G.R. No. 148483. June 29, 2011.
BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS, Petitioner, vs. ORIENT COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, JOSE C. GO, GEORGE C. GO, VICENTE C. GO, GOTESCO PROPERTIES, INC., GO TONG ELECTRICAL SUPPLY INC., EVER EMPORIUM, INC., EVER GOTESCO RESOURCES AND HOLDINGS INC., GOTESCO TYAN MING DEVELOPMENT INC., EVERCREST CEBU GOLF CLUB AND RESORTS, INC., NASUGBU RESORTS INC., GMCC UNITED DEVELOPMENT CORP., GULOD RESORT, INC., OK STAR, EVER PLAZA, INC. AND EVER ELECTRICAL MFG., INC., Respondents.

FACTS

On February 13, 1998, respondent Orient Commercial Banking Corporation (OCBC) declared a bank holiday due to its inability to pay obligations to depositors, creditors, and petitioner Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). The Monetary Board placed OCBC under receivership with the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC) as Receiver. On May 7, 1999, the Monetary Board directed the liquidation of OCBC. On December 17, 1999, BSP filed a complaint for sum of money with preliminary attachment (Civil Case No. 99-95993) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 12, against OCBC and the individual and corporate respondents (principally the Go family and their affiliate companies) to recover a deficiency obligation of over ₱2.3 billion. The RTC granted the application for a writ of preliminary attachment. Respondents challenged the RTC’s orders via a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 60509. On June 11, 2001, the CA rendered a decision nullifying the writs of preliminary attachment and ordering the dismissal of the amended complaint against all respondents except Jose C. Go, Vicente C. Go, and George C. Go. BSP filed the instant petition before the Supreme Court, initially treated as one for certiorari but considered as a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, seeking to annul the CA decision. During the pendency of the petition, on December 16, 2003, the parties executed a Compromise Agreement to settle their differences. The Compromise Agreement, approved by the RTC of Manila, Branch 12 on December 29, 2003, provided for the dismissal of nineteen (19) pending civil cases, including the instant case (G.R. No. 148483), CA-G.R. SP No. 60509, and Civil Case No. 99-95993, in consideration of respondents’ payment of OCBC’s total deficiency obligation of ₱2,974,903,000.00 through a dacion en pago of properties and a ten-year amortization plan with interest.

ISSUE

Whether the petition has been rendered moot and academic by the execution and court approval of a Compromise Agreement between the parties.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court DENIED the petition for being moot and academic. The Court held that a case becomes moot and academic when there is no more actual controversy between the parties or no useful purpose can be served in passing upon the merits. The execution of the Compromise Agreement, which stipulated the dismissal of the instant petition and other related cases, and its approval by the RTC, effectively removed any actual substantial relief to which BSP would be entitled. The issues raised in the petition regarding the propriety of the writ of attachment and the dismissal of the complaint against some respondents were superseded by the parties’ settlement. Consequently, the Court remanded the case to the RTC of Manila, Branch 12, for continuation of proceedings to implement the approved Compromise Agreement in Civil Case No. 99-95993. No costs were awarded.