Title
Asuncion vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 82173
Decision Date
Sep 28, 1988
Petitioner sought loan collection via writ of attachment; RTC granted, CA annulled, SC reinstated with reduced bond, citing procedural lapses and insufficient fraud evidence.
Font Size:

Case Summary (G.R. No. 82173)

Case Overview

  • Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
  • Decision Date: September 28, 1988
  • Petitioner: Edgar S. Asuncion
  • Respondents: The Honorable Court of Appeals and Peninsula Natural Resources Corporation

Background of the Case

  • The petitioner seeks to annul and set aside the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals that reversed orders from the Regional Trial Court regarding a writ of attachment related to a loan.
  • The initial complaint was filed on September 17, 1987, to collect a loan from the private respondent, Peninsula Natural Resources Corporation, supported by an affidavit alleging fraudulent conduct regarding the corporation's properties.

Issuance of Writ of Attachment

  • The Regional Trial Court granted the petitioner's motion for a writ of preliminary attachment on September 24, 1987, after the petitioner posted a bond of P80,000.00.
  • The writ was justified on grounds of potential fraudulent removal or concealment of properties by the private respondent.

Motion to Lift Attachment

  • The private respondent subsequently filed a motion to lift the attachment, claiming no fraudulent intent existed, supported by an affidavit from a former board member, Leoncio Fonacier.
  • The trial court denied the motion on November 4, 1987, and a subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied on November 26, 1987.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

  • The private respondent filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals, which resulted in a decision on January 22, 1988, annulling the trial court's orders.

Supreme Court Decision

  • The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the Court of Appeals' decision.
  • The Court held that there was no grave abuse of discretion by the trial court in issuing the writ of attachment or in denying the motion to lift it.

Key Legal Principles

  • Writ of Preliminary Attachment: Issued when there is a concern that a party may fraudulently dispose of their property to avoid creditor claims.
  • Procedural Compliance: The private respondent failed to comply with necessary procedural requirements, such as providing a copy of the motion to lift the attachment to the petitioner, which undermined their position.

Counter-Attachment Bond

  • The Court deemed the originally required counter-attachment bond of P301,935.41 excessive and modified it to P185,685.00, aligning it with the principal amount claimed by the petitioner.

Important Procedures and Requirements

  • Motion for Reconsideration: The private respondent’s failure to provide the petitioner with a copy of their motion constituted a significant procedural lapse.
  • Filing Requirements: The appeal to the Court of Appeals lacked certified copies of the trial court's orders, violating Section 1, Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court.

Key Takeaw

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur is an AI-powered legal research tool in the Philippines with case digests and full jurisprudence. AI summaries highlight key points but may miss details, so always refer to the full text for accuracy.