Case Digest (G.R. No. L-14087)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-14087)
Facts:
Criste B. Villanueva v. The Hon. Secretary of Justice and Horst‑Kessler Von Sprengeisen, G.R. No. 162187, November 18, 2005, Supreme Court Second Division, Callejo, Sr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Criste B. Villanueva (Senior Vice‑President and Assistant General Manager of Refractories Corporation of the Philippines, RCP) filed a complaint for perjury against private respondent Horst‑Kessler Von Sprengeisen (President and General Manager of Hamburg Trading Corporation, HTC) after an anti‑dumping compromise between RCP and HTC. RCP had protested HTC imports of magnesite‑based refractory bricks; the Bureau of Import Services (BIS) reported a prima facie finding (normal value DM 1,200/ton), and the parties were urged to settle. At a conference the parties agreed to end litigation and to have HTC reform its pricing policy consistent with Republic Act No. 7843 and its rules; a compromise agreement was prepared (initial draft), revised and ultimately signed and notarized on April 22, 1997. The revised compromise contained the inserted phrase “based on the findings of the BIS.”
The Tariff Commission approved the compromise after a May 9, 1997 hearing and the Special Committee rendered a decision adopting the BIS finding; HTC received a copy of the decision on March 4, 1998. HTC later renewed imports, and on July 28, 1998 filed an Urgent Motion to Set Aside and/or Vacate Judgment alleging fraud in the compromise (verified and supported by an Affidavit of Merit executed by Von Sprengeisen). RCP opposed that motion; concurrently Villanueva filed a criminal complaint for perjury with the Manila City Prosecutor, alleging that Von Sprengeisen falsely asserted, among other things, that he was induced to sign the compromise through deceit and that Villanueva had inserted the BIS‑based phrase without his knowledge.
Investigating Prosecutor Francisco Supnet found no probable cause; Second Assistant City Prosecutor Leoncia Dimagiba reviewed and reversed that finding, concluded probable cause existed for perjury, and the City Prosecutor filed an Information. Von Sprengeisen appealed to the Secretary of Justice, who on September 20, 2002 reversed the City Prosecutor, directed withdrawal of the information and found absence of probable cause, reasoning that materiality and willfulness were not established and that Von Sprengeisen honestly believed he had been induced to sign. Villanueva filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA) alleging grave abuse of discretion; the CA dismissed the petition on February 13, 2004, upholding the Secretary of Justice’s resolution. Petitioner then filed a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court challenging the CA decision.
Issues:
- Did the Secretary of Justice commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction in reversing the City Prosecutor and finding no probable cause for perjury?
- Was there probable cause to charge Horst‑Kessler Von Sprengeisen with perjury based on his Urgent Motion and Affidavit of Merit?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)