Title
Stronghold Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Cuenca
Case
G.R. No. 173297
Decision Date
Mar 6, 2013
Stronghold Insurance contested liability for damages from a wrongful attachment bond; Supreme Court ruled Cuencas and Tayactac lacked standing, limiting liability to bond amount.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 173297)

Petitioner

Stronghold Insurance Company, Inc., domestic insurer and surety issuing Bond No. 68427 JCL No. 02370 in favor of the Cuencas and Tayactac to secure the attachment.

Respondents

Tomas, Marcelina and Milagros Cuenca, and Bramie T. Tayactac—stockholders of Arc Cuisine, Inc.—seeking recovery for the loss and damage of corporate property wrongfully attached.

Key Dates

• January 19, 1998 – Complaint and attachment application filed by Marañon.
• February 11, 1998 – Surety bond posted.
• February 13, 1998 – Writ of preliminary attachment issued.
• April 28, 2003 – RTC awards P1,000,000 bond plus damages, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees against Marañon and Stronghold, jointly and solidarily.
• January 31, 2006 – CA affirms RTC decision.
• March 6, 2013 – Supreme Court decision reversing CA.

Applicable Law

Under the 1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 1, judicial power extends only to actual controversies. Rule 3, Section 2 of the Rules of Court requires that every action be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. The Corporation Code establishes that a corporation has a personality separate from its stockholders.

Facts and Procedural History

Marañon secured a writ of attachment against Arc Cuisine, Inc. properties and posted a P1,000,000 surety bond with Stronghold Insurance. The sheriff levied corporate equipment and later lost custody of the items. The Cuencas and Tayactac successfully petitioned the CA to dismiss the attachment for lack of RTC jurisdiction, then sought damages below. The RTC held Marañon and Stronghold liable; the CA affirmed.

Issue on Appeal

Whether the stockholders, in their individual capacity, were real parties in interest entitled to enforce the surety bond for damages arising from the wrongful attachment of corporate assets.

Legal Framework on Real Party in Interest

A real party in interest must have a present, substantial right to the relief sought, not a mere expectancy or derivative interest. Only the entity whose legal rights were invaded may prosecute a claim. Stockholders’ rights to corporate property are indirect and insufficient to establish standing for personal recovery.

Court’s Analysis and Application

Arc Cuisine, Inc. alone owned the attached assets; respondents’ stockholdings conferred an aliquot interest in corporate equity, not title to specific property. Precedents (Asset Priv

...continue reading

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