Galedo, Abegail P.

421. FRANCISCO V. PERMSKUL

PETITIONER : VICTORINO C. FRANCISCO

RESPONDENT : WINAI PERMSKUL
DATE : May 12, 1989
PONENTE : Cruz, Jr. 
TOPIC : Appeal from inferior courts to the Regional Trial Courts

FACTS:

 Petitioner leased his apartment in Makati to private respondent for a period of one year.
Thereafter, private respondent vacated the property and requested the refund of his deposit
minus P1,000.

 Private respondent filed a complaint in Metropolitan Trial Court of Makati. A summary judgment
was rendered and hold that repainting was not chargeable to him. Petitioner was rendered to pay
the balance of deposit after deducting water and electricity charges.

 Petitioner appealed the decision to RTC Makati and this was affirmed. The RTC merely stated
that “This Court hereby adopts by reference the findings of fact and conclusions of law
contained in the decision of MeTC Makati and finds no cogent reason to disturb the
same.”

 Petitioner filed a petition for review to CA but was denied as well as his motion for
reconsideration.

PETITIONER’S CONTENTION:

Respondent court sustained memorandum decision of RTC in violation of Art. VIII of Sec. 14 of
the Constitution.

HELD:

 Reason behind Sec. 14 of Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution:

o The losing party must be given the opportunity to analyze decision so that if he elevates it,
he knows what are the errors for review of higher tribunal
o Losing party may be convince of its merits and be persuaded to accept the verdict in good
grace
o Decisions with full exposition of facts and law on which they are based will constitute a
valuable body of case law that can serve as useful references and even as procedural in
resolution of future controversies.

 The problem is that RTC Makati rendered a mere memorandum decision that simply adopted by
reference the findings of fact and law made by Judge Balita. It is claimed that Judge dela Rama
did not make his own statement of facts and the law as required by the constitution. Hence, his
memo decision was a total nullity.

 SC allowed Incorporation by reference to avoid cumbersome reproduction of decision of lower

court in decisions of higher court.

 The SC held that appellate judge should exert some effort in restating in his own words findings of
facts of lower court and presenting his own interpretation of law instead of merely promoting
language of court a quo as if he cannot do any better. There must be less intellectual indolence
and more pride of authorship in writing of a decision especially if from appellate court.
 Galedo, Abegail P.

 Petition is denied. There was substantial compliance with Sec. 40 because of direct availability
and actual review of decision of Judge Balita incorporated by reference in memo decision of Judge
Dela Rama. Memo decision is a valid act.