Title
Tortal vs. Taniguchi
Case
G.R. No. 212683
Decision Date
Nov 12, 2018
The court ruled that Jerson E. Tortal must pursue a separate annulment of judgment action rather than appeal the nullity of his marriage and property sale.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 212683)

Facts:

  • Jerson E. Tortal (petitioner) and Chizuru Taniguchi (respondent) were married on June 8, 1999.
  • They lived in a house and lot in BF Homes, Parañaque City, owned by Tortal.
  • On April 11, 2000, Taniguchi filed a petition for nullity of their marriage, which was assigned to Branch 260 of the RTC in Parañaque City.
  • The RTC granted the petition on August 25, 2003, declaring the marriage null and void, and awarded the property to Taniguchi.
  • Tortal did not seek reconsideration, and the decision became final on October 14, 2005.
  • While the nullity petition was pending, Sevillana P. Sales filed a collection complaint against Tortal.
  • Tortal and Sales entered into a compromise agreement approved by the RTC.
  • The house and lot were sold at public auction to Sales for P3,500,000.00 on December 3, 2003.
  • On May 24, 2005, Taniguchi filed a complaint to annul the levy and sale, requesting an injunction against the Register of Deeds.
  • The RTC granted the injunction on September 14, 2005, preventing the title's cancellation in favor of Sales.
  • On October 28, 2011, the RTC nullified the levy and sale, making the injunction permanent and ordering Tortal to pay damages to Taniguchi.
  • Tortal and Sales appealed, but the Court of Appeals dismissed their appeal on December 13, 2013.
  • Tortal's motion for reconsideration was denied on May 14, 2014.
  • Tortal filed a Petition for Review, claiming the RTC's decision nullifying his marriage was void due to lack of jurisdiction from improper service of summons.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court denied Tortal's Petition for Review, affirming the Court of Appeals' decisions.
  • Tortal could not challenge the final judgment nullifying his marriage in the context of the appeal regarding the levy and sale.
  • If Tortal believed the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to improper service of summons, he should have filed a petition for annulmen...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court stated that claims of a trial court's lack of jurisdiction must be raised through a separate action for annulment of ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.