Title
BACOS vs. ARCEGA
Case
G.R. No. 152343
Decision Date
Jan 18, 2008
A third-party claim over levied sewing machines was dismissed as spurious, with courts ruling against Bacos due to insufficient evidence of ownership.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 152343)

Proceedings Before the Labor Arbiter

On February 11, 1998, Domingo Arcega initiated a complaint for illegal dismissal against Viabel and Marlon Viado, which resulted in a favorable decision for Arcega on February 25, 1999. The Labor Arbiter determined the dismissal was illegal and ordered the payment of various monetary claims totaling P90,000 for back wages, P45,000 for separation pay, P5,192.40 for service incentive leave pay, P27,000 for 13th month pay, and P16,719.28 for attorney's fees. The claims for moral and exemplary damages were dismissed for lack of merit.

Finality of the Labor Arbiter's Decision

After the deadline for filing an appeal passed without action from Viabel or Viado, the decision of the Labor Arbiter became final and executory on May 21, 1999. Following this, the Labor Arbiter issued a writ of execution, leading to a sheriff's levy on June 8, 1999, of twenty-eight sewing machines belonging to Viabel for public auction scheduled on June 17, 1999.

Petitioner's Claim of Ownership

On June 17, 1999, Ma. Fe Bacos filed a notice of third-party claim asserting ownership of the levied machines, contending they were sold to her by Marlon Viado for P150,000, as evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale dated January 26, 1998. She contested the levy and sought to assert her rights as the legitimate owner of the machines.

Respondent's Opposition

In response to Bacos' claim, Arcega filed an opposition asserting that her claim was frivolous and spurious. Labor Arbiter Daisy G. Cauton-Barcelona examined the evidence and found the Deed of Absolute Sale lacking in authenticity, leading to the dismissal of Bacos' claim on January 10, 2000.

Appeals Process

Bacos appealed the Labor Arbiter's dismissal to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which upheld the Labor Arbiter's decision in a Resolution dated August 31, 2000, and later denied her motion for reconsideration on February 1, 2001. Bacos subsequently filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, raising the same issues concerning her right to the levied property.

Court of Appeals Decision

On November 9, 2001, the Court of Appeals dismissed Bacos' petition, ruling that she failed to substantiate her claim of ownership. The court assessed that the Deed of Absolute Sale was deemed spurious and that Bacos had insufficient evidence to support her claim, lacking critical documentation and testimony from the notary involved.

Statutory and Procedural Framework

Bacos argued that Section 16, Rule 39 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure allowed her to establish her claim through an affidavit of title without the necessity of producing the original deed of ownership. The relevant rule

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.