ith the
e9uie.ents 'ovided in R.A. No. !4!1. It
is/
theefoe/ 'e.atue at this sta%e of the
'oceedin%s to -nd that 'etitione esoted
to
e&'o'iation +ithout -st tyin% the othe
.odes of ac9uisition enu.eated in B:> of
the la+. E&'o'iation 'oceedin%s consists
of t+o sta%es: -st/ conde.nation
of the 'o'ety afte it is dete.ined that
its ac9uisition +ill *e fo a 'u*lic 'u'ose
o
'u*lic use and/ second/ the dete.ination
of 7ust co.'ensation to *e 'aid fo the
ta0in%
of 'ivate 'o'ety to *e .ade *y the cout
+ith the assistance of not .oe than thee
co..issiones.
NATIONAL ,OCER COR,ORATION/
'etitione/ vs. COART OF A,,EALS and
ANTONINO ,O6RE/ es'ondents.
FACTS
Antonio ,o*e o+ns @"/1@1 s9uae3.ete
land FG,o'etyGH located in 6aan%ay 6ano/
Munici'ality of Ti+i/ Al*ay +hich he
develo'ed into a esot3su*division/ Ti+i
<ot S'in% Resots Su*division. Chen the
Co..ission on Iolcanolo%y ceti-ed that
the.al .ineal +ate and stea./ +hich
+ee suita*le fo do.estic use and
'otentially fo co..ecial o industial use/
+ee 'esent *eneath the ,o'ety/
National ,o+e Co'oation FNA,OCORH/
*e%an initiatin% t+o e&'o'iation
co.'laints on the said ,o'ety. The -st
e&'o'iation co.'laint +as %anted *y the
cout. )uin% its 'endency ho+eve/ N,C
*e%an dillin% o'eations and constuction
of stea. +ells. Said 'ocedues 'oduced
+aste .ateials +hich N,C du.'ed
*eyond the site a%eed u'on *y N,C +ith
,o*e. The du.'in% of +aste .ateials
alteed the to'o%a'hy of so.e 'otions of
the ,o'ety. N,C did not act on ,o*eJs
co.'laints and N,C continued +ith its
du.'in%.
In the .eanti.e/ the second a''o'iation
'oceedin%s +as -led *y N,C to ac9uie an
additional ?/??2 s9uae .etes of the
,o'ety. )istu*ed *y +hat N,C did +ith
his 'o'ey/ ,o*e -led a co.'laint fo
da.a%es. Su'isin%ly/ Na'oco +ithde+
its co.'laint fo e&'o'iation *y -lin% a
.otion to dis.iss/ -ve yeas afte -lin% the
second e&'o'iation co.'laint/ on the
%ound that N,C had found an altenative
site and that N,C had aleady a*andoned
in :1": the 'o7ect +ithin the ,o'ety due
to ,o*eJs o''osition.
The tial cout %anted N,C(s .otion
dis.iss *ut allo+ed ,o*e to 'oceed +ith
his co.'laint fo da.a%es. )es'ite the
o''osition of N,C/ the tial cout uled in
favo of ,o*e and odeed N,C to 'ay
,#/22"/2?>.>> as da.a%es. On a''eal/ the
CA aE.ed the assailed decision. <ence
the 'esent a''eal.
N,C a%ued that the co.'laint fo
da.a%es -led *y ,o*e should *e
dis.issed *ecause of the dis.issal of the
second e&'o'iation 'oceedin%s.
ISSAE:
CON the .otion to dis.iss -led *y
Na'oco in ode to +ithda+ its co.'laint
fo e&'o'iation has endeed the
co.'laint fo da.a%es -led a%ainst it *y
,o*e/ nu%atoy.
<EL):
NO.
In e&'o'iation cases/ thee is no such
thin% as the 'laintiDJs .atte of i%ht to
dis.iss the co.'laint 'ecisely *ecause
the lando+ne .ay have aleady suDeed
da.a%es at the stat of the ta0in%. The
'laintiDJs i%ht in e&'o'iation cases to
dis.iss the co.'laint has al+ays *een
su*7ect to cout a''oval and to cetain
2
conditions. The e&ce'tional i%ht that
Section :/ Rule :! of the :1@2 Rules of
Cout confeed on the 'laintiD .ust *e
undestood to have a''lied only to othe
civil actions. The :11! Rules of Civil
,ocedue a*o%ated this e&ce'tional i%ht.
The 'o+e of e.inent do.ain is su*7ect to
li.itations. A lando+ne cannot *e
de'ived of his i%ht ove his land until
e&'o'iation 'oceedin%s ae instituted in
cout.#> The cout .ust then see to it that
the ta0in% is fo 'u*lic use/ thee is
'ay.ent of 7ust co.'ensation and thee is
due 'ocess of la+.
If the 'o'iety of the ta0in% of 'ivate
'o'ety thou%h e.inent do.ain is
su*7ect to 7udicial scutiny/ the dis.issal of
the co.'laint .ust also 'ass 7udicial
in9uiy *ecause 'ivate i%hts .ay have
suDeed in the .eanti.e. The dis.issal/
+ithda+al o a*andon.ent of the
e&'o'iation case cannot *e .ade
a*itaily. If it a''eas to the cout that the
e&'o'iation is not fo so.e 'u*lic use/
then it *eco.es the duty of the cout to
dis.iss the action.## <o+eve/ +hen the
defendant clai.s that his land suDeed
da.a%e *ecause of the e&'o'iation/ the
dis.issal of the action should not foeclose
the defendantJs i%ht to have his da.a%es
ascetained eithe in the sa.e case o in a
se'aate action.
Thus/ N,CJs theoy that the dis.issal of its
co.'laint caied +ith it the dis.issal of
,o*eJs clai. fo da.a%es is *aseless.
Thee is nothin% in Rule @! of the :1@2
Rules of Cout that 'ovided fo the
dis.issal of the defendantJs clai. fo
da.a%es/ u'on the dis.issal of the
e&'o'iation case. Case la+ holds that in
the event of dis.issal of the e&'o'iation
case/ the clai. fo da.a%es .ay *e .ade
eithe in a se'aate o in the sa.e action/
fo all da.a%es occasioned *y the
institution of the e&'o'iation case. The
dis.issal of the co.'laint can *e .ade
unde cetain conditions/ such as the
esevation of the defendantJs i%ht to
ecove da.a%es eithe in the sa.e o in
anothe action. The tial cout in this case
eseved ,o*eJs i%ht to 'ove his clai. in
the sa.e case/ a esevation that has
*eco.e -nal due to N,CJs o+n fault.
Ce .ust coect N,CJs clai. that it -led
the notice of dis.issal 7ust GshotlyG afte it
had -led the co.'laint fo e&'o'iation.
Chile N,C had inti.ated seveal ti.es to
the tial cout its desie to dis.iss the
e&'o'iation case it -led on ? Se'te.*e
:1!1/ it +as only on 4 5anuay :1"? that
N,C -led its notice of dis.issal. It too0 N,C
.oe than -ve yeas to actually -le the
notice of dis.issal. Five yeas is de-nitely
not a shot 'eiod of ti.e. N,C o*viously
dilly3dallied in -lin% its notice of dis.issal
+hile N,C .ean+hile *udened ,o*eJs
'o'ety i%hts.
Asia(s E.e%in% )a%on Co'. vs. )OTC
F 8.R. No. :@11:2H
DOTC vs. C.A. and SalacnibBaternia (G.R.
No. 174166)
!"ro"riation
Facts: This is a consolidated case/ *ut in
vie+ of the to'ic of e&'o'iation +e focus
.oe in the case of )OTC vs.
Salacni*6atenia.
In ode to *ette a''eciate the case
+e .ust -st discuss the facts and ulin%s
in the case ofA#an andGin#o$on.
In :11? Asia(s E.e%in% )a%on FAE)C
H/F co.'osed of the @ .ost inKuential
*usiness.an in the ,hili''ines .ainly 5ohn
8o0on%+ei/ Lucio Tan/ <eny Sy/ Ande+
8otianun/ 8eo%e Ty and Alfonso
Yuchen%co./H L su*.itted an unsolicited
'o'osal to the 8oven.ent thou%h the
)OTC fo the develo'.ent of NAIA III unde
a *uild3o'eate3and tansfe3aan%e.ent
'usuant to RA @1?! as a.ended *y RA
!!:". Cheefoe the 'o'osal +as indeed
a''oved *y the 8oven.ent.
6iddin%s +ee held/ in +hich in the
end the ,o7ect +as a+aded to ,IATCO.
O*7ections +ee aised *y AE)C *ut in the
end the 8oven.ent 7usti-ed the a+ad to
,IATCO .ainly *ecause AE)C +as not a*le
to .atch the *id of ,IATCO.
In 4>>4 the 6uild3o'eate3and
tansfe3aan%e.ent F6OTH *et+een the
8Ovt. and ,IATCO +as 9uestioned in the
case of A%an. Cheefoe the cout uled
a.on% othes that/ in vie+ of ano.alies in
a+adin% ,IATCO the 6OT / the contactM
a+ad F6OTH +as declaed null and void.
%o&ever t'e co(rt r(led t'at it &as not
(n)ind*(l o* t'e realit$ t'at t'e str(ct(res
co)"risin# t'e NA+A +++ *acilit$ are al)ost
co)"lete and t'at t'e *(nds 'ave been
s"ent b$ ,+ATCO in t'eir constr(ction. -or
t'e Govern)ent to ta.e over said *acilit$/ it
'as to co)"ensate res"ondent ,+ATCO as
b(ilder o* t'e said str(ct(res. T'e
co)"ensation )(st be 0(st and accordance
&it' la& and e1(it$ *or t'e #overn)ent
can not (n0(stl$ enric'ed itsel* at t'e
e!"ense o* ,+ATCO and its investors.
The a*ove.entioned 'onounce.ent
of the Cout in A%an %ave ise to the
'etition in the 8In%oyan case. The facts of
+hich ae as follo+s .Afte the
3
'o.ul%ation of the ulin% in A%an case/
NAIA III +as still in the 'ossession of
,IATCO/ des'ite the avo+ed intent of the
8oven.ent to 'ut the ai'ot te.inal into
i..ediate o'eation. Chee*y the 8ovt.
and ,IATCO enteed into seveal ounds of
ne%otiation and even a''eaed *efoe
a*ital 'oceedin%s *efoe Intenational
Cha.*e of Co..ece Intenational Cout
of A*itation.
Then on/ )ec. 4:/ 4>>2 the 8ovt -led
a co.'laint fo e&'o'iation +ith the
,asay RTC. The 8ovt see0s the issuance of
a +it of 'ossession authoi$in% i..ediate
'ossession of NAIA III/ it also declaed that
it had de'osited the a.ount of # 6illion in
cash +ith the Land 6an0/ e'esentin% the
NAIA # te.inal assessed value fo ta&
'u'oses. The RTC thou%h 5ud%e
8in%oyonissued in the sa.e day the Cit of
,ossession 'ayed fo *y the 8oven.ent
citin% the case of 2anila vs. Serrano t'at
t'e RTC 'ad t'e )inisterial d(t$ to iss(e
t'e &rit o* "ossession ("on 3lin# o* a
co)"laint *or e!"ro"riation s(4cient in
*or) and s(bstance/ and ("on de"osit
)ade b$ t'e Govern)ent o* t'e a)o(nt
e1(ivalent to assessed val(e o* t'e
"ro"ert$ s(b0ect *or e!"ro"riation.
<o+eve/ on 5an 2. 4>>?/ the RTC
issued anothe ode L t'e assailed order in
t'is case o* Gin#o$on5 to su''le.ent its
ealie ode dated )ec. 4:/ 4>>2. The RTC
noted that the -st ode +as issued
'usuant to Sec. 4/ Rule @! of the Rules of
Cout. %o&ever/ it &as observed t'at
R.A.6774/ 'ad a)ended R(le 67 in )an$
res"ects. T'at t'ere are at least t&o cr(cial
di8erences bet&een t'e res"ective
"roced(res (nder RA 6774 and R(le 67.
9nder t'e Stat(te t'e Govt. is re1(ired to
)a.e i))ediate "a$)ent to t'e "ro"ert$
o&ner ("on 3lin# o* t'e co)"laint to be
entitled to a &rit o* "ossession/ &'ereas in
R(le 67/ t'e Govt. is re1(ired onl$ to )a.e
an initial de"osit &it' an a(t'ori:ed
#overn)ent de"ositar$. 2oreover R(le 67
"rescribes t'at t'e initial de"osit be
e1(ivalent to t'e assessed val(e o* t'e
"ro"ert$ *or "(r"oses o* Ta!/ (nli.e in RA
6774 &'ic' "rovides/ as t'e relevant
standard *or initial co)"ensation/ t'e
)ar.et val(e o* t'e "ro"ert$ as stated in
t'e ta! declarations or t'e c(rrent relevant
:onal val(ation o* t'e B+R/ &'ic'ever is
'i#'er/ and t'e val(e o* t'e i)"rove)ents
and;or str(ct(re (sin# t'e re"lace)ent
cost )et'od.
The 8ovt. in this case of 8iN%oyon
9uestioned the a*ove ulin%.
The Su'e.e Cout held the validity of
the RTC(s ulin%. It held a.on% othes that
1. RA 6747 a""lies in t'is case/ "artic(larl$
inso*ar as it re1(ires t'e i))ediate
"a$)ent b$ t'e Govt. o* at least t'e
"ro*erred val(e o* t'e NA+A +++ *acilities to
,+ATCO and "rovides certain val(ation
standard )et'od *or t'e deter)ination o*
0(st co)"ensation. <. T'at in a""l$in# RA
6774/ t'e i)"le)entation o* =rit o*
,ossession in *avo(r o* t'e Govt over NA+A
is 'eld in abe$ance (ntil ,+ATCO is directl$
"aid t'e a)o(nt o* > Billion "esos/
re"resentin# t'e "ro*erred val(e o* NA+A +++
>. T'e Govt. s'all "a$ t'e 0(st
co)"ensation 3!ed in t'e decision o* t'e
trial co(rt to ,+ATCO i))ediatel$ ("on t'e
3nalit$ o* said decision.
Finally +e tac0le the facts of the
case of Re'u*lic vs. CA and 6ateina.
Con%ess.an 6ateina/ to%ethe +ith othe
.e.*e of the Lo+e <ouse -led a 'etition
fo ,ohi*ition in Intevention +ith
a''lication fo TRO. 6ateina/ et. al
*elieves that the 8ovt. need not -le
e&'o'iation 'oceedin%s to %ain
'ossession if NAIA # and that ,IATCO is not
entitled to 7ust co.'ensation/ a%uin% that
,IATCO does not o+n NAIA # *ecause 6OT
contact do not vest o+neshi'. That the
land in +hich NAIA # is situated is o+ned
*y the 8oven.ent.
Issue:+n essence/ Baterina is o""osin# t'e
e!"ro"riation "roceedin#s on t'e #ro(nd
t'at NA+A > is alread$ a "(blic "ro"ert$.
%ence ,+ATCO is not entitled to 0(st
co)"ensation *or NA+A >.
%?D@ ,IATCO is entitled to 7ust
co.'ensation and that the e&'o'iation
'oceedin%s co..enced *y the
8oven.ent +as 'o'e and valid.. The
8oven.ent has chosen to esot to
e&'o'iation/ a e.edy availa*le unde
the la+/ +hich has the added *ene-t of an
inte%ated 'ocess fo the dete.ination of
7ust co.'ensation and the 'ay.ent
theeof to ,IATCO. Ce a''eciate that the
case at *a is a hi%hly unusual case/
+hee*y the 8oven.ent see0s to
e&'o'iated a *uildin% co.'le&
constucted on land +hich the State
aleady o+ns.
T'e ri#'t o* e)inent do)ain e!tends
to "ersonal "ro"ert$ and real "ro"ert$/ and
t'e NA+A > str(ct(res/ ad'ered as t'e$ are
to t'e soil/ are considered real "ro"ert$.
T'e "(blic "(r"ose *or t'e e!"ro"riation is
also be$ond dis"(te. +t s'o(ld also be
noted t'at Section 1 o* R(le 67 reco#ni:es
t'e "ossibilit$ t'at t'e "ro"ert$ so(#'t to
be e!"ro"riated )a$ be titled in t'e na)e
4
o* t'e Re"(blic o* t'e ,'ili""ines/ alt'o(#'
occ("ied b$ "rivate individ(als/ and in
s(c' case an aver)ent to t'at e8ect
s'o(ld be )ade in t'e co)"laint. T'e
instant e!"ro"riation co)"laint did aver
t'at t'e NA+A > co)"le! Astands on a
"arcel o* land o&ned b$ t'e Bases
Conversion Develo")ent A(t'orit$/
anot'er a#enc$ o* t'e Re"(blicB.
Ad)ittedl$/ e)inent do)ain is not t'e sole
0(dicial reco(rse b$ &'ic' t'e #overn)ent
)a$ 'ave ac1(ired t'e NA+A > *acilities
&'ile satis*$in# t'e re1(isites in t'e order
'eld b$ t'e SC in t'e Case o* A#an.
)inent Do)ain t'o(#' )a$ be t'e )ost
e8ective/ as &ell as t'e s"eediest )eans
b$ &'ic' s(c' #oals )a$ be acco)"lis'ed.
Not onl$ does it enable i))ediate
"ossession a*ter satis*action o* t'e
re1(isites (nder t'e la&/ it also 'as a b(ilt5
in "roced(re t'ro(#' &'ic' 0(st
co)"ensation )a$ be ascertained. T'(s/
t'ere s'o(ld be no 1(estion as to t'e
"ro"riet$ o* e)inent do)ain "roceedin#s
in t'is case.
Rule @" Cases
Anion*an0 v. CA
Facts: A eal estate .ot%a%e +as e&ecuted
*y S'ouses Leo'oldo and 5essica )aio in
favo of Anion*an0/ as secuity fo a loan.
Fo non3'ay.ent of the 'inci'al
o*li%ation/ Anion*an0 e&ta7udicially
foeclosed the 'o'ety .ot%a%ed and
sold the sa.e at 'u*lic auction/ +ith itself
'ostin% the hi%hest *id.
One +ee0 *efoe the one3yea ede.'tion
'eiod e&'ied/ 'ivate es'ondents
Reynaldo and Fe.ina )aio -led a
co.'laint a%ainst Anion*an0 fo
annul.ent of sale and eal estate
.ot%a%e econveyance. <o+eve/ the
co.'laint +as dis.issed *ecause of
'ocedual eo in -lin% the co.'laint.
Chile thee is a 'endin% .otion fo
econsideation and +ithout info.in% the
'ivate es'ondents/ Anion*an0
consolidated its title ove the foeclosed
'o'ety.
,ivate es'ondents .aintain that
Anion*an0 Js consolidation of the title in its
na.e +as in *ad faith/ thus void a* initio.
,etitione clai.ed that it +as a .ot%a%ee
in %ood faith and fo value +ith a i%ht to
consolidate o+neshi' ove the foeclosed
'o'ety +ith the ede.'tion 'eiod havin%
e&'ied and thee havin% *een no
ede.'tiones.
Issue: Chethe the consolidation of title in
Anion*an0 Js na.e 'o'e.
<eld: Anion*an0 Js consolidation of title
ove the 'o'ety +as 'o'e/ thou%h
'eci'itate. In eal estate .ot%a%e/ +hen
the 'inci'al o*li%ation is not 'aid +hen
due/ the .ot%a%ee has the i%ht to
foeclose the .ot%a%e and to have the
'o'ety sei$ed and sold +ith a vie+ to
a''lyin% the 'oceeds to the 'ay.ent of
the 'inci'al o*li%ation. Foeclosue .ay *e
eDected eithe 7udicially o e&ta7udicially.
In a 'u*lic *iddin% duin% e&ta37udicial
foeclosue/ the cedito N.ot%a%ee/
tustee/ o othe 'eson authoi$ed to act
fo the cedito .ay 'atici'ate and
'uchase the .ot%a%ed 'o'ety as any
othe *idde. Theeafte the .ot%a%o has
one yea +ithin +hich to edee. the
'o'ety fo. and afte e%istation of sale
+ith the Re%iste of )eeds. In case of non3
ede.'tion/ the 'uchase at foeclosue
sale shall -le +ith the Re%iste of )eeds/
eithe a -nal deed of sale e&ecuted *y the
'eson authoi$ed *y vitue of the 'o+e of
attoney e.*odied in the deed o
.ot%a%e/ o his s+on state.ent attestin%
to the fact of non3ede.'tion= +heeu'on/
the Re%iste of )eeds Shall issue a ne+
ceti-cate of title in favo of the 'uchase
afte the o+neJs du'licate of the
ceti-cate has *een 'eviously deliveed
and canceled. Thus/ u'on failue to edee.
foeclosed ealty/ consolidation of title
*eco.es a .atte of i%ht on the 'at of
the auction *uye/ and the issuance of a
ceti-cate of title in favo of the 'uchase
*eco.es .inisteial u'on the Re%iste of
)eeds.
Adiente v. ,ovincial SheiD= F2#@ SCRA
@??H
Facts: To secue the 'ay.ent of the loan/
the Adientes e&ecuted in favo of the
,eninsula )evelo'.ent 6an0 a Real Estate
Mot%a%e. Chen they failed to settle thei
o*li%ation/ the *an0 e&ta37udicially
foeclosed the 'o'ety and sold in a 'u*lic
5
auction to the *an0 as the hi%hest *idde.
Late/ the Adientes +ee noti-ed *y the
*an0 that they have one yea to edee.
the 'o'ety.
T+o days *efoe the 'eiod to edee. the
foeclosed .ot%a%e e&'ied s'ouses
Adiente -led a co.'laint a%ainst the *an0/
the 'ovincial SheiD of Oue$on/ and the
Re%iste of deeds of Oue$on/ fo Annul.ent
of Auction Sale +ith ,eli.inay In7unction
and )a.a%es/ clai.in% that the e9uisite
of notifyin% the .ot%a%os of the intended
e&ta37udicial foeclosue sale +as not duly
co.'lied +ith.
The tial cout/ notin% the a*sence of
docu.entay evidence sho+in% stict
co.'liance +ith the statutoy
e9uie.ents on 'u*lication of notice of
e&ta37udicial foeclosue of .ot%a%e/
declaed the e&ta37udicial foeclosue and
the sale of the .ot%a%ed 'o'eties null
and void.
<o+eve/ CA evesed the decision of the
tial cout afte -ndin% the a%u.ent of the
defendant a''ellants *an0/ et al. that the
lac0 of e9uied notice and 'u*lication of
the e&ta 7udicial foeclosue of .ot%a%e
+as not aveed in the co.'laint/ hence/
cannot *e the *asis of advese 7ud%.ent.
CA held that the case of Ta)b(ntin# v.
Co(rt o* A""eals/ elied u'on *y the tial
cout/ that the 'esu.'tion of co.'liance
+ith oEcial duty is e*utted *y the failue
to 'esent 'oof of 'ostin% and 'u*lication
of the notice of sale/ such .ay *e a''lied
only +hen these o.issions ae alle%ed and
aised *y the 'aty in the co.'laint.
Issue: Chethe the e&ta7udicial foeclosue
sale should *e declaed null and void fo
failue of the *an0 to ave in its 'etition the
SheiDs Ceti-cation of ,ostin% and the
ne+s'a'e +hee the notice +as 'u*lished
as +ell as the 'u*lishe(s aEdavits.
<eld: The Cout is not 'esuaded. Cith
es'ect to 'etitiones( alle%ations in thei
Co.'laint/ clealy/ they +ee 9uestionin%
the validity of the e&ta37udicial foeclosue
of the .ot%a%e on the *asis of lac0 of
notice to the. as .ot%a%os.
It is settled that 'esonal notice to the
.ot%a%o in e&ta37udicial foeclosue
'oceedin%s is not necessay/ hence/ not a
%ound to set aside the foeclosue sale.
The issue of lac0 of 'u*lication of the
notice of foeclosue of the .ot%a%e +as
aised only on a''eal. ,etitione does not
e'esent that he diectly attac0ed in his
co.'laint the validity of the foeclosue
*ecause of such lac0 of notice.
,etitione 'esented no evidence *efoe
the tial cout to 'ove the a*sence of
'u*lication of the notice des'ite the fact
that 'ivate es'ondents/ in thei Ans+e/
s9uaely 'leaded as a defense the
foeclosue sale and 'etitione(s ecei't of
the Gnotice of the sale +hich +as 'u*lished
in a ne+s'a'e of %eneal ciculation.G That
the lac0 of 'u*lication of the notice of
foeclosue +as neve aised in issue *y
'etitione and that it is not +ithin the
issues fa.ed *y the 'aties in the tial
cout ae then too o*vious.
6,I FAMILY SAIIN8S 6AN;/ INC v. S,S.
5ANAARIO ANTONIO IELOSO AN)
NATIII)A) IELOSO
FACTS:S'ouses Ielose o*tained a loan in
the a.ount of ,:.#M fo. Fa.ily 6an0 and
Tust Co.'any secued *y a deed of
.ot%a%e ove thee 'acels of land/ +ith
i.'ove.ents/ e%isteed in thei na.es.
They li0e+ise e&ecuted a 'o.issoy note.
<o+eve/ they failed to 'ay the install.ent
a.ounts of the loan hence thei 'o'eties
+ee foeclosed and +as sold to Fa.ily
6an0 and Tust Co.'any as the hi%hest
*idde in the auction sale fo
,4/!"4/??2.@@. Late/ Fa.ily 6an0 and
Tust Co.'any assi%ned its i%hts on the
said 'o'eties in favo of 6,I Fa.ily 6an0/
Inc.
To eDect the tansfe of title/ the ceti-cate
of sale +as e%isteed in the Re%iste of
)eeds of OC. Actin% on the .atte/
es'ondents oDeed to edee. the
'o'eties fo ,:/"!4/1#?. This +as/
ho+eve/ e7ected *y 'etitione.
Res'ondent theeafte -led a co.'laint fo
annul.ent of foeclosue +ith consi%nation
and 'aye fo da.a%es *efoe RTC 6anch
12 of OC +hee he +as allo+ed to de'osit
+ith said cout the su. of ,:/?>>/>>>
e'esentin% the ede.'tion 'ice.
In the .eanti.e/ 6,I +as a*le to o*tain
+it of 'ossession fo. 6anch !@ of said
cout. 6ased on this decision/ es'ondent
-led a 'etition fo cetioai +ith 'aye fo
'eli.inay in7unction +ith the CA. The
latte initially %anted the 'aye fo
6
in7unction *ut late on lifted said in7unction
+hen it -nally esolved the issue of
'ossession in favo of 6,I.
Res'ondent +ent to the Su'e.e Cout via
'etition fo evie+ +hich aE.ed 6,I(s
i%ht to 'ossess the 'o'eties.
,usuant to the said decision/ on )ece.*e
:@/ :114/ u'on .otion of es'ondents and
des'ite the o''osition of 'etitione/ 6anch
12 odeed the elease of ,:/2>>/>>> of the
consi%ned a.ount to es'ondents/ +ith the
*alance of ,:>>/>>> to ta0e the 'lace of
the in7unction *ond to ans+e fo +hateve
da.a%es 'etitione .i%ht suDe *ecause of
the issuance of the 'eli.inay in7unction
F'eviously issued and late liftedH in favo
of es'ondents.
Afte :> yeas/ 6anch 12 -nally decided in
favo of the validity of the foeclosue
'oceedin%s *ut allo+ed the es'ondents
to edee. the 'o'eties at ,4.:2M. Fo.
this decision 6,I a''ealed to the CA +hich
aE.ed the tial cout(s decision +ith
.odi-cation that the ede.'tion 'ice
should *e at ,4/@!"/@#1.">. <ence this
'etition. It +as the contention of 6,I that
the decision of the CA in %antin%
es'ondent(s i%ht to edee. at
,4/@!"/@#1."> +as in violation of the
ealie ulin% *y the Su'e.e Cout.
ISSAE: CON the s'ouses have co.'lied
+ith all the e9uie.ents fo ede.'tion in
ode to o*tain a favoa*le ulin% fo. the
Cout of A''eals.
<EL): NO. Bona 3de ede.'tion
necessaily i.'lies a easona*le and valid
tende of the entie e'uchase 'ice/
othe+ise the ule on the ede.'tion
'eiod -&ed *y la+ can easily *e
cicu.vented. As e&'lained *y this Cout in
Basbas vs. ntena:
& & & the e&istence of the i%ht of
ede.'tion o'eates to de'ess
the .a0et value of the land until
the 'eiod e&'ies/ and to ende
that 'eiod inde-nite *y 'e.ittin%
the tenant to -le a suit fo
ede.'tion/ +ith eithe 'aty
una*le to foesee +hen -nal
7ud%.ent +ill te.inate the action/
+ould ende nu%atoy the 'eiod
of t+o yeas -&ed *y the statute fo
.a0in% the ede.'tion and
vitually 'aaly$e any eDots of the
lando+ne to eali$e the value of
his land. No *uye can *e
e&'ected to ac9uie it +ithout any
cetainty as to the a.ount fo
+hich it .ay *e edee.ed/ so that
he can ecove at least his
invest.ent in case of ede.'tion.
In the .eanti.e/ the lando+ne(s
needs and o*li%ations cannot *e
.et. It is dou*tful if any such
esult +as intended *y the statute/
a*sent clea +odin% to that eDect.
And in In Bodion#an vs. Co(rt o*
A""eals/the hi%he cout clealy stated
+hat co.'oses the ede.'tion 'ice:
In ode to eDect a ede.'tion/ the
7ud%.ent de*to .ust 'ay the
'uchase the ede.'tion 'ice
co.'osed of the follo+in%: F:H the
'ice +hich the 'uchase 'aid fo
the 'o'ety= F4H inteest of :P 'e
.onth on the 'uchase 'ice= F#H
the a.ount of any assess.ents o
ta&es +hich the 'uchase .ay
have 'aid on the 'o'ety afte the
'uchase= and F2H inteest of :P
'e .onth on such assess.ents
and ta&es & & &.
In this case/ the oDe *y es'ondents on
5uly 42/ :1"@ to edee. the foeclosed
'o'eties fo ,:/"!4/1#? and the
su*se9uent consi%nation in cout of
,:/?>>/>>> on Au%ust 4!/ :1"@/ +hile
.ade +ithin the 'eiod of ede.'tion/ +as
ineDective since the a.ount oDeed and
actually consi%ned not only did not include
the inteest *ut +as in fact also +ay *elo+
the ,4/!"4/??2.@@ 'aid *y the hi%hest
*iddeM'uchase of the 'o'eties duin%
the auction sale.
Futhe.oe/ Aticle :@:@ of the Civil Code
of the ,hili''ines 'ovides:
The vendo cannot avail hi.self of
the i%ht to e'uchase +ithout etunin% to
the vendee the 'ice of the sale & & &.
It is not diEcult to undestand +hy the
ede.'tion 'ice should eithe *e fully
oDeed in le%al tende o else validly
consi%ned in cout. Only *y such .eans
can the auction +inne *e assued that the
oDe to edee. is *ein% .ade in %ood
faith.
Chethe o not es'ondents +ee dili%ent
7
in assetin% thei +illin%ness to 'ay is
ielevant. Rede.'tion +ithin the 'eiod
allo+ed *y la+ is not a .atte of intent *ut
a 9uestion of 'ay.ent o valid tende of
the full ede.'tion 'ice +ithin said 'eiod
The la+ %anted es'ondents the i%ht of
ede.'tion. 6ut in so %antin% that i%ht/
the la+ intended that thei oDe to edee.
*e valid and eDective/ acco.'anied *y an
actual tende of the ede.'tion 'ice.
Fi&in% a de-nite te. +ithin +hich the
'o'ety should *e edee.ed is .eant to
avoid 'olon%ed econo.ic uncetainty ove
the o+neshi' of the thin% sold.
The dis'osition of the instant case in the
tial cout unnecessaily da%%ed fo al.ost
a decade. No+/ it is on its :"
th
yea and
still es'ondents have not tendeed the full
ede.'tion 'ice. No have they consi%ned
the full a.ount/ if only to 'ove thei
+illin%ness and a*ility to 'ay. This +ould
have evidenced thei %ood faith. Thei oDe
+as not a le%al and eDective e&ecise of
the i%ht of ede.'tion conte.'lated *y
la+/ hence/ efusal of the oDe *y
'etitione +as co.'letely 7usti-ed.
Rule @1 Cases
CELESTINO 6ALAS vs. SATARNINO 6ALAS
FACTS: <eein 'etitione and es'ondents
ae the childen of the s'ouses Rufo and
Se*astiana
6alus. Se*astiana died on Se'te.*e @/
:1!"/ +hile Rufo died on 5uly @/ :1"2.
On 5anuay #/ :1!1/ Rufo .ot%a%ed a
'acel of land/ +hich he o+ns/ as secuity
fo a loan he o*tained fo. the Rual 6an0
of Mai%o/ Lanao del Note F6an0H. Rufo
failed to 'ay his loan. As a esult/ the
.ot%a%ed 'o'ety +as foeclosed
and +as su*se9uently sold to the 6an0 as
the sole *idde at a 'u*lic auction held fo
that 'u'ose. On Nove.*e 4>/ :1":/ a
Ceti-cate of Sale+as e&ecuted *y the
sheiD in favo of the 6an0. The 'o'ety
+as not edee.ed +ithin the 'eiod
allo+ed *y la+. Moe than t+o yeas afte
the auction/ o on 5anuay 4?/ :1"2/ the
sheiD e&ecuted a )e-nite )eed of Sale in
the 6an0(s favo. Theeafte/ a ne+ title
+as issued in the na.e of the 6an0. On
Octo*e :>/ :1"1/ heein 'etitione and
es'ondents e&ecuted an E&ta7udicial
Settle.ent of Estate ad7udicatin% to each
of the. a s'eci-c one3thid 'otion of the
su*7ect 'o'ety and also contained
'ovisions +heein the 'aties ad.itted
0no+led%e of the fact that thei fathe
.ot%a%ed the su*7ect 'o'ety to the
6an0 and that they intended to edee. the
sa.e at the soonest 'ossi*le ti.e.
Thee yeas afte the e&ecution of the
E&ta7udicial Settle.ent/ heein
es'ondents
*ou%ht the su*7ect 'o'ety fo. the 6an0.
Mean+hile/ 'etitione continued 'ossession
of the su*7ect lot. Res'ondents -led a
Co.'laint fo Recovey of ,ossession and
)a.a%es a%ainst 'etitione and RTC
endeed a decision odein% the 'laintiDs
to e&ecute a )eed of Sale in favo of the
defendant/ the one3thid shae of the
'o'ety in 9uestion/ 'esently 'ossessed
*y hi.. The RTC held that the i%ht of
'etitione to 'uchase fo. the
es'ondents his shae in the dis'uted
'o'ety +as eco%ni$ed *y the 'ovisions
of the E&ta7udicial Settle.ent of Estate/
+hich the 'aties had e&ecuted *efoe the
es'ondents *ou%ht the su*7ect lot fo.
the 6an0. Res'ondents a''ealed to the CA.
CA eveesed decision of RTC.
ISSAE:
CON co3o+neshi' *et+een 'etitione and
es'ondents 'esisted even afte the lot
+as 'uchased *y the 6an0 and even afte
it +as eventually *ou%ht *y the
Res'ondents fo. the 6an0.
<eld: NO. It *eas to e.'hasi$e that thee
is no dis'ute +ith es'ect to the fact that
the su*7ect 'o'ety +as e&clusively o+ned
*y 'etitione and es'ondents( fathe/ Rufo/
at the ti.e that it +as .ot%a%ed in :1!1.
In the 'esent case/ since Rufo lost
o+neshi' of the su*7ect 'o'ety duin%
his lifeti.e/ it only follo+s that at the ti.e
of his death/ the dis'uted 'acel of land no
lon%e fo.ed 'at of his estate to +hich
his heis .ay lay clai.. Stated diDeently/
'etitione and es'ondents neve inheited
the su*7ect lot fo. thei fathe. Thee is
nothin% in the su*7ect E&ta7udicial
Settle.ent to indicate any e&'ess
sti'ulation fo 'etitione and es'ondents
to continue +ith thei su''osed co3
o+neshi' of the contested lot. On the
contay/ a 'lain eadin% of the 'ovisions
of the E&ta7udicial Settle.ent +ould not/
in any +ay/ su''ot 'etitione(s contention
that it +as his and his si*lin%(s intention to
*uy the su*7ect 'o'ety fo. the 6an0 and
continue +hat they *elieved to *e co3
o+neshi' theeof. It is a cadinal ule in
the inte'etation of contacts that the
8
intention of the 'aties shall *e accoded
'i.odial consideation. Thee is no co3
o+neshi' to tal0 a*out and no 'o'ety to
'atition/ as the dis'uted lot neve fo.ed
'at of the estate of thei deceased fathe.
Futhe.oe/ 'etitione(s contention that
he and his si*lin%s intended to continue
thei su''osed co3o+neshi' of the su*7ect
'o'ety contadicts the 'ovisions of the
su*7ect E&ta7udicial Settle.ent +hee they
clealy .anifested thei intention of havin%
the su*7ect 'o'ety divided o 'atitioned
*y assi%nin% to each of the 'etitione and
es'ondents a s'eci-c :M# 'otion of the
sa.e. ,atition calls fo the se%e%ation
and conveyance of a dete.inate 'otion
of the 'o'ety o+ned in co..on. It see0s
a seveance of the individual inteests of
each co3o+ne/ vestin% in each of the. a
sole estate in a s'eci-c 'o'ety and %ivin%
each one a i%ht to en7oy his estate +ithout
su'evision o intefeence fo. the othe.
In othe +ods/ the 'u'ose of 'atition is
to 'ut an end to co3o+neshi'/ an o*7ective
+hich ne%ates 'etitione(s clai.s in the
'esent case.
Feliciano vs. Cano$a
Facts: Antonio Feliciano 'assed a+ay and
left *ehind a 'acel of land. Leona/ Maia/
,edo and Salina Feliciano declaed
the.selves to *e Antonio(s only suvivin%
heis. They e&ecuted an e&ta7udicial
settle.ent of Antonio(s estate to the
e&clusion of the heis of Este*an and
)ooteo Feliciano/ deceased childen of
Antonio. Futhe/ they e&ecuted a deed of
a*solute sale in favo of the late 5acinto
Feliciano F,edo(s 'otionH/ Felisa Feliciano
FSalina(s 'otionH/ and ,edo Cano$a FLeona
and Maia(s 'otionH.
On Nove.*e 4"/ :1!!/ 5acinto +as
issued a Fee ,atent fo the 'otion of land
he *ou%ht/ declain% that the sa.e +as
'u*lic land +hich +as -st occu'ied and
cultivated *y ,edo Feliciano. On Fe*uay
4#/ :1!1/ ,edo Cano$a +as issued an OCT
fo the land 'uchased fo. Leona and
Maia Feliciano.
On Octo*e :"/ :11#/ 'etitiones/
+hich ae the heis of the late Este*an
Feliciano FEu%enio Feliciano and An%elina
Feliciano3)e LeonH and of the late )ooteo
Feliciano FTinidad Feliciano3Ialiente and
6asilia Feliciano3TinidadH -led a co.'laint
a%ainst Salina/ Felisa/ ,edo Cano$a/ and
the heis of the late 5acinto Feliciano fo the
)eclaation of Nullity of )ocu.ents and
title/ Recovey of Real ,o'ety and
)a.a%es *ecause the settle.ent of the
estate andsale +ee done +ithout thei
'atici'ation and consent as heis of
Este*an and )ooteo. RTC uled in favo of
'etitiones. On a''eal/ CA evesed RTC(s
decision ulin% that 'esci'tion had set in
and that the a''lica*le 'esci'tive 'eiod
to annul is fou yeas fo. the discovey of
the faud. ,etitiones -led a MR *ut +as
denied.
Issue: CON the CA eed +hen it held that
the a''lica*le 'esci'tive 'eiod is fou F2H
yeasQ
<eld: NO. A deed of e&ta7udicial 'atition
e&ecuted +ithout includin% so.e of the
heis/ +ho had no 0no+led%e of and
consent to the sa.e/ is faudulent and
vicious. An action to set it aside on the
%ound of faud could *e instituted/
ho+eve/ such action .ust *e *ou%ht
+ithin fou F2H yeas fo. the discovey of
the faud. In this case/ the heis of )ooteo
and Este*an +as not a*le to 'atici'ate in
the e&ta7udicial 'atition e&ecuted *y the
othe heis and such deed +as faudulently
o*tained. Moeove/ the ecods sho+ that
'etitiones( co.'laint +as -led only on
Octo*e :"/ :11#/ o :@ yeas afte 5acinto
Feliciano +as issued a Fee ,atent and
al.ost :2 yeas afte ,edo Cano$a +as
issued an OCT. ,etitiones ae dee.ed to
have o*tained constuctive notice u'on the
e%istation of the Fee ,atent.
Man%ahas vs. 6o*io
Facts: ,aci-co 6o*io died intestate/
leavin% thee 'acels of land and +as
suvived *y his +ife/ es'ondent Eufocina
6o*io/ fou le%iti.ate childen/ and thee
ille%iti.ate childen. ,etitione Ca.ela
6o*io Man%ahas is one the ille%iti.ate
childen. The heis of ,aci-co Fincludin%
'etitioneH e&ecuted a )eed of E&ta7udicial
Sette.ent +ith +aive +heein they
+aived thei es'ective shaes ove the
'acels of land in favo of es'ondent fo a
consideation of ,:?>/>>>. Accodin% to
'etitione/ the es'ondent 'o.ised he an
additional a.ount fo he fathe(s shae
*ut +hen the fo.e de.anded it/ the
es'ondent efused to 'ay.
A yea late/ es'ondent 6o*io +as
e9uied *y the 6IR to su*.it an oi%inal
co'y of the deed. Res'ondent did not have
an oi%inal co'y of the deed. Chen she
9
as0ed 'etitione Man%ahas to countesi%n
a co'y of a deed/ she efused to si%n
unless she +as %iven the additional
a.ount that she as0ed fo. Late/ 'etitione
si%ned the deed afte the es'ondent
e&ecuted a 'o.issoy note a.ountin% to
,@>>/>>>. <o+eve/ es'ondent failed to
'ay the a.ount des'ite seveal de.ands.
Thus/ a co.'laint fo s'eci-c 'efo.ance
+as -led *y the 'etitione. Res'ondent
aves that she +as foced to si%n the
'o.issoy note. RTC uled in favo of
'etitione. CA evesed the decision of the
RTC. It uled that thee +as no valua*le
consideation since 'etitione had aleady
'eviously si%ned the deed and +as
aleady %iven ,:?>/>>> and that thee +as
inti.idation on the si%nin% of the
'o.issoy note. Futhe/ it held that if
'etitione disa%eed +ith the a.ount she
eceived/ she should have -led an action
fo 'atition.
Issue: F:H CON the CA eed +hen it found
that the 'o.issoy note +as +ithout
consideation and +as si%ned +ith
inti.idation.
F4H CON the CA eed +hen it
stated that 'etitione should have -led an
action fo 'atition instead of a case fo
s'eci-c 'efo.ance.
<eld: F:H YES. Thee +as no sho+in% that
es'ondent +as de'ived of fee a%ency
+hen she si%ned the 'o.issoy note. She
still had a choice and could have efused to
e&ecute the 'o.issoy note and esoted
to 7udicial .eans. As to the consideation/
es'ondent failed to 'ove that the
'o.issoy note +as not su''oted *y any
consideation. It +as clea that the note
+as issued fo a cause o consideation/
+hich is the 'etitione(s si%natue on the
docu.ent.
F4H YES. An action fo 'atition
i.'lies that the 'o'ety is still o+ned in
co..on. Considein% that the heis had
aleady e&ecuted a deed of e&ta7udicial
settle.ent and +aived thei shaes in favo
o es'ondent/ the 'o'eties ae no lon%e
unde a state of co3o+neshi'= thee is
nothin% .oe to *e 'atitioned/ as
o+neshi' had aleady *een .e%ed in one
'eson.
Rule !> Cases
SARMIENTA IS MANALITE <OMEOCNERS
ASSO.
8R :"41?# Octo*e ::/ 4>:>
FACTS
Manalite <o.eo+nes Association/ Inc.
FMA<AH -led a case fo unla+ful
detaineMfoci*le enty. It alle%ed that it +as
the o+ne of the su*7ect 'o'ety and the
,etitione AMARA/ thou%h foce/
inti.idation/ state%y and stealth enteed
the 'e.ises and constucted a *uildin%.
AMARA even -led a case fo the annul.ent
of MA<A(s title. Chen AMARA lost the case/
MA<A odeed the fo.e to vacate.
AMARA 'leaded MA<A to %ive the. one
yea 'eiod to stay. MA<A acceded. Such
'eiod +as e'eatedly e&tended due to the
*enevolence of MA<A. Late on/ AMARA
'o'osed that they *eco.e .e.*es of
MA<A so they can *e 9uali-ed to ac9uie
'otions of the 'o'ety *y sale 'usuant to
the Co..unity Mot%a%e ,o%a.
FCM,H. MA<A a%ain a%eed and toleated
AMARA(S 'ossession/ %ivin% the. until
)ece.*e :111 to co.'ly +ith the
e9uie.ents. AMARA still failed to co.'ly.
Thus afte fo.al de.and lettes to vacate
+as i%noed *y AMARA/ MA<A -led the
co.'laint fo R-orcible ntr$;9nla&*(l
Detainer.S The MTCC dis.issed the case.
RTC evesed the decision of MTC. CA
aE.ed decision of RTC. <ence this
'esent 'etition.
,etitiones asset that the 7uisdictional
e9uie.ent of 'io 'hysical 'ossession in
actions fo foci*le enty +as not alle%ed
+ith 'aticulaity in the co.'laint/ as it
.eely alle%ed that es'ondent had *een
de'ived of its 'ossession ove the
'o'ety. They also .aintained that they
+ee not +ithholdin% 'ossession of the
'o'ety u'on the e&'iation o te.ination
of thei i%ht to 'ossess *ecause they
neve e&ecuted any contact/ e&'ess o
i.'lied/ in favo of the es'ondent. <ence/
thee +as also no unla+ful detaine.
ISSAE
Chethe o not the alle%ations in the
co.'laint ae suEcient to .a0e u' a case
of unla+ful detaine.
<EL)
Yes. In foci*le enty/ the 'laintiD .ust
alle%e in the co.'laint/ and 'ove/ that he
+as in 'io 'hysical 'ossession of the
10
'o'ety in dis'ute until he +as de'ived
theeof *y the defendant *y any of the
.eans 'ovided in Section :/ Rule !> of
the Rules eithe *y foce/ inti.idation/
theat/ state%y o stealth. In unla+ful
detaine/ thee .ust *e an alle%ation in the
co.'laint of ho+ the 'ossession of
defendant stated o continued/ that is/ *y
vitue of lease o any contact/ and that
defendant holds 'ossession of the land o
*uildin% Rafte the e&'iation o te.ination
of the i%ht to hold 'ossession *y vitue of
any contact/ e&'ess o i.'lied.S
Evidence 'oves that afte MA<A ac9uied
the 'o'ety/ MA<A toleated 'etitiones(
stay and %ave the. the o'tion to ac9uie
'otions of the 'o'ety *y *eco.in%
.e.*es of MA<A. ,etitiones( continued
stay on the 'e.ises +as su*7ect to the
condition that they shall co.'ly +ith the
e9uie.ents of the CM,. Thus/ +hen they
failed to ful-ll thei o*li%ations/ MA<A had
the i%ht to de.and fo the. to vacate the
'o'ety as thei i%ht of 'ossession had
aleady e&'ied o had *een
te.inated. The .o.ent MA<A e9uied
'etitiones to leave/ 'etitiones *eca.e
defociants ille%ally occu'yin% the
land. Cell settled is the ule that a 'eson
+ho occu'ies the land of anothe at the
latte(s toleance o 'e.ission/ +ithout
any contact *et+een the./ is necessaily
*ound *y an i.'lied 'o.ise that he +ill
vacate u'on de.and/ failin% +hich/ a
su..ay action fo e7ect.ent is the 'o'e
e.edy a%ainst hi.. Thus/ the RTC and the
CA coectly uled in favo of MA<A.
As to 'etitiones( a%u.ent that MA<A(s
title is void fo havin% *een secued
faudulently/ +e -nd that such issue +as
i.'o'ely aised. In an unla+ful detaine
case/ the sole issue fo esolution is
'hysical o .ateial 'ossession of the
'o'ety involved/ inde'endent of any
clai. of o+neshi' *y any of the
'aties. Since the only issue involved is
the 'hysical o .ateial 'ossession of the
'e.ises/ that is 'ossession de *acto and
not 'ossession de 0(re/ the 9uestion of
o+neshi' .ust *e theshed out in a
se'aate action.


CALARA IS. FRANCISCO
T8.R. No. :?@2#1 : Se'te.*e 41/ 4>:>U .
Facts
,etitione Cle.encia Calaa and he
childen o+n the Lo'hcal FCalaaH
Su*division in 6%y. Anos/ Los 6anos. The
es'ondents in this case ae the *uyes of
the Calaa su*d. So.e of the *uyes of the
su*7ect lot instituted a case fo violation of
,.). 1?!/ a la+ that e%ulates the sale of
su*d lots and condo.iniu.s/ *efoe the
then <u.an Settle.ent Re%ulatoy
Co..ission F<SRCH inco'oatin%
%ievances such as a*sence of a daina%e
syste./ un-nished cu* and %utte/
undevelo'ed oads and a*andoned
electical facilities.
The Calaas conse9uently -led suits
a%ainst es'ondents Fancisco s'ouses and
8audencio Navao +ith the MTC. On 4@
Au%ust :1"4/ es'ondents and 8audencio
Navao -led a 7oint .otion to dis.iss on
the %ound that the Munici'al Cout had no
7uisdiction ove the co.'laints -led
a%ainst the. *y 'etitione since anothe
action ove the sa.e cause and the sa.e
'aties +as 'endin% *efoe the <SRC. MTC
denied the sa.e. In the .eanti.e/ the
<SRC endeed a decision ulin% in favo of
the *uyes odein% the Calaas a.on%
othes to to develo' the su*division.
<o+eve tial ensued in the unla+ful
detaine case. MTC uled in favo of the
Calaas discountin% the e&istence of a
contact of sale *et+een 'etitiones and
es'ondents and u'holdin% its 7uisdiction
ove the case and odeed the es'ondents
*uyes to vacate the land. On a''eal in
RTC/ the latte aE.ed in toto the decision
of MTC. <o+eve/ +hen the case eached
the CA/ it endeed decision/ evesin% the
decisions of the MTC and RTC and odein%
the dis.issal of 'etitionesJ co.'laint fo
unla+ful detaine u'on the conclusion that
+hen a co.'laint fo unla+ful detaine
aises fo. the failue of a *uye on
install.ent *asis of eal 'o'ety to 'ay
*ased on a i%ht to sto' 'ayin% .onthly
a.oti$ations unde ,) 1?!/ the
dete.inative 9uestion is e&clusively
co%ni$a*le *y the <ousin% and Land Ase
Re%ulatoy 6oad F<LAR6H. Theefoe/ the
9uestion of the i%ht to collect the .onthly
a.oti$ation .ust *e dete.ined *y said
a%ency.,etitiones u%e the evesal of the
assailed decision on the follo+in% %ounds:
ISSAE
11
C<T<ER OR NOT CA ERRE) IN )ECLARIN8
T<AT T<E <OASIN8 AN) LAN) ASE
RE8ALATORY 6OAR) F<LAR6H <AS
EVCLASIIE ORI8INAL 5ARIS)ICTION TO
)ETERMINE C<ET<ER T<ERE IS A
,ERFECTE) CONTRACT TO SELL 6ETCEEN
,ETITIONER CALARA AN) RES,ON)ENTS
FRANCISCO
<EL)
CA coectly uled that the cause of action
e.*odied in the co.'laint of 'etitiones
not a si.'le cause of action fo unla+ful
detaine a%ainst es'ondents. ,etitioneJs
co.'laint is fo unla+ful detaine. Chile
%eneally s'ea0in% such action falls +ithin
the oi%inal and e&clusive 7uisdiction of the
MTC/ the dete.ination of the %ound fo
e7ect.ent e9uies a consideation of the
i%hts of a *uye on install.ent *asis of
eal 'o'ety. Indeed 'ivate es'ondent
clai.s that he has a i%ht unde ,.). No.
1?!/ to sto' 'ayin% .onthly a.oti$ations
afte %ivin% due notice to the o+ne o
develo'e of his decision to do so *ecause
of 'etitioneJs alle%ed failue to develo' the
su*division o condo.iniu. 'o7ect
accodin% to the a''oved 'lans and +ithin
the ti.e fo co.'lyin% +ith the sa.e. The
case thus involves a dete.ination of the
i%hts and o*li%ations of 'aties in a sale of
eal estate unde ,.). No. 1?!. The
dete.inative 9uestion theefoe is
e&clusively co%ni$a*le *y the <LAR6/ the
9uestion of the i%ht of 'etitione .ust *e
dete.ined *y the a%ency.
Thus/ 'etitioneJs cause of action a%ainst
'ivate es'ondent should instead *e -led
as a counteclai. in <LAR6 Case in
accodance +ith Rule @of the Rules of Cout
+hich is of su''letoy a''lication to the
<LAR6 Rules of ,ocedue. As the sole
e%ulatoy *ody fo housin% and land
develo'.ent/

the <LAR6 has 7uisdiction
ove 'etitionesJ cause a%ainst es'ondents
and is clealy the *est fou. fo the
dete.ination of all the issues elevant
theeto.
N.6.
%o&ever/ t'e )ere relations'i" o* t'e
"arties as a s(bdivision develo"er;o&ner
and s(bdivision lot b($er does not/
concededl$/ vest t'e %?9RB a(to)atic
0(risdiction over a case. +n t'e cases
o* Ro!as vs. Co(rt o* A""eals and -ilar
Develo")ent Cor"oration vs. S"s. Cillar/
t'is Co(rt ("'eld t'e 2TCDs 0(risdiction
over t'e co)"laint *or e0ect)ent
co))enced b$ t'e s(bdivision develo"er
on acco(nt o* t'e b($erDs *ail(re to "a$ t'e
install)ents sti"(lated in t'e "art$Ds
contract to sell. +n said cases/ 'o&ever/
t'e b($ers 'ad no 0(sti3able #ro(nd to
sto" "a$)ent o* t'e sti"(lated
install)ents and;or an$ o* t'e ca(ses o*
action co#ni:able b$ t'e %?9RB (nder
Section 1

o* ,.D. 1>44. +n not a""l$in# t'e
r(lin# in -rancel Realt$ Cor"oration vs.
S$ci"/ )oreover/ t'e Co(rt li.e&ise too.
a""ro"riate note o* t'e *act t'at t'e b($ers
in said cases 'ave not co))enced an
action *or (nso(nd real estate b(sinesses
"ractices a#ainst t'e s(bdivision
develo"ers. %ere/ res"ondents 'ave not
onl$ instit(ted a co)"laint *or violation o*
,.D. 7E7 a#ainst "etitioner Cle)encia
Calara b(t 'ad also alread$ obtained a
de3nitive r(lin# on t'e latterDs *ail(re to
*(ll$ develo" t'e s(bdivision &'ic' t'e$
cited as 0(sti3cation *or not )a.in# *(rt'er
"a$)ents on ?ot No. <> o* t'e ?o"'cal
(Calara) S(bdivision.
2odestos vs. 9rbina
-acts@ calos A*ina -led a co.'laint fo
ecovey of 'ossession of a 'acel of lot
located at Ta%ui%. <e alle%ed that Modestos
%ained 'ossession of lot thou%h stealth/
sche.e/ and .achinations/ and des'ite
de.and/ Modestos efused to vacate the
'e.ises. Eally on/ Modestos ne%otiated
+ith A*ina fo the sale of the lot/ ho+eve
it did not .ateiali$e. Late on/ Modestos
clai.ed 'ossessoy i%ht ove the land *y
vitue of Insula 8oven.ent ,atent Sales
a''lication 'endin% +ith the Land
Mana%e.ent 6ueau/ on the othe hand
A*ina clai.ed *y vitue of Miscellaneous
Sales A''lication also 'endin% +ith the
Land Mana%e.ent 6ueau.
The RTC uled in favo of A*ina/ on the
%ound that Modestos +ee esto''ed in
9uestionin% the 'ossessoy i%ht of A*ina
*y eason of the ac0no+led%e.ent of the
'ossessoy i%ht of the late/ +hen he
enteed into ne%otiated contact of sale
+hich +as cancelled. The CA aE.ed in
toto the decision of the RTC. <ence this
'etition fo evie+ on cetioai. The
Modestos .ainly a%ued that at the ti.e
A*ina -led his MSA and ac9uied ta&
declaation ove the su*7ect 'o'ety/ it
+as still a %oven.ent 'o'ety/ *ein% 'at
of Fot 6onifacio .ilitay esevation and
since thei oDe to *uy the 'o'ety fo.
A*ina +as *ased on his false assetion/
the 'inci'le of esto''el cannot a''ly.
12
+ss(e@ +on A*ina has the *ette
'ossessoy i%ht ove the su*7ect 'o'ety
*y vitue of MSA and +on Modestos +as
esto''edQ
%eld@ No. The MSA FMiscellaneous Sale
A''licationH -led *y the A*ina is not
a''o'iate *ecause the su*7ect lot is still a
%oven.ent 'o'ety/ *ein% 'at of Fot
6onifacio .ilitay esevation/ hence no
one can clai. 'ossessoy i%ht ove the
said lot.
It is only afte Octo*e :@/ :1"! that the
9uestioned 'o'ety has *een declaed
aliena*le and dis'osa*le *y vitue of
,esidential ,ocla.ation :!4. It is the only
that ti.e +hen a 'ivate 'eson can le%ally
clai. 'ossessoy i%ht ove it. <ence the
clai.ed 'ossession of A*ina as ealy as
5uly 4:/ :1@@/ +hen he -led his MSA/ is
unla+ful and could not *e the *asis of
'ossessoy i%hts. On the contay/
Modestos +ee the actual 'ossesso of the
'o'ety +hen it +as declaed aliena*le
and dis'osa*le on Octo*e :@/ :1"! and
continued to 'ossess the 'o'ety until the
'esent ti.e. Futhe.oe Modestos have
Insula 8oven.ent ,atent Sales
A''lication ove the 'o'ety 'endin% +ith
the Land Mana%e.ent 6ueau/ +hich they
-led on 5anuay 4>>1. In contast A*ina
has a MSA -led in :1@@/ +hich the Land
Mana%e.ent 6ueau consideed invalid
since it +as -led +hen the 'o'ety is still
fo.ed 'at of Fot 6onifacio .ilitay
esevation. Cith es'ect on the issue on
esto''el/ no esto''el aises +hee the
conduct of the 'aty sou%ht to *e esto''ed
is due to i%noance u'on an innocent
.ista0e.
Ca*onilla vs a*iea
Facts: d. )ioscoo ca*onilla -led a
co.'laint fo e7ect.ent a%ainst .acelo
a*iea and .aicis a*iea 'aedes +ith the
.tcc. <e alle%ed that he is the o+ne of
the land/ as evidenced *y toens
ceti-cate of title. <e futhe clai.ed that
he is the also the o+ne of the *uildin%
situated theeon and the es'ondents
occu'ation is only *y .ee toleance of the
oi%inal o+ne. The es'ondents denied the
alle%ation. They alle%ed that they inheited
the land fo. theis 'edecessos and they
have *een in 'ossession of it since :1@>.
The .tcc uled that the land is o+ned *y
ca*onilla/ as evidenced *y the toens
ceti-cate of title. <o+eve +ith e%ad to
the *uildin%/ the .tcc uled in favo of the
es'ondents/ fo failue of ca*onilla to
efute the clai. of the es'ondents.
Ca*onilla elevated the case to the tc. Rtc
aE.ed the decision of the .tcc/ ho+eve
+ith es'ect to the *uildin% tc uled that
the es'ondents failed to 'ove that the
*uildin% +as not included in the tansfe in
the na.e of ca*onilla.
Res'ondents -led a 'etition fo evie+ +ith
the c.a. C.a. evesed the decision of the
tc/ it found out that thee +as no evidence
that the es'ondents 'ossession +as *y
.ee toleance. Futhe/ the action has
aleady 'esci*ed since the : yea 'eiod
fo -lin% foci*le enty has aleady la'sed.
Ca*onilla -led a 'etition fo evie+ on
cetioai +ith the sc.
Issue: +on the alle%ations in the co.'laint
ae suEcient to .a0e u' a case of unla+ful
detaine.
<eld: no/ +Mout a dou*t/ the e%isteed
o+ne of eal 'o'ety is entitled to its
'ossession. <o+eve/ the o+ne cannot
si.'ly +est 'ossession theeof fo.
+hoeve is in actual occu'ation of the
'o'ety to ecove 'ossession/ he .ust
esot to the 'o'e 7udicial e.edy. In the
'esent case/ ca*onilla o'ted to -le an
e7ect.ent case 3 foci*le enty and
unla+ful detaine. The only 9uestion that
the couts esolve in e7ect.ent 'oceedin%
is: +ho is entitled to the 'hysical
'ossession of the 'o'ety. Fo this eason/
an e7ect.ent case +ill not necessaily *e
decided in favo of one +ho has 'esented
'oof of o+neshi'.
Ca*onillaJs alle%ation that es'ondents
'ossession +as *y .ee toleance .a0e
out a case fo unla+ful detaine. It involves
the 'esonJs +ithholdin% fo. anothe of
'ossession of 'o'ety to +hich the latte is
entitled afte the e&'iation of the fo.eJs
i%ht to hold 'ossession.
A e9uie.ent fo a valid cause of action in
an unla+ful detaine case is that
'ossession .ust *e oi%inally la+ful/ and
such 'ossession .ust have tuned unla+ful
only u'on e&'iation of the i%ht of
'ossession.
Ca*onilla failed to 'ove that es'ondents
'ossession +as *ased on his alle%ed
13
toleance.
<e did not oDe any evidence that they
toleated es'ondents enty to and
occu'ation of the su*7ect 'o'ety. A *ae
alle%ation of toleance +ill not suEce. <e
.ust/ at least/ sho+ ovet acts indicative of
his o his 'edecessos 'e.ission to
occu'y the su*7ect 'o'ety.
La Ca.'ana )ev. Co'. vs. Ledes.a
Facts: ,etitione -led an e7ect.ent case
+ith the Meto'olitan Tial Cout FMeTCH
a%ainst 'ivate es'ondent Ledes.a/
alle%in% that des'ite e&'iation of the
contact of lease e&ecuted *et+een the.
and de.ands to vacate su*7ect 'e.ises
and 'ay entals theefo/ the latte failed to
co.'ly +ith such de.ands. ,ivate
es'ondent counteed in his Ans+e that he
had 'aid the entals ove su*7ect 'e.ises
and 'etitione no lon%e had the i%ht to
'ossess the 'o'ety as it had *een
foeclosed *y the )evelo'.ent 6an0 of the
,hili''ines F)6,H. ,ivate es'ondent
futhe 'ointed out that su*7ect 'e.ises
had in fact *een in the 'ossession of the
)6, since Mach o A'il of :11!/ so since
that ti.e/ it +as +ith the )6, that he
.ade aan%e.ents fo his continued
occu'ation of the su*7ect 'e.ises. The
MeTC then endeed 7ud%.ent in favo of
'etitione/ odein% 'ivate es'ondent to
suende 'ossession of su*7ect 'e.ises
to 'etitione. ,ivate es'ondent a''ealed
to the Re%ional Tial Cout FRTCH/ and to
stay e&ecution of said 7ud%.ent/ 'ivate
es'ondent -led a su'esedeas *ond +ith
the MeTC. The RTC aE.ed the MeTC
7ud%.ent. ,etitione then .oved fo the
i..ediate e&ecution of the RTC )ecision/
+hich .otion +as %anted *y the RTC.
Mean+hile/ 'ivate es'ondent elevated
the case to the CA via a 'etition fo evie+
on cetioai +ith 'aye fo the issuance of
a te.'oay estainin% ode o +it of
'eli.inay in7unction. A te.'oay
estainin% ode +as issued *y the CA/
eDectively stayin% i.'le.entation of the
+it of e&ecution issued *y the RTC. No+
the 'esent 'etition fo cetioai fo the
annul.ent of the CA(s esolution
Issue: :. Chethe the CA co..itted %ave
a*use of discetion a.ountin% to lac0 o
e&cess of 7uisdiction +hen it odeed the
issuance of a +it of 'eli.inay in7unction
to stay the i..ediate e&ecution of the RTC
7ud%.ent
4. Chethe the CA e in considein% the
su'esedeas *ond -led +ith the MTC/
+hich ans+es fo un'aid entals/ as
suEcient *ond fo the issuance of a +it of
'eli.inay in7unction
<eld: No. Chen e&i%encies in the case
+aant it/ the a''ellate cout .ay stay the
+it of e&ecution issued *y the RTC in an
action fo e7ect.ent if thee ae
cicu.stances necessitatin% such action.
Chee su'evenin% events Foccuin%
su*se9uent to the 7ud%.entH *in% a*out a
.ateial chan%e in the situation of the
'aties +hich .a0es the e&ecution
ine9uita*le/ o +hee thee is no
co.'ellin% u%ency fo the e&ecution
*ecause it is not 7usti-ed *y the 'evailin%
cicu.stances/ the cout .ay stay
i..ediate e&ecution of the 7ud%.ent.
Thee also e&ists a .ateial chan%e in the
situation of the 'aties. The CA 'o'ely
too0 into seious consideation the fact that
in its )ecision in CA38.R. CI No. #2"?@
entitled La Ca.'ana Food ,oducts/ Inc. v.
)evelo'.ent 6an0 of the ,hili''ines/
+hich has *eco.e -nal and e&ecutoy/ it
odeed heein 'etitione/ fo.ely 0no+n
as La Ca.'ana Food ,oducts/ Inc./ to
suende 'ossession of su*7ect 'o'eties
to the )evelo'.ent 6an0 of the
,hili''ines. Evidently/ a seious cloud of
dou*t has *een cast on 'etitione(s i%ht of
'ossession/ .a0in% it 9uestiona*le
+hethe the RTC )ecision/ odein% 'ivate
es'ondent to suende 'ossession of
su*7ect 'e.ises to 'etitione/ should *e
i..ediately i.'le.ented. Theefoe/ the
CA did not %avely a*use its discetion in
this case= athe/ it acted 'udently +hen it
stayed e&ecution of the RTC )ecision until
such ti.e that a -nal esolution of the .ain
case is eached.
,etitioneJs contention/ that it +as
i.'o'e fo the CA to have %anted
'ivate es'ondentJs .otion to conside the
su'esedeas *ond it 'osted +ith the
Meto'olitan Tial Cout as suEcient to
cove the *ond e9uied fo the issuance of
the +it of 'eli.inay in7unction/ is
li0e+ise incoect. ,etitione a%ues that/
Gsaid su'esedeas *ond is 'osted solely
and 'i.aily to ans+e fo a s'eci-c
'u'ose +hich is fo the 'ay.ent of un'aid
entals accuin% u' to the -nal 7ud%.ent.
This cannot *e held ans+ea*le fo
da.a%es to 'etitione should it late *e
14
found out that the 'ivate es'ondent is
not entitled to the issuance.
Since the only da.a%es that 'etitione
.ay *e entitled to in an action fo unla+ful
detaine ae those aisin% fo. its loss of
the use o occu'ation of su*7ect 'e.ises/
the only da.a%es 'etitione can clai. *y
eason of the stay of e&ecution of the RTC
7ud%.ent is also only fo the GentG o Gfai
ental valueG fo the 'o'ety in 9uestion.
Theefoe/ the CA did not e in considein%
the su'esedeas *ond -led +ith the MTC/
+hich ans+es fo un'aid entals/ as
suEcient *ond fo the issuance of a +it of
'eli.inay in7unction.
Fee vs. Ra*eca
Facts: On 5uly :4/ 4>>2/ the 'laintiD(s
counsel -led a .otion fo i..ediate
e&ecution/ 'ayin% that a +it of e&ecution
*e issued Gfo the i..ediate e&ecution of
the afoesaid 5ud%.ent.G The 'laintiD cited
Section :1/ Rule !> of the Rules of Cout as
*asis fo its .otion.
4

In his ode dated 5uly :2/ 4>>2/ ho+eve/
es'ondent 5ud%e denied the .otion fo
i..ediate e&ecution/
#
statin%:
A Notice of A''eal dated 5uly 1/ 4>>2/
havin% *een seasona*ly -led *y counsel
fo the defendant/ let the ecods of the
a*ove3ca'tioned case *e/ as it is hee*y
odeed/ elevated to the Re%ional Tial
Cout of Manila fo a''o'iate 'oceedin%s
and dis'osition.
Considein% that the Cout has aleady
%iven due couse to the a''eal of the
defendant +hich +as 'efected +ithin the
e%le.entay 'eiod/ no .oe action +ill *e
ta0en on the Motion fo Reconsideation
dated 5uly :1/ 4>>2 -led *y the 'laintiD
thu counsel.
The co.'lainants aveed that es'ondent
5ud%e(s denial of thei .otions had
endeed thei victoy inutile/ and had
unfaily de'ived the 'laintiD of the
'ossession of the 'e.ises. They futhe
aveed that es'ondent 5ud%e(s efusal to
'efo. an act .andated *y the Rules of
Cout had %iven undue advanta%e to the
defendant to the 'laintiD(s da.a%e and
'e7udice.
In his co..ent dated Se'te.*e :@/ 4>>2/
es'ondent 5ud%e denied the cha%es. <e
e&'lained that he had honestly thou%ht
that his cout had lost 7uisdiction ove the
case 'usuant to the 'ovision of Section 1/
Rule 2: of the Rules of Cout F+hich
'ovides that Gin a''eals *y notice of
a''eal/ the cout loses 7uisdiction ove the
case u'on the 'efection of the a''eals
-led in due ti.e and the e&'iation of the
ti.e to a''eal of the othe 'atiesGH once
he had %iven due couse to the defendant(s
notice of a''eal.
The co.'lainants contended that
es'ondent 5ud%e e&hi*ited his i%noance
of the la+ and 'ocedue in elyin% on
Section 1/ Rule 2: of the Rules of Cout
+hich efeed to a''eals fo. the
Re%ional Tial Cout= that Rule 2>/ +hich
contained 'ovisions on a''eal fo. the
Munici'al Tial Couts to the Re%ional Tial
Couts/ and +hich 'ovided in its Section 2
that the 'efection of the a''eal and the
eDect of such 'efection should *e
%ovened *y the 'ovisions of Section 1 of
Rule 2:/ concened a''eals *y notice of
a''eal in %eneal= and that instead/ the
a''lica*le ule should *e Section :1/ Rule
!> of the Rules of Cout.
The co.'lainants 'ointed out that
es'ondent 5ud%e a''aently did not 0no+
that a''eal in foci*le enty and detaine
cases +as not 'efected *y the .ee -lin%
of a notice of a''eal Fas in odinay
actionsH *ut *y -lin% of a notice of a''eal
and a suEcient su'esedeas *ond
a''oved *y the tial 7ud%e e&ecuted to the
'laintiD to 'ay the ents/ da.a%es and
costs accuin% do+n to the ti.e of the
7ud%.ent a''ealed fo.. They asseted
that es'ondent 5ud%e(s invocation of %ood
faith and eo of 7ud%.ent did not a*solve
hi. of lia*ility/ *ecause he had %ossly
ne%lected his duties .andated *y la+ *y
failin% and efusin% to act on thei .otion
fo i..ediate e&ecution and .otion fo
econsideation and *y %ivin% due couse
to the a''eal des'ite no su'esedeas *ond
havin% *een -led and a''oved *y the tial
cout.
Issue: Chethe the 7ud%e +as i%noant in
not considein% the ule of 'ocedue in
a''eal fo. cases of foci*le enty o
unla+ful detaine
15
<eld: Yes. In the case at *a *ased on sec
:1 +hich states:
GSEC. :1. If 7ud%.ent is
endeed a%ainst the defendant/
e&ecution s'all iss(e i))ediatel$
u'on .otion/ (nless an a''eal has
*een 'efected and t'e de*endant
to sta$ e!ec(tion 3les a
s("ersedeas bond/ a''oved *y
the Munici'al Tial Cout and
e&ecuted in favo of the 'laintiD to
'ay the ents/ da.a%es/ and costs
accuin% do+n to the ti.e of the
7ud%.ent a''ealed fo./ and
unless/ duin% the 'endency of the
a''eal/ he de'osits +ith the
a''ellate cout the a.ount of ent
due fo. ti.e to ti.e unde the
contact/ if any/ as dete.ined *y
the 7ud%.ent of the Munici'al Tial
Cout. VVVV VVVV VVVV.G
It is clea fo. the foe%oin% that the
'efection of an a''eal *y itself is not
suEcient to stay the e&ecution of the
7ud%.ent in an e7ect.ent case. The losin%
'aty should li0e+ise -le a su'esedeas
*ond e&ecuted in favo of the 'laintiD to
ans+e fo ents/ da.a%es and costs/ and/
if the 7ud%.ent of the cout e9uies it/ he
should li0e+ise de'osit the a.ount of the
ent *efoe the a''ellate cout fo. the
ti.e duin% the 'endency of the a''eal.
Othe+ise/ e&ecution *eco.es .inisteial
and i.'eative.
defendant seasona*ly -led his Notice of
A''eal dated 1 5uly 4>>2 on :# 5uly 4>>2=
he ho+eve failed to -le any su'esedeas
*ond. ,rior to the -lin% of such notice of
a''eal/ .oe s'eci-cally on :4 5uly 4>>2/
co.'lainants have aleady -led thei
Motion fo E&ecution dated " 5uly 4>>2.
Instead of actin% on the Motion fo
E&ecution/ es'ondent 5ud%e Ra*aca %ave
due couse to the a''eal in an Ode dated
:2 5uly 4>>2 and diected his 6anch Cle0
of Cout to elevate the ecods of the case
to the Re%ional Tial Cout FRTCH. The
6anch Cle0 of Cout ho+eve failed to
fo+ad the ecods to the RTC. This fact is
clea fo. 5ud%e Ra*aca(s Ode dated 4"
5uly 4>>2 +heein he diected the 6anch
Cle0 of Cout to fo+ad the ecods of the
case to the Manila Re%ional Tial Cout
i..ediately. Fo. the foe%oin%/ it is clea
that +hen the co.'lainant .oved fo the
i..ediate e&ecution of 5ud%e Ra*aca(s
decision/ the latte still had 7uisdiction
ove the case. <e theefoe clealy eed
+hen he efused to act on the Motion fo
E&ecution.
Rule !: Cases
Yasay vs. Recto
Facts: On 5une 4"/ :11@/ so.e stoc0holdes
of Inte'ot Resouces Co'oation FIRCH
as0ed then SEC Chai.an ,efecto Yasay to
investi%ate and validate the 'o&ies and
no.inations fo diectos of the
co'oation.
In line +ith this and on the sa.e date F5une
4"H/ the SEC issued a TRO a%ainst the
oEces of the co'oation to CEASE and
)ESIST fo. conductin% its annual
stoc0holdes .eetin% on 5uly 1/ :11@.
6ut *ecause the oEces of IRC +hee a*le
to %et fo. the Cout of A''eals a TRO
a%ainst the Ode of SEC not to %o thou%h
+ith the 5uly 1 stoc0holdes( confeence/
the es'ondents F+ho +ee the oEces of
IRCHstill conducted its .eetin% as 'lanned.
On the ne&t day/ 5uly :>/ :11@/ the
SEC declaed IRC(s confeence as invalid
and odeed the es'ondents FoEces of
the IRCH to sho+ cause +hy they shouldn(t
*e cited fo conte.'t. On the heain%/ the
es'ondent oEces cited the TRO issued *y
the CA as the eason +hy they still +ent
thou%h +ith the .eetin%Mconfeence.
Nevetheless/ the SEC still found the
es'ondent oEces %uilty fo conte.'t.
The Ode of the SEC +ent even as fa as
*ain% Atty. Manalaysay/ one of the
es'ondent oEces/ fo. en%a%in% in the
'actice of la+.
And so/ es'ondent +ent to the CA to
a''eal SEC(s decision +heein the
a''ellate cout evesed SEC(s decision.
Fo. this evesal/ the 'etitione SEC
chai.an A,,EALS to the SC via 'etition fo
evie+/ clai.in% that the evesal of the
a''ellate cout of the decision of the SEC
+as i.'o'e.
6ut the es'ondents a%ue that the
CONTEM,T C<AR8E a%ainst the. +as
CRIMINAL in natue. Thus/ +hen the CA
evesed the %uilty vedict of the SEC
-ndin% es'ondents %uilty of conte.'t/
said decisionMevesal +as tanta.ount to a
NOT 8AILTY vedict +heein no a''eal can
*e ta0en.
16
Issue: F:H Cas the evesal of the CA of the
-ndin%s of SEC that es'ondents +ee
%uilty of conte.'t 'o'eQ F4H Cas the
conte.'t 'oceedin%s conducted *y the
SEC ci.inal o civil in natueQ As such/
+as the evesal of the CA a''eala*leQ
<eld: F:H The ulin% of the CA +as 'o'e
*ecause even thou%h the SEC odeed the
oEces of IRC not to %o thou%h +ith the
stoc0holdes( confeence on 5uly 1/ said
oEces +ee a*le to %et a TRO +ith the CA
a%ainst SEC(s CEASE and )ESIST Ode on
5uly ". Thus/ it +as only 'o'e that the
stoc0holdes( confeence 'ushed thou%h.
F4H Ce a%ee +ith es'ondents that the
cha%e of conte.'t 'ata0es of the natue
of a ci.inal oDense. The e&oneation of
the conte.ne fo. the cha%e a.ounts to
an ac9uittal fo. +hich an a''eal +ould
not lie.
RA distinction is .ade *et+een a civil
and ci.inal conte.'t. Civil conte.'t is
the failue to do so.ethin% odeed *y a
cout to *e done fo the *ene-t of a
'aty. A ci.inal conte.'t is any conduct
diected a%ainst the authoity o di%nity of
the cout.
,etitiones a%ue that the conte.'t
co..itted *y es'ondents +as civil in
natue/ as the te.'oay estainin% ode
the SEC issued +as fo the *ene-t of a
'aty to a case. The contention is
untena*le.
RCivil conte.'t 'oceedin%s ae
%eneally held to *e e.edial and civil in
thei natue= that is/ they ae 'oceedin%s
fo the enfoce.ent of so.e duty/ and
essentially a e.edy fo coecin% a 'eson
to do the thin% e9uied.S RIn %eneal/ civil
conte.'t 'oceedin%s should *e instituted
*y an a%%ieved 'aty/ o his successo/ o
so.eone +ho has a 'ecuniay inteest in
the i%ht to *e 'otected.S If the conte.'t
is initiated *y the cout o ti*unal
e&ecisin% the 'o+e to 'unish a %iven
conte.'t/ it is ci.inal in natue/ and the
'oceedin%s ae to *e conducted in
accodance +ith the 'inci'les and ules
a''lica*le to ci.inal cases. The State is
the eal 'osecuto.
RThe eal chaacte of the 'oceedin%s
in conte.'t cases is to *e dete.ined *y
the elief sou%ht o *y the do.inant
'u'ose. The 'oceedin%s ae to *e
e%aded as ci.inal +hen the 'u'ose is
'i.aily 'unish.ent/ and civil +hen the
'u'ose is 'i.aily co.'ensatoy o
e.edial.S
R6ut +hethe the -st o the second/
conte.'t is still a ci.inal 'oceedin% in
+hich ac9uittal/ fo instance/ is a *a to a
second 'osecution. The distinction is fo
the 'u'ose only of dete.inin% the
chaacte of 'unish.ent to *e
ad.inisteed.S In this case/ the conte.'t is
not civil in natue/ *ut ci.inal/ i.'osed to
vindicate the the di%nity and 'o+e of the
Co..ission= hence/ as in ci.inal
'oceedin%s/ an a''eal +ould not lie fo.
the ode of dis.issal of/ o an e&oneation
fo./ a cha%e of conte.'t.S
Sison v. Caoi*es
Facts: Res'ondent Caoi*es FLas ,inas
5ud%eH issued an ode citin% Sison FMM)A
taEc enfoceH of Indiect Conte.'t. The
ode ste..ed +hen Sison a''ehended
the oEcial dive and son of Caoi*es alon%
E)SA fo taEc violation.
6ecause of this incident/ Caoi*es issued an
ode diected Sison to sho+ cost +ithin the
non e&tendi*le 'eiod of 42hous R+hy he
should not *e cited as in conte.'t of cout
and dealt +ith accodin%ly.S Sison failed to
a''ea as diected in the ode. Thus/ he
+as aested and detained in 5ail. Sison +as
only discha%ed fo. detention +hen he
ad.itted unde duess that he co..itted a
.ista0e and u'on a''eal *y his counsel
assuin% Caoi*es that the sa.e incident
.ay not *e e'eated.
Su*se9uently/ Sison -led an ad.inistative
co.'laint a%ainst Caoi*es. <e alle%ed that
he did not co..itted any oDense e&ce't
that he issued a taEc violation ecei't to
the dive3son of Caoi*es. If indeed such
act is an oDense/ then Las ,inas cout has
no 7uisdiction ove it/ as the incident
ha''ened in Mandaluyon% City. <e cha%ed
that the acts of Caoi*es in aestin% hi.
+ithout a +aant o aest *efoe the
cha%e of indiect conte.'t +as head
constituted the R%avest a*use of authoity
eve co..itted.S <ence/ he 'ayed that
Caoi*es *e dis.issed fo. the sevice.
Caoi*es denied the accusations. <e
clai.ed that he initiated the co.'laint fo
indiect co.te.'t 'usuant to Sec. #FdH of
Rule !: and its last 'a./ and Sec. ?F#Hof
Rule :#?.
Investi%atin% 5ustice found Caoi*es %uilty.
Issue: Is the ode citin% Sison of indiect
conte.'t 'o'e. Cas Caoi*es 7usti-ed in
17
considein% the act of Sison as deli*eate
dise%ad of the es'ect due to cout.
<eld: F:H No. The 'eson cited fo conte.'t
is not a 'aty to case 'endin% in cout. At
-st *lush/ it +ould see. that the
es'ondent 7ud%e +as 7usti-ed in holdin%
the co.'lainant fo conte.'t/ due to the
latte(s efusal to co.'ly +ith the 7ud%e(s
Ode of Se'te.*e :?/ :111. <o+eve/ it
is not lost u'on this Cout that the
co.'lainant +as not a 'aty to any of the
cases 'endin% *efoe the RTC/ 6anch 4?#.
Chat ti%%eed the conte.'t cha%e +as/
in fact/ the taEc violation incident
involvin% the es'ondent 7ud%e(s son.
Futhe.oe/ the ecod sho+s that +hen
the co.'lainant -led his e'ly to the
cha%e as e9uied *y the es'ondent
7ud%e/ the sa.e +as efused *y so.e staD
.e.*e in the latte(s sala.
In Cortes v. Ban#alan/ +e held that a 7ud%e
.ay not hold a 'aty in conte.'t of cout
fo e&'essin% concen on the 7ud%e(s
i.'atiality thou%h a .otion fo voluntay
inhi*ition/ even if the latte .ay have felt
insulted theein. The Cout also declaed/
thus:
WTCUhile the 'o+e to
'unish in conte.'t is
inheent in all couts so as
to 'eseve ode in 7udicial
'oceedin%s and to u'hold
due ad.inistation of
7ustice/ 7ud%es/ ho+eve/
should e&ecise thei
conte.'t 'o+es
7udiciously and s'ain%ly/
+ith ut.ost estaint/ and
+ith the end in vie+ of
utili$in% thei conte.'t
'o+es fo coection and
'esevation not fo
etaliation and vindication.
F4H The es'ondent 5ud%e +as not 7usti-ed
to so conside the act and e.a0s of Sison
as thee*y dis'layin% ao%ance to+ads
and deli*eate dise%ad of the usual
es'ect/ coutesy and acco..odation due
to a cout of la+ and its e'esentative.
Fist of all/ the efusal of Sison and the
su''osed e.a0s should not cause
esent.ent on the 'at of the es'ondent
5ud%e F+ho. Sison .ost li0ely did not yet
0no+ at the ti.eH *ecause he 0ne+/ as a
'u*lic oEcial hi.self/ that Sison +as only
doin% his duty of enfocin% evenl$ the
'aticula taEc e%ulation a%ainst
s+evin% into a one3+ay steet fo. the
+on% diection/ re#ardless o* t'e o4ce or
"osition o* t'e violatorFs *at'er. Secondly/
the es'ondent 5ud%e should have had the
cicu.s'ection e&'ected of hi. as a 7ud%e
to eali$e that the e.a0s of Sison +ee
invited *y Caoi*es III(s atte.'t to *luD his
+ay out of the a''ehension beca(se 'e
&as t'e son o* an RTC 0(d#e. <ence/ the
es'ondent 5ud%e +ould have no %ounds
to cite Sison fo conte.'t of cout. And/
thidly/ the es'ondent 5ud%e and his son
should have challen%ed the issuance of the
taEc violation ecei't 'usuant to the
'etinent ules if they did not a%ee +ith
the *asis of the a''ehension and also
ad.inistatively cha%ed Sison fo any
un+aanted act co..itted. Since neithe
+as done *y the./ *ut/ on the contay/
*oth ulti.ately acce'ted the validity of the
a''ehension/ as *one out *y the etieval
of the dive(s license afte Se'te.*e 41/
:111 *y 'ayin% the -nes coes'ondin% to
the taEc violation/ then it follo+s that the
es'ondent 5ud%e had the consciousness
that his son +as at fault/ instead of Sison.
8.R. No. :?@"41 5une "/ 4>>2
RAMON ). MONTENE8RO/ 'etitione/
vs.
MA. TERESA L. MONTENE8RO/ fo heself
and as the .othe and natual %uadian of
the .inos/ ANTONIO AMELO and ANA
MARIA ,IA ISA6EL/ *oth suna.ed
GMONTENE8RO/G es'ondents.
FACTS:
Ma. Teesa Montene%o -led/ on
5une :112/ a co.'laint fo su''ot a%ainst
he hus*and/ Ra.on/ fo heself and as
.othe and %uadian of he t+o .ino
childen Antonio A.elo and Ana Maia ,ia
Isa*el. Fou yeas afte/ they enteed into a
co.'o.ise a%ee.ent. It +as a''oved
*y the cout and since they did not a''eal
the cout(s a''oval/ it *eca.e -nal and
e&ecutoy.
Ande the a%ee.ent/ Ra.on
o*li%ed hi.self to %ive his ,:/>>>/>>>
entie shae in the con7u%al funds in favo
of his childen/ ,?>>/>>> of +hich 'aya*le
i..ediately and the est : yea afte the
a''oval of the a%ee.ent= esta*lish a
tust fund +oth ,#M in favo of his childen
FeDective @> days afte the a''oval of the
a%ee.entH= and o*tain an educational
'lan fo his childen FeDective : yea afte
18
the a''oval of the a%ee.ent.
Anfotunately/ Ra.on +as not a*le
to co.'ly +ith said o*li%ations. Teesa +as
thus 'o.'ted to -le a .otion fo
e&ecution of the 7ud%.ent a''ovin% the
co.'o.ise a%ee.ent. It +as a''oved
and +its of e&ecution and notice of
%anish.ent +ee sent t+ice to Ra.on *ut
said +its e.ained unsatis-ed.
Teesa then -led on Mach :2/
4>>4/ a .otion fo e&a.ination of Ra.on
as 7ud%.ent o*li%o 'usuant to Sec #"
and #1 of the Rules of Cout. In he .otion/
she alle%ed that thee is an u%ency fo the
e&a.ination to *e conducted at the ealiest
ti.e since 'etitione +as a*out to .i%ate
to Canada. It +as a''oved on Mach :1/
4>>4. The heain% +as ho+eve eset
thice due to failue of 'etitione to attend
*ecause he +as aleady in Canada
esultin% in his *ein% cited in conte.'t of
cout.
The follo+in% seies of events
sho+ed ho+ Ra.on had co..itted
indiect conte.'t of cout(s odes:
Mach 44 L .otion fo
e&a.ination +as set.
Neithe his counsel and
Ra.on a''eaed. The
heain% +as escheduled
on A'il :>/ 4>>4 and
e9uiin% 'etitione +hy he
should not *e held in
conte.'t of cout fo
diso*eyin% the Mach :1/
4>>4 ode.
Mach 4@ 3 'etitione -led
a Co.'liance +ith Motion
to e3schedule ,oceedin%s
and e&'lained his failue to
attend *ased on his *elief
that he still have until A'il
:2 to -le his co..ent as
a%eed u'on.
A'il 2 3 heain% fo the
Co.'liance +ith Motion to
e3schedule ,oceedin%s.
Counsel fo 'etitione
.anifested that his client
had aleady left fo Canada
and +ould not *e a*le to
attend the heain% on A'il
:> and that he +ould *e
availa*le only on the last
+ee0 of 5uly o -st +ee0 of
Au%ust 4>>4. Counsel also
.anifested that he +ould
not *e availa*le on said
date due to othe heain%s.
5une :# L cout issued an
ode esettin% the heain%
fo e&a.ination on 5uly #.
Su*'oena +as issued to
'etitione in his addess at
">?: Estella Avenue/ San
Antonio Iilla%e/ Ma0ati City.
5une :! L cout issued an
ode diectin% 'etitione to
sho+ cause +hy he should
not *e held in conte.'t of
cout fo failue to attend
the A'il :> heain%.
,etitione alle%ed that it
+as *ecause he +as
aleady in Canada and had
no intentions of a*scondin%
fo. his o*li%ations.
5uly # L the heain% did not
'ush thou%h *ecause
'etitione -led a Motion to
Ouash *ecause accodin%
to hi. he .ay not *e
co.'elled *y su*'oena to
attend the # 5uly 4>>4
heain% in 6acolod City. <e
did not alle%e that he +as
still in Canada.
Se't 4 L Motion to Ouash
+as denied *ut e3schedule
the heain% on Octo*e 4#.
Oct 44 L 'etitione
.anifested that he +ould
not *e a*le to attend the
heain% the follo+in% day
as he +as still in Canada
and +ould *e availa*le only
on the -st +ee0 of
)ece.*e. <e .oved that
the heain% *e e3
scheduled on 1 )ece.*e.
Oct 4# L he did not a''ea.
It +as only then that he
+as cited in conte.'t of
cout.
Ra.on -led a .otion fo
econsideation *ut it +as denied.
<ence this 'etition.
ISSAE:
19
CON the cout eed in holdin% the
'etitione %uilty of indiect conte.'t fo
+illfully diso*eyin% the odes of the tial
cout e9uiin% hi. to a''ea fo 'u'oses
of e&a.ination as a 7ud%.ent o*li%o at in
the heain%s scheduled on 44 Mach 4>>4/
:> A'il 4>>4/ and 4# Octo*e 4>>4.
<EL):
NO.
Conte.'t of cout involves the doin% of an
act/ o the failue to do an act/ in such a
.anne as to ceate an aDont to the cout
and the soveei%n di%nity +ith +hich it is
clothed.@ It is de-ned as Gdiso*edience to
the cout *y actin% in o''osition to its
authoity/ 7ustice and di%nity.G! The 'o+e
to 'unish conte.'t is inheent in all couts/
*ecause it is essential to the 'esevation
of ode in 7udicial 'oceedin%s/ and to the
enfoce.ent of 7ud%.ents/ odes and
.andates of the couts= and/ conse9uently/
to the due ad.inistation of 7ustice."
The Rules of Cout 'enali$es t+o ty'es of
conte.'t/ na.ely/ diect conte.'t and
indiect conte.'t. )iect conte.'t is
co..itted in the 'esence of o so nea a
cout as to o*stuct o inteu't the
'oceedin%s *efoe the sa.e/ and includes
dises'ect to+ad the cout/ oDensive
'esonalities to+ad othes/ o efusal to *e
s+on o to ans+e as a +itness/ o to
su*sci*e an aEdavit o de'osition +hen
la+fully e9uied to do so.1
On the othe hand/ Section # of Rule !: of
the Rules of Cout enu.eates 'aticula
acts +hich constitute indiect conte.'t/
thus:
FaH Mis*ehavio of an oEce of a cout in
the 'efo.ance of his oEcial duties o in
his oEcial tansactions=
F*H )iso*edience of o esistance to a
la+ful +it/ 'ocess/ ode/ o 7ud%.ent of a
cout/ includin% the act of a 'eson +ho/
afte *ein% dis'ossessed o e7ected fo.
any eal 'o'ety *y the 7ud%.ent o
'ocess of any cout of co.'etent
7uisdiction/ entes o atte.'ts o induces
anothe to ente into o u'on such eal
'o'ety/ fo the 'u'ose of e&ecutin% acts
of o+neshi' o 'ossession/ o in any
.anne distu*s the 'ossession %iven to
the 'eson ad7ud%ed to *e entitled theeto=
FcH Any a*use of o any unla+ful
intefeence +ith the 'ocesses o
'oceedin%s of a cout not constitutin%
diect conte.'t unde section : of this
Rule=
FdH Any i.'o'e conduct tendin%/ diectly
o indiectly/ to i.'ede/ o*stuct/ o
de%ade the ad.inistation of 7ustice=
FeH Assu.in% to *e an attoney o an oEce
of a cout/ and actin% as such +ithout
authoity=
FfH Failue to o*ey a su*'oena duly seved=
F%H The escue/ o atte.'ted escue/ of a
'eson o 'o'ety in the custody of an
oEce *y vitue of an ode o 'ocess of a
cout held *y hi..
In elation to the foe%oin%/ Section #" of
Rule #1 of the Rules of Cout also 'ovides
that Ga 'aty o othe 'eson .ay *e
co.'elled/ *y an ode o su*'oena/ to
attend *efoe the cout o co..issione to
testify as 'ovided in the t+o 'ecedin%
sections/ and u'on failue to o*ey such
ode o su*'oena o to *e s+on/ o to
ans+e as a +itness o to su*sci*e his
de'osition/ .ay *e 'unished fo conte.'t
as in othe cases.G This 'ovision elates
s'eci-cally to Section #F*H of Rule !: of the
Rules of Cout.
Indiect conte.'t .ay eithe *e initiated
F:H .otu 'o'io *y the cout *y issuin% an
ode o any othe fo.al cha%e e9uiin%
the es'ondent to sho+ cause +hy he
should not *e 'unished fo conte.'t o F4H
*y the -lin% of a vei-ed 'etition/
co.'lyin% +ith the e9uie.ents fo -lin%
initiatoy 'leadin%s.:> In the 'esent case/
the tial cout initiated the 'oceedin%s fo
indiect conte.'t *y issuin% t+o odes::
diectin% the 'etitione to sho+ cause +hy
he should not *e 'unished fo indiect
conte.'t.
Conte.'t/ +hethe diect o indiect/ .ay
*e civil o ci.inal de'endin% on the natue
and eDect of the conte.'tuous act.
Ci.inal conte.'t is Gconduct diected
a%ainst the authoity and di%nity of the
cout o a 7ud%e actin% 7udicially= it is an act
o*stuctin% the ad.inistation of 7ustice
+hich tends to *in% the cout into
dise'ute o dises'ect.G:4 On the othe
hand/ civil conte.'t is the failue to do
so.ethin% odeed to *e done *y a cout o
a 7ud%e fo the *ene-t of the o''osin%
'aty theein and is theefoe/ an oDense
a%ainst the 'aty in +hose *ehalf the
violated ode +as .ade.:# If the 'u'ose
is to 'unish/ then it is ci.inal in natue=
*ut if to co.'ensate/ then it is civil.:2
In the 'esent case/ the conte.'tuous act
+as the 'etitione(s efusal to attend a
heain% fo his e&a.ination as 7ud%.ent
o*li%o/ u'on .otion *y the es'ondent
Teesa. It .ust *e 'ointed out that the
'u'ose of Section #@ of Rule #1 is to
'ovide the 7ud%.ent o*li%ee a e.edy in
case +hee the 7ud%.ent o*li%o continues
to fail to co.'ly +ith its o*li%ation unde
the 7ud%.ent. ,etitione(s efusal to *e
e&a.ined/ +ithout 7usti-a*le eason/
20
constituted indiect conte.'t +hich is civil
in natue.
,etitione(s deli*eate +illfulness and even
.alice in diso*eyin% the odes of the tial
cout ae clealy sho+n in the 'leadin%s he
hi.self had -led *efoe the tial cout.
In his Manifestation of :1 Mach 4>>4
'etitione insisted on his i%ht to -le a e'ly
o co..ent on the Motion to E&a.ine
)efendant as 5ud%.ent O*li%o until :2
A'il 4>>4 solely on the *asis of the
'u'oted a%ee.ent at the confeence on
@ Mach 4>>4. ,etitione .eely *ushed
aside the Ode of the tial cout e9uiin%
hi. to a''ea on 44 Mach 4>>4 fo the
heain% *y not a''eain% in cout.
,etitione cannot si.'ly assu.e that his
.anifestation +ould suEce fo the tial
cout to e3schedule the 44 Mach 4>>4
heain%. That 'otion of the .anifestation
-led *y 'etitione on :1 Mach 4>>4/ +hich
eads:
#. In the .eanti.e/ +e have no othe
o'tion *ut to cancel the settin% on Mach
44/ 4>>4 until Res'ondent shall have
su*.itted his Re'lyMCo..ent and the
issue is -nally laid to est *y the issuance
of a -nal Ode fo that 'u'ose.
de.onstates *eyond dou*t ao%ance/
hau%htiness and dises'ect. Chile
'etitione a''aently disa%ees +ith the :1
Mach 4>>4 Ode of *y the tial cout/ he
did not -le a .otion fo its econsideation.
Neithe did he -le a .otion to eset the
scheduled heain% on 44 Mach 4>>4. Ce
have uled that a .otion fo continuance o
'ost'one.ent is not a .atte of i%ht *ut
is addessed to the sound discetion of the
cout.:? ,etitione sou%ht to de'ive the
tial cout of the discetion= he too0 it u'on
hi.self to cancel o to ode the cout to
cancel the 44 Mach 4>>4 scheduled
heain%.
,etitione .a0es a *elated clai. in the
'esent 'etition that his failue to attend
the 44 Mach 4>>4 heain% +as due to the
fact that he +as aleady on his +ay to
Manila on 44 Mach 4>>4 in 'e'aation fo
his 4@ Mach 4>>4 ti' to Canada.
<o+eve/ such e&'lanation +as not stated
in the :1 Mach 4>>4 Manifestation and ?
A'il 4>>4 Co.'liance and Motion to Re3
schedule ,oceedin%s. The e&'lanation is
eithe a delayed aftethou%ht o an
un%uaded confession of a deli*eate 'lan
to delay o even avoid his e&a.ination as a
7ud%.ent o*li%o.
Neithe can 'etitione ely on the alle%ed
ie%ulaity in the tial cout(s %ant of the
.otion to e&a.ine hi. as 7ud%.ent o*li%o
*efoe he +as a*le to -le a e'ly o
co..ent. Section #@ of/ Rule #1 of the
Rules of Cout allo+s/ as a .atte of i%ht/
the 'laintiD +ho is a 7ud%.ent o*li%ee to
e&a.ine the defendant as 7ud%.ent
o*li%o/ at any ti.e afte the etun of the
+it of e&ecution is .ade. Section #@ eads
as follo+s:
Sec. #@. E&a.ination of 7ud%.ent o*li%o
+hen 7ud%.ent unsatis-ed. N Chen the
etun of a +it of e&ecution issued a%ainst
'o'ety of a 7ud%.ent o*li%o/ o any one
of seveal o*li%os in the sa.e 7ud%.ent/
sho+s that the 7ud%.ent e.ains
unsatis-ed/ in +hole o in 'at/ the
7ud%.ent o*li%ee/ at any ti.e afte such
etun is .ade/ shall *e entitled to an ode
fo. the cout +hich endeed the said
7ud%.ent/ e9uiin% such 7ud%.ent o*li%o
to a''ea and *e e&a.ined concenin% his
'o'ety and inco.e *efoe such cout o
*efoe a co..issione a''ointed *y it/ at a
s'eci-ed ti.e and 'lace= and 'oceedin%s
.ay theeu'on *e had fo the a''lication
of the 'o'ety and inco.e of the
7ud%.ent o*li%o to+ads the satisfaction
of the 7ud%.ent. 6ut no 7ud%.ent o*li%o
shall *e so e9uied to a''ea *efoe a
cout o co..issione outside the 'ovince
o city in +hich such o*li%o esides o is
found. FE.'hasis su''liedH
Thus/ the tial cout co..itted no a*use of
discetion in schedulin% the e&a.ination of
'etitione on 44 Mach 4>>4. On the
contay/ it acted +ith ut.ost 7udiciousness
to avoid a .iscaia%e of 7ustice *ecause
'etitione +as e'oted to *e a*out to
leave fo Canada/ a fact +hich 'etitione
did not efute in his Manifestation of :1
Mach 4>>4.
It is note+othy that +hile 'etitione
insisted that he still had until :2 A'il 4>>4
to -le a e'ly o co..ent on the .otion
fo e&a.ination/ he also .anifested
thou%h counsel on ? A'il 4>>4 that he
aleady left fo Canada on 4@ Mach 4>>4
and +ill not *e *ac0 until the last +ee0 of
5uly o the -st +ee0 of Au%ust 4>>4. It is
o*vious then that 'etitione +anted to %ain
ti.e to avoid *ein% e&a.ined.
Cith es'ect to the :> A'il 4>>4 heain%/
it is esta*lished that 'etitione +as aleady
in Canada at the ti.e of the scheduled
heain%. Nonetheless/ it .ust *e stessed
that the e3schedulin% of the heain% to :>
A'il 4>>4 +as *ou%ht a*out *y his
un7usti-a*le failue to attend the 44 Mach
4>>4 heain%.
Su*se9uently/ des'ite 'etitione(s :1
Mach 4>>4 and ? A'il 4>>4
.anifestations that he +ould etun to the
21
,hili''ines so.eti.e duin% the last +ee0
of 5uly o -st +ee0 of Au%ust 4>>4/
'etitione did not attend the 4# Octo*e
4>>4 heain%. A%ain/ instead of -lin% a
.otion to eset the heain%/ 'etitione -led
a .anifestation the day *efoe the
scheduled heain%/ info.in% the cout that
he +ill *e una*le to attend the heain% and
su%%estin% the heain% to *e eset to 1
)ece.*e 4>>4. Such .anifestation to e3
schedule the 4# Octo*e 4>>4 heain% +as/
fo all intents and 'u'oses/ a .otion to
'ost'one the heain% / *ut the 'leadin% did
not contain a notice of heain%.
It is of no .o.ent that 'etitione +as
eventually e&a.ined as 7ud%.ent o*li%o
on :! )ece.*e 4>>4/ nine F1H .onths
afte the oi%inal settin%. <is su*se9uent
a''eaance at the heain% did not +i'e out
his conte.'tuous conduct.
BANK OF THE PHILIPPINEISLANDS vs
CALANZA, GR 180699, Octob! 1",
#010
NACH$RA, %&'

This is a ,etition fo Indiect Conte.'t -led
*y 'etitione 6an0 of the ,hili''ine Islands
F6,IH a%ainst es'ondents La*o A*ite
Rodeic0 5ose'h Calan$a FLA Calan$aH/
SheiD Enico Y. ,aedes FSheiD ,aedesH/
A.elia Eni9ue$ FEni9ue$H/ and Re.o L.
Sia FSiaH.

Facts: Eni9ue$ and Sia +ee the *anch
.ana%e and the assistant *anch
.ana%e/ es'ectively/ of 6acolod3
Sin%can% 6anch of 'etitione. On
Se'te.*e #/ 4>>#/ they +ee dis.issed
fo. e.'loy.ent on %ounds of *each of
tust and con-dence and dishonesty. The
follo+in% day/ they -led se'aate
co.'laints fo ille%al dis.issal a%ainst
'etitione *efoe the National La*o
Relations Co..ission FNLRCH/ Re%ional
A*itation 6anch No. II/ 6acolod City.
Afte the su*.ission of thei es'ective
'osition 'a'es/ E&ecutive LA )anilo C.
Acosta endeed a decision on Mach 41/
4>>2/ -ndin% that Eni9ue$ and Sia had
*een ille%ally dis.issed fo. e.'loy.ent.

,usuant to the afoesaid decision/
Eni9ue$ and Sia +ee einstated in
'etitione(s 'ayoll.

,etitione a''ealed to the NLRC. The NLRC
uled that 'etitione had 7ust cause to
te.inate Eni9ue$ and Sia. <ence/ it
evesed and set aside the LA decision and/
althou%h it dis.issed the co.'laint/ it
odeed 'etitione to %ive the dis.issed
e.'loyees -nancial assistance e9uivalent
to one3half .onth(s 'ay fo evey yea of
sevice. In vie+ of this decision/ 'etitione
sto''ed the 'ayoll einstate.ent.
T?U

Eni9ue$ and Sia elevated the .atte to
the Cout of A''eals FCAH/ *ut failed to
o*tain a favoa*le decision. On Nove.*e
#>/ 4>>?/ the a''ellate cout aE.ed in
toto the NLRC decision. The case
eventually eached this Cout and +as
doc0eted as 8.R. No. :!4":4.

)uin% the 'endency of the 'etition *efoe
this Cout/ Eni9ue$ and Sia -led a Motion
fo ,atial E&ecution
T@U
of the LA decision
dated Mach 41/ 4>>2. Citin% Ro1(ero v.
,'ili""ine Airlines/ they clai.ed that the
einstate.ent as'ect of the LA decision
+as i..ediately e&ecutoy duin% the
entie 'eiod that the case +as on a''eal.

In an Ode dated Octo*e :#/ 4>>!/ LA
Calan$a %anted Eni9ue$ and Sia(s .otion
des'ite the o''osition of 'etitione. <e
o'ined that so lon% as thee is no -nality
yet of the decision evesin% a ulin% of the
lo+e ti*unal Fin this case/ the LAH
a+adin% einstate.ent/ the sa.e should
*e enfoced. Considein% that the case +as
then 'endin% *efoe this Cout/ he
sustained Eni9ue$ and Sia(s clai./
a''lyin% the cases of Ro1(ero and Air
,'ili""ines Cor"oration v. Ga)ora. The
coes'ondin% +it of e&ecution +as
su*se9uently issued. A'on sevice of the
+it/ SheiD ,aedes seved on 'etitione a
notice of sale of a 'acel of land o+ned *y
'etitione to satisfy its o*li%ation.

A%%ieved/ 'etitione i..ediately -led an
A%ent ,etition fo In7unction +ith 'aye
fo the issuance of a Te.'oay Restainin%
Ode FTROH andMo Cit of ,eli.inay
In7unction +ith the NLRC/ Fouth
)ivision/ Ce*u City. On Nove.*e 4@/ 4>>!/
the NLRC issued a TRO.

)isa''ointed +ith the conduct of LA
Calan$a/ SheiD ,aedes/ Eni9ue$/ and Sia/
and in vie+ of the 'endency of 8.R. No.
:!4":4/ entitled nri1(e: v. Ban. o* t'e
,'ili""ine +slands/ *efoe this Cout/
'etitione instituted the 'esent 'etition fo
indiect conte.'t. ,etitione aves that LA
Calan$a(s Ode %antin% Eni9ue$ and
Sia(s .otion fo 'atial +it of e&ecution
22
'ee.'ts the decision of this Cout and
eventually esults in the 'ay.ent of
Eni9ue$ and SiaJs clai.s +hich .ay *e
contay to this Cout(s conclusion.
,etitione adds that es'ondents
o*stinately 'esist in a''lyin%
7uis'udence +hich is clealy ina''lica*le.
Finally/ 'etitione a%ues that the e&ecution
'oceedin%s +ee done +ith undue haste
that 'etitione +as not %iven an
o''otunity to su*.it evidence in its
defense to sto' the e&ecution. These/
accodin% to 'etitione/ clealy indicate
utte dises'ect to the Cout and ae
%ounds to cite es'ondents in indiect
conte.'t.


Mean+hile/ on Fe*uay :4/ 4>>"/ this
Cout endeed a )ecision in 8.R. No.
:!4":4/ denyin% the 'etition -led *y
Eni9ue$ and Sia/ thee*y sustainin% the
NLRC and the CA(s conclusion that Eni9ue$
and Sia +ee validly dis.issed fo.
e.'loy.ent *y 'etitione.

On 5une #>/ 4>>"/ the NLRC/ Fouth
)ivision/ Ce*u City/ %anted 6,I(s 'etition
fo in7unction/
On Octo*e 4!/ 4>>"/ LA Calan$a issued an
Ode considein% the case closed and
te.inated *ased on Eni9ue$ and Sia(s
.anifestation and .otion to dis.iss in
vie+ of the satisfaction and full 'ay.ent of
thei clai.s.

Issue: Chethe o not es'ondents ae
%uilty of indiect conte.'t. O in the
altenative/ do the acts of es'ondents
Eni9ue$ and Sia in -lin% a .otion fo
'atial e&ecution= of LA Calan$a in %antin%
the +it of e&ecution and a''lyin% o not
a''lyin% esta*lished 7uis'udence= and of
SheiD ,aedes in sevin% the notice of sale
of the eal 'o'ety o+ned *y 'etitione fall
unde the Sec # Rule !: Rules of Cout.

<eld: SC ans+e in the ne%ative and
dis.iss the 'etition fo lac0 of .eit.
Conte.'t of cout is de-ned as a
diso*edience to the cout *y actin% in
o''osition to its authoity/ 7ustice/ and
di%nity. It si%ni-es not only a +illful
dise%ad o diso*edience of the cout(s
ode/ *ut such conduct +hich tends to
*in% the authoity of the cout and the
ad.inistation of la+ into dise'ute o/ in
so.e .anne/ to i.'ede the due
ad.inistation of 7ustice. It is a de-ance of
the authoity/ 7ustice/ o di%nity of the cout
+hich tends to *in% the authoity and
ad.inistation of the la+ into dises'ect o
to intefee +ith o 'e7udice 'aty3liti%ants
o thei +itnesses duin% liti%ation.

The 'o+e to 'unish fo conte.'t is
inheent in all couts and is essential to the
'esevation of ode in 7udicial
'oceedin%s and to the enfoce.ent of
7ud%.ents/ odes/ and .andates of the
cout/ and conse9uently/ to the due
ad.inistation of 7ustice. <o+eve/ such
'o+e should *e e&ecised on the
'esevative/ not on the vindictive/
'inci'le. Only occasionally should the
cout invo0e its inheent 'o+e in ode to
etain that es'ect/ +ithout +hich the
ad.inistation of 7ustice +ill falte o
fail. Only in cases of clea and
contu.acious efusal to o*ey should the
'o+e *e e&ecised. Such 'o+e/ *ein%
dastic and e&taodinay in its natue/
should not *e esoted to unless necessay
in the inteest of 7ustice.

It is tue that/ at the ti.e of the -lin% *y
Eni9ue$ and Sia of the .otion fo the
'atial e&ecution of the LA decision +hich
diected thei einstate.ent/ the decision
had aleady *een evesed *y the NLRC/
and such evesal +as aE.ed *y the
CA. The case +as then on a''eal to this
Cout via a 'etition fo evie+
on certiorari unde Rule 2? of the Rules of
Cout. Ce -nd that thei .otion fo 'atial
e&ecution +as a *ona -de atte.'t to
i.'le.ent +hat they .i%ht have %enuinely
*elieved they +ee entitled to in
accodance +ith e&istin% la+s and
7uis'udence. This is es'ecially tue in the
instant case +hee the .eans of livelihood
of the dis.issed e.'loyees +as at sta0e.
Any .an in such an uncetain and
econo.ically theatened condition +ould
*e e&'ected to ta0e +hateve .easues
ae availa*le to ensue a .eans of
sustenance fo hi.self and his
fa.ily. Clealy/ Eni9ue$ and Sia +ee
.eely 'usuin% a clai. +hich they
honestly *elieved +as due the.. Thei act
is fa fo. *ein% contu.acious.

On the othe hand/ LA Calan$a/ on .otion
of Eni9ue$ and Sia/ issued the +it of
e&ecution considein% that at the ti.e of
the a''lication of the +it/ this Cout had
yet to decide 8.R. No. :!4":4. LA
Calan$a o'ined that so lon% as thee is no
-nality yet of the decision evesin% a
23
ulin% of the LA a+adin% einstate.ent/
the sa.e should *e enfoced. This +as ho+
he inte'eted this Cout(s 'onounce.ents
in Ro1(ero Case and Ga)ora Case that
Reven if the ode of einstate.ent of the
La*o A*ite is evesed on a''eal/ it is
o*li%atoy on the 'at of the e.'loye to
einstate and 'ay the +a%es of the
dis.issed e.'loyee duin% the 'eiod of
a''eal until evesal *y the hi%he cout.S

6ut as +e clealy discussed in Ba#o
v. National ?abor Relations
Co))ission/ +hile it is tue that the
einstate.ent as'ect of the LA decision is
i..ediately e&ecutoy/ the evesal
theeof *y the NLRC *eco.es -nal and
e&ecutoy afte ten F:>H days fo. ecei't
theeof *y the 'aties. That the CA .ay
ta0e co%ni$ance of and esolve a 'etition
fo the nulli-cation of the NLRC decision on
7uisdictional and due 'ocess
consideations does not aDect the statutoy
-nality of the NLRC decision. It then
lo%ically follo+s that/ at the ti.e of the
a''lication fo the +it since the Cout
eventually sustained the NLRC and the CA
decisions in 8.R. No. :!4":4 no issue of
'ayoll einstate.ent .ay *e consideed at
all afte the evesal of the LA decision *y
the NLRC.

Still/ the eoneous issuance of the
+it of e&ecution *y LA Calan$a can only *e
dee.ed %ave a*use of discetion +hich is
.oe 'o'ely the su*7ect of a 'etition
fo certiorari and not a 'etition fo indiect
conte.'t. No one +ho is called u'on to ty
the facts o inte'et the la+ in the 'ocess
of ad.inistein% 7ustice can *e infalli*le in
his 7ud%.ent.

Finally/ SheiD ,aedes/ in sevin%
the notice of sale/ +as only 'efo.in% his
duty 'usuant to the +it of e&ecution. No
.atte ho+ eoneous the +it +as/ it +as
issued *y LA Calan$a and +as addessed to
hi. as the sheiD/ co..andin% hi. to
collect fo. 'etitione the a.ount due
Eni9ue$ and Sia. In the event he failed to
collect the a.ount/ he +as authoi$ed to
cause the satisfaction of the sa.e on the
.ova*le and i..ova*le 'o'eties of
'etitione not e&e.'t fo.
e&ecution. Thus/ any act 'efo.ed *y
SheiD ,aedes 'usuant to the afoesaid
+it cannot *e consideed conte.'tuous.
At the ti.e of the sevice of the notice of
sale/ thee +as no ode fo. any cout o
ti*unal estainin% hi. fo. enfocin% the
+it. It +as .inisteial duty fo hi. to
i.'le.ent it.

To *e consideed conte.'tuous/ an
act .ust *e clealy contay to o
'ohi*ited *y the ode of the cout o
ti*unal. A 'eson cannot/ fo diso*edience/
*e 'unished fo conte.'t unless the act
+hich is fo*idden o e9uied to *e done is
clealy and e&actly de-ned/ so that thee
can *e no easona*le dou*t o uncetainty
as to +hat s'eci-c act o thin% is fo*idden
o e9uied.

24