G.R. No. L-6413 / February 27, 1912
MUERTEGUY & ABOITIZ, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. ISIDORO V. DELGADO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On August 19, 1909, plaintiffs Muertéguy & Aboitiz filed an action to recover P4,161.57 from defendant Isidoro V. Delgado. The defendant demurred on October 1, 1909, which was overruled on November 29, 1909. After excepting to the ruling, the defendant filed his answer on January 22, 1910. The case was set for trial on April 26, 1910, and on April 29, 1910, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. Neither the defendant nor his attorney was present at the trial. The record established that the defendant had no notice that the case had been scheduled for trial on a specific date. Although the defendant’s attorney was notified after the trial had commenced, he could not attend due to other professional commitments.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court’s judgment should be set aside due to lack of notice to the defendant regarding the scheduled trial date, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to be present and present his defenses.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the trial court and ordered a new trial. The Court emphasized that parties have a fundamental right to be present at the trial of their cases, either personally or through counsel, and are entitled to reasonable notice of the trial date. Since the defendant had no notice of the scheduled trial and was consequently deprived of the opportunity to attend and present his defenses, the judgment was rendered without due process. The case was remanded to the lower court with instructions to conduct a new trial after giving the defendant due notice. No costs were awarded.