Silangan Textile Manufacturing Corp. vs.
Demetria
G.R. No. 166719
Mar 11, 2007
The Supreme Court grants the petition and reverses the decision of the Court of Appeals, dismissing the
civil case and lifting the attachment over Silangan Textile Manufacturing Corporation's properties due to
forum shopping, separate civil liability of the accused individuals, and the dismissal of the main action.
Facts:
Luzon Spinning Mills, Incorporated (LSMI) filed a Complaint for Collection of Sum of Money
against Silangan Textile Manufacturing Corporation (STMC) on August 23, 2000.
LSMI claimed that from November 19, 1998, to June 14, 1999, Anita, Jimmy, and Benito Silangan,
as stockholders and officers of STMC, ordered 111,161.60 kilograms of yarn valued at
P9,999,845.00.
The yarn was delivered to STMC's office, evidenced by delivery receipts.
STMC issued 34 postdated checks totaling P9,999,845.00, some of which were dishonored due
to insufficient funds.
LSMI demanded payment, but STMC failed to comply, prompting the filing of the Complaint.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) issued a writ of preliminary attachment against STMC's properties.
STMC moved to dismiss the civil Complaint, citing forum shopping and the existence of criminal
cases for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (BP 22) against the Silangans.
The RTC denied STMC's motion, leading STMC to elevate the case to the Court of Appeals, which
also dismissed their petition.
STMC then filed a petition with the Supreme Court.
Issue:
1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming that the certification against forum shopping is
inapplicable in this case.
2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the application of Section 1(b), Rule 111 of the
2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
3. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the issuance of the writ of preliminary
attachment in favor of LSMI.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court granted the petition.
The decision of the Court of Appeals was reversed.
Civil Case No. 00-0420 before the RTC of Lipa City, Branch 85, was dismissed.
The attachment over STMC's properties was ordered lifted.
Ratio:
The Supreme Court determined that the civil action for the collection of the sum of money was
deemed instituted in the criminal cases for violation of BP 22 filed against the Silangans.
The Court emphasized that the criminal action for BP 22 necessarily includes the corresponding
civil action, and no separate civil action should be allowed.
This rule aims to prevent creditors from using the threat of criminal prosecution to collect debts
without paying filing fees.
The Court cited "Hyatt Industrial Manufacturing Corporation v. Asia Dynamic Electrix
Corporation," which held that civil actions arising from the issuance of bouncing checks are
deemed included in the criminal cases filed against the corporate officers.
The Court noted that the writ of preliminary attachment is an ancillary remedy dependent on
the main action.
Since the main action (Civil Case No. 00-0420) was dismissed, the writ of preliminary attachment
must also be lifted.
