Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Lacson
GR 142508; May 5, 2010
Topic: Dismissal of Action Rule 17
Ponente: Peralta, J.
Facts:
1. Presidential Decree No. 388 - the Philippine
Sugar Commission (PHILSUCOM) was
created and vested with the power to act as
the single buying and selling agency of
sugar in the Philippines.
2. Sept.
7,
2977
PHILSUCOM
further
organized the National Sugar Trading
Corporation (NASUTRA) as its buying
marketing arm.
3. Petitioner: Robert S. Benedicto was the
concurrent Chairman and President of
Traders Royal Bank and NASUTRA.
Cases involved:
A. Bacolod Case: filed by respondents
individual sugar planters and agricultural
corporations (Manuel et.al) [RTC Bacolod
Branch 44]
a. Premised on claim for unpaid shares
based on Sugar Orders 1 & 2 issued
by PHILSUCOM.
b. Covered the sugar export sales
supposedly undervalued by NASUTRA
RTC Bacolod:
1. June 5, 1006 issued Order granting
Petitioners Motion to Dismiss.
2. There are similarities with the Lacson Case
and Monfort Case.
3. Guilty of Forum Shopping for failure to
report in their original anti-forum shopping
that they filed a similar case with Pasig
RTC.
4. Even if it has been withdrawn it was
commenced already.
5. Since NATSURA has been dissolved
therefore no cause of action against
NATSURA.
CA:
1. Reversed RTC decision and ordered to be
remanded to RTC.
2. Petitioner filed Motion for Reconsideration
but was denied. Thus, the case.
Issue: CA erred in: 1) absolving the respondents
for violating the anti-forum shopping; 2) for
refusing to apply litis pendentia notwithstanding
the conceded similarities with some antecedent
issues and other pending cases.
SCs ruling: Petition is not meritorious.
1. On Forum Shopping (Bacolod case and Pasig
Case):
1. Pasig Case had strong resemblance with
Bacolod Case, however it was dismissed
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.