Facts:
You are the counsel of ABC Corporation, a domestic juridical entity engaged in the
business of textile manufacturing. In order to finance its business, ABC Corporation obtained a
loan from Babylon Bank in the amount of Ten Million Pesos on 10 October 2022, payable on or
before 10 October 2023. As security for the loan, Juan Dela Cruz, President and Chief Executive
Officer of ABC Corporation, executed a real estate mortgage on 10 October 2022 over his
condominium unit at The Ridge Residences (Unit 2021), located in Mandaluyong City, in favor of
Babylon Bank. In addition, Juan Dela Cruz and Juana Santos, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
of ABC Corporation, executed a Joint Deed of Suretyship on 10 October 2022 where they bound
themselves solidarily liable with ABC Corporation as regards the latter’s loan from Babylon Bank.
ABC Corporation eventually defaulted in the payment of its loan and despite extensions
given by Babylon Bank, no payment was made. As a result, Babylon Bank extrajudicially foreclosed
on the real estate mortgage and was declared the winning bidder. A Certificate of Sale dated 20
October 2023 was issued to Babylon Bank. However, considering that the foreclosure sale was
unable to cover the total obligation of ABC Corporation, Babylon Bank instituted a complaint for
sum of money against ABC Corporation, Juan Dela Cruz, and Juana Santos, before the Regional
Trial Court of Mandaluyong City on 03 November 2023 demanding the payment of Three Million
Pesos representing the deficiency amount from the foreclosure sale. After the complaint was
filed, corresponding summonses were issued and the sheriff sought to personally serve the same
on ABC Corporation, Juan Dela Cruz, and Juana Santos.
Based on the Sheriff’s Return dated 05 December 2023, the sheriff sought to personally
serve the summonses to ABC Corporation, Juan Dela Cruz, and Juana Santos on 06, 12, and 18
November 2023 but was unable to do so due to the following reasons: (a) there was no corporate
officer present at the principal office address of ABC Corporation; (b) the security guard of the
subdivision where Juan Dela Cruz supposedly resided informed the sheriff that he no longer lived
there and when the sheriff requested entry into the subdivision to verify the same, he was not
allowed to do so; and (c) the neighbors of Juana Santos confirmed that she lived there but stated
that she was not there during the dates the sheriff visited her residence. As a result, the sheriff,
on 20 November 2023, served the summonses on Lydia Cruz, the secretary of Juana Santos, at
the principal office of ABC Corporation. Before the sheriff had the summonses received by Lydia
Cruz, he confirmed that Lydia Cruz was instructed by Juana Santos to receive the summonses on
behalf of herself, Juan Dela Cruz, and ABC Corporation.
Having learned of the same, you as counsel of ABC Corporation, filed a motion to dismiss
by way of special appearance on 22 November 2023, alleging that the trial court did not acquire
jurisdiction over the persons of ABC Corporation, Juan Dela Cruz, and Juana Santos due to
improper service of summons. In an Order dated 01 December 2023, which you received on 03
December 2023, the RTC denied your motion ruling that there was proper service of summons
since Lydia Cruz was authorized by Juana Santos, the treasurer of ABC Corporation, to receive the
summons and there was valid substituted service of summons on Juan Dela Cruz and Juana Santos
considering that personal service of summons was held to be impossible. On 10 December 2023,
you filed a motion for reconsideration reiterating that Lydia Cruz is not among the persons
enumerated under the Rules of Court authorized to receive summons on behalf of a corporation
and the substituted service of summons on Juan Dela Cruz and Juana Santos was improper for
not having been received by a competent person in their respective residences. In an Order dated
22 December 2023, which you received on 27 December 2023, the trial court denied the motion
ruling that such arguments were already resolved in its earlier order. Aggrieved, you filed a
petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals imputing grave abuse of discretion on the trial
court judge for issuing the Orders dated 01 and 22 December 2023.
Instructions:
Prepare the necessary petition for certiorari. You may provide the personal circumstances
of the parties. As for the public respondent, you are free to indicate who the same is. Deadline of
submission is at 11:59 pm of 13 January 2024. The beadle should send the link of your Google
Drive folder not later than 12:30 am of 14 January 2024. Make sure to enable my access to your
folders. NO FINAL REQUIREMENT MEANS AUTOMATIC INC.