Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 87 views

    Naoaki Hirakawa Represented by Erica M. Shibamura vs. Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari M. Tiongco

    Uploaded by

    Clarebeth Recaña Ramos
    Naoaki Hirakawa sued Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari Tiongco for failing to pay Php 60 million owed to him. Hirakawa was assigned rights to payment from a land sale between Lopzcom and another party. Checks written to pay for the land were dishonored. The complaint alleged breach of contract but sought payment of the debt, so it should be treated as a collection case regardless of its label. The Supreme Court ruled that the allegations in the complaint determine the nature of the case over its title. Hirakawa had a cause of action against the respondents for collection of the unpaid debt.

    Copyright:

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

    Naoaki Hirakawa Represented by Erica M. Shibamura vs. Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari M. Tiongco

    Uploaded by

    Clarebeth Recaña Ramos
    87 views2 pages
    Naoaki Hirakawa sued Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari Tiongco for failing to pay Php 60 million owed to him. Hirakawa was assigned rights to payment from a land sale between Lopzcom and another party. Checks written to pay for the land were dishonored. The complaint alleged breach of contract but sought payment of the debt, so it should be treated as a collection case regardless of its label. The Supreme Court ruled that the allegations in the complaint determine the nature of the case over its title. Hirakawa had a cause of action against the respondents for collection of the unpaid debt.

    Original Title

    Naoaki Hirakawa represented by Erica M. Shibamura Vs. Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari M. Tiongco.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Naoaki Hirakawa sued Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari Tiongco for failing to pay Php 60 million owed to him. Hirakawa was assigned rights to payment from a land sale between Lopzcom and another party. Checks written to pay for the land were dishonored. The complaint alleged breach of contract but sought payment of the debt, so it should be treated as a collection case regardless of its label. The Supreme Court ruled that the allegations in the complaint determine the nature of the case over its title. Hirakawa had a cause of action against the respondents for collection of the unpaid debt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    87 views2 pages

    Naoaki Hirakawa Represented by Erica M. Shibamura vs. Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari M. Tiongco

    Uploaded by

    Clarebeth Recaña Ramos
    Naoaki Hirakawa sued Lopzcom Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari Tiongco for failing to pay Php 60 million owed to him. Hirakawa was assigned rights to payment from a land sale between Lopzcom and another party. Checks written to pay for the land were dishonored. The complaint alleged breach of contract but sought payment of the debt, so it should be treated as a collection case regardless of its label. The Supreme Court ruled that the allegations in the complaint determine the nature of the case over its title. Hirakawa had a cause of action against the respondents for collection of the unpaid debt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Naoaki Hirakawa represented by Erica M. Shibamura Vs.

    Lopzcom
    Realty Corporation and Atty. Gari M. Tiongco
    G.R No. 213230, December 5, 2019

    Lazaro-Javier, J.

    Case Doctrine: Allegations in the body of the pleading or the complaint,


    and not its title or nomenclature, determine the nature of an action,
    irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon the
    claims asserted.

    Facts: Lopzcom Realty Corporation is a domestic corporation engaged in


    realty development while Atty. Gari Tiongco is its President and Chariman.
    Naoaki Hirakawa is a Japanese National represented by his agent Erica
    Shibamura. Hirakawa alleged that sold to Lopzcom for Php 100,000,000 a
    92-hectare subdivision project (Windfields Subdivision) in Cebu City. As
    payment, Tiongco delivered to Sakai 9 Westmont Bank postdated personal
    checks. Sakai assigned, transferred and conveyed to Hirakawa all his
    rights and interest on the 4 out of 9 checks, total of Php 65,000,000. Upon
    encashment of the first check, Hirakawa requested Lopzcom and Tiongco
    to replace remaining checks with new ones to which they acceded, drawn
    against Tiongco’s personal account in PDCP. When it became due, the
    checks were dishonored because the account was already closed. On
    February 9, 1999, Lopzcom executed the Deed of Assignment of a golf
    course project in favor of Hirakawa. After 3 years. Hirakawa discovered that
    the golf course was never developed. He was compelled to demand that
    Tiongco pay their outstanding obligation wherein 2 PNB postdated checks
    were issued but it remained unfunded.

    On March 22, 2010, Hirakawa served respondents a final Notice of


    Demand for Payment amounting to Php 60,000,000 but they still failed to
    pay. Hirakawa sued them for Breach of Contract and Attachment before the
    Regional Trial Court. RTC issued an ex-parte writ of preliminary
    attachment. Respondents filed an Urgent Motion to Quash the said writ.
    Subsequently, they filed an undated Motion to Dismiss the complaint ont
    grounds that not being a party to subject contract, Hirakawa had no cause
    of action against them and that he had no legal capacity to file suit.

    Issue: Whether or not CA gravely err in dismissing the complaint due to


    Hirakawa’s lack of cause of action against respondents

    Held: Yes. The cause or causes of action ultimately seeks payment of


    respondent’s indebtedness and claim for damages allegedly suffered by
    Hirakawa because of respondents’ failure or refusal to settle their
    obligation. Allegations in the body of the pleading or the complaint, and not
    its title or nomenclature, determine the nature of an action, irrespective of
    whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon the claims asserted.
    Although the complaint was erroneously denominated as breach of
    contract, the allegations and the relief sought are plainly for collection of
    sum of money. Hirakawa is simply asking for the payment of the calue of
    the checks assigned to him and does not ask for rescission of contrat or
    restoration of things. Rules of procedure may be relaxed to relieve a party
    of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of noncompliance with
    the process required.

    You might also like