Title
Sy vs. Mina
Case
G.R. No. L-32217
Decision Date
Aug 15, 1988
Petitioner challenged venue in a civil case over unpaid rice purchase, claiming improper jurisdiction. SC upheld Isabela court's jurisdiction based on implied consent via unsigned sales invoice.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-32217)

Relevant Dates

The events pertinent to this case occurred primarily in 1970, with the initial complaint filed on April 22, 1970, and subsequent motions and orders issued throughout June 1970. The decision of the Supreme Court was rendered on August 15, 1988.

Applicable Law

This case is governed by the 1987 Philippine Constitution and relevant provisions of the Revised Rules of Court, particularly Section 3, Rule 4, which addresses the venue of actions.

Factual Background

On October 25, 1969, Mercedes Sy purchased rice from M. Chuakay & Sons Rice Mill, Inc., and in the ensuing legal action, the Municipal Court issued a writ of attachment due to dishonored checks provided by Sy. After various motions regarding the dismissal of the complaint and the writ of attachment, the Municipal Court denied Sy's motion, prompting her to seek a higher judicial remedy.

Issues Presented

The petitioner raised two crucial issues: (1) whether the Municipal Court of Cabatuan, Isabela is the proper venue for the case considering the unsigned nature of the sales invoice receipt; and (2) whether the sales invoice receipt can affect the venue of the action per the provisions of the Revised Rules of Court.

Venue Determination

The Supreme Court determined that the sales invoice receipt, despite being unsigned, contained a stipulation indicating that the buyer agreed to the jurisdiction of Cabatuan, Isabela courts in cases of default. This stipulation was found to be a sufficient basis for establishing jurisdiction. The petitioner’s argument that the lack of signature invalidated the invoice was dismissed, citing precedent which holds that acceptance of the sales invoice constitutes implied conformity to its terms.

Legal Precedent

The Court referenced prior cases, specifically Pan Pacific Company (Phil.) vs. Advertising Corporation and Naga Development v. Court of Appeals, both of which affirmed that actions undertaken by a party, such

...continue reading

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