Title
The Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. vs. Toyota Bel-Air, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 137884
Decision Date
Mar 28, 2008
Toyota unlawfully retained leased property post-expiration; MeTC ordered vacate and retroactive compensation. RTC nullified writ; SC reversed, upheld MeTC, citing Toyota's non-compliance with compromise conditions and misuse of remedies.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 247410)

Lease and Unlawful Detainer Proceedings

The five-year lease over the Makati property expired April 15, 1997. Toyota’s continued possession after that date became unlawful. Insular Life demanded vacation, then sued for ejectment. The MeTC found Toyota in unlawful possession, awarded double rent at P585,640 monthly from the lease termination date until turnover of possession, plus P50,000 attorney’s fees and P20,000 litigation expenses.

Writ of Execution and Clarificatory Orders

Upon withdrawal of appeals, MeTC issued a writ of execution on August 12, 1998, which incorporated the rent award “from April 15, 1997.” The sheriff levied on Toyota’s properties and bank accounts with auction set. Toyota sought certiorari relief before the RTC, charging MeTC with grave abuse for retroactively computing rent. Meanwhile, MeTC issued two clarificatory orders (September 14 and October 28, 1998) inserting “as of April 15, 1997” and reinstating “a month” into the dispositive portion to align with its ratio decidendi.

RTC Certiorari and Injunction

The RTC enjoined the auction and, on September 30, 1998, voided the writ of execution for MeTC’s alleged grave abuse in amending its decision’s dispositive portion. The court held the clarifications insufficient to cure ambiguity and ordered Toyota to consign accrued rentals. Insular Life’s reconsideration was denied March 5, 1999.

Compromise Agreement

While the certiorari petition was pending before this Court, Toyota and Insular Life entered a conditional compromise dated May 7, 1999. It required: (a) transfer of three Toyota vehicles worth P1.5 M; (b) issuance of twelve post-dated corporate checks totaling P6.5 M; and (c) posting a surety bond of P6.5 M from Insular Life’s approved surety list.

Supreme Court’s Remand and Findings on Compromise

By Resolution dated August 8, 2001, the Supreme Court remanded to the RTC to determine whether Toyota fulfilled the compromise conditions. RTC found Toyota failed to deliver valid checks (account under garnishment) and a compliant surety bond, and that substitute real-property collateral was unacceptable. Each party submitted supplemental memoranda; Insular Life urged strict compliance; Toyota claimed substantial compliance hindered by RTC’s voiding of the writ.

Conditional Nature of the Agreement

Applying Civil Code doctrine on suspensive conditions, the Court held that the issuance of post-dated checks and bond were positive suspensive conditions. Their non-fulfillment meant the compromise never acquired obligatory force. Toyota’s inability to meet these conditions prevented any binding agreement; Insular Life had no obligation to lift garnishment or accept collateral.

Certiorari Jurisdiction and Prematurity

On the merits of the petition, the Court found Toyota’s certiorari before the RTC premature. Under Rule 65, certiorari lies only where no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy exists; Toyota could have employed in-court remedies such as a motion to quash the writ or motion to clarify the dispositive portion in MeTC. The RTC should have allowed the MeTC to correct any error.

Interpretation of the Dispositive Portion

Although generally only the dispositive portion controls execution, recognized exceptions permit reference to the body of the decision where ambiguity exists or extensive discussion supports a broader interpretation. Here, MeTC’s findings and conclusions clearly established rent computation “from April 15, 1997.” The insertion of that date in the writ and subsequent clarificatory orders merely gave effect to what the body of the decision had expressed. The RTC erred in nullifying the entire writ over an inadvertent omission in the dispo

...continue reading

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