GR 162894; (February, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 162894 ; February 26, 2008
RAYTHEON INTERNATIONAL, INC., petitioner, vs. STOCKTON W. ROUZIE, JR., respondent.
FACTS
Respondent Stockton W. Rouzie, Jr., an American citizen, entered into a contract with Brand Marine Services, Inc. (BMSI), a Connecticut corporation, to negotiate service contracts in the Philippines for a commission. He secured a dredging contract for BMSI with the Philippine government. After an unsuccessful labor case against BMSI and Rust International, Inc. (RUST) for unpaid commissions, which was dismissed by the NLRC for lack of jurisdiction, Rouzie filed a civil action for damages in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bauang, La Union. He impleaded petitioner Raytheon International, Inc., alleging it had combined with BMSI and RUST as one company, thereby assuming the obligation to pay his commissions.
Petitioner Raytheon, a foreign corporation licensed in the Philippines, moved to dismiss the complaint on grounds of failure to state a cause of action and forum non conveniens, arguing the contract was governed by Connecticut law. The RTC denied the motion, holding the allegations sufficed for a valid judgment and that forum non conveniens was inapplicable as Raytheon was licensed to do business locally. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s denial of the petition for certiorari, prompting Raytheon’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in refusing to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action and on the ground of forum non conveniens.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the appellate court’s decision. On the first issue, the Court held that a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action is limited to the allegations in the complaint. The complaint alleged that Raytheon had combined with BMSI and RUST, functioning as one entity that assumed the obligation to pay Rouzie. Hypothetically admitting these allegations, they constitute a cause of action against Raytheon. The veracity of these corporate combination allegations is a matter of evidence to be fully ventilated during trial, not resolvable in a preliminary motion.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that the principle of forum non conveniens was improperly invoked. Forum non conveniens is a discretionary doctrine where a court may resist imposition upon its jurisdiction if it is not the most convenient or appropriate forum. The RTC validly exercised its discretion in assuming jurisdiction. Raytheon is licensed to do business in the Philippines, subjecting it to Philippine courts’ jurisdiction. Moreover, significant aspects of the case—the negotiation and performance of the dredging contract—occurred in the Philippines. The RTC did not gravely abuse its discretion in finding itself a proper forum to adjudicate the claim. The petition was denied for lack of merit.