G.R. No. 158992; January 26, 2007
Republic of the Philippines and Victor S. Clavel, Petitioners, vs. Spouses Jose and Amelia Luriz, Respondents.

FACTS

Respondents Spouses Luriz filed an ejectment complaint against petitioner Victor Clavel before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Quezon City, claiming ownership over two lots based on a Transfer Certificate of Title and deeds of sale. Clavel, an administrative officer of the Philippine Orthopedic Center (POC), defended his possession by asserting that the lots were owned by the government hospital, which had built cottages thereon since 1953 and authorized its personnel to reside there. The MeTC ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering Clavel to vacate and pay compensation.
Upon receiving the adverse decision, Clavel, through the Office of the Solicitor General, filed a Notice of Appeal. However, the MeTC dismissed this appeal for failure to pay the appeal fee on time and granted the respondents’ motion for execution. A writ of execution was issued, leading to Clavel’s eviction. Clavel and the Republic, which later intervened, elevated the matter via a special civil action for certiorari to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which denied the petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC, ruling that the appeal was not perfected due to the late payment of fees, rendering the MeTC judgment final and executory.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the dismissal of the petitioners’ appeal from the MeTC decision for alleged late payment of appeal fees.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the appeal. The legal logic centered on the proper computation of the reglementary period for perfecting an appeal. The Court clarified that the period to appeal should be counted from the petitioner’s receipt of the MeTC decision, not from the filing of the notice of appeal. The records showed Clavel received the decision on October 10, 1997. He filed his notice of appeal on October 13, 1997, which was within the 15-day period. The appeal fee was paid on October 28, 1997. Applying Section 3, Rule 40 of the Rules of Court, the Court held that the appeal is deemed perfected upon the timely filing of the notice of appeal and the subsequent payment of the appeal fee, which may be made within a reasonable time thereafter, not to exceed fifteen days from the filing of the notice. Since the fee was paid on October 28, it was within fifteen days of the October 13 notice. Therefore, the appeal was timely perfected. The MeTC’s dismissal of the appeal and immediate execution were premature. The Court set aside the writ of execution and directed the MeTC to give due course to the appeal.