|
Sunday, July 23, 2006
SC sustains prohibition v. Marcoses from claiming stocks in telecom firm
THE Supreme Court (SC) has upheld a decision of the anti-graft court barring the family of the late deposed President Ferdinand Marcos from acquiring P265.2 million worth of stock shares in Eastern Telecommunications Philippines Inc. (EPTI) due to their refusal and failure to pay the appropriate amount of docket fees.
In a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Reynato Puno, the SC's Second Division said the Sandiganbayan made no error in dismissing the Marcoses' ownership claims on ETPI assets recovered by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).
The Sandiganbayan, in a Feb. 15, 1999 resolution, junked the complaint against the PCGG "for lack of jurisdiction due to the failure of petitioners to pay the proper amount of filing fees."
"The rule is clear. It is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate initiatory pleading, but also the payment of the prescribed docket fee that vests the trial court with jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action," the SC ruled.
The case stemmed from the compromise agreement entered into by the late Ambassador Roberto Benedicto, an alleged Marcos crony, with the PCGG where Benedicto surrendered 51 percent of his equity in EPTI, consisting of 2,652,000 shares of stock, which is equivalent to 10.2 percent of ETPI's total capital stock.
As part of a compromise agreement with the PCGG in 1990, Benedicto turned over 2.65 million ETPI shares to the PCGG in exchange for his immunity from suit.
The high court said even assuming hypothetically that the Marcos heirs have a right over the ceded ETPI shares of stocks, their claim had prescribed because under Article 1144 of the Civil Code, an action involving constructive trust prescribes in 10 years.
It noted that petitioners virtually "slept on their rights" by allowing the 10-year prescriptive period for filing to elapse, instead of manifesting their willingness to abide by the ruling of the Sandiganbayan to pay the proper docket fees.
"Even if we consider the petitioners' (Marcos heirs) right of action for recovery of shares as having accrued only on Nov. 3, 1990, when Benedicto entered into a compromise agreement with the Republic of the Philippines surrendering the shares in question, or even on the latter period of Sept. 10, 1993, wherein this court upheld the validity of the compromise agreement, the 10-year prescriptive period has already elapsed. Prescription has already set in, thereby barring their right of action," the SC said.
In 1998, the Marcos heirs filed a complaint against the PCGG before the Sandiganbayan to recover the surrendered ETPI shares. Aside from the recovery of the surrendered shares, the Marcos heirs also asked that they be paid P1 million in damages and attorney’s fees. They paid a docket fee of P4,800.
On Oct. 14, 1998, the Sandiganbayan ordered petitioners to show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to their non-payment of the prescribed docket fee, more particularly the additional amount of P1,326,955, considering that they claimed ownership over 2.65 million ETPI shares with a par value of P100 per share.
The Marcos heirs did not pay the additional docket fees and manifested to the Sandiganbayan that the payment of additional docket fees would constitute an unconstitutional diminution or modification of their substantive rights.
On Feb. 15, 1999, the Sandiganbayan issued its assailed resolution for failure of the Marcoses to pay the proper amount of filing fees.
When their motion for reconsideration was rejected by the Sandiganbayan, the Marcos heirs elevated their case to the SC. (ECV/Sunnex)
(July 23, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
|
