Case Digest (G.R. No. 201760)
Facts:
- Parties Involved: LBL Industries, Inc. (petitioner) and City of Lapu-Lapu (respondent).
- Property Details: Petitioner owns a 40,634-square meter parcel of land, Lot No. 4839, in Mactan, Lapu-Lapu City, covered by TCT No. 34555.
- Initial Complaint: On January 25, 2006, the City of Lapu-Lapu filed a complaint to expropriate a 300-square meter portion of Lot No. 4839 for a road project.
- Amended Complaint: On February 19, 2006, the area sought for expropriation increased to 2,750 square meters.
- Possession and Utilization: The respondent deposited 15% of the fair market value and took possession of the property.
- Petitioner's Response: On February 28, 2006, the petitioner filed an Answer with a Secretary's Certificate authorizing Elsie Tan Mari o to act on behalf of the corporation.
- RTC Orders: The RTC issued orders for a writ of possession, but the branch clerk of court did not comply.
- Motion to Dismiss: On January 25, 2008, the petitioner moved to dismiss the case due to the respondent's failure to prosecute.
- RTC Denial: The RTC denied the motion, attributing delays to unresolved motions and pre-trial settings.
- Petition for Certiorari: The petitioner filed a Petition for Certiorari with the CA, which was dismissed due to procedural defects, including the absence of a board resolution.
- CA Denial: The CA also denied the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, leading to the present petition before the Supreme Court.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- Sufficiency of Secretary's Certificate: The Supreme Court ruled that the Secretary's Certificate is sufficient proof of authority for the corporation's representative.
- Expedited Resolution: The Supreme...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- Authority Proof: The Supreme Court found that the Secretary's Certificate executed by Assistant Corporate Secretary Elsie T. Mari o, authorizing Roberto Z. Sison, is sufficient proof of authority. The Court cited precedents where a Secretary's Certificate was recognized as adequate proof of authority for corporate representation.
- CA's Error: The Court held that the CA erred in dismissing the petitioner’s certiorari petition and denying its motion for reconsideration based on the absence of a board resolution.
- RTC's Delay: The Court addressed the RTC's de...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 201760)
Facts:
In the case of LBL Industries, Inc. v. City of Lapu-Lapu, the petitioner, LBL Industries, Inc., is the registered owner of a 40,634-square meter parcel of land, Lot No. 4839, situated in Mactan, Lapu-Lapu City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 34555. On January 25, 2006, the respondent, City of Lapu-Lapu, filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) seeking to expropriate a 300-square meter portion of Lot No. 4839 for a road opening project. This complaint was later amended on February 19, 2006, increasing the area sought to be expropriated to 2,750 square meters. Upon depositing an amount equivalent to 15% of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration, the respondent took possession of and utilized the property. On February 28, 2006, the petitioner filed its Answer, accompanied by a Secretary's Certificate authorizing Elsie Tan Mari o to act on behalf of the corporation. The RTC issued orders directing the issuance of a writ of possession, but the branch clerk of court failed to comply. On January 25, 2008, the petitioner moved for the dismissal of the case due to the respondent's failure to prosecute the case for an unreasonable length of time. The RTC denied the motion to dismiss, attributing the delay to the unresolved motion for a joint survey and the setting of the case for pre-trial. The petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was also denied. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which was dismissed due to several procedur...