Title
Ley Construction and Development Corp. vs. Sedano
Case
G.R. No. 222711
Decision Date
Aug 23, 2017
A lease dispute arose when petitioner sued respondent for unpaid rent. The Supreme Court upheld dismissal due to improper venue, affirming the exclusive venue stipulation in the lease contract requiring filing in Pasay City.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 238892)

Facts:

  • Lease and Sublease Agreements
    • On January 14, 2005, Ley Construction and Development Corporation (petitioner) leased a 50,000-sq.m. parcel of land in Pasay City from Philippine National Construction Corporation (PNCC).
    • On September 11, 2006, petitioner subleased 14,659.80 sq.m. of the parcel to Marvin Medel Sedano (respondent) for ten years starting November 15, 2005, at a monthly rent of ₱1,174,780.00, with annual increases of 10% beginning the third year.
  • Alleged Breach and Initial Complaint
    • Respondent allegedly failed to pay rent from August to December 2011, amounting to ₱8,828,025.46. Despite demands, he did not settle the arrears.
    • On March 13, 2012, petitioner filed a Complaint for Collection of Sum of Money and Damages with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Valenzuela City (Civil Case No. 40-V-12).
  • Respondent’s Answer, Third-Party Complaint, and Counterclaim
    • Respondent contended he paid rents for August–December 2011 directly to PNCC following petitioner’s eviction order, and thus impleaded PNCC in a third-party complaint seeking reimbursement if held liable.
    • He invoked an affirmative defense of improper venue, citing Section 21 of the lease contract: “All actions or cases filed in connection with this lease shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City, exclusive of all others.”
    • Respondent asserted counterclaims for reimbursement of a ₱3,518,352.00 deposit, ₱400,000.00 overpayment, moral and exemplary damages, and litigation expenses.
  • Venue Dispute and RTC Rulings
    • Petitioner opposed, arguing the stipulation deprived lower courts of jurisdiction and was void, and that respondent waived any venue objection by participating in motions and counterclaims.
    • On June 15, 2015, RTC Valenzuela granted respondent’s motion and dismissed the complaint for improper venue. A reconsideration motion was denied on January 27, 2016.

Issues:

  • Whether the RTC of Valenzuela City erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground of improper venue under Section 21 of the lease contract.

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. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.