Title
Express Padala vs. Ocampo
Case
G.R. No. 202505
Decision Date
Sep 6, 2017
Employee dismissed for misappropriation; foreign conviction recognized in PH, but summons improperly served, voiding judgment due to lack of jurisdiction.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 91260)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Background
  • Petitioner: Express Padala (Italia) S.p.A., now BDO Remittance (Italia) S.p.A., a corporation with principal office in Italy.
  • Respondent: Helen M. Ocampo, employed by petitioner in September 2002 as a remittance processor; dismissed in February 2004 for misappropriating €24,035.60 by falsifying customer money-transfer invoices.
  • Proceedings Below
  • Criminal Conviction in Italy
    • BDO Remittance filed criminal charges before the Court of Turin.
    • On April 13, 2005, Ocampo pleaded guilty and was convicted to six months’ imprisonment (suspended) and a €300 fine.
  • Petition for Recognition of Foreign Judgment
    • On September 22, 2008, petitioner filed with the RTC of Mandaluyong City for recognition of the Turin decision and requested DFA to cancel or restrict Ocampo’s Philippine passport.
    • Sheriff attempted personal service on November 21, 2008 at Ocampo’s last known Batangas address but, upon learning Ocampo resided in Italy, effected substituted service on her uncle, Victor Macahia.
  • RTC Decision
    • Ocampo failed to answer; RTC declared her in default and allowed ex parte presentation of evidence.
    • On September 14, 2009, RTC recognized the Turin decision and ordered DFA to cancel or restrict Ocampo’s passport until sentence served.
  • Court of Appeals (CA) Proceedings
    • Ocampo, through counsel, filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari on April 12, 2010, challenging service and jurisdiction.
    • On January 5, 2012, CA set aside the RTC decision for lack of valid service and lack of jurisdiction.
  • Supreme Court Petition
    • Petitioner filed a Rule 45 petition arguing (a) improper remedy by Ocampo and (b) no grave abuse of discretion by RTC.
    • Ocampo presented a June 29, 2010 Turin High Court decree extinguishing her criminal liability.

Issues:

  • Jurisdictional Service
  • Was substituted service upon Ocampo valid under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court?
  • Did the RTC acquire jurisdiction over Ocampo’s person?
  • Recognition and Enforcement
  • Did the RTC gravely abuse its discretion in recognizing and enforcing the Court of Turin decision?
  • Was the order to cancel or restrict Ocampo’s passport proper?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.