Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 63 views

    Serafin Tijam Vs Sibonghanoy

    Uploaded by

    Kim Siddayao Ziganay
    The case involved a civil suit filed by Spouses Serafin and Felicitas against Spouses Sibonghanoy to recover P1,908.00 with interest. After trial, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. When the writ of execution was unsatisfied, the plaintiffs moved for a writ against the Surety's bond. The Surety argued the court lacked jurisdiction after 15 years, as the amount was below the CFI's jurisdiction threshold. The court ruled the Surety was barred by laches from raising this, as unreasonable delay can lead to estoppel. It also held one cannot question jurisdiction only after an adverse decision, as that permits undesirable practice of accepting favorable judgments but attacking adverse ones.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Serafin Tijam Vs Sibonghanoy

    Uploaded by

    Kim Siddayao Ziganay
    63 views1 page
    The case involved a civil suit filed by Spouses Serafin and Felicitas against Spouses Sibonghanoy to recover P1,908.00 with interest. After trial, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. When the writ of execution was unsatisfied, the plaintiffs moved for a writ against the Surety's bond. The Surety argued the court lacked jurisdiction after 15 years, as the amount was below the CFI's jurisdiction threshold. The court ruled the Surety was barred by laches from raising this, as unreasonable delay can lead to estoppel. It also held one cannot question jurisdiction only after an adverse decision, as that permits undesirable practice of accepting favorable judgments but attacking adverse ones.

    Original Description:

    jurisdiction

    Original Title

    Jurisdiction

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The case involved a civil suit filed by Spouses Serafin and Felicitas against Spouses Sibonghanoy to recover P1,908.00 with interest. After trial, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. When the writ of execution was unsatisfied, the plaintiffs moved for a writ against the Surety's bond. The Surety argued the court lacked jurisdiction after 15 years, as the amount was below the CFI's jurisdiction threshold. The court ruled the Surety was barred by laches from raising this, as unreasonable delay can lead to estoppel. It also held one cannot question jurisdiction only after an adverse decision, as that permits undesirable practice of accepting favorable judgments but attacking adverse ones.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    63 views1 page

    Serafin Tijam Vs Sibonghanoy

    Uploaded by

    Kim Siddayao Ziganay
    The case involved a civil suit filed by Spouses Serafin and Felicitas against Spouses Sibonghanoy to recover P1,908.00 with interest. After trial, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. When the writ of execution was unsatisfied, the plaintiffs moved for a writ against the Surety's bond. The Surety argued the court lacked jurisdiction after 15 years, as the amount was below the CFI's jurisdiction threshold. The court ruled the Surety was barred by laches from raising this, as unreasonable delay can lead to estoppel. It also held one cannot question jurisdiction only after an adverse decision, as that permits undesirable practice of accepting favorable judgments but attacking adverse ones.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Serafin Tijam vs Sibonghanoy

    G.R. No. L-21450 April 15, 1968


    Facts:
    Spouses Serafin and Felicitas commenced a civil case against spouses Sibonghanoy to recover
    from them a sum of P1, 908.00 with legal interest. A writ of attachment was issued by the court against
    the defendants properties but the same was soon dissolved. After trial, the court rendered judgment in
    favor of the plaintiffs and after the same had become final and executor, the court issued a writ of
    execution against the defendants. The writ being unsatisfied, the plaintiffs moved for the issuance of the
    writ of execution against the Suretys bond. Subsequently, the Surety moved to quash the writ on the
    ground that the same was issued without summary hearing. This was denied by the RTC. The Surety
    appealed in the CA, which was denied. This time, the surety just asked for an extension in order for them
    to file the motion for reconsideration. But instead of filing for a motion for reconsideration, it filed a motion
    to dismiss saying that by virtue of R.A. 296 which is the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1948, section
    88 of which placed within the exclusive original jurisdiction of inferior courts all civil action where the value
    of the subject matter does not exceed P2,000.00. The Court of First Instance therefore has no jurisdiction
    over the case. The question of jurisdiction was filed by the Surety only 15 years from the time the action
    was commenced in the Court of First Instance.
    Issue:
    WON Surety bond is estopped from questioning the jurisdiction of the CFI Cebu for the first time
    upon appeal.
    Held:
    Yes. The court ruled that the Surety is now barred by laches from invoking this plea after almost
    fifteen years before the Surety filed its motion to dismiss raising the question of lack of jurisdiction for the
    first time. A party may be estopped or barred from raising a question in different ways and for different
    reasons. Thus we speak of estoppel in pais, or estoppel by deed or by record, and of estoppel by laches.
    Laches, in a general sense is failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do
    that which, by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier. Furthermore, it has also
    been held that after voluntarily submitting a cause and encountering an adverse decision on the merits, it
    is too late for the loser to question the jurisdiction or power of the court "undesirable practice" of a party
    submitting his case for decision and then accepting the judgment, only if favorable, and attacking it for
    lack of jurisdiction, when adverse.

    You might also like