Case Digest (G.R. No. 175862)
Facts:
On 27 November 1997, Samsung Mabuhay Corporation filed Civil Case No. 97-86265 against Real Bank, Inc. alleging that three UCPB checks totaling P1,563,750.00 were misappropriated by Reynaldo Senson and deposited with Real Bank. The case was raffled to RTC, Branch 9, later re-raffled to RTC, Branch 20; original counsel for Samsung withdrew on 19 October 2000 with the client's consent and new counsel entered appearance on 4 June 2001, but a mediation set on 3 April 2001 proceeded without Samsung and RTC Branch 20 dismissed the complaint on 5 June 2002, denial of reconsideration on 2 August 2002, and the Court of Appeals set those orders aside on 18 August 2006.
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in setting aside the trial court's dismissal for failure of Respondent Samsung and its counsel to attend the mediation conference?
- Was Respondent Samsung properly notified of the mediation conference?
- Was the withdrawal of Samsung's original counsel effective despite the lack of trial-court approval?
- Was Samsung negligent in failing to inquire into the status of its case and secure new counsel for almost eight months?
Ruling:
The petition was DENIED and the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals dated 18 August 2006 and 13 December 2006 were AFFIRMED. The Supreme Court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint and REMANDED the case to RTC, Branch 20 for continuation of proceedings.
Ratio:
The Court found that the withdrawal of counsel filed with the court and made with the client's conformity was effective under Rule 138, Sec. 26, so notice of the mediation sent to the withdrawn counsel was ineffectual and Samsung's absence was excusable. Although mediation is part of pre-trial and Sec. 5, Rule 18, Rules of Court authorizes dismissal for plaintiff's failure to appear, dismissals are drastic and require a showing of contumacious or dilatory conduct; the records showed no such pattern and Samsung had otherwise prosecuted the case diligently, so lesser sanctions and a trial on the merits were warranted.
Doctrine:
- Under Rule 138, Sec. 26, a counsel's withdrawal with the client's consent is effective upon filing and does not require court approval.
- (Get Pro to unlock 3 more doctrines)