Summary Judgment Distinguished From Judgment On The Pleadings

Benjamin Castillo was the registered owner of a parcel of land located in Laurel, Batangas, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-19972. The Philippine Tourism Authority allegedly claimed ownership of the same parcel of land based on Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-18493. On April 5, 2000, Castillo and Olivarez Realty Corporation, represented by Dr. Pablo R. Olivarez, entered into a contract of conditional sale over the property. Under the deed of conditional sale, Castillo agreed to sell his property to Olivarez Realty Corporation for P19,080,490.00 and Olivarez Realty Corporation assumes the responsibility of taking necessary legal action thru Court to have the claim/title TCT T-18493 of Philippine Tourism Authority over the above-described property be nullified and voided with the full assistance of Castillo.

On September 2, 2004, Castillo filed a complaint for action for rescission against Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez with the Regional Trial Court of Tanauan City, Batangas. Castillo alleged that Dr. Olivarez convinced him into selling his property to Olivarez Realty Corporation on the representation that the corporation shall be responsible in clearing the property of the tenants and in paying them disturbance compensation. However, the corporation only paid 2,500,000.00 of the purchase price and failed to comply the terms of the conditional sale. Despite demand, Olivarez Realty Corporation refused to fully pay the purchase price.

In their answer, Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez admitted that the corporation only paid P2,500,000.00 of the purchase price. In their defense, defendants alleged that Castillo failed to "fully assist" the corporation in filing an action against the Philippine Tourism Authority. Neither did Castillo clear the property of the tenants within six months from the signing of the deed of conditional sale.

On March 8, 2006, Castillo filed a motion for summary judgment and/or judgment on the pleadings. He argued that Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez "substantially admitted the material allegations of his complaint." Should judgment on the pleadings be improper, Castillo argued that summary judgment may still be rendered as there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.

The trial court found that Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez’s answer "substantially admitted the material allegations of Castillo’s complaint and did not raise any genuine issue as to any material fact." Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez appealed to the Court of Appeals which affirmed in toto the trial court’s decision. Hence, this petition for review on certiorari.

ISSUE:

Is summary judgment rendered the Regional Trial Court correct?

RULING:

The summary judgment is correct. An issue of material fact exists if the answer or responsive pleading filed specifically denies the material allegations of fact set forth in the complaint or pleading. If the issue of fact "requires the presentation of evidence, it is a genuine issue of fact." However, if the issue "could be resolved judiciously by plain resort" to the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and other paperson file, the issue of fact raised is sham, and the trial court may resolve the action through summary judgment.

A summary judgment is usually distinguished from a judgment on the pleadings. Under Rule 34 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, trial may likewise be dispensed with and a case decided through judgment on the pleadings if the answer filed fails to tender an issue or otherwise admits the material allegations of the claimant’s pleading.

Judgment on the pleadings is proper when the answer filed fails to tender any issue, or otherwise admits the material allegations in the complaint. On the other hand, in a summary judgment, the answer filed tenders issues as specific denials and affirmative defenses are pleaded, but the issues raised are sham, fictitious, or otherwise not genuine.

In this case, Olivarez Realty Corporation admitted that it did not fully pay the purchase price as agreed upon in the deed of conditional sale. As to why it withheld payments from Castillo, it set up the following affirmative defenses: First, Castillo did not file a case to void the Philippine Tourism Authority’s title to the property; second, Castillo did not clear the land of the tenants; third, Castillo allegedly sold the property to a third person, and the subsequent sale is currently being litigated beforea Quezon City court.

Considering that Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez’s answer tendered an issue, Castillo properly availed himself of a motion for summary judgment. However, the issues tendered by Olivarez Realty Corporation and Dr. Olivarez’s answer are not genuine issues of material fact. These are issues that can be resolved judiciously by plain resort to the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and other papers on file; otherwise, these issues are sham, fictitious, or patently unsubstantial.

Castillo’s alleged failure to "fully assist" the corporation in filing the case is not a defense. As the trial court said, "how can Castillo assist the corporation when the latter did not file the action in the first place?"

Neither can Olivarez Realty Corporation argue that it refused to fully pay the purchase price due to the Philippine Tourism Authority’s adverse claim on the property. The corporation knew of this adverse claim when it entered into a contract of conditional sale. It even obligated itself under the deed of conditional sale to sue the Philippine Tourism Authority. This defense, therefore, is sham.

As demonstrated, there are no genuine issues of material fact in this case. These are issues that can be resolved judiciously by plain resort to the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and other papers on file. As the trial court found, Olivarez Realty Corporation illegally withheld payments of the purchase price. The trial court did not err in rendering summary judgment.

G.R. No. 196251, July 9, 2014

OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION and DR. PABLO R. OLIVAREZ, Petitioner, vs. BENJAMIN CASTILLO, Respondent.

LEONEN,J.

The author takes no responsibility for the validity, correctness and result of this work. The information provided is not a legal advice and it should not be used as a substitute for a competent legal advice from a licensed lawyer. See the disclaimer

Neil Christian

I want to share to you my knowledge about law, our travels with my family, success principles as well as healthy insights. I hope you will enjoy and learn from my blog.