Facts:

• JP Latex Technology, Inc. (petitioner) is a domestic corporation manufacturing latex and balloons.
• Ballons Granger Balloons, Inc. (Granger) is a foreign corporation based in Canada.
• The dispute arose from a contract for the sale of machinery, including four dipping lines and associated equipment, valued at US$1,230,000.00.
• Non-cash considerations included a 20% shareholding in JP Latex's distribution company and the distributorship of its balloons in Canada and Greece.
• Granger fulfilled its obligations by re-assembling the machinery in JP Latex's factory in Biñan, Laguna, and transferring its dipping formulations and technology.
• JP Latex partially paid US$748,262.87 and failed to honor the non-cash commitments.
• Granger filed a complaint for rescission and damages, with an application for a writ of replevin, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Biñan, Laguna.
• The RTC ruled in favor of Granger, ordering the rescission of the contract, the return of the machinery, and the payment of damages.
• JP Latex filed a motion for reconsideration and opposed Granger's motion for execution pending appeal.
• The RTC initially denied but later granted the motion for execution pending appeal, leading to the dismantling of the machinery.
• JP Latex filed a special civil action for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which was denied due to the lack of a motion for reconsideration of the RTC's order.
• JP Latex sought relief from the Supreme Court.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The Supreme Court granted the petition for review on certiorari.
• The decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals, as well as the RTC's order dated November 10, 2006, and t...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• Execution pending appeal is improper and premature when there is a pending motion for reconsideration of the RTC decision.
• The pendency of such a motion prevents the commencement of the period to appeal, making any order of execution pending a...continue reading