Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    1 - CABRERAvsPSA - Vicedo - Lloyd David

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    Sasha Cabrera filed a petition to cancel her first Report of Birth with the Regional Trial Court in Davao City which was granted. However, the Court of Appeals ruled this was improper and she should file a petition for correction. She refiled in Davao City RTC Branch 14 but it was dismissed for improper venue. The Supreme Court held that (1) venue is procedural not jurisdictional and can be waived; (2) Davao City was the most convenient venue as it was Cabrera's residence and the Philippine Statistics Authority had a field office there. The dismissal by RTC Branch 14 was reversed and the case reinstated and remanded for further proceedings.

    Copyright:

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

    1 - CABRERAvsPSA - Vicedo - Lloyd David

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    40 views2 pages
    Sasha Cabrera filed a petition to cancel her first Report of Birth with the Regional Trial Court in Davao City which was granted. However, the Court of Appeals ruled this was improper and she should file a petition for correction. She refiled in Davao City RTC Branch 14 but it was dismissed for improper venue. The Supreme Court held that (1) venue is procedural not jurisdictional and can be waived; (2) Davao City was the most convenient venue as it was Cabrera's residence and the Philippine Statistics Authority had a field office there. The dismissal by RTC Branch 14 was reversed and the case reinstated and remanded for further proceedings.

    Original Description:

    Case digest for Civil Procedure

    Original Title

    1_CABRERAvsPSA_Vicedo_Lloyd David

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Sasha Cabrera filed a petition to cancel her first Report of Birth with the Regional Trial Court in Davao City which was granted. However, the Court of Appeals ruled this was improper and she should file a petition for correction. She refiled in Davao City RTC Branch 14 but it was dismissed for improper venue. The Supreme Court held that (1) venue is procedural not jurisdictional and can be waived; (2) Davao City was the most convenient venue as it was Cabrera's residence and the Philippine Statistics Authority had a field office there. The dismissal by RTC Branch 14 was reversed and the case reinstated and remanded for further proceedings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    40 views2 pages

    1 - CABRERAvsPSA - Vicedo - Lloyd David

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    Sasha Cabrera filed a petition to cancel her first Report of Birth with the Regional Trial Court in Davao City which was granted. However, the Court of Appeals ruled this was improper and she should file a petition for correction. She refiled in Davao City RTC Branch 14 but it was dismissed for improper venue. The Supreme Court held that (1) venue is procedural not jurisdictional and can be waived; (2) Davao City was the most convenient venue as it was Cabrera's residence and the Philippine Statistics Authority had a field office there. The dismissal by RTC Branch 14 was reversed and the case reinstated and remanded for further proceedings.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    SASHA M. CABRERA, PETITIONER, VS.

    THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICS


    AUTHORITY (FORMERLY NATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICE), OFFICE OF THE
    CONSUL GENERAL, PHILIPPINE EMBASSY, KUALA LUMPUR, AND THE OFFICE
    OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL, RESPONDENTS.
    G.R. No. 241369, June 03, 2019
    PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
    FACTS:
    Petitioner alleged that she was born on July 20, 1989, at Lahad Datu Sabah, Malaysia.
    But due to the distance of their home from the Philippine Embassy, it was only
    registered in 2008. Later, she found that her birth was wrongfully entered as July 20,
    1980, but instead of correcting it, her mother registered it for the second time. This
    prompted her to file a petition for cancellation of her first Report of Birth before the RTC
    Davao Br. 17 which granted it. The OSG appealed with the CA and ruled that since
    petitioner's birth was already validly registered, it can no longer be the subject of a
    second registration. The CA held that the proper recourse would be to file a petition for
    correction of entry to correct her first Report of Birth under Rule 108 of the Rules of
    Court.
    She didn’t move for reconsideration, but instead refiled it. It was raffled to RTC Br. 14,
    but it motu proprio dismissed the petition, saying the petition should have been filed with
    the RTC where petitioner's first Record of Birth was registered, i.e., the RTC of the
    place where the PSA is located, which is Quezon City, and not the RTC of petitioner's
    residence in Davao City.
    ISSUE:
    Whether the RTC Br. 14 erred in dismissing the re-filed petition on the ground of
    improper venue.
    HELD:
    Yes. The RTC Br. 14 incorrectly dismissed the re-filed petition on ground of
    improper venue.
    Venue is procedural, not jurisdictional, and hence, may be waived. In civil cases, venue
    is a matter of procedural law. A party's objections to venue must be brought at the
    earliest opportunity either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer; otherwise, the
    objection shall be deemed waived. When the venue of a civil action is improperly laid,
    the court cannot motu proprio dismiss the case. This rule was intended to provide
    convenience to parties, rather than restrict access to courts.
    It was established that Davao City is the residence of petitioner, and as further pointed
    out by the OSG, PSA has a field office in Davao City, then Davao City is the most
    convenient venue for the parties. Thus, the RTC-Br. 14 should have taken cognizance
    of and heard petitioner's re-filed petition to promote, not defeat, the ends of justice.
    Petition is GRANTED. Order of RTC Br. 14 is REVERSED. Cases is REINSTATED
    and REMANDED for further proceedings.

    You might also like