Case Digest (G.R. No. 227960)
Facts:
In People of the Philippines vs. Rafael Jose Consing, Jr. (G.R. No. 161075, July 15, 2013), petitioner Rafael Consing negotiated loans totaling ₱18,000,000 from Unicapital Inc., secured by a purportedly valid mortgage over a Cavite property under Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-687599 in his mother Cecilia de la Cruz’s name. Unicapital and its joint-venture partner Plus Builders paid a combined ₱24,367,946.50 for the property, only to discover the title was spurious and actually belonged to third parties. Unicapital demanded restitution of more than ₱41 million, prompting Consing to file a civil suit in Pasig City RTC for injunctive relief, claiming agency status for his mother, and Unicapital to file (a) a criminal complaint for estafa by falsification in Makati City RTC (Criminal Case No. 00-120) and (b) a separate civil suit for recovery of money and damages in Makati City RTC (Civil Case No. 99-1418). After his arraignment was deferred by RTC Branch 59 on a prejudicial‐qCase Digest (G.R. No. 227960)
Facts:
- Loan and property transactions
- Petitioner Rafael Jose Consing, Jr., and his mother, Cecilia de la Cruz, obtained loans totaling ₱18,000,000 from Unicapital Inc., secured by a real estate mortgage over a parcel covered by TCT No. T-687599 (later found spurious).
- Unicapital exercised its option to purchase half the mortgaged property by offsetting the loan obligations (₱18,000,000) and paying an additional ₱3,145,946.50; Plus Builders, Inc. acquired the other half. Subsequent title search revealed the true title (TCT No. 114708) belonged to Po Willie Yu and Juanito Tan Teng.
- Judicial proceedings
- July–August 1999
- July 22: Consing filed Civil Case No. 1759 in Pasig RTC for injunctive relief, claiming he was merely his mother’s agent.
- July 22: Unicapital lodged a criminal complaint for estafa through falsification; August 6: Unicapital filed Civil Case No. 99-1418 in Makati RTC for money recovery and damages with a writ of preliminary attachment.
- 2000–2003
- January 27, 2000: Makati City Prosecutor filed Information for estafa through falsification against Consing and de la Cruz (Criminal Case No. 00-120, RTC Makati, Branch 59).
- February–November 2001: Consing moved to defer arraignment citing as prejudicial questions the Pasig and Makati civil cases (and later the CA-G.R. SP No. 63712 in Cavite); RTC suspended arraignment (Nov. 26, 2001).
- May 20, 2003: CA initially dismissed certiorari petition of the State, upholding suspension.
- May 31, 2001 (earlier): In G.R. No. 148193, SC reversed CA in Cavite case, ruling Pasig and Manila civil cases did not raise a prejudicial question.
- August 18, 2003: CA amended its decision in the Makati case, reversed the RTC suspension, and ordered arraignment to proceed; December 11, 2003: CA denied Consing’s motion for reconsideration.
Issues:
- Whether the pendency of the Pasig and Makati civil cases constituted a prejudicial question justifying the suspension of arraignment and trial in Criminal Case No. 00-120 (RTC Makati, Branch 59).
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)