Facts:

• The case involves the Shell Company of the Philippines, Ltd., and individuals Numeriano Jacolo, Ernesto Dedel, and Jacinto Monoy as petitioners.
• Respondents include Judge Manuel Lopez Enage, Francisca Timosa, Chiveniano Go, the City Sheriff of Butuan City, and the Provincial Sheriff of Agusan.
• Timosa and Go filed a lawsuit for damages in the Court of First Instance of Agusan, presided over by Judge Enage.
• The damages sought were related to a levy on execution initiated by Shell Company to satisfy a final judgment against Go See Gawa and Eustaquia Sastre.
• Shell Company was represented by Attorney Alfred P. Deen from Cebu City, while the other petitioners were represented by the law firm of Deen, Mercado, and Catalua from Butuan City.
• Only the Butuan City law firm received court notices, leading to proceedings occurring without the knowledge of Shell Company's counsel.
• Petitioners Jacolo, Dedel, and Monoy were denied a postponement request due to their counsel's separation from the law firm, resulting in decisions against them without a full hearing.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

1. The Supreme Court ruled that there was a denial of procedural due process for Shell Company as their counsel was not notified of the proceedings.
2. The Court also ruled that the refusal to grant a postponement to Jacolo, Dedel, and Monoy was an...(Unlock)

Ratio:

1. The Court emphasized that procedural due process requires that parties be given the opportunity to be heard at every stage of the proceedings.

   • Shell Company's counsel was not notified due to a mistaken assumption that the Butuan City law firm represented them.
   • This oversight rendered the proceedings and subsequent decisions against Shell Company invalid.
   • The right to be heard is fundamental and indispensable.

2. Regarding Jacolo, Dedel, and Monoy, the Court noted that while the granting or refusal of motions for continuance is discretionary, this discretion must be exercised wisely with a vie...continue reading