Title
Linden Suites, Inc. vs. Meridien Far East Properties, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 211969
Decision Date
Oct 4, 2021
Linden Suites sued Meridien for encroachment damages. Courts ruled in favor of Linden, but execution stalled. SC allowed examination of Meridien's officers to enforce judgment, rejecting separate juridical entity defense.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 211969)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of the Dispute
    • Petitioner Linden Suites, Inc. (LSI) filed on November 18, 2005 before RTC Pasig City (Branch 70, Civil Case No. 69023) a complaint for damages against respondent Meridien Far East Properties, Inc. (MFEPI).
    • LSI alleged that in the course of excavation for its condominium project, it discovered MFEPI’s concrete retaining wall encroaching on LSI’s property. MFEPI’s removal effort was incomplete, forcing LSI to hire a contractor at a cost of ₱3,980,468.50, which MFEPI refused to reimburse.
  • Prior Judicial Proceedings and Enforcement Efforts
    • RTC rendered judgment on November 18, 2005 ordering MFEPI to pay:
      • ₱3,980,468.50 plus legal interest from August 21, 2000;
      • ₱1,000,000.00 as actual and compensatory damages;
      • ₱500,000.00 for attorney’s fees; and costs of suit.
    • Court of Appeals affirmed but deleted the compensatory damages; this Court denied further motions, and an Entry of Judgment issued January 23, 2009.
    • LSI obtained a writ of execution (August 6, 2009). Sheriff attempts to serve MFEPI at its Makati office (April 2010) and at its 2006 SEC-registered address in Mandaluyong (June 2010) failed.
  • Motion to Examine Judgment Obligor and Lower Court Rulings
    • LSI filed on November 8, 2010 an Urgent Motion to Examine Judgment Obligor, seeking to compel MFEPI officers to disclose corporate assets and income.
    • RTC denied the motion (February 18, 2011; July 8, 2011 on reconsideration), ruling that:
      • It lacked territorial jurisdiction to compel MFEPI officers residing in Makati; and
      • Compelling examination would violate the doctrine of separate corporate personality.
    • LSI’s petition for certiorari before the CA was dismissed (Decision July 18, 2013; Resolution March 31, 2014), prompting this Review on Certiorari.

Issues:

  • Whether the RTC, as the court that rendered the final and executory judgment, may examine respondent’s officers for purposes of executing that judgment, notwithstanding Section 36, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.
  • Whether compelling the officers to appear for examination infringes on the doctrine of separate juridical personality or on territorial jurisdiction limitations.

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.