G.R. No. 107303 - Onate vs. Abrogar

On December 23, 1991, Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada filed a complaint for sum of money with prayer for immediate writ of attachment in Civil Case No. 91-3506, Branch 150, RTC Makati.
On December 24, 1991, the court issued an ex parte order granting the writ of preliminary attachment; the writ was formally issued on December 27, 1991.
On January 3, 1992, upon Sun Life’s ex parte motion, the court amended the writ to reflect the precise amount of indebtedness.

On January 3, 1992, Sheriff Arturo C. Flores, with a Sun Life representative, attempted to serve summons and the amended writ at petitioners’ office (108 Aguirre St., Makati); service failed for lack of a responsible officer.
Between January 3–9, 1992, notices of garnishment were served on various banks and levies were made on Onate’s condominium unit and real property.
Summons was eventually served on petitioners on January 9, 1992, and on co-defendant Dino on January 16, 1992.

January 21, 1992: Petitioners filed an “Urgent Motion to Discharge/Dissolve Writ of Attachment.” Sun Life filed an ex parte motion to examine Brunner Development Corp.’s bank records at Urban Bank; the court granted it and examination occurred on January 23, 1992. Petitioners moved to nullify that proceeding.
January 30, 1992: Petitioners filed a memorandum supporting discharge. Sun Life moved to examine BPI Account No. 0041-0277-03 (which petitioners denied owning) and PNB records of checks payable to Brunner, and to compel compliance with garnishment notices.
February 6, 1992: The trial court (a) denied petitioners’ motion to discharge the amended writ, (b) approved Sun Life’s additional attachment bond, (c) granted examination of the BPI account, and (d) denied petitioners’ motion to nullify the January 23 examination.
March 12, 1992: Petitioners moved for reconsideration; on September 6, 1992, the motion was denied.

Emmanuel C. Onate, Econ Holdings Corporation, and Brunner Development Corporation filed separate certiorari petitions (G.R. Nos. 107303 & 107491) with prayer for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to question the contested orders.
A TRO was issued on June 28, 1993, staying enforcement of the writ and related proceedings.

Whether the RTC had jurisdiction to issue and enforce a writ of preliminary attachment ex parte prior to service of summons on the defendants.
Whether the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion in allowing examination of petitioners’ bank records without notice to them, in violation of Rule 57, Section 10 of the Rules of Court and Republic Act No. 1405 (bank secrecy law).