GLOBE ASIATIQUE REALTY HOLDINGS CORPORATION - Mandaluyong City

Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig : CA Decision Final and Executory
Written by Delfin Lee
CA-G.R.SP NO. 128262
DECISION
Page 20 of page 21
The propriety and correctness of the Summary Judgment is a proper subject of an appeal under Rule 41 as what was

resorted to by Faria and Atty. Bernabe. We are also aware that public respondent’s denial of HDMF’S Motion of

Reconsideration of the Summary Judgment made the case final in view of its (HDMF’S) failure to file the correct appeal

under Rule 41 within the 15-day period and it cannot be corrected by Certiorari (under Rule 65) as a substitute appeal

for a lost one (Under Rule 41). Be that as it may the instant case is far from being completely final and executor

considering that Faria and Atty. Bernabe have  

Show more

seasonably appealed the same under Rule 41. To pass upon the above

mentioned matter, re propriety and correctness of Summary Judgment now in the instant petition is not only improper but

also hovers on procedural and jurisdictional matters not to mention that it would be premature as it preempts the proper

and timely adjudication of the respective appeals (of Faria and Atty. Bernabe) on its merits by this Court at the proper

opportune time.
WHEREOF, there being no grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction on the part of public

rendering the assailed Resolution dated January 30, 2012 containing the Summary Judgment and the Resolution dated

December 11, 2012 denying HDMF, Faria and Atty. Bernabe’s Motion for Reconsideration, the instant petition is hereby

DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
STEPHEN C. CRUZ
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
MAGDANGAL M. DE LEON
Associate Justice
ELIHU A. YBANEZ
Associate Justice
Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig: RTC court of makati rules in favor of Globe Asiatique
Loan take out and issue a notice to plaintiff Globe Asiatique in order for the latter to correct and submit the lacking

requirements in any buyer-borrower who is subsequently found to be ineligible for the loan. Simply stated, the

introduction of any evidence by defendant HDMF regarding alleged spurious and fictitious buyer-borrowers become

inconsequential, immaterial and irrelevant as it is the one which approved their PAG-IBIG membership, approved their

loan applications, and supposedly post validated their eligibility for loans. Globe Asiatique, on the other hand, cannot

be said to have breached any of the warranties provided in the FCAs because these warranties are now inexistent as per

the provisions of the MOA because of these warranties are premised on the supposed power of Globe Asiatique to approve

the loan applications of the PAG-IBIG FUND buyer-borrowers, a power which has already has been removed by the MOA.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, a Summary Judgment is hereby rendered declaring that:
1. Plaintiffs have proven their case by preponderance of evidence. As such they are entitled to specific

performance and right to damages as prayed for in the Complaint, except that the exact amount of damages will have to be

determined during trial proper.
2. Pursuant to the provision of their MOA amending the continuing FCAs and CSAs, a defendant HDMF is hereby ordered

to comply faithfully and religiously with its obligations under the said contracts, including but not limited to the

release of loan take out proceeds of those accounts whose Deeds(s) of Assignment with Special Power of Attorney have

already been annotated in the corresponding Transfer Certificate of Title covering the houses and lots purchased by the

PAG-IBIG member-borrower from plaintiff GARHC as well as the evaluation of the loan applications of those who underwent

or will undergo plaintiff GARHC loan counseling and are qualified for PAG-IBIG FUND loans under the MOA and continuing

FCAs and process the approval thereof only if qualified, under the Window 1 Facility as provided for in MOA and

continuing FCAs;
3. The unilateral cancellation by defendant HDMF of the continuing FCAs specially the latest FCAs of December 15,

2009, January 5 and March 17, 2010 and CSA dated 10 February 2009, is hereby SET ASIDE:
4. Defendants are ordered to automatically off set the balance of those listed in ANNEX “E” of the Motion of

Summary Judgment against the retention money, escrow money, funding commitment fees, loan take out proceeds and other

receivables of plaintiff GARHC which are still in control and possession of defendant HDMF;
5. Defendants are ordered to accept the replacement-buyers listed in Annex “F” of the Motion of Summary Judgment,

which list is unopposed by defendants, without interest or penalty from the time of defendant HDMF’s cancellation of the

Collection Servicing Agreement (CSA)
Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig: CA orders NBI , PNP and CIDG to stop the manhunt against Delfin Lee
CA-G.R. SP No. 127553
Decision
J. Diamante
Supreme Court in the case of Salonga vs. Hon. Paño, et al. instructs, thus:
“The purpose of preliminary investigation is to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution,

and to protect him from an open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expenses and anxiety of a public

trial, and also to protect the state from useless and expensive trials. The right to a preliminary investigation is a

salutatory grant, and to withhold it would be to transgress constitutional due process. However, in order to satisfy the

due process clause it is not enough that the preliminary investigation is conducted in the sense of making sure that the

transgressor shall not escape with impunity. A preliminary investigation serves not only the purpose of the State. More

important, it is a part of the guarantees of freedom and fair play which are birthrights of all who live in our country.

It is, therefore, imperative upon the fiscal or the judge as the case may be, to relieved the accused from the pain of

going through a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a prima facie case or that no

probable cause exists to form a sufficient belief as to the guilt of the accused. Although there is no general formula

or fixed rule for the determination of probable cause since the same must be decided in the light of the conditions

obtaining in given situations and its existence depends to a large degree upon the finding or opinion of the judge

conducting the examination, such as finding should not disregard the facts before the judge nor run counter to the

dictates of reason. The judge of fiscal, therefore should not go on with prosecution in the hope that some credible

evidence might later turn up during trial for this would be a flagrant violation of a basic right which the courts are

created to uphold. It bears repeating that the judiciary lives up to its mission by vitalizing and not denigrating

constitutional rights. So it has been before. It should continue to be so.” (Emphasis Supplied). (Citations Omitted).
Meanwhile, the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the OSG on September 18, 2013 is merely NOTED in the view of the

previous resolution issued by this Court denying its motion of extension of time within which to file a Memorandum.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the instant petition is hereby PARTIALLY GRANTED. The assailed Resolutions dated

May 22. 2012 and August 22, 2012 are hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE for the issuance thereof was attended with grave

abuse of discretion on the part of public respondent Hon. Ma. Amifaith S. Fider-Reyes, in her capacity as the Presiding

judge of San Fernando, Pampanga RTC - Branch 42. Consequently the warrant of arrest issued against petitioner Delfin S.

Lee is hereby QUASHED, RECALLED AND LIFTED. Afore-named public respondent judge is directed to CEASE and DESIST from

future proceedingwith Criminal Case No. 18480 insofar as petitioner Delfin S. Lee is concerned.
Furthermore, all government agencies tasked in the enforcement of the said warrant of arrest including but not limited

to the Philippine National Police (PNP), National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and Bureau of Immigration (BI) are

immediately ENJOINED from implementing the same.
SO ORDERED.
FRANCHITO M. DIAMANTE
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
AGNES REYES- CAPRIO


Associate Justice


MELCHOR Q.C SADANG
Associate Justice
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above

decision were reached in consultation before the case to the writer of the opinion of the court.
FRANCHITO M. DIAMANTE
Associate Justice
Acting Chairperson
Special Fifteenth Division
Delfin Lee of Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig : Lifting of Warrant Certified by the PNP
Delfin Lee of Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig : Lifting of Warrant Certified by the PNP
Written by Delfin Lee
Republic of the Philippines
NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF, PNP
Camp Crame Quezon City
ATTY. MANUEL R. PICHAY
Rivera, Pedrico and Rivera-Tamayo Law Offices
1097 Apt. 9, Sugay Building
Mc Arthur Highway, Balibago


Angeles City
Dear Atty. Pichay:
This pertains to your letter dated December 2, 2013 addressed to the undersigned, requesting for certification of de-

listing of your client, Mr. Delfin S. Lee from the list of wanted persons in view of the Court of Appeals’ Decision

dated November 7, 2013 immediately enjoining the PNP from implementing the quashed warrant of arrest against him.
Please be informed that the PNP is now in the process of de-listing Mr. Delfin S. Lee from the list of wanted persons

following procedures as set forth in the PNPI-3 Circular Number 98-01 dated july 23, 1998. The secretary of the interior

and Local Government is the final authority in the approval of the said de-listing. As a background, the inclusion of

Mr. Delfin S. Lee in the list of wanted persons was by virtue of Memorandum Circular No. 2013-182 dated November 9, 2012

issued by the DILG.
Further, be assured that the PNP fully recognizes and acknowledges the Decision of the Court of Appeals promulgating

that al government agencies tasked in the enforcement of the warrant of arrest against your client are enjoined from

implementing the same.
Very truly yours,
ALAN LA MADRID PURISIMA
Police Director General
Chief, PNP
Globe Asiatique wins against Pagibig : A certificate issued by the CIDG respecting CA 's decision
Republic of the Philippines
NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND DETENTION GROUP
Camp Crame, Quezon City
MEMORANDUM
TO : ALL REGIONALS, SOD’S ID AND WAISS Chiefs
FROM : DIRECTOR, CIDG
SUBJECT : Recalled lifted and Quashed Warrant of Arrest against Delfin S. Lee in CC no.

18480
DATE : November 20, 2013
1. References
a. Referral slip from CIDG with remarks “Request Appropriate Action” “ Request Dissemination” and “ For

info/ref/file” dated Nov. 13, 2013
b. Letter from atty. Willie Rivera dated Nov. 13, 2013
c. Certification from court of Appeals dated Nov. 12, 2013; and
d. Decision of Special Fifteenth (15th)Division, Court of Appeals, CA-G.R. SP no. 127553 promulgated on Nov. 07,

2013
This pertains to the letter from Atty. Willie b. Rivera, requesting the delisting and / or removal of the name

of their client Mr. Delfin S. Lee from the PNP-CIDG list of Warrant of Arrest
Please be informed that the Court of Appeals Special 15th Division promulgated a decision in CA G.R SP No.

127553 dated Nov. 07, 2013 “the warrant of arrest issued against petitioner Delfin S. Lee is hereby QUASHED, RECALLED

and LIFTED” the Criminal Case No. 18480. Furthermore, “all government agencies tasked in the enforcement of the paid

warrant of arrest including but not limited to the Philippine National Police, National Bureau of Investigation and the

Bureau of Immigration are immediately enjoined from implementing the same”. Attached is the decision of the above court

together with the certified true copy of the same for your perusal.
ITCON, you are hereby enjoined from implementing the warrant of arrest against Delfin S. Lee in so far as

Criminal Case No. 18480 is concerned.
For Strict compliance.
BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE DIRECTOR, CIDG:
NVP BLESILDA E. DAGOGOY 12/6/13
ELISEO TAM RASCO, MPA
POLICE SENIOR SEPRINTENDENT (DSC)
CHIEF DIRECTORIAL POLICE
KNOW THE TRUTH http:globeasiatique.ph