Title
Asset Pool A , Inc. vs. Clark Development Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 205915
Decision Date
Nov 10, 2015
The case involves a compromise agreement between Asset Pool A (SPV-AMC), Inc. and Clark Development Corporation, where CDC agrees to pay APA a sum of PhP277.413 Million as the secured creditor's share in the gross gaming revenues of the Regency Casino, leading to the approval of the agreement by the Supreme Court and the dismissal of the appeal.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 205915)

Facts:

  • The case involves Asset Pool A (SPV-AMC), Inc. (APA) and Clark Development Corporation (CDC).
  • APA is the transferee and successor-in-interest of United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) and Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (Metrobank), secured creditors of Mondragon Leisure and Resorts Corporation (MLRC).
  • MLRC was responsible for developing and operating the Mimosa Leisure Estate (MLE).
  • APA contested the inclusion of secured creditors' claims in the bidding documents for the privatization of MLE.
  • APA filed an action for specific performance and damages in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 62, in Angeles City, Pampanga (Civil Case No. 13926), which was dismissed.
  • APA then filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 104129), which was also dismissed on September 4, 2012, and their motion for reconsideration was denied on February 7, 2013.
  • While the appeal was pending, CDC announced another public bidding for MLE's privatization.
  • APA filed a Very Urgent Motion for Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which the Supreme Court granted on October 21, 2015.
  • On November 6, 2015, both parties submitted an Urgent Joint Motion to Render Judgment Based on a Compromise Agreement and Lift the TRO, including a detailed compromise agreement outlining the terms of settlement between APA and CDC.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  1. The Supreme Court approved the compromise agreement submitted by APA and CDC.
  2. The Supreme Court lifted and set aside the temp...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court's decision to approve the compromise agreement was based on the principle that a compromise agreement is a contract where parties make reciprocal concessions to avoid or end litigation.
  • According to Article 2029 of the Civil Code, the court should persuade parties in a civil case to agree upon a fair compromise.
  • The Court emphasized that the stipulations, clauses, terms, and conditions within a compromise agreement must not contravene law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
  • Once entered into, a compromise agreement has the effect and authority of res judicata, meaning it is conclusive between ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.