G.R. No. 181517, July 6, 2015
Green Star Express, Inc. and Fruto Sayson, Jr., Petitioners, vs. Nissin-Universal Robina Corporation, Respondent.

FACTS

On February 25, 2003, a vehicular accident occurred between a Mitsubishi L-300 van owned by Universal Robina Corporation (URC) and a passenger bus owned by petitioner Green Star Express, Inc., resulting in the death of the van’s driver. The bus driver, petitioner Fruto Sayson, Jr., was charged with reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Green Star sent a demand letter to respondent Nissin-Universal Robina Corporation (NURC) for repair costs of its bus. NURC denied liability. The criminal case was later dismissed without prejudice due to insufficient evidence. Petitioners then filed a complaint for damages against NURC before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Pedro, Laguna. The summons was served on January 22, 2004, and was received by Francis Tinio, a cost accountant of NURC. NURC filed a Motion to Dismiss, claiming lack of jurisdiction due to improper service of summons. The RTC denied the motion, ruling there was substantial compliance as NURC actually received the summons. The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC, nullified its resolutions, and dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the service of summons was improper. Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied.

ISSUE

Whether or not the summons was properly served on NURC, vesting the trial court with jurisdiction.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution. The Court held that the rules on service of summons upon a domestic private juridical entity must be strictly complied with. Under Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Court, service upon a domestic corporation may be made only on the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house counsel. The service of summons upon Francis Tinio, a cost accountant, who is not among the persons enumerated in the rule, was improper and invalid. The fact that the corporation may have actually received the summons does not cure the defect. Consequently, the trial court did not validly acquire jurisdiction over NURC.