Scribd
Upload
47 views1 page

Facts:: Graciano Borja vs. Mamerto Roxas & Jose de Borja

The document discusses a case between Graciano Borja and Mamerto Roxas & Jose de Borja regarding a disputed insurance payout following the destruction of a rice mill by fire. At a pre-trial conference, it was agreed that P8,305 would be deposited with the clerk of court pending the outcome of the case, but the court later ordered the money released to Jose de Borja. The Supreme Court ruled that this order contravened the pre-trial agreement.

Uploaded by

Janine Castro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views1 page

Facts:: Graciano Borja vs. Mamerto Roxas & Jose de Borja

The document discusses a case between Graciano Borja and Mamerto Roxas & Jose de Borja regarding a disputed insurance payout following the destruction of a rice mill by fire. At a pre-trial conference, it was agreed that P8,305 would be deposited with the clerk of court pending the outcome of the case, but the court later ordered the money released to Jose de Borja. The Supreme Court ruled that this order contravened the pre-trial agreement.

Uploaded by

Janine Castro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Graciano Borja vs.

Mamerto Roxas & Jose de Borja

FACTS: Jose de Borja brought a suit against the National Union Fire Insurance Co. to recover
an insurance indemnity of P20,000 after the destruction by fire of a rice mill and warehouse.
Petitioner Graciano Borja as administrator of the estate of Luis Borja intervened, claiming one-
half of said indemnity, because, he alleged, the property insured belonged to a partnership
composed of Jose de Borja and the deceased Luis Borja.

At the pre-trial, it was agreed that the insurance company would pay P15,000 in full payment of
the policy, and would renounce its claim for P1,610 the proceeds of the goods saved from the
fire. It was further agreed that, pending decision of the court on the claim of intervenor, Graciano
Borja, the amount of P8,305 should be deposited in the office of the Clerk of Court.

However, on motion of respondent Jose de Borja and over the objection of petitioner the Court
of First Instance ordered that the amount thus deposited with the Clerk of Court be turned over
to respondent Jose de Borja after the filing of a bond conditioned upon the payment of said sum
to intervenor in case final judgment should be rendered in favor of the latter. It is this order of
the court that is impugned by petitioner.

ISSUE: Whether or not the CFI could authorize the Clerk of Court to deliver the sum of P8,305
to respondent Jose de Borja upon filing of bond by the latter.?

RULING: NO. In pre-trial, agreements reached thereat may not be lightly disturbed. It was
agreed at a pre-trial that the amount of P8,305 be deposited in the office of the Clerk of Court.
The court below acted improperly in ordering that the said amount be delivered to the
respondent even upon the filing of a bond. Such order contravened the compromise entered
into by the parties at the pre-trial.

Under rule 25, section 1 of the new Rules of Court, the agreement reached at the pre-trial,
approved in an order of the court cannot be altered because "such order when entered controls
the subsequent course of the action, unless modified at the trial to prevent manifest injustice."
Save in extraordinary situations, pre-trial agreements should not be disturbed. Pre-trial
conferences should be encouraged because they bring the parties together, thus making
possible an amicable settlement, or at least the nonessentials of a case are done away with
from the beginning.

Petition granted.

You might also like