Summerville vs.

Eugenio
G.R. 16374, August 7, 2007

Facts: A complaint was filed by Summerville Against the Khos for unfair
Competition.

The city prosecutor’s office recommended prosecution of the Khos and thus an
information was filed for unfair competition before the Regional Trial Court.

The Khos field a petition for review before the Department of Justice. The
Secretary of Justice then issued a resolution dismissing the complaint. Based
on this, the prosecutor filed a motion to withdraw the information with the
Regional Trial Court which was granted by the Regional Trial Court.

Issue: Did the judge act accordingly when he granted the withdrawal of the
information?

Ruling: No

Rule 112, Section 4 of Rules of Court provides that:

“If x x x the Secretary of Justice reverses or modifies the resolution of the

provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, he shall direct the
prosecutor concerned either to file the corresponding information without
conducting another preliminary investigation, or to dismiss or move for
dismissal of the complaint or information with notice to the parties. x x x

In the case of Santos Vs. Orda, Jr., the Court held that:

The trial court is not bound to adopt the resolution of the Secretary of
Justice since it is mandated to independently evaluate or assess the merits
of the case and it may either agree or disagree with the recommendation of
the Secretary of Justice.
In this case, the trial court failed to conduct its own determination of a prima
facie case and simply relied on the resolution of the Sec. of Justice this was
evident by the fact that the motion was granted only a day after in was filed.

Thus, it was improper for the judge to rely solely on the resolution of the
secretary of justice in allowing the withdrawal of the information.