Title
Litton Mills, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 94980
Decision Date
May 15, 1996
Litton Mills sued Gelhaar Uniform Co. for breach of contract over soccer jersey shipments. Supreme Court ruled Gelhaar, via its agent Empire, was doing business in the Philippines, validating service of summons and jurisdiction.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 87880)

Background of the Case

Litton Mills entered into an agreement with Empire Sales Philippines Corporation, the local agent of Gelhaar, to supply 7,770 dozens of soccer jerseys. A critical aspect of this agreement required that before Litton could collect payment via a letter of credit, an inspection certificate confirming the jerseys' satisfactory condition must be provided by Empire. Following some difficulties with the issuance of this certificate, Litton filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court of Pasig, seeking specific performance and damages.

Trial Court Proceedings

In response to the complaint, the Regional Trial Court initially granted a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction compelling Empire to issue the inspection certificate, which it did promptly, allowing the shipment to proceed. Subsequently, various motions for extension of time to file an answer were filed by Gelhaar’s counsel, Atty. Remie Noval, which the court mostly granted.

Motion to Dismiss and Jurisdictional Issue

At a later stage, a different law firm entered a special appearance on behalf of Gelhaar, contesting the jurisdiction of the Philippine courts over the company. They stated that Gelhaar, as a foreign corporation, was not doing business in the Philippines, thereby rendering the service of summons invalid. The trial court ultimately ruled that Gelhaar was indeed doing business in the Philippines and upheld its jurisdiction, which prompted Gelhaar to file a certiorari petition in the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals determined that the trial court erred by not requiring proof of Gelhaar's business activities in the Philippines before asserting jurisdiction. It emphasized that mere allegations of doing business were insufficient and pointed out that Atty. Noval’s authority to represent Gelhaar was not adequately established. Thus, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision and required a new summons to be issued to Empire, contingent on establishing the claim that Gelhaar was doing business in the Philippines.

Supreme Court Ruling

Upon petitioning the Supreme Court, Litton argued that jurisdiction over Gelhaar had been established through service on its agent and by virtue of Atty. Noval's appearance. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s assertion of jurisdiction, stating that Gelhaar's entry into a contract for the sale of jerseys constituted doing business in the Philippines. The court clarified that the allegations of the complaint were adequate to establish that Gelhaar was engaging in business activities in the country. The court also countered Gelhaar's argument that its connection with Litton was merely an isolated transaction, recognizing that such a commercial act was within the corporation's ordinary business activities.

Authority of Atty. Noval

Regarding Atty. Noval's authority, the Supreme Court agreed with

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.