THE Supreme Court (SC) has found Makati City guilty of forum-shopping for pursuing two simultaneous legal actions against a Pasig City court regarding a dispute on jurisdiction over part of Fort Bonifacio.
In a 27-page decision dated June 15, the SC Second Division said the city, through its lawyers, was “guilty of direct contempt” for engaging in forum shopping.
It imposed a fine of P2,000 each on the city’s three counsels: Pio Kenneth I. Dasal, Glenda Isabel L. Biason, and Gwyn Gareth T. Mariano.
The case was an offshoot of Makati City’s dispute with Taguig City over 729.15 hectares of land occupied by the inner Fort Bonifacio barangays (Post Proper Northside and Post Proper Southside) and the seven Enlisted Men’s Barrios barangays (whose names end in “EMBO”). The area contains the lucrative Bonifacio Global City.
The high court did not tackle the dispute itself, as an appeal by Taguig City over the July 30, 2013 decision in Makati City’s favor remains pending before the Court of Appeals (CA) Sixth Division.
Makati City initially lost the legal battle, after Pasig City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 153 Judge Briccio C. Ygaña issued a July 8, 2011 decision that ruled the area a part of Taguig City. Makati City, however, questioned the judge’s jurisdiction, claiming the decision was only antedated and issued after he retired on July 9.
In response, Makati City petitioned the CA to annul Mr. Ygaña’s judgment, while simultaneously filing a motion for reconsideration (MR) ad cautelam with the Pasig RTC -- a “precautionary” appeal of the decision while rejecting the judge’s jurisdiction.
The CA Former Seventh Division dismissed the petition to annul the judgment in December 2012 on the grounds of forum-shopping, although the court later dropped this finding in an April 2013 resolution that only junked the case for prematurity.
The MR ad cautelam tackled by Pasig RTC Judge Leili Cruz Suarez (who took over Mr. Ygaña) also resulted in a loss for Makati City. But when the case was elevated before the CA Sixth Division, the city prevailed in the July 2013 decision now being appealed by Taguig City.
The high court agreed with Taguig City that Makati City should be sanctioned for forum-shopping, and said the lawyers had no justification for simultaneously filing the petition for annulment and the MR ad cautelam.
The decision, penned by Associate Justice Marvic M. V. F. Leonen, noted that Makati City’s contention about the just-retired judge could have been raised in the MR.
“It was not as though respondent was left with no other remedy... Lack of jurisdiction could have just as easily been raised as an error in its Appeal or in its Motion for Reconsideration,” it read.
The high court added that Makati City’s actions even gave rise to harm as the RTC began conflicting with the CA. While the RTC found the city guilty of forum-shopping, the CA, as narrated above, “strangely flip-flopped” on the issue.
“Respondent City of Makati’s actions have not only vexed courts as an adverse litigant. They have actually and already given rise to conflicting decisions, not only between different courts -- the RTC and Court of Appeals -- but even within the Court of Appeals itself,” the decision said.
The high court also criticized Makati City’s actions as “a contumacious attempt to obfuscate the resolution of cases through the abuse of legal processes.”
source: Businessworld
No comments:
Post a Comment