Title
Solis vs. Solis-Laynes
Case
G.R. No. 235099
Decision Date
Mar 29, 2023
Salvador contested ownership of a fishpond after tax declaration changes, alleging fraud. Service of summons to Marivic in the U.S. was defective; Supreme Court remanded for trial to ensure due process.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 235099)

Key Dates

– February 16, 2015: Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered judgment quieting title in petitioners’ favor.
– July 20, 2017: Court of Appeals (CA) reversed and dismissed petitioners’ complaint.
– October 23, 2017: CA denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
– March 29, 2023: Supreme Court issued final decision.

Applicable Law

– 1987 Philippine Constitution, due process guarantee (Art. III, Sec. 1).
– Rules of Court: Rule 45 (certiorari); Rule 14, Section 15 (1997 Rules on extraterritorial service of summons).

Procedural and Factual Background

  1. The Spouses Solis initially possessed an untitled fishpond in Romblon, covered by tax declarations in Ramon’s name. Upon their deaths, Salvador discovered the tax declaration had been “corrected” to Ramon Jr., Salvador’s brother, who later died, leading to extrajudicial settlement in favor of his heirs, including Marivic. A free patent and certificate of title issued in Marivic’s name.
  2. Salvador filed a complaint for quieting of title, reconveyance, and nullity of tax declaration, free patent, and certificate of title. He alleged fraud by Marivic and sought to annul her titles.
  3. Marivic, residing in the United States, could not be located for personal service. The RTC granted petitioners leave to serve by publication pursuant to Section 15, Rule 14, directing publication nationwide and mailing of copies of summons and complaint to her last known address in Saginaw, Michigan. Salvador published but mailed the documents to a Romblon address.
  4. Marivic failed to answer, prompting the RTC to declare her in default and render judgment in favor of petitioners on February 16, 2015. She filed a motion for new trial alleging fraud and due process violation; the RTC denied relief.
  5. The CA reversed, holding extraterritorial service invalid for failure to mail to Marivic’s U.S. address and dismissed the complaint. Petitioners elevated the matter by Rule 45 petition.

Extraterritorial Service Under Section 15, Rule 14

– Section 15 permits service outside the Philippines in quasi in rem actions affecting property within the country by: (a) personal service abroad; (b) publication plus registered mailing to defendant’s last known address; or (c) other methods deemed sufficient by the court.
– Quieting title is quasi in rem, permitting extraterritorial service. The RTC’s order plainly envisioned mode (b): publication and mailing to Marivic’s Michigan address.

Defective Service and Due Process

– Petitioners complied with publication but mailed only to the Philippines address, not to the U.S. address specified.
– Proper service is a jurisdictional due process requirement. Failure to mail to the last known address rendered summons invalid and all subsequent proceedings void for lack of notice.

Voluntary Appearance and Cure of Defect

– A defendant may cure a service defect by voluntary appearance seeking affirmative relief.
– Marivic filed a Motion for New Trial, challenging the default and alleging fraud in service. She thereby manifested intent to

    ...continue reading

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