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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 117 views

    Irr - Ra 7942

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Honorico
    1) Insular Savings Bank filed a petition for review with the Regional Trial Court challenging a decision by the Philippine Clearing House Corporation's Arbitration Committee in favor of Far East Bank and Trust Company. 2) The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, stating it should have been filed as a separate case. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that while the Regional Trial Court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, it should have been filed with the Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court, not as a separate case. The Regional Trial Court does not have jurisdiction over petitions for review of arbitration decisions.

    Copyright:

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

    Irr - Ra 7942

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Honorico
    117 views6 pages
    1) Insular Savings Bank filed a petition for review with the Regional Trial Court challenging a decision by the Philippine Clearing House Corporation's Arbitration Committee in favor of Far East Bank and Trust Company. 2) The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, stating it should have been filed as a separate case. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that while the Regional Trial Court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, it should have been filed with the Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court, not as a separate case. The Regional Trial Court does not have jurisdiction over petitions for review of arbitration decisions.

    Original Description:

    law

    Original Title

    IRR- RA 7942

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Insular Savings Bank filed a petition for review with the Regional Trial Court challenging a decision by the Philippine Clearing House Corporation's Arbitration Committee in favor of Far East Bank and Trust Company. 2) The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, stating it should have been filed as a separate case. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that while the Regional Trial Court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, it should have been filed with the Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court, not as a separate case. The Regional Trial Court does not have jurisdiction over petitions for review of arbitration decisions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    117 views6 pages

    Irr - Ra 7942

    Uploaded by

    Ralph Honorico
    1) Insular Savings Bank filed a petition for review with the Regional Trial Court challenging a decision by the Philippine Clearing House Corporation's Arbitration Committee in favor of Far East Bank and Trust Company. 2) The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, stating it should have been filed as a separate case. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that while the Regional Trial Court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction, it should have been filed with the Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court, not as a separate case. The Regional Trial Court does not have jurisdiction over petitions for review of arbitration decisions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 6

    Insular Savings Bank vs.

    Far
    East Bank and Trust
    Company
    G.R. No. 141818
    June 22, 2006
    Facts

    Philippine Clearing House


    Corporation’s Arbitration Regional Trial Court (Makati)
    Committee Civil Case No. 92-145

    Far East Bank and Trust Company Far East Bank and Trust Company

    Complaint
    Complaint

    Home Bankers Trust and Company Home Bankers Trust and Company
    and its president and depositors
    Regional Trial Court (Makati)
    Arbitration Committee
    Civil Case No. 92-145

     Decided in favor of Far East Bank  Insular Savings Bank filed a


    and Trust Company. PETITION FOR REVIEW in the earlier
     A motion for reconsideration was case filed by Far East Bank and
    filed by Insular Savings bank but it Trust Company.
    was denied

     The Regional Trial Court dismissed


    the petition of Insular Savings
    bank for lack of jurisdiction on the
    ground that it should have been
    docketed as a separate case
    ISSUE

    Whether or not the Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over the petition for
    review filed by Insular Savings bank?

    NO
    Ruling
     Proper recourse of Insular Saving Bank from the denial of its motion for
    reconsideration by the Arbitration Committee is to file either:
    1. A motion to vacate the arbitral award with the RTC;
    2. A petition for review with the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court; or
    3. A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

     In the case at bar, Insular Savings Bank filed a petition for review with the RTC when
    the same should have been filed with the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the
    Rules of Court.
     The RTC is correct in dismissing the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction but not
    on the ground that petitioner should have filed a separate case but on the necessity
    of the filing the correct petition in the proper court
     Court of Appeals retains jurisdiction in petitions for review or in petitions for
    certiorari.

     Therefore, the RTC has no jurisdiction over the petition for review filed by
    Insular Savings Bank.

    You might also like