Motion to Dismiss: Improper Service of Summons and Lack of Jurisdiction, Summaries of Law

A motion to dismiss a complaint filed against a corporation based on the improper service of summons and the lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. The document argues that the service of summons was made on an unauthorized personnel and that the new rules of civil procedure have restricted the service of summons to specific individuals. The document also includes a prayer for the dismissal of the complaint.

Typology: Summaries

2021/2022

Uploaded on 04/04/2022

jeremy-luglug
jeremy-luglug 🇵🇭

3 documents

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
(Motion to Dismiss)
(CAPTION)
MOTION TO DISMISS
COMES NOW the Respondent, _____________ Inc., through the undersigned
counsel, appearing especially and solely for this purpose, and to this
Honorable Court, most respectfully moves for the dismissal of the Complaint
on the following ground that THE HONORABLE COURT HAS NOT ACQUIRED
JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE DEFENDING PARTY.
DISCUSSION
A cursory reading of the Summons and Return of Service would readily show
that the copies of the Summons dated 08 May 2001 and the Complaint and
its corresponding annexes were allegedly delivered and tendered upon the
Movant _____________ INC. through a certain Maria Clara alleged to be the
authorized personnel of Movant _____________ INC., Bacolod City on 29 August
2001. Copies of the said Summons and Return of Service that form part of
the records on the case are hereto pleaded as integral part of this Motion;
9
Said service of Summons, however, constitutes an improper service of
summons amounting to lack of jurisdiction over the person of the herein
Movant Corporation _____________ INC. since the summons was improperly
served upon a person who is not one of those persons named or enumerated
in Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure upon whom
service of summons shall be made;
The material provision on the service of summons provided for in Section 11
of Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure reads as follows:
"Section 11. Service upon domestic private juridical entity.- When the
defendant is a corporation, partnership or association organized under the
laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service may be made on
the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary,
treasurer, or in-house counsel" (underscoring ours)
It bears no further emphasis that the service of the summons was done on a
person who is not included in the exclusive enumeration provided for under
the said Section, as service was done only on an alleged authorized
personnel of the Movant Corporation;
This new revision of the Rules of Court for the service of summon is a clear
departure from the old rule as stated in Section 13, Rule 14 of the Rules of
Court which provided that:
"SECTION 13.Service upon private domestic corporation or partnership. - If
the defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the Philippines or
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download Motion to Dismiss: Improper Service of Summons and Lack of Jurisdiction and more Summaries Law in PDF only on Docsity!

(Motion to Dismiss) (CAPTION) MOTION TO DISMISS COMES NOW the Respondent, _____________ Inc., through the undersigned counsel, appearing especially and solely for this purpose, and to this Honorable Court, most respectfully moves for the dismissal of the Complaint on the following ground that THE HONORABLE COURT HAS NOT ACQUIRED JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE DEFENDING PARTY. DISCUSSION A cursory reading of the Summons and Return of Service would readily show that the copies of the Summons dated 08 May 2001 and the Complaint and its corresponding annexes were allegedly delivered and tendered upon the Movant _____________ INC. through a certain Maria Clara alleged to be the authorized personnel of Movant _____________ INC., Bacolod City on 29 August

  1. Copies of the said Summons and Return of Service that form part of the records on the case are hereto pleaded as integral part of this Motion; Said service of Summons, however, constitutes an improper service of summons amounting to lack of jurisdiction over the person of the herein Movant Corporation _____________ INC. since the summons was improperly served upon a person who is not one of those persons named or enumerated in Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure upon whom service of summons shall be made; The material provision on the service of summons provided for in Section 11 of Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure reads as follows: "Section 11. Service upon domestic private juridical entity.- When the defendant is a corporation, partnership or association organized under the laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service may be made on the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house counsel" (underscoring ours) It bears no further emphasis that the service of the summons was done on a person who is not included in the exclusive enumeration provided for under the said Section, as service was done only on an alleged authorized personnel of the Movant Corporation; This new revision of the Rules of Court for the service of summon is a clear departure from the old rule as stated in Section 13, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court which provided that: "SECTION 13.Service upon private domestic corporation or partnership. - If the defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the Philippines or

a partnership duly registered, service may be made on the president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent, or any of its directors." It must be equally noted that the changes in the new rules are substantial and not just general semantics as the new rules restricted the service of summons on persons clearly enumerated therein. In effect, the new provision makes it more specific and clear such that in the case of the word "manager", it was made more precise and changed to "general manager", "secretary" to "corporate secretary", and excluding therefrom agent and director; The designation of persons or officers who are authorized to accept summons for a domestic corporation or partnership is under the new rules, limited and more clearly specified, departure from which is fatal to the validity of the service of the summons and resulting in the failure of the court to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent corporation. PRAYER WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Complaint with respect to the Movant Corporation be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for. _____________, Philippines, Date. (COUNSEL) (NOTICE OF HEARING) (EXPLANATION) COPY FURNISHED: OPPOSING COUNSEL