Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    Tan Vs Republic, 573 Scra 89 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Mac
    This case involves a complaint filed by the Bureau of Customs against Mannequin International Corporation for unpaid duties and taxes. Genoveva Tan was included as a defendant in an amended complaint. The trial court granted Tan's motion to be excluded from the case. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding the trial court abused its discretion. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Tan participated fully in the Court of Appeals proceedings and could not later question the outcome after it was unfavorable to her.

    Copyright:

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

    Tan Vs Republic, 573 Scra 89 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Mac
    40 views2 pages
    This case involves a complaint filed by the Bureau of Customs against Mannequin International Corporation for unpaid duties and taxes. Genoveva Tan was included as a defendant in an amended complaint. The trial court granted Tan's motion to be excluded from the case. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding the trial court abused its discretion. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Tan participated fully in the Court of Appeals proceedings and could not later question the outcome after it was unfavorable to her.

    Original Description:

    Evidence

    Original Title

    TAN v REP

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a complaint filed by the Bureau of Customs against Mannequin International Corporation for unpaid duties and taxes. Genoveva Tan was included as a defendant in an amended complaint. The trial court granted Tan's motion to be excluded from the case. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding the trial court abused its discretion. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Tan participated fully in the Court of Appeals proceedings and could not later question the outcome after it was unfavorable to her.

    Copyright:

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

    Tan Vs Republic, 573 Scra 89 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Mac
    This case involves a complaint filed by the Bureau of Customs against Mannequin International Corporation for unpaid duties and taxes. Genoveva Tan was included as a defendant in an amended complaint. The trial court granted Tan's motion to be excluded from the case. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding the trial court abused its discretion. The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Tan participated fully in the Court of Appeals proceedings and could not later question the outcome after it was unfavorable to her.

    Copyright:

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

    TAN VS REPUBLIC, 573 SCRA 89

    FACTS:

    In 2002, the Republic, through the Bureau of Customs, filed an Amended


    Complaint for collection of sum of money with damages and prayer for injunctive writ
    against Mannequin International Corporation before the Regional Trial Court of Manila,
    on the cause of action that Mannequin paid its 1995-1997 duties and taxes using spurious
    Tax Credit Certificates amounting to P55,664,027.00. The case was docketed as Civil
    Case No. 02-102639 and assigned to Branch 8 of the Manila RTC. The original
    complaint was amended to include other individuals - among them Genoveva P. Tan - as
    one of the defendants.

    After the Republic rested its case, Genoveva filed a demurrer to evidence
    followed by an urgent manifestation with leave of court to allow her to change the
    caption of her demurrer to that of a motion to exclude and drop her from the case and/or
    dismiss the same as against her.

    The Manila RTC granted Genoveva’s urgent manifestation and treated her
    demurrer as a motion to exclude/drop her from the case.

    Subsequently, in a July 1, 2010 Order, the trial court resolved to grant Genoveva’s
    motion to exclude.

    The Republic thus filed an original Petition for Certiorari with the CA, docketed
    as CA- G.R. SP No. 118442, on the contention that the Manila RTC committed grave
    abuse of discretion in granting Genoveva’s motion to exclude/drop her from the case.

    In a March 30, 2011 Resolution, the CA dismissed the petition for being tardy and
    for failing to attach thereto relevant documents and pleadings. But, on motion for
    reconsideration, the petition was reinstated. Genoveva took no action to question the
    reinstatement.

    On July 29, 2013, the CA issued the assailed Decision granting the Republic's
    Petition for Certiorari. The instant Petition was thus instituted.

    On December 31, 2016, Genoveva passed away at the age of 82. Her heirs are
    thus properly substituted in these proceedings.
    ISSUES:

    Whether or not Genoveva should be dropped from the case.

    HELD:

    No. The facts reveal that when the CA overturned its own March 30, 2011
    Resolution dismissing the Republic's Petition for Certiorari for being tardy and lacking in
    the requisite attachments and thus reinstated the same, Genoveva took no action to
    question the reinstatement. She did not move to reconsider; nor did she come to this
    Court for succor. Instead, she allowed the proceedings before the CA to continue, and is
    only now - at this stage - raising the propriety of the reinstatement, after participating in
    the whole process before the CA. This cannot be countenanced. As correctly ruled by the
    CA, Genoveva may not, after participating in the proceedings before it, later question its
    disposition when it turns out to be unfavorable to her cause.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy