Case Summary (G.R. No. 91004-05)
Filing and Denial of Petition
Joseph Tay Chun Suy initiated a special civil action for certiorari and prohibition with the Court of Appeals, contesting the six orders issued by the respondent judges in Civil Case No. CEB-5162. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition on August 28, 1989, and subsequently denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration on November 7, 1989. The petitioner appealed this dismissal.
Background of the Dispute
On March 26, 1984, a judgment was rendered by Judge Mariano C. Tupas of the Regional Trial Court of Davao, which ordered Sta. Clara Lumber Co., Inc. to pay Suy the sum of ₱181,194.90. This judgment became final and led to a writ of execution which resulted in the sale of the motor vessel Sta. Clara I to the petitioner for ₱317,000. Following this transaction, the Philippine Trigon Shipyard Corporation filed a complaint in Cebu, claiming a maritime lien against the vessel based on alleged overdue repair costs and unjust detention.
Issuance of Writ of Preliminary Attachment
On July 21, 1986, Judge Valeriano P. Tomol, Jr. issued a writ of preliminary attachment against the vessel as part of the remedy sought by Trigon. This writ was based upon the plaintiff’s allegations that Suy, and the sheriff in Davao, acted knowingly and in bad faith regarding the ownership and detention of the vessel. The sheriff allegorically attached the vessel as well as Suy’s bank accounts.
Petitioner’s Arguments Against Attachment
Suy invoked Rule 57, Section 1, of the Revised Rules of Court, arguing that there were no grounds that justified the issuance of the order of attachment. He contested the claims made by Trigon and contended that he was an indispensable party to the suit given his prior acquisition of the vessel. Moreover, he argued that he had not been afforded a chance for a hearing before the preliminary attachment was issued.
Legal Justifications for Attachment
In rejecting Suy's appeal, the Court highlighted that the claims made by Trigon, particularly regarding unjust detention, provided sufficient justification for the writ of attachment. It noted that Suy's questionable acquisition of the vessel from a non-owner justified Trigon’s action in seeking a remedy for an alleged maritime lien, making Suy’s presence necessary in the proceedings.
Grounds for Writ of Attachment Upheld
The Court confirmed that the trial court’s decision to issue the writ was based on sufficiently detailed allegations presented by Trigon. The Court also rejected Suy’s argument concerning the necessity of notifying the custodian of the vessel before the attachment, emphasizing the presumptive regularity of official duties performed.
Authority of Judges on Ex Parte Issuances
The Court ruled that the issuance of the writ of attachment ex parte, without prior hearing, was valid given the potential risk that Suy might abscond with the vessel.
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 91004-05)
Background of the Case
- The case involves a special civil action for certiorari and prohibition filed by petitioner Joseph Tay Chun Suy against the Court of Appeals and several respondent judges related to Civil Case No. CEB-5162 in the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City.
- The initial complaint in Civil Case No. CEB-5162 was filed by Philippine Trigon Shipyard Corporation against multiple parties, including Tay Chun Suy, alleging a maritime lien on the motor vessel Sta. Clara I.
Procedural History
- The petitioner faced six orders from the respondent judges, which he sought to overturn through the Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition on August 28, 1989, and denied the motion for reconsideration on November 7, 1989.
- The petitioner subsequently elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
The Judgment in Civil Case No. 15,970
- On March 26, 1984, a judgment was rendered in favor of Tay Chun Suy against Sta. Clara Lumber Co., Inc., ordering the latter to pay him P181,194.90 with interest and additional costs.
- The decision became final and executory, leading to a writ of execution and the subsequent sale of the Sta. Clara I vessel to Tay Chun Suy for P317,000.00 at a public auction.
The Allegations of Philippine Trigon Shipyard Corporation
- Trigon alleged that the Sta. Clara I vessel was wrongfully sold to Tay Chun Suy as it was no longer owned by Sta. Clara Lumber Co., Inc. at the time of the auction.
- They claimed that Tay Chun Suy and the Davao City Sheriff were aware of the vessel's ownership issues and alleged that the auction price was significantly lower than its actual value.
The Issuance of Writ of Preliminary Attachment
- Judge Valeriano P. Tomol, Jr. issued a writ of preliminary attachment ba