20 First Philippine International Bank v.

CA AUTHOR: TIGLAO
[G.R. No. 115849 | 24 January 1996] NOTES:
TOPIC: Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens
PONENTE: J. Panganiban
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:

EMERGENCY RECIT

FACTS:
Producers Bank (now called First Philippine International Bank), which has been under conservatorship since
1984, is the owner of six (6) parcels of land.
The Bank had an agreement with Demetrio Demetria and Jose Janolo for the two to purchase the six parcels of
land for P5.5 million pesos.
The said agreement was made by Demetria and Janolo with the Banks manager, Mercurio Rivera.
Later however, the Bank, through its conservator, Leonida Encarnacion, sought the repudiation of the
agreement alleging that Rivera was not authorized to enter into such an agreement, hence there was no valid
contract of sale.
Because of this, Demetria and Janolo sued Producers Bank.
RTC: Ruled in favor of Demetria and Janolo. Due to this unfavorable decision, the Bank filed an appeal with
the Court of Appeals.
Meanwhile, Henry Co, who holds 80% shares of stocks with the said Bank, filed a motion for intervention with
the trial court.
The trial court denied the motion since the trial has been concluded already and the case is now pending appeal.
Subsequently, Co, assisted by ACCRALAW, filed a separate civil case against Carlos Ejercito as successor-in-
interest (assignee) of Demetria and Janolo, seeking to have the purported contract of sale be declared
unenforceable against the Bank.
Ejercito et al argued that the second case constitutes forum shopping.
ISSUE(S): W/N the second case filed by Henry Co constituted forum shopping

HELD: Yes.

RATIO:
There is forum shopping because there is identity of interest and parties between the first case and the second
case.
There is identity of interest because both cases sought to have the agreement, which involves the same
property, be declared unenforceable as against the Bank.
There is identity of parties even though the first case is in the name of the bank as defendant, and the second
case is in the name of Henry Co as plaintiff.
There is still forum shopping here because Henry Co essentially represents the bank. Both cases aim to have
the bank escape liability from the agreement it entered into with Demetria et al.
The Supreme Court also discussed that to combat forum shopping, which originated as a concept in
international law, the principle of forum non conveniens was developed.
The doctrine of forum non conveniens provides that a court, in conflicts of law cases, may refuse impositions
on its jurisdiction where it is not the most convenient or available forum and the parties are not precluded
from seeking remedies elsewhere.
DISSENTING/CONCURRING OPINION(S):