Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 222 views

    Motion To Dismiss

    Uploaded by

    Jaimie Lyn Tan
    A corporation filed a motion to dismiss a complaint on the grounds that the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion argues that service of the summons was improper because it was served on an authorized personnel rather than one of the specific officers listed in the rules for service, such as the president or corporate secretary. If service is not proper, the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion requests that the complaint be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

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

    Motion To Dismiss

    Uploaded by

    Jaimie Lyn Tan
    222 views2 pages
    A corporation filed a motion to dismiss a complaint on the grounds that the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion argues that service of the summons was improper because it was served on an authorized personnel rather than one of the specific officers listed in the rules for service, such as the president or corporate secretary. If service is not proper, the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion requests that the complaint be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    yjuyhkuij

    Original Title

    NO. 32

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    A corporation filed a motion to dismiss a complaint on the grounds that the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion argues that service of the summons was improper because it was served on an authorized personnel rather than one of the specific officers listed in the rules for service, such as the president or corporate secretary. If service is not proper, the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion requests that the complaint be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    222 views2 pages

    Motion To Dismiss

    Uploaded by

    Jaimie Lyn Tan
    A corporation filed a motion to dismiss a complaint on the grounds that the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion argues that service of the summons was improper because it was served on an authorized personnel rather than one of the specific officers listed in the rules for service, such as the president or corporate secretary. If service is not proper, the court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation. The motion requests that the complaint be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    MOTION TO DISMISS

    COMES NOW the Respondent, _____________ Inc., through the undersigned counsel, appearing

    especially and solely for this purpose, and to this Honorable Court, most respectfully moves for the

    dismissal of the Complaint on the following ground that THE HONORABLE COURT HAS NOT ACQUIRED

    JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE DEFENDING PARTY.

    DISCUSSION

    A cursory reading of the Summons and Return of Service would readily show that the copies of the

    Summons dated 08 May 2001 and the Complaint and its corresponding annexes were allegedly

    delivered and tendered upon the Movant _____________ INC. through a certain Maria Clara alleged

    to be the authorized personnel of Movant _____________ INC., Bacolod City on 29 August 2001.

    Copies of the said Summons and Return of Service that form part of the records on the case are

    hereto pleaded as integral part of this Motion;

    Said service of Summons, however, constitutes an improper service of summons amounting to lack of

    jurisdiction over the person of the herein Movant Corporation _____________ INC. since the

    summons was improperly served upon a person who is not one of those persons named or

    enumerated in Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure upon whom service of

    summons shall be made;

    The material provision on the service of summons provided for in Section 11 of Rule 14 of the 1997

    Rules of Civil Procedure reads as follows:

    "Section 11. Service upon domestic private juridical entity.- When the defendant is a corporation,

    partnership or association organized under the laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality,

    service may be made on the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary,

    treasurer, or in-house counsel" (underscoring ours)

    It bears no further emphasis that the service of the summons was done on a person who is not

    included in the exclusive enumeration provided for under the said Section, as service was done only

    on an alleged authorized personnel of the Movant Corporation;

    This new revision of the Rules of Court for the service of summon is a clear departure from the old

    rule as stated in Section 13, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court which provided that:

    "SECTION 13.Service upon private domestic corporation or partnership. - If the defendant is a

    corporation organized under the laws of the Philippines or a partnership duly registered, service may

    be made on the president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent, or any of its directors."

    It must be equally noted that the changes in the new rules are substantial and not just general

    semantics as the new rules restricted the service of summons on persons clearly enumerated therein.

    In effect, the new provision makes it more specific and clear such that in the case of the word

    "manager", it was made more precise and changed to "general manager", "secretary" to "corporate

    secretary", and excluding therefrom agent and director;


    The designation of persons or officers who are authorized to accept summons for a domestic

    corporation or partnership is under the new rules, limited and more clearly specified, departure from

    which is fatal to the validity of the service of the summons and resulting in the failure of the court to

    acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent corporation.

    PRAYER

    WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Complaint with respect to the Movant Corporation be

    dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

    Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

    _____________, Philippines, __Date__.

    (COUNSEL)

    (NOTICE OF HEARING)

    (EXPLANATION)

    COPY FURNISHED:

    OPPOSING COUNSEL

    You might also like