Sumalinog, Jaz Ann T.

90. Cameron Granville v Chua, GR No. 191170

.
PETITIONER: CAMERON GRANVILLE 3 ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.
RESPONDENT:Fidel CHUA and FILIDEN REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORP
DATE: September 14, 2016
PONENTE: Sereno, C.J.
TOPIC: Parties to Civil Actions

FACTS:
● Respondents obtained an initial loan of P4M from Metrobank secured by REM over 3
parcels of land. The REM was later on amended to accommodate additional loans.
● Respondents failed to pay thus. Metrobank sought for the foreclosure of REM.
● Subsequently, respondents filed a complaint for injunction to stop the public auction.
● RTC issued a TRO. However, when it expired, public auction was scheduled. The said
auction was ordered to be rescheduled however, Metrobank received the notice too late.
Public auction was pushed through and a certificate of sale was issued in its favor.
● RTC denied the application for preliminary injunction.
● Upon petition for certiorari, CA reversed and set aside the order and remanded the case
to RTC for further proceeding.
● Respondents filed a Motion to Admit Amended Complaint for Annulment of foreclosure of
mortgage, declaration of nullity of certificate of sale and injunction.
● On the other hand, petitioner filed a Motion for Joinder of Party and/or substitution
alleging that by virtue of Deed of Absolute Sale, Metrobank sold it credits against
respondents (including all rights, interests, claims and causes from loan and mortgage)
to Asia Recovery Corp (ARC). ARC in turn, assigned the credit to petitioner through the
Deed of Assignment. Petitioner prayed that it be substituted in lieu of Metrobank.
● RTC granted the joinder without dropping Metrobank ruling that it is necessary party.
● Upon special civil action for certiorari, CA granted the petition ruling that Metrobank
should be excluded from the case. Moreover, petitioner cannot substitute Metrobank
without disclosing the consideration paid by petitioner.

ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner may be joined as party-defendant in this case. YES

RULING:
The rationale for allowing may parties to join in a proceeding is trial convenience: to save the
parties unnecessary work, trouble and expense. In order to meet the requirements of justice and
convenience, the rule on joinder of parties is construed with considerable flexibility. Hence,
courts are given broad discretion in determining who may properly be joined in a proceeding.

Here, there is enough evidence to support the fact of the transfer of interest between Metrobank
and petitioner. CA turned a blind eye to representations of Metrobank before trial court
confirming the transfer of interest to ARC and then o petitioner. This admission of Metrobank
sufficiently supplied whatever was admitted by the non-presentation of the entire portfolio of non-
performing loans.

DISPOSITION: Petition GRANTED