Lessons Applicable: forum non conveniens (conflicts of laws)
FACTS:
- Eduardo K. Litonjua, Sr. and Aurelio J. Litonjua (Litonjuas) were engaged in the shipping business owning 2 vessels: Don Aurelio and El Champion
- Because their business where doing well, Bank of America (BA) offered them to take a loan for them to increase their ships.
- BA acquired through them as borrowers four more ships: (a) El Carrier; (b) El General; (c) El Challenger; and (d) El Conqueror. The registration, operation, income, funds, possession of the vessel belonged to the corporation.
- May 10, 1993: Litonjuas filed a complaint to the RTC Pasig claming that during its operations and the foreclosure sale, BA as trutees failed to fully render an account of the income. They lost all their 6 vessels and 10% of their personal funds and they still have an unpaid balance of their loans.
- BA NT&SA, and BA international filed a Motion to Dismiss on grounds of forum non conveniens and lack of cause of action against them
- RTC and CA: Dismissed
ISSUE:
1. W/N there is grounds of forum non conveniens
2. W/N there is litis pendentia
1. W/N there is grounds of forum non conveniens
2. W/N there is litis pendentia
HELD: Denied
1. NO.
1. NO.
- The doctrine of forum non-conveniens, literally meaning 'the forum is inconvenient', emerged in private international law to deter the practice of global forum shopping
- Under this doctrine, a court, in conflicts of law cases, may refuse impositions on its jurisdiction where it is not the most "convenient" or available forum and the parties are not precluded from seeking remedies elsewhere.
- Whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed on the basis of said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of the particular case and is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court.
- Philippine Court may assume jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to do so; provided, that the following requisites are met:
- (1) that the Philippine Court is one to which the parties may conveniently resort to; - present
- (2) that the Philippine Court is in a position to make an intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and, - present
- (3) that the Philippine Court has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision - present
- This Court further ruled that while it is within the discretion of the trial court to abstain from assuming jurisdiction on this ground, it should do so only after vital facts are established, to determine whether special circumstances require the court's desistance; and that the propriety of dismissing a case based on this principle of forum non conveniens requires a factual determination, hence it is more properly considered a matter of defense
2. NO.
- litis pendentia to be a ground for the dismissal of an action there must be:
- (a) identity of the parties or at least such as to represent the same interest in both actions -present
- (b) identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same acts - not shown
- (c) the identity in the two cases should be such that the judgment which may be rendered in one would, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in the other - not shown
- It merely mentioned that civil cases were filed in Hongkong and England