Decision
Hongkong And Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited v. Catalan
G.R. No. 159590 · 2004-10-18 · AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. · LawPhil
HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED, petitioner, vs. CECILIA DIEZ CATALAN, respondent. x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x G.R. No. 159591 October 18, 2004 HSBC INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEE LIMITED, petitioner, vs. CECILIA DIEZ CATALAN, respondent.
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.:
Before us are two petitions for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court separately filed by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (HSBANK) and HSBC International Trustee Limited (HSBC TRUSTEE). They seek the reversal of the consolidated Decision,1 dated August 14, 2003, of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP Nos. 75756 and 75757, which dismissed the petitions for certiorari of herein petitioners assailing the Order, dated May 15, 2002, of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 44, Bacolod City (RTC) in Civil Case No. 01-11372 that denied their respective motions to dismiss the amended complaint of respondent Cecilia Diez Catalan. The factual antecedents are as follows: On January 29, 2001, respondent filed before the RTC, a complaint for a sum of money with damages against petitioner HSBANK, docketed as Civil Case No. 01-11372, due to HSBANK's alleged wanton refusal to pay her the value of five HSBANK checks issued by Frederick Arthur Thomson (Thomson) amounting to HK$3,200,000.00.2 On February 7, 2001, summons was served on HSBANK at the Enterprise Center, Tower I, Ayala Avenue corner Paseo de Roxas St., Makati City.3 HSBANK filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer or Motion to Dismiss dated February 21, 2001.4 Then, it filed a Motion to Dismiss, dated March 8, 2001, on the grounds that (a) the RTC has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint; (b) the RTC has not acquired jurisdiction for failure of the plaintiff to pay the correct filing or docket fees; (c) the RTC has no jurisdiction over the person of HSBANK; (d) the complaint does not state a cause of action against HSBANK; and (e) plaintiff engages in forum-shopping.5 On September 10, 2001, Catalan filed an Amended Complaint impleading petitioner HSBC TRUSTEE as co-defendant and invoking Article 19 of the Civil Code as basis for her cause of action.6 The Amended Complaint alleges: Defendants HSBANK and HSBC TRUSTEE, doing business in the Philippines, are corporations duly organized under the laws of the British Virgin Islands with head office at 1 Grenville Street, St.
Helier Jersey, Channel Islands and with branch offices at Level 12, 1 Queen's Road Central, Hongkong and may be served with summons and other court processes through their main office in Manila with address at HSBC, the Enterprise Center, Tower 1, Ayala Avenue corner Paseo de Roxas Street, Makati City. Sometime in March 1997, Thomson issued five HSBANK checks payable to Catalan, to wit: CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 807852 Mar.
15, 1997 $600,000.00 807853 Mar. 17, 1997 800,000.00 807854 Mar. 17, 1997 600,000.00 807855 Mar.
22, 1997 600,000.00 807856 Mar. 23, 1997 600,000.00 TOTAL