G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014

3/3/2020 G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.
oner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC.,…
Home Law Firm Law Library Laws
Jurisprudence
July 2014 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme
Custom Search Court Jurisprudence
Search
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2014
> July 2014 Decisions > G.R. No. 172204, July 10,
ChanRobles On- 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.
Line Bar Review LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC.,
Respondent.:
G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL

CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-
PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC., Respondent.
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014
CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.

LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE,
INC., Respondent.
DECISION
LEONEN, J.:
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014julydecisions.php?id=570 1/66
3/3/2020 G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC.,…
The Rules of Court governs court procedures, including

the rules on service of notices and summons. The
Cooperative Code provisions on notices cannot replace
the rules on summons under the Rules of Court. Rule
14, Section 11 of the Rules of Court provides an
exclusive enumeration of the persons authorized to
receive summons for juridical entities. These persons
are the juridical entity’s president, managing partner,
general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-
house counsel.
This petition under Rule 45 assails the Court of

Appeals’ decision dated November 25, 2005, and its
resolution dated April 5, 2006. The Court of Appeals
remanded the case to the trial court for respondent’s
presentation of evidence.
Respondent Laguna West Multi-Purpose Cooperative is

a cooperative recognized under Republic Act No. 6657
or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.1 It

allegedly entered into a joint venture agreement with
farmer-beneficiaries through Certificates of Land
Ownership Award (CLOA) in Silang, Cavite.2 While

respondent was negotiating with the farmer-
beneficiaries, petitioner Cathay Metal Corporation
entered into Irrevocable Exclusive Right to Buy (IERB)
contracts with the same farmer-beneficiaries.3 Under

the IERB, the farmer-beneficiaries committed
themselves to sell to petitioner their agricultural
properties upon conversion to industrial or commercial
properties or upon expiration of the period of
prohibition from transferring title to the properties.4
In 1996, respondent caused the annotation of its

adverse claim on the farmer-beneficiaries’ certificates
of title.5
On November 9, 1998, the Department of Agrarian

Reform issued an order converting the properties from
agricultural to mixed use.6
In 1999, petitioner and the farmer-beneficiaries
executed contracts of sale of the properties.7 Transfer

certificates of title were also issued in the name of
petitioner in the same year.8 The annotations in the
original titles were copied to petitioner's titles.9
Respondent’s Vice-President, Orlando dela Peña, sent

two letters dated March 20, 2000 and April 12, 2000 to
petitioner, informing it of respondent’s claim to the
properties.10 Petitioner did not respond.11
On September 15, 2000, petitioner filed a consolidated

petition for cancellation of adverse claims on its
transfer certificates of title with the Regional Trial Court
of Tagaytay City.12 It served a copy of the petition by

registered mail to respondent's alleged official address
at “Barangay Mayapa, Calamba, Laguna.”13 The

petition was returned to sender because respondent
could not be found at that address.14 The postman

issued a certification stating that the reason for the
return was that the “cooperative [was] not existing.”15

Petitioner allegedly attempted to serve the petition
upon respondent personally.16 However, this service
failed for the same reason.17
Upon petitioner's motion, the Regional Trial Court

issued an order on December 15, 2000 declaring
petitioner’s substituted service, apparently by
registered mail,18 to have been effected,19

thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Acting on the “Manifestation And Motion For

Substituted Service” filed by petitioner
Cathay Metal Corporation, thru counsel, and
finding the reasons therein stated to be
meritorious, the same is hereby GRANTED.
Accordingly, this Court hereby declares that
substituted service of the Consolidated

Petition for Cancellation of Adverse Claim on
the President of Laguna West Multi-Purpose
Cooperative, Inc. has been effected. The
latter is hereby given a period of fifteen
(15) days from the delivery of said
pleadings to the Clerk of Court within which
to file their opposition to the Consolidated
petition for cancellation of adverse claim.20
Petitioner was later allowed to present its evidence ex
parte.21
Upon learning that a case involving its adverse claim

was pending, respondent, through Mr. Orlando dela
Peña, filed a manifestation and motion, alleging that
respondent never receive
received a copy of the summons and
the petition.22 It moved for the service of the

summons and for a copy of the petition to be sent to
No. 160, Narra Avenue, Looc, Calamba, Laguna.23
July-2014 The Regional Trial Court granted respondent's

Jurisprudence
manifestation and motion on March 16, 2001.24 It
ordered that respondent be furnished with a copy of
the petition at its new address.25

DECISION -
BERSAMIN, J. : G.R.
Instead of furnishing respondent with a copy of the
No. 209287, July 01,
petition, petitioner filed on April 16, 2001 a motion for
2014 - MARIA
reconsideration of the March 16, 2001 Regional Trial
CAROLINA P.
Court order.26 In its motion for reconsideration,
ARAULLO,
petitioner argued that the case was already submitted
CHAIRPERSON,
for decision after all of petitioner’s evidence had been
BAGONG ALYANSANG
MAKABAYAN; JUDY admitted, and a memorandum had been filed.27
M. TAGUIWALO, Therefore, it was too late for respondent to ask the
PROFESSOR, court that it be furnished with a copy of the petition. 28

UNIVERSITY OF THE Moreover, because respondent was already in default,
PHILIPPINES a manifestation and motion, without allegations of
DILIMAN, CO- grounds for a motion to lift order of default, would not
CHAIRPERSON, give it personality to participate in the proceedings.29
PAGBABAGO; HENRI Petitioner sent a copy of the motion for reconsideration

KAHN, CONCERNED to respondent by registered mail and set the motion for
CITIZENS hearing on April 20, 2001.30
MOVEMENT; REP.
LUZ ILAGAN, Respondent failed to appear at the hearing on the
GABRIELA WOMEN’S motion for reconsideration. On April 20, 2001, the
PARTY Regional Trial Court submitted the motion for
REPRESENTATIVE;
resolution.31
REP. TERRY L.
RIDON, KABATAAN
Respondent received
receive a copy of the motion for
PARTYLIST
reconsideration after the hearing. On August 13, 2001,
REPRESENTATIVE;
respondent filed a motion for leave to admit attached
REP. CARLOS
opposition32 and opposition to petitioner’s motion for
ISAGANI ZARATE,
reconsideration of the March 16, 2001 Regional Trial
BAYAN MUNA PARTY-
Court order.33 Respondent argued that since
LIST
petitioner’s ex parte presentation of evidence was
REPRESENTATIVE;
secured through extrinsic fraud, there should be a new
RENATO M. REYES,
JR., SECRETARY trial to give respondent a fair day in court.34 This was
GENERAL OF BAYAN; opposed by petitioner on September 6, 2001.35

MANUEL K. DAYRIT, Petitioner emphasized its alleged compliance with the
CHAIRMAN ANG Cooperative Code rule on notices and respondent’s
KAPATIRAN PARTY; failure to file its comment despite the court’s order that
VENCER MARI E. approved petitioner’s substituted service.36 Petitioner
CRISOSTOMO, further pointed out that it had always questioned the
CHAIRPERSON,
authority of Mr. dela Peña to act for respondent.37
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
VILLANUEVA,
On January 16, 2003, the Regional Trial Court granted
CONVENOR, YOUTH
petitioner's motion for reconsideration.38 It found that
ACT NOW, Petitioner,
respondent's alleged representatives failed to prove
v. BENIGNO SIMEON
their authorities to represent respondent.39 It ruled
C. AQUINO III,
that service should be made to the address indicated in
PRESIDENT OF THE
its Cooperative Development Authority Certificate of
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES; Registration.40 The case was declared submitted for
PAQUITO N. OCHOA, decision.41

JR., EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY; AND Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration of the
FLORENCIO B. ABAD, January 16, 2003 order of the Regional Trial Court.42
SECRETARY THE
DEPARTMENT OF On March 21, 2003, the Regional Trial Court issued a
BUDGET AND decision granting petitioner’s petition for cancellation of

MANAGEMENT, annotations.43 The Register of Deeds of Cavite was
Respondents.; G.R. ordered to cancel the annotations on the certificates of
NO. 209135 -
title.44
AUGUSTO L. SYJUCO
JR., PH.D., Petitioner,
On April 3, 2003, the Regional Trial Court issued an
v. FLORENCIO B.
order45 rescinding its March 21, 2003 decision for
ABAD, IN HIS
having been prematurely rendered, thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
CAPACITY AS THE
SECRETARY OF
DEPARTMENT OF This is regard to the Decision dated March
BUDGET AND 21, 2003 which the Court has rendered in
MANAGEMENT; AND this particular case.
HON. FRANKLIN
MAGTUNAO DRILON, A review of the records show that the court
IN HIS CAPACITY AS for reasons unexplained, has committed an
THE SENATE error in judgment in rendering said decision
PRESIDENT OF TH unmindful of the fact that there is still a
PHILIPPINES, pending incident (Oppositor Laguna’s
Respondents.; G.R. Motion for Reconsideration) which has first
NO. 209136 - to be resolved.
MANUELITO R. LUNA,
Petitioner, v. Fully aware that the error if allowed to
SECRETARY remain unrectified would cause a grave
FLORENCIO ABAD, IN injustice and deeply prejudiced [sic] the
HIS OFFICIAL herein respondent, the Court, faithfully
CAPACITY AS HEAD adhering to the principle enunciated by the
OF THE DEPARTMENT Honorable Supreme Court in the case of
OF BUDGET AND Astraquilio vs Javier, 13 CRA 125 which
MANAGEMENT; AND provides that:
EXECUTIVE
“It is one of the inherent powers
SECRETARY PAQUITO
of the court to amend and
OCHOA, IN HIS
control its process and orders so
OFFICIAL CAPACITY
as to make them conformable to
AS ALTER EGO OF
law and justice. This power
THE PRESIDENT,
Respondents.; G.R. includes the right to reverse
itself, especially when in its
NO. 209155 - ATTY.
opinion it has committed an
JOSE MALVAR
error or mistake in judgment,
VILLEGAS, JR.,
and that to adhere to its decision
Petitioner, v. THE
HONORABLE will cause injustice to a party

EXECUTIVE litigant.”
SECRETARY PAQUITO
do hereby, with deep and sincere apologies
N. OCHOA, JR.; AND
to the party-litigants, more particularly to
THE SECRETARY O
the herein respondent Laguna West Multi-
BUDGET AND
Purpose Cooperative, Inc., RECALL and
MANAGEMENT
RESCIND its Decision which was
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
prematurely rendered.46
Respondents.; G.R.
NO. 209164 -
PHILIPPINE In an order dated May 26, 2003, the Regional Trial
CONSTITUTION
Court denied respondent’s motion for reconsideration
ASSOCIATION
of the January 16, 2003 order.47
(PHILCONSA),
REPRESENTED BY
On June 23, 2003, the Regional Trial Court decided to
DEAN FROILAN
grant48 petitioner's petition for cancellation of
BACUNGAN,
BENJAMIN E. DIOKNO annotation on the basis of the following facts:49
AND LEONOR M.
BRIONES, Petitioner,
. . . These annotations were subsequently
v. DEPARTMENT OF
copied to the Transfer Certificates of Titles
BUDGET AND
over the parcels of land subject of this suit
MANAGEMENT
that were issued in the name of Cathay. . . .
AND/OR HON.
Upon verification, Cathay found that Laguna
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
did not file any claim against the farmer-
Respondents.; G.R.
beneficiaries or Cathay since the time the
NO. 209260 -
annotations were made. . . . Moreover,
INTEGRATED BAR OF
affidavits of adverse claim and supporting
THE PHILIPPINES
documents that Laguna supposedly
(IBP), Petitioner, v.
submitted to the Register of Deeds of Cavite
SECRETARY
were certified by the Register of Deeds to
FLORENCIO B. ABAD
be inexistent in the registry's vault. . . .
OF THE DEPARTMENT
Moreover, the Cooperative Development
OF BUDGET AND
Authority likewise certified that Laguna has
MANAGEMENT (DBM),
been inoperative since 1992 and during the
Respondent.; G.R.
period when the annotations were made in
NO. 209442 - GRECO
1996. The Bureau of Posts has also certified
ANTONIOUS BEDA B.
that Laguna's office at Barangay Mayapa,
BELGICA; BISHOP
Calamba, Laguna, its official address as
REUBEN M ABANTE
indicated in its Articles of Incorporation and
AND REV. JOSE L.
Confirmation of Registration is "closed".50
GONZALEZ,
Petitioner, v. According to the Regional Trial Court, since respondent
PRESIDENT BENIGNO was inoperative at the time when its adverse claims
SIMEON C. AQUINO were annotated, "there [was] no reason for [it] to
III, THE SENATE OF believe that the person who caused the annotations of
THE PHILIPPINES, adverse claim on the titles of the farmer-beneficiaries .
REPRESENTED BY . . was authorized to do so."51
SENATE PRESIDENT
FRANKLIN M. The Regional Trial Court ordered the Register of Deeds
DRILON; THE HOUSE to cancel the annotations on the transfer certificates of
OF
title.52 It held that Section 70 of Presidential Decree
REPRESENTATIVES,
No. 1529 or the Property Registration Decree declares
REPRESENTED BY
that "an adverse claim is effective [only] for a period of
SPEAKER FELICIANO
thirty (30) days and may be cancelled upon filing of a
BELMONTE, JR.; THE
verified petition after the lapse of this period."53 Since
EXECUTIVE OFFICE,
the 30-day period had already lapsed, the annotations
REPRESENTED BY
were already the subject of cancellation.54
EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO
Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals based on
N. OCHOA, J THE
two grounds:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT,
1) Petitioner-appellee secured the favorable
REPRESENTED BY
orders of the lower court in fraud of
SECRETARY
appellant Laguna West by sending the
FLORENCIO ABAD;
petition, all other pleadings, and notices to
THE DEPARTMENT OF
its former address, thus, denying its day in
FINANCE,
court; and
REPRESENTED BY
SECRETARY CESAR V.
2) The trial court erred in applying the rule
PURISIMA; AND THE
on substituted service, thus, it did not
BUREAU OF
validly acquire jurisdiction over the
TREASURY,
appellant.55
REPRESENTED BY
ROSALIA V. DE LEON,
Respondents.; G.R. The Court of Appeals granted respondent's appeal on
NO. 209517- November 25, 2005. The dispositive portion of the
CONFEDERATION Court of Appeals' decision reads:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
FOR UNITY,
RECOGNITION AND
ADVANCEMENT OF WHEREFORE, premises considered, the
appeal is hereby granted. The case is
GOVERNMENT ordered remanded for appellant's

EMPLOYEES presentation of evidence and thereafter, for
(COURAGE), the trial court to render judgment, albeit
REPRESENTED BY ITS with dispatch.56
1ST VICE
PRESIDENT,
The Court of Appeals ruled that there was no valid
SANTIAGO
service of summons upon respondent in accordance
DASMARINAS, JR.;
ROSALINDA with Rule 14, Section 11 of the Revised Rules of Civil
NARTATES, FOR Procedure.57 Hence, the "court acquire[d] no

HERSELF AND AS jurisdiction to pronounce a judgment in the case."58
NATIONAL
PRESIDENT OF THE The Court of Appeals denied petitioner's motion for
CONSOLIDATED reconsideration on April 5, 2006.59
UNION OF
EMPLOYEES The issue in this case is whether respondent was
NATIONAL HOUSING properly served with summons or notices of the
AUTHORITY (CUE- hearing on the petition for cancellation of annotations
NHA); MANUEL of adverse claim on the properties.
BACLAGON, FOR
HIMSELF AND AS Petitioner emphasized the following points:
PRESIDENT OF THE
SOCIAL WELFARE Summons was served upon respondent at its official
EMPLOYEES registered address at Barangay Mayapa, Calamba,
ASSOCIATION OF
Laguna.60 Since no one received
receive the summons,
THE PHILIPPINES,
petitioner insisted that the trial court issue an order to
DEPARTMENT OF
effect substituted service.61 Respondent still did not file
SOCIAL WELFARE
its answer.62
AND DEVELOPMENT
CENTRAL OFFICE
Later, a certain Orlando dela Peña would file a
(SWEAP-DSWD CO);
manifestation and motion dated February 27, 2001
ANTONIA PASCUAL,
FOR HERSELF AND purportedly on behalf of respondent.63 Mr. dela Peña
AS NATIONAL claimed that he was an authorized representative of
PRESIDENT OF THE respondent and that respondent was already holding
DEPARTMENT OF office at No. 160, Narra Avenue, Looc, Calamba,
AGRARIAN REFORM Laguna, which was not the official address of
EMPLOYEES respondent.64 Mr. dela Peña never submitted proof of

ASSOCIATION his authority to represent respondent. He was also
(DAREA); ALBERT never a member of respondent cooperative.65
MAGALANG, FOR
HIMSELF AND AS However, Mr. dela Peña was still allowed to file an
PRESIDENT OF THE answer or opposition.66 Petitioner filed a motion for
ENVIRONMENT AND reconsideration opposing the order allowing him to file
MANAGEMENT
an answer or opposition on behalf of respondent.67
BUREAU EMPLOYEES
Respondent failed to oppose this. He did not participate
UNION (EMBEU);
further.68
AND MARCIAL
ARABA, FOR HIMSELF
Later, a certain Mr. Geriberto Dragon would claim to be
AND AS PRESIDENT
an officer of respondent. He would file an opposition on
OF THE KAPISANAN
its behalf after the period to file an opposition had
PARA SA
lapsed.69 Mr. Dragon alleged that respondent’s address
KAGALINGAN NG
MGA KAWANI NG was at No. 167, Barangay Looc, Calamba, Laguna.70
MMDA (KKK-MMDA), Like Mr. dela Peña, Mr. Dragon had never been a
Petitioner, v. member or officer of respondent.71

BENIGNO SIMEON C.
AQUINO III, Petitioner argued that Mr. dela Peña and Mr. Dragon
PRESIDENT OF THE never submitted proof of their authority to represent
REPUBLIC OF THE respondent.72 They were never officers or members of
PHILIPPINES;
respondent cooperative.73 Therefore, petitioner cannot
PAQUITO OCHOA,
be blamed for being skeptical about Mr. dela Peña’s
JR., EXECUTIVE
and Mr. Dragon’s claims of authority.74
SECRETARY; AND
HON. FLORENCIO B.
Moreover, Mr. dela Peña and Mr. Dragon could not
ABAD, SECRETA OF
claim to have been authorized to represent respondent
THE DEPARTMENT OF
because it was determined to be inoperative since
BUDGET AND
1992.75 In 2002, respondent was dissolved by the
MANAGEMENT,
Respondents.; G.R. Cooperative Development Authority.76
NO. 209569 -
VOLUNTEERS Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the trial court
AGAINST CRIME AND order allowing respondent to file an answer or
CORRUPTION (VACC), opposition to the petition for cancellation of annotation
REPRESENTED BY was granted because of Mr. dela Peña’s and Mr.
DANTE L. JIMENEZ, Dragon’s failure to show evidence of authority to act on
Petitioner, v. behalf of respondent.77

PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
EXECUTIVE Petitioner argued that summons could only be validly
SECRETARY, AND served to respondent’s official address as indicated in
FLORENCIO B. ABAD, its registration with the Cooperative Development
SECRETARY OF THE Authority.78 This is because respondent as a registered
DEPARTMENT OF cooperative is governed by Republic Act No. 6938, a

BUDGET AND substantive law that requires summons to be served to
MANAGEMENT, respondent’s official address.79 Substantive law takes
Respondent.
precedence over procedural rules.80
SEPARATE
Petitioner cites Article 52 of Republic Act No.
OPINION - CARPIO, J.
6938:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
: G.R. No. 209287 -
G.R. NO. 209135 -
G.R. NO. 209136 - Article 52. Address. – Every cooperative
G.R. NO. 209155 - shall have an official postal address to
G.R. NO. 209164 - which all notice and communications shall
G.R. NO. 209260 - be sent. Such address and every change
G.R. NO. 209442 - thereof shall be registered with the
G.R. NO. 209517 - Cooperative Development Authority.
G.R. NO. 209569,
July 01, 2014 -
Further, petitioner argues that there is no law that
MARIA CAROLINA P.
requires parties to serve summons to “every
ARAULLO,
unsubstantiated address alleged by [a] party.”81
CHAIRPERSON,
BAGONG ALYANSANG
Petitioner also argued that the Court of Appeals erred
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
when it remanded the case for trial because
M. TAGUIWALO,
respondent already admitted that its adverse claims
PROFESSOR,
were based not on a right over the property but on the
UNIVERSITY OF THE
PHILIPPINES “alarm[ing] . . . possibility of losing the deal”82 with
DILIMAN, CO- the owners of the property. There was no agreement
CHAIRPERSON, yet vesting in respondent any right over the
PAGBABAGO; HENRI properties.83

KAHN, CONCERNED
CITIZENS Moreover, the annotations on the title were made in
MOVEMENT; REP. 1996 when respondent was already inoperative.84
LUZ ILAGAN,
GABRIELA WOMEN’S Meanwhile, respondent emphasized that it entered into
PARTY a joint venture agreement with the farmer-
REPRESENTATIVE;
beneficiaries.85 While in the process of negotiations,
REP. TERRY L.
petitioner suddenly entered into the picture by offering
RIDON, KABATAAN
the farmer-beneficiaries an Irrevocable Exclusive Right
PARTYLIST
to Buy (IERB) contracts.86 It was then that respondent
REPRESENTATIVE;
caused the annotation of an adverse claim on the
REP. CARLOS
titles.87
ISAGANI ZARATE,
BAYAN MUNA PARTY- Respondent, through its Vice President, Mr. dela Peña,
LIST wrote two letters between March and April 2000
REPRESENTATIVE; relative to its adverse claims in an attempt to amicably
RENATO M. REYES, settle what seemed then as a brewing dispute.88 These
JR., SECRETARY letters were written on respondent’s letterheads
GENERAL OF BAYAN; indicating the address, No. 167, Barangay Looc,
MANUEL K. DAYRIT,
Calamba, Laguna.89
CHAIRMAN ANG
KAPATIRAN PARTY;
Petitioner deliberately served summons upon
VENCER MARI E.
respondent to its old address.90 Later, petitioner would
CRISOSTOMO,
be allowed to present evidence ex parte.91
CHAIRPERSON,
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
Moreover, respondent was unable to appear at the
VILLANUEVA,
hearing on the motion for reconsideration of the court
CONVENOR, YOUTH
order allowing respondent to file its answer or
opposition. Based on the records, respondent’s failure
v. BENIGNO SIMEON
to appear was due to petitioner setting the hearing on
C. AQUINO III,
April 20, 2001 and mailing respondent’s a copy of the
PRESIDENT OF THE
motion on April 16, 2001 or just four (4) days before
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES; the hearing.92
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
JR., EXECUTIVE Respondent filed a motion for leave to admit attached
SECRETARY; AND opposition to petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
FLORENCIO B. ABAD, This was opposed by petitioner. Pending respondent’s
SECRETARY THE motion for leave to admit attached opposition, the trial
DEPARTMENT OF court already issued its order dated January 16, 2013,
BUDGET AND granting petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the
MANAGEMENT, order allowing respondent to file its answer or
Respondents. opposition to the petition for cancellation of adverse
claims.93
SEPARATE
OPINION - BRION, J. Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration of the
: G.R. No. 209287 - order dated January 16, 2003. While the said incidents
G.R. NO. 209135 - were pending, the trial court rendered its decision
G.R. NO. 209136 - dated March 21, 2003, granting petitioner’s petition to
G.R. NO. 209155 - cancel the annotations of adverse claims.94 This,
G.R. NO. 209164 -
according to respondent, was a premature decision.95
G.R. NO. 209260 -
G.R. NO. 209442 - The trial court rescinded the March 21, 2003 decision.
G.R. NO. 209517 - On May 26, 2003, the trial court denied respondent’s
G.R. NO. 209569, motion for reconsideration.96
July 01, 2014 -
MARIA CAROLINA P. Within the period allowed for respondent to file its
ARAULLO, petition for certiorari, the trial court rendered judgment
CHAIRPERSON, granting petitioner’s petition to cancel the annotations
BAGONG ALYANSANG
of adverse claims on the title.97
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
M. TAGUIWALO,
Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals. The
PROFESSOR,
appellate court remanded the case to the lower court
UNIVERSITY OF THE
so that respondent could be allowed to present
PHILIPPINES
evidence.98
DILIMAN, CO-
CHAIRPERSON,
Respondent argued that petitioner was not being fair
PAGBABAGO; HENRI
when it served summons to respondent’s old address
KAHN, CONCERNED
despite knowledge of its actual address.99
CITIZENS
MOVEMENT; REP.
Moreover, respondent argued that its rights over the
LUZ ILAGAN,
GABRIELA WOMEN’S property should be best determined after trial.100
PARTY
REPRESENTATIVE; According to respondent, had there been a trial, it
REP. TERRY L. would have:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
RIDON, KABATAAN
PARTYLIST
4.2.1 Presented documentary evidence that
REPRESENTATIVE;
its negotiation with the former landowners
REP. CARLOS
had earned for it part-ownership of the
ISAGANI ZARATE,
properties, or at the very least, the
BAYAN MUNA PARTY-
exclusive authority to deal with potential
LIST
buyers or developers of the properties such
REPRESENTATIVE;
as petitioner.
RENATO M. REYES,
JR., SECRETARY
4.2.2 Offered in evidence the actual Joint
GENERAL OF BAYAN;
Venture Agreements (“JVA”) between the
MANUEL K. DAYRIT,
former landowners and Laguna West
CHAIRMAN ANG
whereby Laguna West had made partial
KAPATIRAN PARTY;
payment of the former landowners’ 40%
VENCER MARI E.
share in the joint venture. Laguna West had
CRISOSTOMO,
thus acquired interest over the properties,
CHAIRPERSON,
or had the same or better right than the
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
registered owner thereof.
VILLANUEVA,
CONVENOR, YOUTH 4.2.3 Proved by competent evidence that
ACT NOW, Petitioner, the annotation sought to be cancelled was
v. BENIGNO SIMEON not a simple adverse claim but qualifies as a
C. AQUINO III, registration of an interest over the subject
PRESIDENT OF THE properties;
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES; 4.2.4 Presented Laguna West’s authorized
PAQUITO N. OCHOA, representatives, Orlando dela Peña,
JR., EXECUTIVE Geriberto Dragon and Ediza Saliva, and one
SECRETARY; AND or two of the original landowners to testify
FLORENCIO B. ABAD, on their dealings with Laguna West.
SECRETARY THE
DEPARTMENT OF 4.2.5 Called on the officers of the CD on
BUDGET AND questions about a cooperative’s address of
MANAGEMENT, record vis-à-vis its actual address as known
Respondents. to the party that the cooperative had
previously been communicating with, in this
CONCURRING AND case, petitioner.101
DISSENTING - DEL
CASTILLO, J. : G.R.
We rule that respondent was not validly served with
No. 209287 - G.R.
summons or notice of the hearing. However, its
NO. 209135 - G.R.
annotations of adverse claims should be cancelled for
NO. 209136 - G.R.
being based on a future claim.
NO. 209155 - G.R.
NO. 209164 - G.R.
I
NO. 209260 - G.R.
NO. 209442 - G.R.
Respondent was not validly
NO. 209517 - G.R.
served with summons
NO. 209569, July 01,
2014 - MARIA
CAROLINA P. Republic Act No. 6938 of 1990 or the Cooperative Code
of the Philippines provides that cooperatives are
ARAULLO,
mandated to have an official postal address to which
CHAIRPERSON,
notices shall be sent, thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
BAGONG ALYANSANG
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
M. TAGUIWALO,
Art. 52. Address. – Every cooperative shall
PROFESSOR,
have an official postal address to which all
UNIVERSITY OF THE
notices and communications shall be sent.
PHILIPPINES
Such address and every change thereof
DILIMAN, CO-
CHAIRPERSON, shall be registered with the Cooperative

PAGBABAGO; HENRI Development Authority.
KAHN, CONCERNED
CITIZENS
This provision was retained in Article 51 of Republic Act
MOVEMENT; REP.
No. 9520 or the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008.
LUZ ILAGAN,
Article 51 provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
GABRIELA WOMEN’S
PARTY
REPRESENTATIVE; Art. 51. Address. Every cooperative shall
REP. TERRY L. have an official postal address to which all
RIDON, KABATAAN notices and communications shall be sent.
PARTYLIST Such address and every change thereof
REPRESENTATIVE; shall be registered with the Authority.
REP. CARLOS
ISAGANI ZARATE,
BAYAN MUNA PARTY- Relying on the above provision, petitioner argued that
LIST respondent was sufficiently served with summons and
REPRESENTATIVE; a copy of its petition for cancellation of annotations
RENATO M. REYES, because it allegedly sent these documents to
JR., SECRETARY respondent’s official address as registered with the
GENERAL OF BAYAN; Cooperative Development Authority. Petitioner further
MANUEL K. DAYRIT, argued that the Rules of Procedure cannot trump the
CHAIRMAN ANG Cooperative Code with respect to notices. This is
KAPATIRAN PARTY; because the Cooperative Code is substantive law, as
VENCER MARI E. opposed to the Rules of Procedure, which pertains only
CRISOSTOMO, to matters of procedure.
CHAIRPERSON,
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR Petitioner is mistaken.
VILLANUEVA,
CONVENOR, YOUTH The promulgation of the Rules of Procedure is among
ACT NOW, Petitioner, the powers vested only in this court. Article VIII,
v. BENIGNO SIMEON Section 5(5) provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
C. AQUINO III,
PRESIDENT OF THE
Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the
REPUBLIC OF THE
following powers:
PHILIPPINES;
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
....
JR., EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY; AND
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
protection and enforcement of constitutional
SECRETARY THE
rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in
DEPARTMENT OF all courts, the admission to the practice of

BUDGET AND law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance
MANAGEMENT, to the underprivileged. Such rules shall
Respondents. provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of
SEPARATE cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
CONCURRING same grade, and shall not diminish,
OPINION - PERLAS- increase, or modify substantive rights.
BERNABE, J. : G.R. Rules of procedure of special courts and
No. 209287 - G.R. quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective
NO. 209135 - G.R. unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
NO. 209136 - G.R.
NO. 209155 - G.R.
This means that on matters relating to procedures in
NO. 209164 - G.R.
court, it shall be the Rules of Procedure that will
NO. 209260 - G.R.
govern. Proper court procedures shall be determined
NO. 209442 - G.R.
by the Rules as promulgated by this court.
NO. 209517 - G.R.
NO. 209569, July 01,
Service of notices and summons on interested parties
2014 - MARIA
in a civil, criminal, or special proceeding is court
CAROLINA P.
procedure. Hence, it shall be governed by the Rules of
ARAULLO,
Procedure.
CHAIRPERSON,
BAGONG ALYANSANG
The Cooperative Code provisions may govern matters
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
relating to cooperatives’ activities as administered by
M. TAGUIWALO,
the Cooperative Development Authority. However, they
PROFESSOR,
are not procedural rules that will govern court
UNIVERSITY OF THE
processes. A Cooperative Code provision requiring
PHILIPPINES
cooperatives to have an official address to which all
DILIMAN, CO-
notices and communications shall be sent cannot take
CHAIRPERSON,
the place of the rules on summons under the Rules of
PAGBABAGO; HENRI
Court concerning a court proceeding.
KAHN, CONCERNED
CITIZENS
This is not to say that the notices cannot be sent to
MOVEMENT; REP.
cooperatives in accordance with the Cooperative Code.
LUZ ILAGAN,
Notices may be sent to a cooperative’s official address.
GABRIELA WOMEN’S
However, service of notices sent to the official address
PARTY
in accordance with the Cooperative Code may not be
REPRESENTATIVE;
used as a defense for violations of procedures, specially
REP. TERRY L.
when such violation affects another party’s rights.
RIDON, KABATAAN
PARTYLIST
Section 11, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court provides the
REPRESENTATIVE; rule on service of summons upon a juridical entity. It

REP. CARLOS provides that summons may be served upon a juridical
ISAGANI ZARATE, entity only through its officers. Thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
BAYAN MUNA PARTY-
LIST
Sec. 11. Service upon domestic private
REPRESENTATIVE;
juridical entity. – When the defendant is a
RENATO M. REYES,
corporation, partnership or association
JR., SECRETARY
organized under the laws of the Philippines
GENERAL OF BAYAN;
with a juridical personality, service may be
MANUEL K. DAYRIT,
made on the president, managing partner,
CHAIRMAN ANG
general manager, corporate secretary,
KAPATIRAN PARTY;
treasurer, or in-house counsel.
VENCER MARI E.
CRISOSTOMO,
CHAIRPERSON, We have already established that the enumeration in
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
Section 11 of Rule 14 is exclusive.102 Service of
VILLANUEVA,
summons upon persons other than those officers
CONVENOR, YOUTH
enumerated in Section 11 is invalid.103 Even
substantial compliance is not sufficient service of
v. BENIGNO SIMEON
summons.104
C. AQUINO III,
PRESIDENT OF THE
This provision of the rule does not limit service to the
REPUBLIC OF THE
officers’ places of residence or offices. If summons may
PHILIPPINES;
not be served upon these persons personally at their
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
JR., EXECUTIVE residences or offices, summons may be served upon
any of the officers wherever they may be found.
SECRETARY; AND
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
Hence, petitioner cannot use respondent's failure to
SECRETARY THE
amend its Articles of Incorporation to reflect its new
DEPARTMENT OF
address as an excuse from sending or attempting to
BUDGET AND
send to respondent copies of the petition and the
MANAGEMENT,
summons. The Rules of Court provides that notices
Respondents.
should be sent to the enumerated officers. Petitioner
failed to do this. No notice was ever sent to any of the
CONCURRING
enumerated officers.
OPINION - LEONEN,
J. : G.R. No. 209287
Petitioner insists that it should not be made to inquire
- G.R. NO. 209135 -
further as to the whereabouts of respondent after the
G.R. NO. 209136 -
attempt to serve the summons by registered mail to
G.R. NO. 209155 -
respondent’s address as allegedly indicated in its
G.R. NO. 209164 -
Articles of Incorporation. The Rules does not provide
G.R. NO. 209260 - that it needs to do so. However, it provides for service
G.R. NO. 209442 - by publication. Service by publication is available when
G.R. NO. 209517 - the whereabouts of the defendant is unknown. Section
G.R. NO. 209569, 14, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
July 01, 2014 -
MARIA CAROLINA P.
Sec. 14. Service upon defendant whose
ARAULLO,
identity or whereabouts are unknown. – In
CHAIRPERSON,
any action where the defendant is
BAGONG ALYANSANG
designated as an unknown owner, or the
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
like, or whenever his whereabouts are
M. TAGUIWALO,
unknown and cannot be ascertained by
PROFESSOR,
diligent inquiry, service may, by leave of
UNIVERSITY OF THE
court, be effected upon him by publication
PHILIPPINES
in a newspaper of general circulation and in
DILIMAN, CO-
such places and for such time as the court
CHAIRPERSON,
may order. (Emphasis supplied)
PAGBABAGO; HENRI
KAHN, CONCERNED
CITIZENS This is not a matter of acquiring jurisdiction over the
MOVEMENT; REP. person of respondent since this is an action in rem. In
LUZ ILAGAN, an action in rem, jurisdiction over the person is not
GABRIELA WOMEN’S required as long as there is jurisdiction over the res.
PARTY This case involves the issue of fair play and ensuring
REPRESENTATIVE; that parties are accorded due process.
REP. TERRY L.
RIDON, KABATAAN In this case, petitioner served summons upon
PARTYLIST respondent by registered mail and, allegedly, by
REPRESENTATIVE; personal service at the office address indicated in
REP. CARLOS respondent’s Certificate of Registration. Summons was
ISAGANI ZARATE, not served upon respondent’s officers. It was also not
BAYAN MUNA PARTY- published in accordance with the Rules of Court. As a
LIST result, respondent was not given an opportunity to
REPRESENTATIVE; present evidence, and petitioner was able to obtain
RENATO M. REYES, from the Regional Trial Court an order cancelling
JR., SECRETARY respondent’s annotations of adverse claims.
GENERAL OF BAYAN;
MANUEL K. DAYRIT, Respondent was, therefore, not validly served with
CHAIRMAN ANG summons.
KAPATIRAN PARTY;
VENCER MARI E. II
CRISOSTOMO,
CHAIRPERSON,
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
VILLANUEVA, Respondent’s alleged non-operation
CONVENOR, YOUTH does not bar it from authorizing a person
ACT NOW, Petitioner, to act on its behalf in court proceedings
v. BENIGNO SIMEON
C. AQUINO III, Petitioner argues that failure to serve the summons
PRESIDENT OF THE upon respondent was due to respondent's non-
REPUBLIC OF THE operation and failure to amend its Articles of
PHILIPPINES; Incorporation to reflect its new address.
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
JR., EXECUTIVE Petitioner's conclusion that respondent was no longer
SECRETARY; AND operating was based only on the postmaster's
FLORENCIO B. ABAD, certification. According to the postmaster’s
SECRETARY THE certification, it failed to serve the petition for
DEPARTMENT OF cancellation of annotation to respondent’s official
BUDGET AND address because of respondent’s nonexistence or
MANAGEMENT, closure. Petitioner failed to consider that the
Respondents. postmaster was not in the position to make a reliable
statement as to the existence or closure of an entity.
G.R. No. 178055,
July 02, 2014 - Moreover, the Cooperative Development Authority's
AMECOS certification stating that respondent was not submitting
INNOVATIONS, INC. any financial report since 1992, which was proof of its
AND ANTONIO F. non-operation, was a mere statement of what was
MATEO, Petitioners, indicative of non-operation. It was not yet a conclusive
v. ELIZA R. LOPEZ, statement that respondent was not in operation.
Respondent.
In any case, even assuming that respondent was not
G.R. No. 177374, operating, it might still exercise its powers as a
July 02, 2014 - cooperative until it would get dissolved. Section 9 of
MARIANO JOSE, Republic Act No. 6938 provides the powers and
FELICISIMO JOSE, capacities of registered cooperatives.
DECEASED,
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
Section 9. Cooperative Powers and
CHILDREN MARIANO
Capacities. - A cooperative registered
JOSE, CAMILO JOSE,
under this Code shall have the following
TIBURCIA JOSE,
powers and capacities:
FERMINA JOSE, AND
VICTORIA JOSE,
(1) To sue and be sued in its cooperative
Petitioners, v.
name;
ERNESTO M. NOVIDA, (2) Of succession;

RODOLFO PALAYLAY, (3) To amend its articles of cooperation in
JR., ALEX M. accordance with the provisions of this code;
BELARMINO, (4) To adopt by-laws not contrary to law,
RODRIGO LIBED, morals or public policy, and to amend and
LEONARDO L. LIBED, repeal the same in accordance with this
BERNARDO B. Code;
BELARMINO, (5) To purchase, receive
receive, take or grant,
BENJAMIN G. hold, convey, sell, lease, pledge, mortgage,
ACOSTA, MODESTO and otherwise deal with such real and
A. ORLANDA, personal property as the transaction of the
WARLITO B. MEJIA, lawful affairs of the cooperative may
MAMERTO B. reasonably and necessarily require, subject
BELARMINO, to the limitations prescribed by law and the
MARCELO O. DELFIN Constitution;
AND HEIRS OF (6) To enter into division, merger or
LUCINO A. ESTEBAN, consolidation, as provided in this Code;
REPRESENTED BY (7) To join federations or unions, as
CRESENCIA M. VDA. provided in this Code;
DE ESTEBAN, (8) To accept and receive grants, donations
Respondents. and assistance from foreign and domestic
sources; and
G.R. No. 202809, (9) To exercise such other powers granted
July 02, 2014 - in this Code or necessary to carry out its
DENNIS L. GO, purpose or purposes as stated in its articles
Petitioner, v. of cooperation.
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Prior to dissolution, a cooperative is entitled to the
Respondent.
exercise of these powers. It may engage in deals
involving its properties or rights. It may cause the
G.R. No. 181045,
annotation of claims it deems to have in order to
July 02, 2014 -
protect such claim. Contrary to petitioner’s claim,
SPOUSES EDUARDO
respondent is not prevented from authorizing persons
AND LYDIA SILOS,
to act on its behalf.
Petitioners, v.
PHILIPPINE
In any case, even if petitioner alleged that respondent
NATIONAL BANK,
was already dissolved by virtue of a November 7, 2002
Respondent.
resolution of Cooperative Development Authority, the
relevant acts of respondent had occurred before such
A.M. No. P-13-
resolution.
3147 (Formerly A.M.
No. 11-4-78-RTC), The resolution of the issue of representation could have

July 02, 2014 - facilitated the resolution of the case on the merits.
OFFICE OF THE
COURT III
ADMINISTRATOR,
Complainant, v. PAZ
P. CAPISTRANO, The trial court could have resolved
COURT the issue of representation; premature
STENOGRAPHER III, decisions elicit suspicion
REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, QUEZON The court must not trifle with jurisdictional issues. It is
CITY, BRANCH 224, inexcusable that a case involving issues that the trial
Respondent. court had full control of had to be elevated to this court
for determination.
G.R. No. 188035,
July 02, 2014 - The trial court had every opportunity to resolve the
IMMACULATE validity of Mr. dela Peña’s and Mr. Dragon’s alleged
CONCEPTION authority to act on behalf of respondent. The trial court
ACADEMY/DR. JOSE had, in fact, already allowed respondent to file its
PAULO E. CAMPOS, answer and oppose petitioner’s petition for cancellation
Petitioners, v. of annotation. It could have easily ordered Mr. dela
EVELYN E. CAMILON, Peña or Mr. Dragon to produce evidence of their
Respondent. authority to represent respondent.
G.R. No. 194638, Moreover, there had been at least two motions for
July 02, 2014 - reconsideration filed before the trial court finally
PARAÑAQUE KINGS decided the petitioner’s petition for cancellation of
ENTERPRISES, INC., annotation.
Petitioner, v.
CATALINA L. The first was filed by petitioner when the trial court
SANTOS, granted respondent’s manifestation and motion on
REPRESENTED BY March 16, 2001. The trial court could have heard the
HER ATTORNEY-IN- parties on the issue of representation at this instance
FACT, LUZ B. had it noted petitioner’s non-compliance with the rule
PROTACIO, AND that the notice of hearing must “be served in such a
DAVID R. manner as to ensure its receipt by the other party at
RAYMUNDO, least three (3) days before the date of the hearing.”105
Respondents. Section 4, Rule 15 provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
G.R. No. 193796,

July 02, 2014 - LAND Sec. 4. Hearing of motion. – Except for
motions which the court may act upon
BANK OF THE without prejudicing the rights of the adverse

PHILIPPINES, party, every written motion shall be set for
Petitioner, v. hearing by the applicant. Every written
ATLANTA motion required to be heard and the notice
INDUSTRIES, INC., of the hearing thereof shall be served in
Respondent. such a manner as to ensure its receipt by
the other party at least three (3) days
G.R. No. 173861, before the date of hearing, unless the court
July 14, 2014 - JAY for good cause sets the hearing on shorter
CANDELARIA AND notice.
ERIC BASIT,
Petitioners, v.
In this case, petitioner set the case for hearing on April
REGIONAL TRIAL
20, 2001. It served a copy upon respondent by
COURT, BRANCH 42,
registered mail only on April 16, 2001 or four (4) days
CITY OF SAN
before the set date for hearing. To be covered by the
FERNANDO,
three-day rule under Rule 15, Section 4, petitioner
(PAMPANGA)
should ensure respondent’s receipt of the notice by
REPRESENTED BY ITS
April 17, 2001. We take judicial notice that service by
PRESIDING JUDGE
registered mail in our jurisdiction does not take place in
HON. MARIA
one day. Service of notice by registered mail only four
AMIFAITH S. FIDER-
(4) days before the date of hearing, therefore, does not
REYES, OFFICE OF
amount to ensuring the other party’s receipt at least
THE PROVINCIAL
three (3) days before the hearing.
PROSECUTOR, CITY
OF SAN FERNANDO,
The second motion for reconsideration was filed by
PAMPANGA AND
respondent when the Regional Trial Court granted
ALLIED DOMECQ
petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of its order of
PHILIPPINES, INC.,
March 16, 2001. Hence, for the second time, the trial
Respondents.
court had an opportunity to hear whether Mr. dela Peña
or Mr. Dragon was properly authorized to act on behalf
G.R. No. 198226,
of respondent.
July 18, 2014 -
ABOITIZ TRANSPORT
On one hand, nobody’s rights would have been
SYSTEM
prejudiced had respondent been allowed to prove the
CORPORATION AND
alleged representatives’ authorities. On the other hand,
ABOITIZ SHIPPING
there is a likelihood of prejudice, in this case, if the
CORPORATION,
court relied purely on technicalities.
Petitioners, v.
CARLOS A. GOTHONG
Thus, we reiterate this court’s ruling in Alonso v.
LINES, INC. AND
VICTOR S. Villamor:106
CHIONGBIAN, . . . In other words, [processes] are a

Respondents.; G.R. means to an end. When they lose the
NO. 198228 - character of the one and become the other,
ABOITIZ TRANSPORT the administration of justice is at fault and
SYSTEM courts are correspondingly remiss in the
CORPORATION, performance of their obvious duty.
Petitioner, v. CARLOS
A. GOTHONG LINES, . . . To take advantage of [a purely
INC. AND VICTOR S. technical error] for other purposes than to
CHIONGBIAN, cure it, does not appeal to a fair sense of
Respondents. justice. Its presentation as fatal to [a
party]’s case smacks of skill rather than
G.R. No. 190303, right. A litigation is not a game of
July 09, 2014 - technicalities in which one, more deeply
COLEGIO DE SAN schooled and skilled in the subtle art of
JUAN DE LETRAN- movement and position, entraps and
CALAMBA, Petitioner, destroys the other. It is, rather, a contest in
v. ENGR. DEBORAH which each contending party fully and fairly
P. TARDEO, lays before the court the facts in issue and
Respondent. then, brushing aside as wholly trivial and
indecisive all imperfections of form and
G.R. No. 183901, technicalities of procedure, asks that justice
July 09, 2014 - be done upon the merits. Lawsuits, unlike
DEPARTMENT OF duels, are not to be won by a rapier’s
AGRARIAN REFORM, thrust. Technicality, when it deserts its
Petitioner, v. SALUD proper office as an aid to justice and
GACIAS BERIÑA,1 becomes its great hindrance and chief
CESAR GACIAS, enemy, deserves scant consideration from
NORMA GACIAS courts. There should be no vested rights in
TANDOC,2 LYDIA technicalities. No litigant should be
LEANDER GACIAS, permitted to challenge a record of a court of
AND GREGORIO these Islands for defect of form when his
MEDEN GACIAS, substantial rights have not been prejudiced
Respondents.; G.R. thereby.
NO. 183931 - LAND
BANK OF THE
Both motions for reconsideration filed in the trial court
PHILIPPINES,
were opportunities to hear the parties on the issue of
Petitioner, v. SALUD
representation and to ensure that all parties were given
GACIAS BERIÑA,
their fair opportunity to be heard. The trial court
CESAR GACIAS,
ignored both opportunities and chose to rule based on
NORMA GACIAS
technicalities to the prejudice of respondent.
TANDOC, LYDIA
LEANDER GACIAS, The rules cannot be interpreted as a means to violate
AND GREGORIO due process rights. Courts should, as much as possible,
MEDEN GACIAS, give parties the opportunity to present evidence as to
Respondents. their claims so that decisions will be made based on
the merits of the case.
G.R. No. 179571,
July 02, 2014 - The trial court issued a decision pending incidents yet
ERLINDA K. to be resolved. We take this opportunity to remind
ILUSORIO, Petitioner, courts that the issuance of fair decisions is the heart of
v. BAGUIO COUNTRY our functions. The judiciary is expected to take
CLUB CORPORATION seriously its task of crafting decisions with utmost
AND ANTHONY R. DE judiciousness. Premature decisions only elicit suspicion
LEON, Respondents. of the courts and diminish our role as administrator of
justice.
G.R. No. 207392,
July 02, 2014 - IV
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Rights still under negotiations
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. are not adverse claims
RAMIE ORTEGA Y
KALBI, A.K.A AY-AY, Ordinarily, this case would be remanded to the trial
Accused-Appellant. court for the presentation of respondent’s evidence.
However, this case has been pending in this court for
G.R. No. 197515, about eight (8) years. In the interest of judicial
July 02, 2014 - economy and efficiency, and given that the court
COMMISSIONER OF records are sufficient to make a determination on the
INTERNAL REVENUE, validity of respondent’s adverse claim, we shall rule on
Petitioner, v. UNITED the issue.
SALVAGE AND
TOWAGE (PHILS.), Respondent had been assailing the lack of service of
INC., Respondent. summons upon it and the resulting cancellation of its
alleged adverse claim on the titles. Its claim is
A.C. No. 6470, anchored on its disrupted negotiations with the farmer-
July 08, 2014 - beneficiaries involving the properties. In its
MERCEDITA DE memorandum filed on March 1, 2007, respondent
JESUS, Complainant, stated:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
v. ATTY. JUVY MELL
SANCHEZ-MALIT,
1.2 Some ten (10) years ago, Laguna West
Respondent.
entered into [sic] Joint Venture Agreement
(“JVA”) with various farmer-CLOA
G.R. No. 177235, beneficiaries in the Kaong-Kalayugan area

July 07, 2014 - of Silang, Cavite for a total lot area of Eight
SERCONSISION R. Hundred Fifty Five Thousand and Nine
MENDOZA, Petitioner, Hundred Fourteen (855,914) square
v. AURORA MENDOZA meters.
FERMIN, Respondent.
1.3 To hold the CLOA beneficiaries to their
G.R. No. 176598, commitment to submit their respective lots
July 09, 2014 - to the JVA, Laguna West promised them a
PETRONIO CLIDORO, guaranteed share of 40% in the proceeds of
DIONISIO CLIDORO, the project.
LOLITA CLIDORO,
CALIXTO CARDANO, 1.4 But, while Laguna West was still in the
JR., LOURDES process of finalizing the negotiations with
CLIDORO-LARIN, these farmer-beneficiaries, petitioner
MATEO CLIDORO AND entered the picture by offering an alleged
MARLIZA CLIDORO- “Irrevocable Exclusive Right to Buy (IERB)”
DE UNA, Petitioners, contracts with the same farmer-landowners
v. AUGUSTO for the purpose of converting the subject
JALMANZAR, vast track [sic] of land into an industrial,
GREGORIO CLIDORO, commercial and residential area.
JR., SENECA
CLIDORO-CIOCSON, 1.5 Alarmed with the possibility that it could
MONSERAT lose the deal to a big and moneyed
CLIDORO-QUIDAY, corporation, Laguna West caused the
CELESTIAL CLIDORO- annotation of adverse claims on the thirty-
BINASA, APOLLO nine (39) TCTs in 1996.107
CLIDORO, ROSALIE
CLIDORO-CATOLICO,
SOPHIE CLIDORO, Respondent’s annotations on petitioner’s certificates of
title are similarly worded, thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
AND JOSE CLIDORO,
JR., Respondents.
Entry No. . . . -AFFIDAVIT OF ADVERSE

Adm. Case No.
CLAIM- Covering the parcel of land
8108, July 15, 2014 -
described in this title as per Affidavit of
DANTE LA JIMENEZ &
Adverse Claim executed by Calisto M. Dela
LAURO G. VIZCONDE,
Pena [sic] of Laguna West Multi-Purpose
Complainants, v.
Cooperative Inc., wherein the registered
ATTY. FELISBERTO L.
owner entered into a Joint Venture
VERANO, JR.,
Agreement, as per Affidavit of Adverse
Respondent.; Adm.
Claim, subs. and sworn to before the Not.
Case No. 10299 - Public for . . ., a copy is on file in this

ATTY. OLIVER O. registry.
LOZANO,
Complainant, v. Date of inst.- . . . .
ATTY. FELISBERTO L. Date of inscription- . . . .
VERANO, JR., NOTE: The foregoing annotations were
Respondent. copied from TCT. . . .108
G.R. No. 181836,

July 09, 2014 - BANK Another version of the annotation is worded as
follows:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
OF THE PHILIPPINE
ISLANDS, Petitioner,
v. COMMISSIONER
Entry No. . . . -ADVERSE CLAIM- Signed
OF INTERNAL
and executed by Calixto M. dela Pena [sic],
REVENUE,
president and Chairman of Cooperative,
Respondent.
[alleging] therein the existence of Joint
Venture Agreement with the registered
G.R. No. 176341,
owner and that there are about to dispose
July 07, 2014 - PRO-
said lot, exec. before the Not. Public . . .
GUARD SECURITY
Copy is on file in this registry.
SERVICES
CORPORATION,
Date of inst.- . . . .
Petitioner, v. TORMIL
Date of inscription- . . . .109
REALTY AND
NOTE: The foregoing annotations were
DEVELOPMENT
copied from TCT. . . .
CORPORATION,
Respondent.
The purpose of annotations of adverse claims on title is

G.R. No. 178145, to apprise the whole world of the controversy involving
July 07, 2014 - a property. These annotations protect the adverse
REYNALDO S. claimant's rights before or during the pendency of a
MARIANO, Petitioner, case involving a property. It notifies third persons that
v. PEOPLE OF THE rights that may be acquired with respect to a property
PHILIPPINES, are subject to the results of the case involving it.
Respondent.
Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 or the

G.R. No. 203288, Property Registration Decree governs adverse claims.
July 18, 2014 - It describes an adverse claim as a statement in writing
REMEDIOS M. setting forth a subsequent right or interest claimed
MAULEON, Petitioner, involving the property, adverse to the registered
v. LOLINA MORAN
PORTER, owner. Thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

REPRESENTED BY
ERVIN C. MORAN,
Section 70. Adverse claim. – Whoever
Respondent.
claims any part or interest in registered
land adverse to the registered owner,
G.R. No. 190277,
arising subsequent to the date of the
July 23, 2014 -
original registration, may, if no other
ABSOLUTE
provision is made in this Decree for
MANAGEMENT
registering the same, make a statement in
CORPORATION,
writing setting forth fully his alleged right or
Petitioner, v.
interest, and how or under whom acquired,
METROPOLITAN BANK
a reference to the number of the certificate
AND TRUST
of title of the registered owner, the name of
COMPANY,
the registered owner, and a description of
Respondent.
the land in which the right or interest is
claimed.
G.R. No. 189644,
July 02, 2014 - NEIL
The statement shall be signed and sworn to,
E. SUYAN, Petitioner,
and shall state the adverse claimant’s
v. PEOPLE OF THE
residence, and a place at which all notices
PHILIPPINES AND
may be served upon him. This statement
THE CHIEF
shall be entitled to registration as an
PROBATION AND
adverse claim on the certificate of title. The
PAROLE OFFICER,
adverse claim shall be effective for a period
DAGUPAN CITY,
of thirty days from the date of registration.
Respondent.
After the lapse of said period, the
annotation of adverse claim may be
G.R. No. 182438,
cancelled upon filing of a verified petition
July 02, 2014 - RENE
therefor by the party in interest: Provided,
RONULO, Petitioner,
however, that after cancellation, no second
v. PEOPLE OF THE
adverse claim based on the same ground
PHILIPPINES,
shall be registered by the same claimant.
Respondent.
Before the lapse of thirty days aforesaid,

G.R. No. 194833,
any party in interest may file a petition in
July 02, 2014 -
the court of First Instance where the land is
PEOPLE OF THE
situated for the cancellation of the adverse
PHILIPPINES,
claim, and the court shall grant a speedy
Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
hearing upon the question of the validity of
PORFERIO BALINO
such adverse claim, and shall render
judgment as may be just and equitable. If
ALIAS “TOTO,” the adverse claim is adjudged to be invalid,

Accused-Appellant. the registration thereof shall be ordered
cancelled. If, in any case, the court, after
G.R. No. 196936, notice and hearing, shall find that the
July 02, 2014 - adverse claim thus registered was frivolous,
MONCHITO R. it may fine the claimant in an amount not
AMPELOQUIO, less than one thousand pesos nor more
Petitioner, v. JAKA than five thousand pesos, in its discretion.
DISTRIBUTION, INC., Before the lapse of thirty days, the claimant
Respondent. may withdraw his adverse claim by filing
with the Register of Deeds a sworn petition
G.R. No. 195466, to that effect.
July 02, 2014 - ARIEL
L. DAVID, DOING
A claim based on a future right does not ripen into an
BUSINESS UNDER
adverse claim as defined in Section 70 of Presidential
THE NAME AND
Decree No. 1529. A right still subject to negotiations
STYLE “YIELS HOG
cannot be enforced against a title holder or against one
DEALER,”
that has a legitimate title to the property based on
PETITIONER, VS.
possession, ownership, lien, or any valid deed of
JOHN G. MACASIO,
transfer.
Respondent.
Respondent’s claim was not based on any of those. Its

G.R. No. 204101,
claim was based on a deal with the CLOA farmer-
July 02, 2014 - THE
beneficiaries, which did not materialize.
LATE ALBERTO B.
JAVIER, AS
Respondent alleged that had there been a trial, it could
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
have “[p]resented documentary evidence that its
SURVIVING WIFE,
negotiation with the former landowners had earned for
MA. THERESA M.
it part-ownership of the properties, or . . . the
JAVIER, AND
exclusive authority to deal with potential buyers or
CHILDREN, KLADINE
M. JAVIER, CHRISTIE developers.”110 Respondent contradicts itself. For there
to be a contract, there must be a meeting of the minds
M. JAVIER, JALYN M.
JAVIER, CANDY between the parties. There could not have been any
GRACE M. JAVIER contract earning for respondent part-ownership or any

right since it was still undergoing negotiations with the
AND GLIZELDA M.
JAVIER, Petitioners, farmer-beneficiaries. At that stage, meeting of the
v. PHILIPPINE minds was absent. The terms were not yet final.
Hence, no right or obligation could attach to the
TRANSMARINE
CARRIERS, INC. parties. In essence, parties cannot claim, much less
make an adverse claim of any right, from terms that
AND/OR NORTHERN
are still under negotiations.
MARINE
MANAGEMENT, LTD., Respondent also alleged that had it been allowed to
Respondents. offer as evidence the joint venture agreement it
entered with the farmer-beneficiaries, it would have
G.R. No. 184785, shown that it “had made partial payment of the former
July 09, 2014 - RUBY landowners’ 40% share in the joint venture,”111
P. LAGOC, Petitioner, acquiring for itself an “interest over the properties, or .
v. MARIA ELENA
. . better right than the registered owner[s].”112
MALAGA, OFFICE OF
Respondent was mistaken.
THE OMBUDSMAN
AND THE OFFICE OF
Republic Act No. 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian
THE DEPUTY
Reform Law prohibits its own circumvention. The
OMBUDSMAN
prohibition on disposition includes all rights relating to
(VISAYAS),
disposition such as sale, and promise of sale of
Respondents.; G.R.
property upon the happening of conditions that remove
NO. 184890 - LIMUEL
the restrictions on disposition.
P. SALES, Petitioner,
v. MARIA ELENA
Republic Act No. 6657 prohibits the sale, transfer, or
MALAGA, OFFICE OF
conveyance of awarded lands within ten (10) years,
THE OMBUDSMAN
subject only to a few exceptions. Section 27 of the Act
AND THE OFFICE OF
provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
THE DEPUTY
OMBUDSMAN
(VISAYAS), SECTION 27. Transferability of Awarded
Respondents. Lands. —Lands acquired by beneficiaries
under this Act may not be sold, transferred
G.R. No. 163999, or conveyed except through hereditary
July 09, 2014 - succession, or to the government, or the
PHILIPPINE LONG LBP, or to other qualified beneficiaries for a
DISTANCE period of ten (10) years: provided,
TELEPHONE however, that the children or the spouse of
COMPANY, Petitioner, the transferor shall have a right to
v. MILLARD R. repurchase the land from the government
OCAMPO, CIPRIANO or LBP within a period of two (2) years. Due
REY R. HIPOLITO, notice of the availability of the land shall be
ERIC F. MERJILLA given by the LBP to the Barangay Agrarian
AND JOSE R. Reform Committee (BARC) of the barangay
CARANDANG, where the land is situated. The Provincial
Respondents, Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee
(PARCCOM) as herein provided, shall, in
turn, be given due notice thereof by the
G.R. No. 188944, BARC.

July 09, 2014 -
SPOUSES RODOLFO If the land has not yet been fully paid by
BEROT AND LILIA the beneficiary, the rights to the land may
BEROT, Peitioners, v. be transferred or conveyed, with prior
FELIPE C. SIAPNO, approval of the DAR, to any heir of the
Respondent. beneficiary or to any other beneficiary who,
as a condition for such transfer or
G.R. No. 205179, conveyance, shall cultivate the land himself.
July 18, 2014 - Failing compliance herewith, the land shall
GERVE MAGALLANES, be transferred to the LBP which shall give
Petitioner, v. PALMER due notice of the availability of the land in
ASIA, INC., the manner specified in the immediately
Respondent. preceding paragraph.
G.R. No. 209302, In the event of such transfer to the LBP, the
July 09, 2014 - latter shall compensate the beneficiary in
ALONE AMAR P. one lump sum for the amounts the latter
TAGLE, Petitioner, v. has already paid, together with the value of
ANGLO-EASTERN improvements he has made on the land
CREW MANAGEMENT,
PHILS., INC., ANGLO-
Republic Act No. 6657 also provides that the awarded
EASTERN CREW
lands may be converted to residential, commercial, or
MANAGEMENT (ASIA)
industrial use if these are not economically feasible
AND CAPT.
anymore or because of urbanization, greater economic
GREGORIO B.
value will be derived with their conversion. Section 65
SIALSA,
of the Act provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Respondents.
G.R. No. 203834, SECTION 65. Conversion of Lands. — After

July 09, 2014 - HEIRS the lapse of five (5) years from its award,
OF DIOSDADO M. when the land ceases to be economically
MENDOZA, NAMELY: feasible and sound for agricultural purposes,
LICINIA V. or the locality has become urbanized and
MENDOZA, PETER the land will have a greater economic value
VAL V. MENDOZA, for residential, commercial or industrial
CONSTANCIA V. purposes, the DAR, upon application of the
MENDOZA YOUNG, beneficiary or the landowner, with due
CRISTINA V. notice to the affected parties, and subject to
MENDOZA FIGUEROA, existing laws, may authorize the
DIOSDADO V. reclassification or conversion of the land
MENDOZA, JR., and its disposition: provided, that the

JOSEPHINE V. beneficiary shall have fully paid his
MENDOZA JASA, AND obligation.
RIZALINA V.
MENDOZA PUSO,
These provisions imply the following on rules on sale of
Petitioners, v.
awarded lands:
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS AND
1) Subject to a few exceptions, lands acquired by
HIGHWAYS AND THE
beneficiaries may be conveyed to non-beneficiaries
DPWH SECRETARY,
after ten (10) years.
Respondents.
2) Before the lapse of ten (10) years but after the

G.R. No. 207851,
lapse of five (5) years, a beneficiary may dispose of the
July 08, 2014 -
acquired land if it “ceases to be economically feasible
ANGEL G. NAVAL,
and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has
Petitioner, v.
become urbanized and the land will have a greater
COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS AND economic value”113 with its residential, commercial, or
industrial use.
NELSON B. JULIA,
Respondents.
These implications are easily abused. Hence, Republic
Act No. 6657 included among the prohibitions any act
G.R. No. 160143,
July 02, 2014 - LAND that will circumvent its provisions. Thus:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
BANK OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
SECTION 73. Prohibited Acts and
Petitioner, v.
Omissions. — The following are prohibited:
BENECIO EUSEBIO,
(a) The ownership or possession, for the
JR., Respondent.
purpose of circumventing the provisions of
this Act, of agricultural lands in excess of
G.R. No. 185100,
the total retention limits or award ceilings
July 09, 2014 - GIRLY
by any person, natural or juridical, except
G. ICO, Petitioner, v.
those under collective ownership by farmer-
SYSTEMS
beneficiaries. (b) The forcible entry or illegal
TECHNOLOGY
detainer by persons who are not qualified
INSTITUTE, INC.,
beneficiaries under this Act to avail
MONICO V. JACOB
themselves of the rights and benefits of the
AND PETER K.
Agrarian Reform Program. (c) The
FERNANDEZ,
conversion by any landowner of his
Respondents.
agricultural land into any
nonagricultural use with intent to avoid
the application of this Act to his
G.R. No. 166680, landholdings and to dispossess his

July 07, 2014 - tenant farmers of the land tilled by
ALOYSIUS DAIT them. (d) The willful prevention or
LUMAUIG, Petitioner, obstruction by any person, association or
v. PEOPLE OF THE entity of the implementation of the CARP.
PHILIPPINES, (e) The sale, transfer, conveyance or
Respondent. change of the nature of lands outside
of urban centers and city limits either
G.R. No. 183290, in whole or in part after the effectivity
July 09, 2014 - of this Act. The date of the registration
DEPARTMENT of the deed of conveyance in the
REFORM, SECRETARY Register of Deeds with respect to titled
OF AGRARIAN lands and the date of the issuance of
REPRESENTED BY the tax declaration to the transferee of
NASSER C. the property with respect to
PANGANDAMAN, unregistered lands, as the case may be,
Petitioner, v. shall be conclusive for the purpose of
SPOUSES DIOSDADO this Act. (f) The sale, transfer or
STA. ROMANA AND conveyance by a beneficiary of the
RESURRECCION 0. right to use or any other usufructuary
RAMOS, right over the land he acquired by
REPRESENTED BY virtue of being a beneficiary, in order to
AURORA STA. circumvent the provisions of this Act.
ROMANA, (Emphasis supplied)
PURIFICACION C.
DAEZ, REPRESENTED
The prohibition from disposition of the properties
BY EFREN D.
encompasses all rights relating to disposition, including
VILLALUZ AND
the right to convey ownership or to promise the sale
ROSAURO D.
and transfer of property from the farmer-beneficiaries
VILLALUZ, AND
to anyone upon the happening of certain conditions
SPOUSES LEANDRO
that will remove the conveyance restrictions.
C. SEVILLA AND
MILAGROS C. DAEZ,
The conveyance of the property within the prohibited
Respondents.
period or before its conversion to non-agricultural use
is an outright violation of Republic Act No. 6657.
G.R. No. 190445,
Meanwhile, the promise of sale of properties upon the
July 23, 2014 -
happening of conditions that will remove restrictions
BANCO DE ORO
carry with it an intent to circumvent the provisions of
UNIBANK, INC.,
Republic Act No. 6657. This law prohibits its
Petitioner, v.
circumvention.
SPOUSES ENRIQUE
GABRIEL LOCSIN In this case, the CLOAs were awarded to the farmer-
AND MA. GERALDINE beneficiaries between 1990 and 1992.114 Since the
R. LOCSIN, affidavit of adverse claim annotated on petitioner’s
Respondents. certificates of title was annotated in 1996 and the
properties were converted only in 1998, respondent’s
G.R. No. 205055, joint venture agreement with the farmer-beneficiaries
July 18, 2014 - could not have validly transferred rights to respondent.
COMMISSIONER OF The 10-year period of prohibition against conveyance
INTERNAL REVENUE, had not yet lapsed at that time. Neither were the
Petitioner, v. TEAM properties already converted to non-agricultural use at
SUAL CORPORATION that time. Respondent’s adverse claim, therefore,
(FORMERLY MIRANT based on its alleged payment of the farmer-
SUAL beneficiaries’ 40% could not be valid.
CORPORATION),
Respondent. In sum, whether or not there were provisions on
transfer of rights or promise to transfer rights in the
G.R. No. 201286, joint venture agreement, there could be no basis for
July 18, 2014 - respondent’s adverse claim. Lack of that provision
INOCENCIA means that respondent does not have any valid claim
TAGALOG, Petitioner, or right over the properties at all. Meanwhile, inclusion
v. MARIA LIM VDA. of such provision is illegal and, therefore, void.
DE GONZALEZ,
GAUDENCIA L. This ruling is also applicable to petitioner, which
BUAGAS, RANULFO Y. entered into irrevocable exclusive right to buy
LIM, DON L. CALVO, contracts from the farmer-beneficiaries. These
SUSAN C. SANTIAGO, contracts provided that the farmer-beneficiaries
DINA C. ARANAS, committed themselves to selling their properties to
AND RUFINA C. petitioner upon expiration of the period of prohibition
RAMIREZ, to transfer or upon conversion of the properties from
Respondents. agricultural to industrial or commercial use, whichever
comes first. These contracts were executed between
G.R. No. 199208, farmer-beneficiaries and petitioner during the period of
July 30, 2014 - prohibition and before the properties’ conversion from
PEOPLE OF THE agricultural to mixed use. Upon conversion of the
PHILIPPINES, properties, these were immediately sold to petitioner.
Appellee, v. Intent to circumvent the provisions of Republic Act No.
TRINIDAD A. 6657 is, therefore, apparent. Petitioner’s contracts are,
CAHILIG, Appellant. therefore, also illegal and void. Hence, this decision is
without prejudice to the right of interested parties to
G.R. No. 169745, seek the cancellation of petitioner’s certificates of title
July 18, 2014 - obtained in violation of the law.
REPUBLIC OF THE
PIDLIPPINES, WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Register
REPRESENTED BY of Deeds of Cavite is ORDERED to cancel the
THE HONORABLE annotations of adverse claims on the transfer
SECRETARY OF certificates of title.
LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT SO ORDERED.
(DOLE), Petitioner, v.
NAMBOKU PEAK, Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Villarama, Jr.* and
INC., Respondent.; Mendoza, JJ., concur.
G.R. NO. 170091 -
PHIL-JAPAN
Endnotes:
WORKERS UNION-
SOLIDARITY OF
UNIONS IN THE * Villarama, Jr., J., designated as Acting
PIDLIPPINES FOR Member per Special Order No. 1691 dated
EMPOWERMENT AND May 22, 2014 in view of the vacancy in the
REFORMS (PJWU- Third Division.
SUPER), MED-
ARBITER CLARISSA 1Rollo, p. 34.
G. BELTRAN LERIOS
AND SECRETARY 2 Id. at 34 and 82.
PATRICIA A. STO.
TOMAS OF THE
3 Id. at 12 and 34.
DEPARTMENT OF
LABOR AND
4 Id. at 12 and 305.
EMPLOYMENT,
Petitioners, v. PIDL-
5 Id. at 34 and 958.
JAPAN INDUSTRIAL
MANUFACTURING
CORPORATION, 6 Id. at 318–324.
Respondent.
7 Id at 325–865.
G.R. No. 177484,
July 18, 2014 - 8 Id.; see also rollo, p. 1081; see for
SPOUSES ALEJANDRO
example rollo, p. 315.
MANZANILLA AND
REMEDIOS VELASCO, 9 Id. at 1081; see for example rollo, p. 317.
Petitioners, v.
WATERFIELDS
10 Id. at 34 and 973–976.
INDUSTRIES
CORPORATION, 11 Id. at 34.

REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, ALIZA 12 Id. at 35 and 173–304.
MA, Respondent.
13 Id. at 35 and 304.

G.R. No.178115,
July 28, 2014 -
14 Id. at 35.
PEOPLE OF THE
PIDLIPPINES,
15 Id. at 872.
JOJO SUMILIDG,
16 Id. at 35.
RICARDO SUMILIDG
ALIAS CARDING
SUMILIDG, PASOT 17 Id.
SALOLI, ERIC ENOC,
WARLITOMONTEBON, 18 Id. at 35, 872, 875, 882, 959, 1040, and
AND CIO LIMAMA, 1094.
Accused, JOJO
SUMILIDG, RICARDO 19 Id. at 35 and 873.
SUMILIDG ALIAS
CARDING SUMILIDG,
20 Id.
AND PASOT SALOLI,
Accused-Appellants.
21 Id. at 35.
G.R. No. 192352,

22 Id. at 977.
July 23, 2014 -
ROSEMARIE
ESMARIALINO, 23 Id. at 35 and 977–978.
Petitioner, v.
EMPLOYEES' 24 Id. at 980.
COMPENSATION
COMMISSION, 25 Id. at 35 and 980.
SOCIAL SECURITY
SYSTEM AND
26 Id. at 981–989.
JIMENEZ PROTECTIVE
AND SECURITY
27 Id. at 982.
AGENCY,
Respondent.
28 Id.
G.R. No. 194157,
July 30, 2014 - 29 Id. at 985–986.
ROMEO R. ARAULLO,
Petitioner, v. OFFICE 30 Id. at 988.
OF THE
OMBUDSMAN, HON. 31 Id. at 35–36.
MERCEDITAS N.
GUTIERREZ, HON.
32 Id. at 36 and 990–993.
GERARDO C.
NOGRALES, HON.
33 Id. at 36 and 994–998.
ROMEO L. GO, HON.
PERLITA B. VELASCO,
34 Id. at 996–997.
HON. ARDEN S.
ANNI, ATTY.
35 Id. at 999-1009.
FILOMEMO B.
BALBIN, ATTY.
ERNESTO P. TABAO 36 Id. at 1000–1003.
AND ATTY. ROBERTO
F. DE LEON, 37 Id. at 1003.
Respondents.
38 Id. at 874–880.
A.C. No. 10031,
July 23, 2014 - RAUL
39 Id. at 879.
M. FRANCIA,
Complainant, v.
40 Id. at 878–879.
ATTY. REYNALDO V.
ABDON, Respondent.
41 Id. at 36 and 880.
G.R. No. 178343,
July 14, 2014 - THE 42 Id. at 1080.
OFFICE OF THE
OMBUDSMAN, 43 Id. at 1020–1044.
Petitioner, v. ALEX M.
VALENCERINA, 44 Id. at 1044.
Respondent.
45 Id. at 1045–1046.
G.R. No. 187701,
July 23, 2014 -
46 Id.
PHILAM INSURANCE
COMPANY, INC.
47 Id. at 1080–1081.
(NOW CHARTIS
PHILIPPINES
INSURANCE, INC.*), 48 Id. at 1045.
Petitioner, v. HEUNG-
A SHIPPING 49 Id. at 1081–1084.
CORPORATION AND
WALLEM PHILIPPINES 50 Id. at 1080–1082.
SHIPPING, INC.,
Respondents.; G.R.
51 Id. at 1082.
NO. 187812 -
HEUNG-A SHIPPING
52 Id. at 36.
CORPORATION AND
WALLEM PHILIPPINES
53 Id. at 1082–1083.
SHIPPING, INC.,
Petitioners, v.
54 Id. at 1083.
PHILAM INSURANCE
COMPANY, INC.
(NOW CHARTIS 55 Id. at 34.
PHILIPPINES
INSURANCE, INC.), 56 Id. at 38.
Respondent.
57 Id. at 37.
G.R. No. 201725,
July 18, 2014 -
58 Id. at 38.
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
59 Id. at 40.
JOY ALCALA Y
60 Id. at 1175.
NOVILLA, Accused-
Appellant.
61 Id.
G.R. No. 186589,
July 18, 2014 - 62 Id.
RICARDO C.
SILVERIO, SR. AND 63 Id.
LORNA CILLAN-
SILVERIO,
64 Id. at 1176.
Petitioners, v.
RICARDO S.
65 Id.
SILVERIO, JR.,
Respondent.
66 Id.
G.R. No. 209373,

July 30, 2014 - JOEL 67 Id.
YONGCO AND
JULIETO LAÑOJAN, 68 Id.
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES, 69 Id.
Respondent.; G.R.
NO. 209414 - 70 Id.
ANECITO TANGIAN,
JR., Petitioner, v.
71 Id. at 1177.
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
72 Id. at 1194 and 1197.
Respondent.
73 Id. at 1194 and 1196.

G.R. No. 182705,
July 18, 2014 -
VICENTE JOSEFA, 74 Id. at 1197.
Petitioner, v. MANILA
ELECTRIC COMPANY, 75 Id. at 1189.
Respondent.
76 Id.
G.R. No. 198388,
July 28, 2014 -
77 Id. at 1177.
JORAINA DRAGON
TALOSIG, Petitioner,
78 Id. at 1182–1183.
v. UNITED
PHILIPPINE LINES,
79 Id. at 1184–1185.
INC., FERNANDO
LISING [President],
HOLLAND AMERICAN 80 Id. at 1185.
LINE WASTOURS,
INC., Respondent. 81 Id. at 1187.
G.R. No. 188931, 82 Id. at 1191–1192.

July 28, 2014 -
JUANITO M. GOPIAO,
83 Id. at 1192–1193.
Petitioner, v.
METROPOLITAN BANK
84 Id. at 1198.
& TRUST CO.,
Respondent.
85 Id. at 1209.
G.R. No. 196786,

July 23, 2014 - 86 Id. at 1210.
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, 87 Id.
STANLEY BUNAGAN Y 88 Id.
JUAN, Accused-
Appellant.
89 Id.
G.R. No. 201572,

90 Id.
July 09, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
91 Id. at 1211.
PHILIPPINES,
Appellee, v. RAEL
92 Id. at 1212.
DELFIN, Appellant.
G.R. No. 176694, 93 Id. at 1213.

July 18, 2014 - GMA
NETWORK, INC., 94 Id. at 1214.
Petitioner, v.
CENTRAL CATV, INC., 95 Id.
Respondent.
96 Id.
G.R. No. 178451,
July 30, 2014 -
97 Id. at 1215.
RURAL BANK OF
CABADBARAN, INC.,
98 Id.
Petitioner, v.
JORGITA A.
MELECIO-YAP, LILIA 99 Id. at 1218.
MELECIO PACIFICO
(DECEASED, 100 Id. at 1219.
SUBSTITUTED BY
HER ONLY CHILD 101 Id. at 970.
ERLL ISAAC M.
PACIFICO, JR.),
102 See for example Paramount Insurance
REYNALDO A.
Corp. v. A.C. Ordoñez Corporation and
MELECIO, ROSIE
Franklin Suspine, 583 Phil. 321, 327 (2008)
MELECIO DELOSO,
[Per J. Ynares-Santiago, Third Division; JJ.
AND SARAH MELECIO
Austria-Martinez, Chico-Nazario, Nachura,
PALMA-GIL,
and Reyes concurring].
Respondents.
103 Id.
A.C. No. 10450,

July 30, 2014 - 104 Id. at 328.
EMERITA B.
MAHILUM, 105 Rules of Court, Rule 15, sec. 4.
Complainant, v.
ATTY. SAMUEL SM. 106 16 Phil. 315, 321–322 (1910) [Per J.
LEZAMA, Respondent.
Moreland, En Banc].
G.R. No. 197046,

107 Rollo, pp. 1209-1210.
July 21, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
108 Id. at 90.
PHILIPPINES,
109 Id. at 100.
GEORGE ZAPATA Y
VIANA, Accused-
Appellant. 110 Id. at 970.
G.R. No. 183664, 111 Id.

July 28, 2014 -
AIRLIFT ASIA 112 Id.
CUSTOMS
BROKERAGE, INC.
113 Rep. Act No. 6657 (1988), sec. 65.
AND ALLAN G.
BENEDICTO,
114Rollo, p. 318.
Petitioners, v. COURT
OF APPEALS,
COMMISSIONER OF
THE BUREAU OF
CUSTOMS, AND THE
SECRETARY OF Back to Home | Back to Main
FINANCE,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 189574,

July 18, 2014 -
ESTRELLA D. S.
BAÑEZ, Petitioner, v.
SOCIAL SECURITY
SYSTEM AND DE LA
SALLE UNIVERSITY,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 208623,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
VIRGILIO ANTONIO Y
RIVERA, Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 207818,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
ALEX DE LOS
SANTOS, Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 200748,

July 23, 2014 - JAIME
D. DELA CRUZ,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 175293,

July 23, 2014 -
CRISANTO F.
CASTRO, JR.,
Petitioner, v. ATENEO
DE NAGA
UNIVERSITY, FR.
JOEL TABORA, AND
MR. EDWIN BERNAL,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 200903,

July 22, 2014 -
KALIPUNAN NG
DAMAYANG
MAHIHIRAP, INC.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICE-PRESIDENT,
CARLITO BADION,
CORAZON DE JESUS
HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, ARNOLD
REPIQUE, FERNANDO
SEVILLA AS
PRESIDENT OF
SAMAHANG PAMATA
SA KAPATIRANG
KRISTIYANO,
ESTRELIETA
BAGASBAS, JOCY
LOPEZ, ELVIRA
VIDOL, AND DELIA
FRAYRES, Petitioners,
v. JESSIE ROBREDO,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF
INTERIOR AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT,
HON. GUIA GOMEZ,
IN HER CAPACITY AS
MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF SAN JUAN, HON.
HERBERT BAUTISTA,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
THE MAYOR OF
QUEZON CITY, HON.
JOHN REY TIANGCO,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
MAYOR OF NAVOTAS
CITY, AND THE
GENERAL MANAGER
OF THE NATIONAL
HOUSING
AUTHORITY,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 194068,

July 09, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
BENJIE CONSORTE Y
FRANCO, Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 199100,

July 18, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
ROSENDO AMARO,
Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 177524,

July 23, 2014 -
NATIONAL UNION OF
WORKERS IN HOTEL
RESTAURANT AND
ALLIED INDUSTRIES
(NUWHRAIN-APL-
IUF), PHILIPPINE
PLAZA CHAPTER,
Petitioner, v.
PHILIPPINE PLAZA
HOLDINGS, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 199874,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
PETER FANG Y
GAMBOA A.K.A.
“FRITZ” AND
JEFFERSON FANG Y
PERALTA, ACCUSED,
PETER FANG Y
GAMBOA A.K.A.
“FRITZ,” Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 198093,

July 28, 2014 - FLP
ENTERPRISES INC. –
FRANCESCO
SHOES/EMILIO
FRANCISCO B.
PAJARO, Petitioners,
v. MA. JOERALYN D.
DELA CRUZ AND
VILMA MALUNES,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 180086,

July 02, 2014 - AFP
RETIREMENT AND
SEPARATION
BENEFITS SYSTEM
[AFP-RSBS],
Petitioner, v.
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 193324,

July 23, 2014 - ST.
LUKE’S MEDICAL
CENTER, Petitioner,
v. DANIEL QUEBRAL
AND ST. LUKE’S
MEDICAL CENTER
EMPLOYEES’
ASSOCIATION -
ALLIANCE OF
FILIPINO WORKERS
(SLMCEA-AFW),
Respondents.
G.R. No. 182970,

July 23, 2014 -
EMILIANO S.
SAMSON, Petitioner,
v. SPOUSES JOSE
AND GUILLERMINA
GABOR, TANAY
RURAL BANK, INC.,
AND REGISTER OF
DEEDS OF MORONG,
RIZAL, Respondents.
G.R. No. 172204,

July 10, 2014 -
CATHAY METAL
CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v. LAGUNA
WEST MULTI-
PURPOSE
COOPERATIVE, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 190706,

July 21, 2014 -
SHANG PROPERTIES
REALTY
CORPORATION
(FORMERLY THE
SHANG GRAND
TOWER
CORPORATION) AND
SHANG PROPERTIES,
INC. (FORMERLY
EDSA PROPERTIES
HOLDINGS, INC.),
Petitioners, v. ST.
FRANCIS
DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 188133,

July 07, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Appellee, v. OLIVER
RENATO EDAÑO Y
EBDANE, Appellant.
G.R. No. 203434,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
MARCELINO VITERBO
y REALUBIT AND
RONALD VITERBO y
REALUBIT, Accused-
Appellants.
G.R. No. 202809,

July 02, 2014 -
DENNIS L. GO,
Petitioner, v.
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 181045,

July 02, 2014 -
SPOUSES EDUARDO
AND LYDIA SILOS,
Petitioners, v.
PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL BANK,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 178055,

July 02, 2014 -
AMECOS
INNOVATIONS, INC.
AND ANTONIO F.
MATEO, Petitioners,
v. ELIZA R. LOPEZ,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 177374,

July 02, 2014 -
MARIANO JOSE,
FELICISIMO JOSE,
DECEASED,
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
CHILDREN MARIANO
JOSE, CAMILO JOSE,
TIBURCIA JOSE,
FERMINA JOSE, AND
VICTORIA JOSE,
Petitioners, v.
ERNESTO M. NOVIDA,
RODOLFO PALAYLAY,
JR., ALEX M.
BELARMINO,
RODRIGO LIBED,
LEONARDO L. LIBED,
BERNARDO B.
BELARMINO,
BENJAMIN G.
ACOSTA, MODESTO
A. ORLANDA,
WARLITO B. MEJIA,
MAMERTO B.
BELARMINO,
MARCELO O. DELFIN
AND HEIRS OF
LUCINO A. ESTEBAN,
REPRESENTED BY
CRESENCIA M. VDA.
DE ESTEBAN,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 196249,

July 21, 2014 - ROSE
HANA ANGELES,
doing business under
the name and style
[of] LAS MARIAS
GRILL AND
RESTAURANT[,] and
ZENAIDA ANGELES[,]
doing business under
the name and style
[of] CAFÉ TERIA BAR
AND RESTAURANT,
Petitioners, v.
FERDINAND M.
BUCAD, CHARLESTON
A. REYNANTE,
BERNADINE B.
ROAQUIN, MARLON
A. OMPOY, RUBEN N.
LAROZA,
EVANGELINE B.
BUMACOD, WILMA
CAINGLES, BRIAN
OGARIO, EVELYN A.
BASTAN, ANACLITO
A. BASTAN, MA. GINA
BENITEZ, HERMINIO
AGSAOAY,
NORBERTO
BALLASTEROS,
DEMETRIO L.
BERDIN, JR., JOEL
DUCUSIN, JOVY R.
BALATA, and
MARIBEL ROAQUIN,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 207443,

July 23, 2014 -
GENATO
INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Petitioner, v. HON.
JUDGE OSCAR P.
BARRIENTOS, In His
Capacity As The
Presiding Judge Of
The Regional Trial
Court, Of Caloocan
City, Branch 123,
EMILY P. DIZON, In
Her Capacity As The
Branch Clerk Of Court
Of The Regional Trial
Court Of Caloocan
City, Branch 123,
JIMMY T. SORO,
Court Process Server
Of The Regional Trial
Court Of Caloocan,
Branch 123, EVELINA
M. GARMA, CITY
TREASURER OF
CALOOCAN CITY,
PHILLIP L. YAM,
Officer-In-Charge,
Real Property Tax
Division Of The
Caloocan City
Treasurer’S Office,
ANTHONY B.
PULMANO, Officer-In-
Charge, City Assessor
Of Caloocan City, And
LAVERNE REALTY &
DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION,
Respondents. D E C I
SION
G.R. No. 198097,

July 30, 2014 -
STATUS MARITIME
CORPORATION, MS.
LOMA B. AGUIMAN,
FAIRDEAL GROUP
MANAGEMENT S.A.,
AND MT FAIR JOLLY,
Petitioners, v.
SPOUSES
MARGARITO B.
DELALAMON AND
PRISCILA A.
DELALAMON,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 195190,

July 28, 2014 -
ROYALE HOMES
MARKETING
CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v. FIDEL P.
ALCANTARA
[DECEASED],
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
HEIRS, Respondent.
A.M. No. P-14-

3218 [Formerly: OCA
IPI No. 13-4037-P],
July 08, 2014 -
SELECTION AND
PROMOTION BOARD,
OFFICE OF THE
COURT
ADMINISTRATOR,
Complainant, v.
RONALDO D. TACA,
CASHIER I,
METROPOLITAN
TRIAL COURT,
OFFICE OF THE
CLERK OF COURT,
MANILA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 196118,

July 30, 2014 -
LEONARDO C.
CASTILLO,
REPRESENTED BY
LENNARD V.
CASTILLO, Petitioner,
v. SECURITY BANK
CORPORATION, JRC
POULTRY FARMS OR
SPOUSES LEON C.
CASTILLO, JR., AND
TERESITA FLORES-
CASTILLO,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 196219,

July 30, 2014 -
SPOUSES MAURICIO
M. TABINO AND
LEONILA DELA CRUZ-
TABINO, Petitioners,
v. LAZARO M.
TABINO, Respondent.
G.R. No. 205610,

July 30, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
RAMONITO VILLARTA
Y RIVERA AND ALLAN
ARMENTA Y CABILES,
Accused-Appellants.
G.R. No. 205741,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
REYMAN ENDAYA Y
LAIG, Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 184295,

July 30, 2014 -
NATIONAL
TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v.
ALPHAOMEGA
INTEGRATED
CORPORATION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 203957,

July 30, 2014 -
UNIVERSITY OF
SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY UNION,
Petitioner, v.
UNIVERSITY OF
SANTO TOMAS,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 181843,

July 14, 2014 -
MIGUEL CIRERA Y
USTELO, Petitioner,
v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 197530,

July 09, 2014 -
ABOITIZ EQUITY
VENTURES, INC.,
Petitioner, v. VICTOR
S. CHIONGBIAN,
BENJAMIN D.
GOTHONG, AND
CARLOS A. GOTHONG
LINES, INC. (CAGLI),
Respondents.
G.R. No. 161759,

July 02, 2014 -
COMMISSIONER OF
CUSTOMS, Petitioner,
v. OILINK
INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 192866,

July 09, 2014 -
PEDRO G.
RESURRECCION,
JOSEPH COMETA AND
CRISEFORO
LITERATO, JR.,
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 191240,

July 30, 2014 -
CRISTINA B.
CASTILLO, Petitioner,
v. PHILLIP R.
SALVADOR,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 174411,

July 02, 2014 - CITY
OF DAGUPAN,
REPRESENTED BY
THE CITY MAYOR

BENJAMIN S. LIM,
Petitioner, v. ESTER
F. MARAMBA,
REPRESENTED BY
HER ATTORNEY-IN-
FACT JOHNNY
FERRER, Respondent.
G.R. No. 203472,

July 09, 2014 -
MAGSAYSAY
MARITIME
CORPORATION,
EDUARDO U. MANESE
AND NORWEGIAN
CRUISE LINE,
Petitioners, v. HENRY
M. SIMBAJON,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 196251,

July 09, 2014 -
OLIVAREZ REALTY
CORPORATION AND
DR. PABLO R.
OLIVAREZ,
Petitioners, v.
BENJAMIN CASTILLO,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 208321,

July 30, 2014 -
WESLEYAN
UNIVERSITY-
PHILIPPINES,
Petitioner, v.
NOWELLA REYES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 210636,

July 28, 2014 - MA.
HAZELINA A. TUJAN-
MILITANTE IN
BEHALF OF THE
MINOR CRISELDA M.
CADA, Petitioner, v.
RAQUEL M. CADA-
DEAPERA,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 191723,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
ROLANDO LAS PIÑAS,
JIMMY DELIZO AND
MERWIN LAS PIÑAS,
Accused-Appellants.
G.R. No. 171914,

July 23, 2014 -
SOLEDAD L.
LAVADIA, Petitioner,
v. HEIRS OF JUAN
LUCES LUNA,
REPRESENTED BY
GREGORIO Z. LUNA
AND EUGENIA
ZABALLERO-LUNA,
Respondents.
A.M. No. P-14-

3198 (formerly A.M.
OCA IPI No. 09-3158-
P), July 23, 2014 -
FLORA P. HOLASCA,
Petitioner, v.
ANSELMO P.
PAGUNSAN, JR.,
SHERIFF IV,
REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, BRANCH 20,
IMUS, CAVITE,
Respondent.; [A.M.
NO. P-14-3199
(FORMERLY A.M. OCA
IPI NO. 10-3415-P)] -
OFFICE OF THE
COURT
ADMINISTRATOR
(OCA), Petitioner, v.
FRANCISCO J.
CALIBUSO, JR.,
CLERK OF COURT III,
MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURT IN CITIES,
BRANCH 1, CAVITE
CITY, Respondent.
G.R. No. 200334,

July 30, 2014 - THE
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Respondent-Appellee,
v. VICTOR COGAED Y
ROMANA, Accused-
Appellant.
G.R. No. 163879,

July 30, 2014 - DR.
ANTONIO P.
CABUGAO, Petitioner,
v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES AND
SPOUSES RODOLFO
M. PALMA AND
ROSARIO F. PALMA,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 165805] - DR.
CLENIO YNZON,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES
AND SPOUSES
RODOLFO M. PALMA
AND ROSARIO F.
PALMA, Respondents.
G.R. No. 209287,

July 01, 2014 -
MARIA CAROLINA P.
ARAULLO,
CHAIRPERSON,
BAGONG ALYANSANG
MAKABAYAN; JUDY
M. TAGUIWALO,
PROFESSOR,
UNIVERSITY OF THE
PHILIPPINES
DILIMAN, CO-
CHAIRPERSON,
PAGBABAGO; HENRI
KAHN, CONCERNED
CITIZENS
MOVEMENT; REP.
LUZ ILAGAN,
GABRIELA WOMEN’S
PARTY
REPRESENTATIVE;
REP. TERRY L.
RIDON, KABATAAN
PARTYLIST
REPRESENTATIVE;
REP. CARLOS
ISAGANI ZARATE,
BAYAN MUNA PARTY-
LIST
REPRESENTATIVE;
RENATO M. REYES,
JR., SECRETARY
GENERAL OF BAYAN;
MANUEL K. DAYRIT,
CHAIRMAN ANG
KAPATIRAN PARTY;
VENCER MARI E.
CRISOSTOMO,
CHAIRPERSON,
ANAKBAYAN; VICTOR
VILLANUEVA,
CONVENOR, YOUTH
ACT NOW,
Petitioners, v.
BENIGNO SIMEON C.
AQUINO III,
PRESIDENT OF THE
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES;
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
JR., EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY; AND
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
SECRETARY THE
DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209135] -
AUGUSTO L. SYJUCO
JR., PH.D., Petitioner,
v. FLORENCIO B.
ABAD, IN HIS
CAPACITY AS THE
SECRETARY OF
DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT; AND
HON. FRANKLIN
MAGTUNAO DRILON,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
THE SENATE
PRESIDENT OF TH
PHILIPPINES,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209136] -
MANUELITO R. LUNA,
Petitioner, v.
SECRETARY
FLORENCIO ABAD, IN
HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS HEAD
OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT; AND
EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO
OCHOA, IN HIS
OFFICIAL CAPACITY
AS ALTER EGO OF
THE PRESIDENT,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209155] - ATTY.
JOSE MALVAR
VILLEGAS, JR.,
Petitioner, v. THE
HONORABLE
EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO
N. OCHOA, JR.; AND
THE SECRETARY O
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209164] -
PHILIPPINE
CONSTITUTION
ASSOCIATION
(PHILCONSA),
REPRESENTED BY
DEAN FROILAN
BACUNGAN,
BENJAMIN E. DIOKNO
AND LEONOR M.
BRIONES, Petitioners,
v. DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT
AND/OR HON.
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209260] -
INTEGRATED BAR OF
THE PHILIPPINES
(IBP), Petitioner, v.
SECRETARY
FLORENCIO B. ABAD
OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT (DBM),
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209442] -
GRECO ANTONIOUS
BEDA B. BELGICA;
BISHOP REUBEN M
ABANTE AND REV.
JOSE L. GONZALEZ,
Petitioners, v.
PRESIDENT BENIGNO
SIMEON C. AQUINO
III, THE SENATE OF
THE PHILIPPINES,
REPRESENTED BY
SENATE PRESIDENT
FRANKLIN M.
DRILON; THE HOUSE
OF
REPRESENTATIVES,
REPRESENTED BY
SPEAKER FELICIANO
BELMONTE, JR.; THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE,
REPRESENTED BY
EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY PAQUITO
N. OCHOA, J THE
DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT,
REPRESENTED BY
SECRETARY
FLORENCIO ABAD;
THE DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE,
REPRESENTED BY
SECRETARY CESAR V.
PURISIMA; AND THE
BUREAU OF
TREASURY,
REPRESENTED BY
ROSALIA V. DE LEON,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209517] -
CONFEDERATION
FOR UNITY,
RECOGNITION AND
ADVANCEMENT OF
GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES
(COURAGE),
REPRESENTED BY ITS
1ST VICE
PRESIDENT,
SANTIAGO
DASMARINAS, JR.;
ROSALINDA
NARTATES, FOR
HERSELF AND AS
NATIONAL
PRESIDENT OF THE
CONSOLIDATED
UNION OF
EMPLOYEES
NATIONAL HOUSING
AUTHORITY (CUE-
NHA); MANUEL
BACLAGON, FOR
HIMSELF AND AS
PRESIDENT OF THE
SOCIAL WELFARE
EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION OF
THE PHILIPPINES,
DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL WELFARE
AND DEVELOPMENT
CENTRAL OFFICE
(SWEAP-DSWD CO);
ANTONIA PASCUAL,
FOR HERSELF AND
AS NATIONAL
PRESIDENT OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF
AGRARIAN REFORM
EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION
(DAREA); ALBERT
MAGALANG, FOR
HIMSELF AND AS
PRESIDENT OF THE
ENVIRONMENT AND
MANAGEMENT
BUREAU EMPLOYEES
UNION (EMBEU);
AND MARCIAL
ARABA, FOR HIMSELF
AND AS PRESIDENT
OF THE KAPISANAN
PARA SA
KAGALINGAN NG
MGA KAWANI NG
MMDA (KKK-MMDA),
Petitioners, v.
BENIGNO SIMEON C.
AQUINO III,
PRESIDENT OF THE
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES;
PAQUITO OCHOA,
JR., EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY; AND
HON. FLORENCIO B.
ABAD, SECRETA OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT,
Respondents.; [G.R.
NO. 209569] -
VOLUNTEERS
AGAINST CRIME AND
CORRUPTION (VACC),
REPRESENTED BY
DANTE L. JIMENEZ,
Petitioner, v.
PAQUITO N. OCHOA,
EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY, AND
FLORENCIO B. ABAD,
SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND
MANAGEMENT,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 188707,

July 30, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
MANUELITA
AMPATUAN Y
GONZALES, ET AL.,
Accused, MASTOR
SARIP Y MARUHOM
AND WARREN TUMOG
Y SAMPARADO,
Accused-Appellants.
G.R. No. 180651,

July 30, 2014 -
NURSERY CARE
CORPORATION;
SHOEMART, INC.;
STAR APPLIANCE
CENTER, INC.; H&B,
INC.; SUPPLIES
STATION, INC.; AND
HARDWARE
WORKSHOP, INC.,
Petitioners, v.
ANTHONY ACEVEDO,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS
THE TREASURER OF
MANILA; AND THE
CITY OF MANILA,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 180343,

July 09, 2014 -
BAHIA SHIPPING
SERVICES, INC. AND
FRED OLSEN CRUISE
LINES LIMITED,
Petitioners, v.
CRISANTE C.
CONSTANTINO,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 176317,

July 23, 2014 -
MANOLITO GIL Z.
ZAFRA, Petitioner, v.
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 207949,

July 23, 2014 -
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
ARMANDO DIONALDO
Y EBRON, RENATO
DIONALDO Y EBRON,
MARIANO GARIGUEZ,
JR.Y RAMOS, AND
RODOLFO LARIDO Y
EBRON, Accused-
Appellants.
G.R. No. 179205,

July 30, 2014 - HEIRS
OR REYNALDO DELA
ROSA, NAMELY:
TEOFISTA DELA
ROSA, JOSEPHINE
SANTIAGO AND
JOSEPH DELA ROSA,
Petitioners, v. MARIO
A. BATONGBACAL,
IRENEO
BATONGBACAL,
JOCELYN
BATONGBACAL,
NESTOR
BATONGBACAL AND
LOURDES
BATONGBACAL,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 172132,

July 23, 2014 - THE
HERITAGE HOTEL
MANILA, ACTING
THROUGH ITS
OWNER, GRAND
PLAZA HOTEL
CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v.
SECRETARY OF
LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT; MED-
ARBITER TOMAS F.
FALCONITIN; AND
NATIONAL UNION OF
WORKERS IN THE
HOTEL, RESTAURANT
AND ALLIED
INDUSTRIES–
HERITAGE HOTEL
MANILA
SUPERVISORS
CHAPTER
(NUWHRAIN-
HHMSC),
Respondents.
Copyright © 1995 - 2020 REDiaz

G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC., Respondent. - July 2014 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC., Respondent. - July 2014 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

3/3/2020 G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.

oner, v. LAGUNA WEST MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE, INC.,…

Home Law Firm Law Library Laws

July 2014 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

G.R. No. 172204, July 10, 2014 - CATHAY METAL

CATHAY METAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.

The Rules of Court governs court procedures, including

This petition under Rule 45 assails the Court of

Respondent Laguna West Multi-Purpose Cooperative is

or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.1 It

Ownership Award (CLOA) in Silang, Cavite.2 While

contracts with the same farmer-beneficiaries.3 Under

prohibition from transferring title to the properties.4

In 1996, respondent caused the annotation of its

On November 9, 1998, the Department of Agrarian

agricultural to mixed use.6

In 1999, petitioner and the farmer-beneficiaries

executed contracts of sale of the properties.7 Transfer

petitioner in the same year.8 The annotations in the

original titles were copied to petitioner's titles.9

Respondent’s Vice-President, Orlando dela Peña, sent

properties.10 Petitioner did not respond.11

On September 15, 2000, petitioner filed a consolidated

of Tagaytay City.12 It served a copy of the petition by

at “Barangay Mayapa, Calamba, Laguna.”13 The

could not be found at that address.14 The postman

return was that the “cooperative [was] not existing.”15

upon respondent personally.16 However, this service

failed for the same reason.17

Upon petitioner's motion, the Regional Trial Court

registered mail,18 to have been effected,19

Acting on the “Manifestation And Motion For

Accordingly, this Court hereby declares that

substituted service of the Consolidated

petition for cancellation of adverse claim.20

Petitioner was later allowed to present its evidence ex

Upon learning that a case involving its adverse claim

the petition.22 It moved for the service of the

No. 160, Narra Avenue, Looc, Calamba, Laguna.23

July-2014 The Regional Trial Court granted respondent's

the petition at its new address.25

M. TAGUIWALO, Therefore, it was too late for respondent to ask the

PROFESSOR, court that it be furnished with a copy of the petition. 28

PAGBABAGO; HENRI Petitioner sent a copy of the motion for reconsideration

GENERAL OF BAYAN; opposed by petitioner on September 6, 2001.35

PAQUITO N. OCHOA, decision.41

BUDGET AND decision granting petitioner’s petition for cancellation of

HONORABLE will cause injustice to a party

GOVERNMENT ordered remanded for appellant's

NARTATES, FOR Procedure.57 Hence, the "court acquire[d] no

AS NATIONAL claimed that he was an authorized representative of

PRESIDENT OF THE respondent and that respondent was already holding

DEPARTMENT OF office at No. 160, Narra Avenue, Looc, Calamba,

AGRARIAN REFORM Laguna, which was not the official address of

EMPLOYEES respondent.64 Mr. dela Peña never submitted proof of

Petitioner, v. member or officer of respondent.71

AGAINST CRIME AND order allowing respondent to file an answer or

CORRUPTION (VACC), opposition to the petition for cancellation of annotation

REPRESENTED BY was granted because of Mr. dela Peña’s and Mr.

DANTE L. JIMENEZ, Dragon’s failure to show evidence of authority to act on

Petitioner, v. behalf of respondent.77

DEPARTMENT OF cooperative is governed by Republic Act No. 6938, a