Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    San Miguel V Pundogar

    Uploaded by

    gokudera hayato
    San Miguel filed a breach of contract complaint against Christina Trino in RTC Lanao Del Norte. A certificate from the barangay captain stated Trino could not be contacted. The RTC ruled for San Miguel. Trino argued the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to failure to comply with mandatory conciliation under PD 1508. The RTC agreed and set aside its decision. The Supreme Court ruled that where a defendant fails to respond to conciliation, the requirements of PD 1508 are satisfied. It held the RTC had jurisdiction as Trino could not frustrate the statute by refusing conciliation and later challenging jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    San Miguel V Pundogar

    Uploaded by

    gokudera hayato
    28 views1 page
    San Miguel filed a breach of contract complaint against Christina Trino in RTC Lanao Del Norte. A certificate from the barangay captain stated Trino could not be contacted. The RTC ruled for San Miguel. Trino argued the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to failure to comply with mandatory conciliation under PD 1508. The RTC agreed and set aside its decision. The Supreme Court ruled that where a defendant fails to respond to conciliation, the requirements of PD 1508 are satisfied. It held the RTC had jurisdiction as Trino could not frustrate the statute by refusing conciliation and later challenging jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    San Miguel filed a breach of contract complaint against Christina Trino in RTC Lanao Del Norte. A certificate from the barangay captain stated Trino could not be contacted. The RTC ruled for San Miguel. Trino argued the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to failure to comply with mandatory conciliation under PD 1508. The RTC agreed and set aside its decision. The Supreme Court ruled that where a defendant fails to respond to conciliation, the requirements of PD 1508 are satisfied. It held the RTC had jurisdiction as Trino could not frustrate the statute by refusing conciliation and later challenging jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    28 views1 page

    San Miguel V Pundogar

    Uploaded by

    gokudera hayato
    San Miguel filed a breach of contract complaint against Christina Trino in RTC Lanao Del Norte. A certificate from the barangay captain stated Trino could not be contacted. The RTC ruled for San Miguel. Trino argued the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to failure to comply with mandatory conciliation under PD 1508. The RTC agreed and set aside its decision. The Supreme Court ruled that where a defendant fails to respond to conciliation, the requirements of PD 1508 are satisfied. It held the RTC had jurisdiction as Trino could not frustrate the statute by refusing conciliation and later challenging jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    San Miguel v.

    Pundogar, 173 SCRA 704 (1989)

    Facts: Petitioner San Miguel Filed a complaint for breach of contract with damages against
    respondent Christina Trino before the RTC Lanao Del Norte. A certificate to file action, signed
    by the Barangay captain of Barangay Palao, Iligan City, bearing the notation tthat the
    respondent cannot be contacted was filed along with the complaint. On january 26, 1986 the
    trial court rendered a decision against private respondent. Private respondent filed a petition
    for relief from judgment with the trial court, alleging that the court had no jurisdiction to render
    its decision for failure of petitioner to go trhough the mandatory conciliation. Private
    respondent argued that the certification of the Barangay Captain was inadequate compliance
    with PD 1508, private respondent being a resident not of barangay palao but rather of brgy.
    Cabili. The trial court presided by respondent judge, issued an order upholding private
    respondents contentions and set aside the assailed decision holding that RTC acted without
    jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the action for failure to comply with PD
    1508. A motion for reconsideration was denied.

    Issues: Whether or not the lower court acquired jurisdiction for failure to comply with PD 1508

    Held: Where defendant fails for one reason or another to respond to a notice to appear before
    the lupon, the requirement of PD 1508 ust be regarded as having been satisfied by the
    plaintiff. The defendant in an action fails for one reason or another to respond to a notice to
    appear before the lupon, the requirement of PD 1508 must be regarded as having been
    satisfied by the plaintiff. A defendant cannot be allowed to frustrate the requirement of the
    statute by her own refusal or failure to appear before the lupon and then later to assail a
    judgment rendered in such action by setting up the very ground of non compliance with PD
    1508. In simplest temrs, a defendant cannot be allowed to profit by her own default. Private
    respondent stated that she had not receive notice to appear before the lupon. We do not
    believe that the statement and suggestion should be given credence. The barangay
    authorities of barangay palao must be presumed to have performed their official duties and to
    have acted regularly in issuing the certificate to file action. They must be presumed to have
    sent a notice to private respondnet to apepar before the Lupon.

    You might also like