Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1

4. Manguila vs Court of Appeals GR No.

1250127 August 12, 2002


Doctrine and Rationale
For implementation for the writ of attachment to commence, the court must have
acquired jurisdiction over the defendant for without such jurisdiction, the court has
no power to act in any authority against the defendant.
The court may acquire jurisdiction over the person through proper and valid service
of summons or other coercive process or his voluntary submission to courts
authority. Section 14 of the RC provides that whereabouts of unknown and cannot
be ascertained by diligent inquiry, service may, by leave of court, be effected upon
him by publication in a newspaper of general circulation.
Lastly, parties may agree in writing on the venue on which an action should be
brought. However, mere stipulation, unless exclusive, does not preclude parties
from bringing case in other venues. As a general rule, venue for personal actions is
where the defendant resides or may be found, or where plaintiff resides, at the
election of the plaintiff.
5. Vicente Chuidan vs Sandiganbayan GR No. 139941 dated January 19,
2011
Doctrine and Rationale
Remedies of the defendant whose property or assets has been attached under the
RC are: 1) Rule 57 Section 12 file a counter bond; 2) Rule 57 Section 13 which is to
quash the attachment on the ground that it was irregularly or improvidently issued.
The ground must be in relation to issuance of the writ of attachments.
The defendant is not allowed to file a motion to dissolve the writ on preliminary
attachment which would result to trial on merits of action.
Preliminary Injunction
6. Teresita Idolor vs Court of Appeals GR No. 141853 dated February 7,
2001
Injunction is a preservative remedy aimed at protecting substantive rights and
interests. The essential requisites must be present: 1) There must be a right in esse
or the existence of a right to be protected; 2) the act against which the injunction is
to directed is a violation of such right.
If the right of redemption has already expired, the party seeking injunction no
longer has sufficient interest or title in the property sought to be protected. A party
seeking injunction who has insufficient title or interest to sustain it, and no claim to
be ultimate relief sought, shows no equity.