phil ports vs. wg&a

8/13/2019 Phil Ports vs. WG&A

1/3

PHILIPPINE PORTS AUTHORITY versus WILLIAM GOTHONG & ABOITIZ(WG&A), INC.

(G.R. No. !"#$, %'ur ", $$")

*OCTRINE+

The clear import of such amendment in Section 3, Rule 10 is that under the newrules, “the amendment may (now) substantially alter the cause of action ordefense.”

ACTS+

• WG&A is engaged in the shipping industry while PPA is a GOCC created by

PD 87 to operate and administer the country’s sea port acilities!

• "he lease contracted by the #eterans $hipping Corp! o%er the arine $lip

Way in the 'orth (arbor was e)pired! WG&A re*uested PPA or it to allow tolease and operate said acility!

• Pres! +strada issued a emorandum appro%ing the WG&A to lease the

arine $lip Way rom ,anuary - to ,une ./0 1//- or until its turno%er to thehighest bidder or the 'orth (arbor oderni2ation!

• A contract o lease was entered and PPA surrendered possession o arine

$lip Way in a%or o WG&A!

• PPA0 belie%ing that the lease was already e)pired on ,une ./0 sent a letter to

WG&A directing it to %acate the said premises and to turn o%er theimpro%ements thereon!

• 3n response WG&A wrote PPA urging it to reconsider its decision to e4ect the

ormer0 but it was denied by PPA!

•

'o%ember 180 1//- 5 WG&A commenced and 3n4unction $uit beore the 6"C0anila! 3t claimed that PPA un4ustly0 illegally and prematurely terminated thecontract also prayed or the issuance o "6O to arrest the e%acuationreco%ery or damages or breach and attorney’s ees!

• December --0 1//- 5 WG&A AMEN*E* its complaint or the -rs/ /0e0 it

added that the PPA is already es/o11e2 rom denying that the correct periodo the lease is until its turno%er to the highest winning bidder or the 'orth(arbor oderni2ation /3r2 4use o- 4/o' 5 should it be orced to %acate


2/3

the said premises0 it will be e'//5e2 /o 6e re-u'2e2 5 %alue o theimpro%ements! PPA iled its answer!

• RTC 5 denied the "6O! WG&A mo%ed or the reconsideration and iled a

MOTION TO A*MIT ATTACHE* SECON* AMEN*E* COMPLAINT and thecomplaint was already captioned as I'7u'4/o' 8/3 Prer -or Te01orrRes/r''9 Or2er '2:or Wr/ o- Pre50'r I'7u'4/o' '2 209es'2:or -or Re-or0/o' o- Co'/r4/. 3n i ts -our/3 4use o- 4/o' 5reormation o the contract as it ailed to e)press the true intent o the parties!

• "he PPA strongly opposed the admission o the second amended complaint

on the ground that the re-or0/o' o- 4o'/r4/ constitutes su6s/'/50e'20e'/0 which i granted0 will su6s/'/55 5/er the 4use o- 4/o'and the /3eor the case!

• 6"C denied the admission o the second amended complaint! WG&A iled its

6 but also denied! WG&A iled a Petition or Certiorari with the CA!

• CA 5 granted its petition directing the 6"C to admit the second amended

complaint o WG&A pursuant to Se4/o' ;, Ru5e $ o the 6e%ised 6ules oCourt! PPA mo%ed to reconsider but the same was denied!

ISSUE+

WO' the CA erred in ruling that the 6"C committed gra%e abuse o discretionwhen it denied the admission o the second amended complaint

RULING+

'o! "he CA did not err in ruling that the 6"C committed gra%e abuse odiscretion! "he RTC 115e2 /3e o52 $ection .0 6ule -/ o the 6ules o Court! "heapplication o the old 6ules by the 6"C almost i%e 9:; years ater its amendment bythe -


3/3

action or that the cause ofaction or defense issubstantially altered. ) ) )

intent to delay.@

"he ?or /3/ /3e 4use o- 4/o' or 2e-e'se s su6s/'/55 5/ere2= wasstricenBo and not retained in the new rules!

"he 45er 01or/ o such amendment in $ection .0 6ule -/ is that under thenew rules0 >/3e 0e'20e'/ 0 ('o8) su6s/'/55 5/er /3e 4use o- 4/o' or2e-e'se.=

"his is true0 howe%er0 when despite a substantial change or alteration in thecause o action or deense0 the amendments sought to be made shall ser%e the393er '/eres/s o- su6s/'/5 7us/4e0 and 1reve'/ 2e5 and e?u55 1ro0o/ethe laudable ob4ecti%e o the rules which is to secure a ?4ust0 speedy and ine)pensi%e

disposition o e%ery action and proceeding!@

phil ports vs. wg&a

Documents