Case Digest (G.R. No. 159750)
Facts:
Jehan Shipping Corporation v. National Food Authority, G.R. No. 159750, December 14, 2005, Third Division, Panganiban, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Jehan Shipping Corporation (Jehan) sued respondent National Food Authority (NFA) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City, Branch 5, filing on August 2, 1997 a complaint for collection of freight and for injunction after its vessel, M/V Phannie, hired to transport 19,300 bags of imported rice, capsized on May 1, 1996; Jehan sought recovery of P139,030.00 in earned freight and P13,612,767.47 in salvaging and rehabilitation expenses, while NFA answered denying liability and filed counterclaims for losses and expenses.
On August 28, 2001, the RTC rendered judgment in favor of Jehan ordering NFA to pay the claimed amounts (plus interest and costs). NFA received a copy of the decision on October 1, 2001. Jehan promptly filed a Motion for Execution Pending Appeal on October 2, 2001; NFA filed an Answer with Counterclaims (September 18, 1997) and later filed a Motion for Reconsideration on October 16, 2001 and a Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration on November 12, 2001. Jehan filed oppositions to the motions and related pleadings between November and December 2001.
The RTC, at a hearing on November 9, 2001, ordered that resolution of Jehan’s Motion for Execution Pending Appeal be held in abeyance pending resolution of NFA’s motions for reconsideration. The RTC set the motions for hearing on December 7, 2001; Jehan’s counsel appeared but NFA’s counsel did not. The RTC issued an order on December 7 directing NFA’s counsel to comment within ten days; that order was received by NFA on January 4, 2002. Despite the lack of a three-day notice of hearing in NFA’s motions (required by Sections 4 and 5, Rule 15, Rules of Court), the RTC issued a Joint Resolution dated January 8, 2002 denying NFA’s motions on the ground they lacked notice of hearing, declared Jehan’s Motion for Execution Pending Appeal moot, and granted Jehan’s motion for issuance of a writ of execution; the writ issued on January 16, 2002. NFA filed a Notice of Appeal on January 18, 2002, which the RTC denied in an Order dated January 25, 2002 on the ground the decision had become final.
NFA then filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with Application for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order before the Court of Appeals (CA) assailing the RTC’s January 8, 2002 Joint Resolution, January 16, 2002 Writ of Execution, and January 25, 2002 Order. The CA sustained NFA, concluding that despite the lack of formal notice of hearing, Jehan had in fact been given an opportunity to be heard (through oppositions and actual attendance at the December 7 hearing) and therefore the motions were not pro forma; the CA set aside the RTC’s Joint Resolution, the writ of execution, and the January 25 order, ordered the RTC to rule on the merits of NFA’s motions, and made the injunction per...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- May the Court of Appeals review and set aside a trial court’s writ of execution issued to implement a decision allegedly already final and executory?
- Did the failure of NFA to include a notice of hearing in its Motion for Reconsideration and Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration render those motions pro forma so as not to toll the period to appeal, thereby making the RT...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)