This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2015-09-09 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| A writ of preliminary attachment is defined as a provisional remedy issued upon order of the court where an action is pending to be levied upon the property or properties of the defendant therein, the same to be held thereafter by the sheriff as security for the satisfaction of whatever judgment that might be secured in the said action by the attaching creditor against the defendant.[10] However, it should be resorted to only when necessary and as a last remedy because it exposes the debtor to humiliation and annoyance.[11] It must be granted only on concrete and specific grounds and not merely on general averments quoting the words of the rules.[12] Since attachment is harsh, extraordinary, and summary in nature,[13] the rules on the application of a writ of attachment must be strictly construed in favor of the defendant. | |||||
|
2009-06-26 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Section 1 (d), Rule 57 of the Rules of Court applies where a party is guilty of fraud in contracting a debt or incurring an obligation, or in concealing or disposing of the property for the taking, detention or conversion of which the action is brought. In Wee v. Tankiansee,[43] we held that for a writ of attachment to issue under this Rule, the applicant must sufficiently show the factual circumstances of the alleged fraud because fraudulent intent cannot be inferred from the debtor's mere non-payment of the debt or failure to comply with his obligation. The affidavit, being the foundation of the writ, must contain particulars showing how the imputed fraud was committed for the court to decide whether or not to issue the writ. To reiterate, a writ of attachment can only be granted on concrete and specific grounds and not on general averments merely quoting the words of the rules.[44] | |||||
|
2008-02-13 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| Let it be stressed that the provisional remedy of preliminary attachment is harsh and rigorous for it exposes the debtor to humiliation and annoyance.[41] The rules governing its issuance are, therefore, strictly construed against the applicant,[42] such that if the requisites for its grant are not shown to be all present, the court shall refrain from issuing it, for, otherwise, the court which issues it acts in excess of its jurisdiction.[43] Likewise, the writ should not be abused to cause unnecessary prejudice. If it is wrongfully issued on the basis of false or insufficient allegations, it should at once be corrected.[44] | |||||
|
2001-02-23 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| To reiterate, petitioner's Motion for Attachment fails to meet the standard set forth in D.P. Lub Oil Marketing Center, Inc. v. Nicolas,[10] in applications for attachment. In the said case, this Court cautioned -- | |||||