Case Summary (G.R. No. 230669)
Petitioner
Rex Sorongon pleaded not guilty to Estafa under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code, accused of misappropriating the borrowed mixer.
Respondent
The People of the Philippines prosecuted Sorongon for Estafa, alleging he willfully failed to return the mixer and converted it for personal use.
Key Dates
• July 2004 – Mixer borrowed by petitioner
• January 2005 – Demand letter sent by the Van der Boms’ counsel
• March 2005 – Amicable settlement before Barangay Sto. Rosario
• January 2006 – Filing of the Information for Estafa
• July 25, 2011 – RTC conviction
• October 25, 2016 – CA affirmed conviction
• February 21, 2017 – CA denied reconsideration
Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution; Rule 45, Rules of Court; Revised Penal Code Article 315(1)(b); Civil Code provisions on novation (Arts. 1291–1299).
Facts of the Case
After completing the water system, Sorongon requested use of the cement mixer for an Iloilo project. Nelly Van der Bom lent it on condition of prompt return. Months passed without return despite repeated demands, prompting a formal demand letter and barangay proceedings.
Prosecution Evidence
Testimony from Nelly, a mechanic, two employees, and the original seller established that Sorongon borrowed the mixer, transported it to Iloilo, and never returned it despite demands, indicating misappropriation.
Defense Evidence
Sorongon denied borrowing the mixer. Barangay Kagawad Rudy de la Torre certified an amicable settlement in March 2005 under which Nelly waived ownership of disputed equipment—including the mixer—and parties agreed not to file further charges. Sorongon relied on this settlement in a labor case award.
Lower Court Rulings
The RTC convicted Sorongon of Estafa, crediting prosecution witnesses and holding the amicable settlement irrelevant to criminal liability. The CA affirmed, ruling compromise does not extinguish public criminal action.
Issue on Review
Whether the pre-filing barangay settlement effectively novated the original commodatum obligation, thereby preventing incipient criminal liability under Article 315(1)(b).
Supreme Court Analysis on Novation
Acknowledging that Estafa under Article 315(1)(b) arises from contractual obligations, the Court recognized a well-established exception: a valid pre-filing novation can extinguish the original trust relation and prevent criminal liability when the parties unequivocally replace the old obligation with a new, incompatible one.
Application of Jurisprudence
Citing People v. Nery, Quinto v. People, Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. v. Reynado, and Degaños v. People, the Court emphasized that valid novation requires (1) a prior valid obligation, (2) agreement to
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 230669)
Case Title and Citation
- G.R. No. 230669, June 16, 2021
- Petitioner: Rex Sorongon
- Respondent: People of the Philippines
- Decision penned by Justice Caguioa, with Gesmundo, C.J., Carandang, Zalameda, and Gaerlan, JJ., concurring.
Procedural History
- Petitioner sought review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
- He challenged the Court of Appeals’ Decision (Oct. 25, 2016) and Resolution (Feb. 21, 2017) in CA-G.R. CR No. 01887.
- The CA had affirmed the RTC Branch 65, San Miguel, Jordan, Guimaras, which in Criminal Case No. 06-0949 (July 25, 2011) found petitioner guilty of Estafa under Article 315(1)(b) of the RPC.
Facts of the Case
- Petitioner, a civil engineer, was engaged by Nelly and Hans Van der Bom to install a water system for their water-refilling business.
- After project completion (July 2004), petitioner borrowed a cement mixer valued at ₱25,000 for his Iloilo project, promising to return it on demand.
- Several months passed; petitioner failed to return the mixer despite Nelly’s repeated demands and a formal letter from her lawyer.
- Information for Estafa filed alleging misappropriation of the mixer to petitioner’s personal use, to complainant’s damage.
Evidence of the Prosecution
- Nelly Vander Bom: testified to lending the mixer on commodatum and petitioner’s failure to return it despite formal demand.
- Francisco Igpuara (mechanic): familiar with the mixer; heard from Hans Van der Bom that petitioner took it to Iloilo.
- Arnaldo Marcasote (employee): confirmed petitioner borrowed the mixer and asked for operating instructions.
- Daren Almarquez (employee): saw petitioner take the mixer on a jeepney; mixer never returned.
- Bernaros Gregorios Keultjes (previous owner): sold the heavy-duty German mixer to the Van der Boms in 2000 for ₱50,000.
Evidence of the Defense
- Rudy de la Torre (Barangay Kagawad): recounted barangay proceedings (March 200