Case Digest (G.R. No. L-36527)
Facts:
Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila, Commissioner of Customs and Hon. Secretary of Finance v. Court of Appeals, Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch XIII, Presided Over by Hon. Jesus P. Morfe and Jesus G. De Jesus, G.R. No. L-36527, February 29, 1988, Supreme Court First Division, Gancayco, J., writing for the Court.The private respondent, Jesus G. De Jesus, a tobacco importer, arranged for a sizeable importation of tobacco which, upon arrival at the Port of Manila in the late 1960s, was withheld by customs on the ground that required documents were lacking and a law had been violated. After administrative efforts to secure release failed, De Jesus filed a petition in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila (Civil Case No. 83572) for injunction, prohibition and mandamus against the Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila, the Commissioner of Customs and the Secretary of Finance to compel release of the shipment.
On May 15, 1972, the trial court rendered judgment for De Jesus. The Solicitor General, representing the customs officials, contended it received a copy of that Decision on May 25, 1972, and filed a Notice of Appeal on June 23, 1972; De Jesus moved for writ of execution pending appeal on June 26. The trial court, however, found the Solicitor General was served on May 23, 1972, concluded the Decision had become final and executory before the Notice of Appeal was filed, and in an order dated July 11, 1972 disallowed the appeal. A motion for reconsideration was denied on August 10, 1972, and on August 19, 1972 the CFI issued a writ of mandamus directing release of the tobacco — a de facto execution of its judgment.
The Solicitor General petitioned the Court of Appeals (Special Division) on September 15, 1972 for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, seeking to stay enforcement and to annul the CFI's determination that service occurred on May 23. The Court of Appeals issued a temporary restraining order but, in its January 23, 1973 Decision (CA-G.R. No. 01347), ruled that the Solicitor General had been served on May 23, 1972; therefore the Notice of Appeal filed June 23 was late, the CFI's judgment had become final and executory, and the appellate petition was dismissed. The Solicitor General's motion for reconsideration at the Court of Appeals failed.
The Solicitor General (for the customs respondents) filed this Rule 45 petition for certiorari with the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Supreme Court, in a Rule 45 petition for certiorari, re-examine the Court of Appeals' finding of fact that the Solicitor General received the trial court's Decision on May 23, 1972, rather than May 25, 1972?
- Did the failure to perfect an appeal within the reglementary period render the trial court's Decision final and executory and authorize issuance of the writ of mandamus...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)