16 s a n t i a g o s a r a a n d r e a n i n a p 2 0

This preview shows page 16 - 17 out of 30 pages.

16 | S A N T I A G O , S a r a A n d r e a N i n a P . 2 0 1 7 - 0 0 6 4 C i v i l P r o c e d u r e S e a t w o r k Question No. 05: Provide 3 case digests for each of the following: a. Distinction between Rule 45 and 65 G.R. No. 129368 August 25, 2003 LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. COURT OF APPEALS FACTS This is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court which seeks to annul and set aside the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals. Manotoc Securities, Inc. (MSI) was a duly licensed broker and dealer in securities, doing business and operating under the provisions of the Securities Act. The Insular Bank of Asia and America (IBAA) and the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) are private commercial banking corporations duly authorized to operate as trust companies. In case of default by the investment agent, the custodian bank as its attorney-in-fact was authorized to sell so much of the qualified securities held in the portfolio and to apply the proceeds thereof. MSI executed in favor of IBAA, conformably to the said custodianship agreement, deeds of assignment to securities existing and as may from time to time be brought under the operation of the assignment from time to time by way of supplementary schedules hereto incorporated and made an integral part hereof by their terms of reference. The private respondents filed a complaint before the RTC. They alleged inter alia that as part of and in connection with the investments made by the private respondents and other investors in the portfolio, and as security for the payment or return of the said investments, IBAA as trustee issued custodian receipts to the private respondents, certifying that it was holding in custody a portfolio of qualified securities with values equivalent to the amounts of the investments, and acknowledged that its custodian receipts, together with their corresponding investment agreements, constituted a lien on the portfolio of qualified securities in its custody to the total amount of the investment portfolio. They further alleged that despite their repeated demands, MSI refused, failed and neglected to pay over or return their investments as and when they matured. They further alleged that MSI failed to maintain the security value of the investment portfolio as agreed upon, thus, constituting events of default under the terms and conditions of the custodianship agreement. RTC ruled in favor of MSI thereby suspending the proceedings as the allegations in the petitions indicated that although there was no prayer specifically directed against Manotoc or MSI, the petitions were in reality claims against the latter, or, at the very least, the disposition of the petitions would affect properties belonging or pertaining to a corporation under management or receivership of the SEC. It held that the SEC had primary jurisdiction to the exclusion of the RTC. Since its jurisdiction was merely secondary, the authority of the court

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture