Asiatic Petroleum vs. Quico, 69 Phil. 433, No.

46529 January 23, 1940

Facts:

Co Quico was a sales agent of Asiatic Petroleum. He was later in default

for a certain sum, so he left for China without rendering account to Asiatic.
Asiatic sought to recover the unremitted sum, by filing a complaint which led to
the preliminary attachment of Co’s deposit with Mercantile Bank of China. There
were summons by publication, and Co was declared in default, with judgment
rendered against him.
A writ of execution was issued, and levy was made on the deposits, but
this was unsatisfied because the same were transferred to Co’s son. Co’s
counsel then appeared to have the proceedings nullified on the ground of lack
of jurisdiction of the court over the person of Co. This was granted.

Issue: Does the court have jurisdiction to levy on Co’s deposits?

Yes. Even though Co was outside the Philippines when the case against him was
instituted, he possessed property within the Philippines.
“All property within a state is subject to the jurisdiction of its courts, and they
have the right to adjudicate title thereto, enforce liens thereupon, and subject it
to the payment of the debts of its owners, whether resident or not.”
“The sovereign power may lay hands on any and all persons or property within
its borders…”
In such case, no distinction needs to be made between movable and
immovable property.