You are on page 1of 3

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
City of Makati
Branch 145
MA. LEONORA JACINTA J. LIMBO,
Plaintiff,
-

Versus -

Civil Case No. 13-848

MARIBEL J. RIVERA
JOSEPH J. RIVERA and the
Office of the Register of Deeds of Makati,
Defendants.
X-----------------------------------X
POSITION PAPER
DEFENDANT MARIBEL RIVERA and unto this Honorable Court, in compliance with
the Order of this Honorable Court dated April 27, 2015 herewith respectfully states, viz:
1.

The issue on discussion is whether or not the instant Complaint may be dismissed for
plaintiffs alleged failure to state the assessed value of the properties, subject matter

of the case, which is determinative of the jurisdiction of the court;


2. Defendant agrees with this Honorable Court that the case should be dismissed for
plaintiffs failure to allege in the Complaint the assessed value of the real property
(properties) involved in this case, citing the case of Victorino Quinagoran vs. Court of
Appeals and the Heirs of Juan dela Cruz, G.R. No. 155179, August 24, 2007, which is
determinative of jurisdiction. Absent any allegation of the assessed value of the
property, the court would not know whether or not it has jurisdiction to try the case
based on the jurisdictional threshold of the value of the property of P50,000.00 below
or above;
3. It would be error on the part of the court to merely assume that the property is above
the P50,000.00 threshold conferring jurisdiction on the Regional Trial Court. Thus,
we agree with the Honorable Court that the failure of the plaintiff to allege the
assessed value of the real property renders no option but to dismiss the case, even
moto proprio;
4. The Court is likewise correct that the defect may not be cured by mere amendment,
citing the case of Rosario, et. al. vs. Carandang, et. al. 96 Phil. 845) because in the
first place, the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter in view of the absence
of its assessed value. And since it has no jurisdiction, the court cannot entertain any
amendment thereto;

Page 02.

5. While the dismissal is without prejudice and the case may be refiled anew with the
proper allegations of the properties assessed valuations, plaintiff must likewise pay
the proper legal fees for the filing not merely based on the assessed value issued by
the city assessors office but rather it must be based on the properties zonal valuation.
6. As the two properties have zonal values of at least 9 to 15 million considering their
locations in J.P. Rizal and in Agno Street, both in Makati City, the proper payment of
legal fees must be made in accordance to the Supreme Court CircularA.M. No. 042-04-SC amending Rule 141 of the Rules of Court on LEGAL FEES;
7. Section 7 of the said Circular states that in cases involving property, the FAIR MARKET
value of the REAL property in litigation STATED IN THE CURRENT TAX
DECLARATION OR CURRENT ZONAL VALUATION OF THE BUREAU OF
INTERNAL REVENUE, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, OR IF THERE IS NONE, THE
STATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN LITIGATION OR THE VALUE OF THE
PERSONAL PROPERTY IN LITIGATION AS ALLEGED BY THE CLAIMANT shall be
the basis of the assessed fees for the payment of the legal fees in full in accordance with the
table of fees set forth therewith;

8. As per zonal valuation of the Department of Finance in the City of Makati released in
the Department Order No. 63-97 dated June 6, 1997 and pursuant thereto, a zonal
valuation and classification of the different streets/subdivisions in the Makati area
was released CIRCA 1998. it appears therefrom that the zonal value of the properties
situated along JP Rizal would range from P14,500 to P26,000 per square meter while
properties situated along Agno Street have a zonal valuation of P15,000 per square
meter. (Please refer to attachment, Annex A)
9. The property situated in Agno Street has an area of 240 square meter multiplied by
15,000 equals a zonal value of about P3,600,000.00 per 1998 zonal valuation while
the J.P. Rizal property has an area of 279 square meter multiplied by its middle range
of about P20,000 equal a zonal value of about P5,580,000.00 or a total zonal value
of P9,180,000.00 more of less. And this is a conservative amount.;
10. It would be superfluous to question how much legal fees was paid by the plaintiff in
the filing of this case as this is not really the issue now. Rest assured though that
when the Complaint is refiled, defendants would be eager to delve into whether the
zonal valuation was applied and how much legal fees were paid.
WHEREFORE premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable
Court that that the instant case be dismissed by correctly adopting its own pronouncement citing
the pertinent jurisprudence on the matter.
Such other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.

Page 03.
Quezon City for Makati City

May 14, 2015

Atty. MARIA LOURDES PAREDES-GARCIA


Wheels Executive Suites Wheels Building
No. 222 E. Rodriguez Sr., Ave., Quezon City
PTR No. 3114149 January 7, 2015 Rizal
IBP No. 977084 January 7, 2015 Rizal
Roll No. 33476
MCLE Compliance V No. -0001086 November 5, 2013
Tel. Nos. 416-3901; 09209053089
Copy Furnished:
Atty. Antonio M. Dionolo ----------Registered Mail with Return Card
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Rm. 304 MJM Properties Building
650 JP Rizal Street, Makati City
Atty. Floresmindo B. Ramirez ---------- Registered Mail with Return Card
No. 26 Tibeg Street, Amparo Village
Caloocan City, Metro Manila
EXPLANATION
Copies of this Position Paper were sent to above-named counsels thru registered mail
instead of personal service in view of lack of messengerial service to effect one.
Atty. MARIA LOURDES PAREDES-GARCIA