Davao Light & Power Co. Inc.

v CA (204 SCRA 343)

Facts:
Davao Light and Power Inc, Co. filed a complaint for recovery of sum of money and damages
against Queensland otel and !eodorico "darna. !he complaint contained an e# parte
application for a writ of preliminary attachment.
$udge %artate& granted the writ and fi#ed the attachment 'ond at around P()illion. !he
summons, copy of complaint, writ of attachment, copy of attachment 'ond were served upon
Queensland and "darna. Pursuant to the writ, the *heriff sei&ed the properties of the latter.
Queensland and "darna filed a motion to discharge the attachment for lac+ of ,urisdiction to
issue the same 'ecause at the time the order of attachment was promulgated -)ay ., /0102
and the attachment writ issued -)ay //,/0102, the !rial Court had not yet ac3uired ,urisdiction
over cause and person of defendants.
!rial Court denied the motion to discharge.
C" annulled the !rial Court4s 5rder. Davao see+s to reverse C"4s order.
Issue:
6hether or not preliminary attachment may issue e# parte against a defendant 'efore ac3uiring
,urisdiction over his person.
eld:
Yes. 7ule 89 spea+s of the grant of the remedy :at the commencement of the action or at any
time thereafter; 6hat the rule is saying is that after an action is properly commenced -'y filing of
the complaint and payment of all re3uisite doc+et and other fees2, the plaintiff may apply for and
o'tain a writ of preliminary attachment. !his he may do so, 'efore or after, the summons to the
defendant.
!he C" decision is reversed and the writ of attachment issued 'y $udge %artate& is reinstated.
<<
Preliminary "ttachment = provisional remedy in virtue of which a plaintiff or other party may, at
the commencement of the action or at any time thereafter, have the property of the adverse
party ta+en into custody of court as security for satisfaction of ,udgment to 'e recovered.
%ature of "ttachment: a remedy which is purely statutory in respect of which the law re3uires a
strict of construction of the provisions granting it. %o principle, whether statutory or through
,urisprudence, prohi'its its issuance 'y any court 'efore the ac3uisition of ,urisdiction over the
person.