This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2010-09-29 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Orion Security Corporation v. Kalfam Enterprises, Inc.[23] explains how courts acquire jurisdiction over the parties in a civil case: Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiffs upon the filing of the complaint. On the other hand, jurisdiction over the defendants in a civil case is acquired either through the service of summons upon them or through their voluntary appearance in court and their submission to its authority. (Emphasis supplied.) | |||||
|
2009-09-11 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiffs upon the filing of the complaint. On the other hand, jurisdiction over the defendants in a civil case is acquired either through the service of summons upon them or through their voluntary appearance in court and their submission to its authority.[9] The service of summons is a vital and indispensable ingredient of due process.[10] As a rule, if defendants have not been validly summoned, the court acquires no jurisdiction over their person, and a judgment rendered against them is null and void.[11] | |||||
|
2009-08-14 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| In the present case, there was no showing in the return of service (1) of the impossibility of personal service within a reasonable time; (2) that Lapuz, the person on whom summons was served, was of suitable age and discretion; and (3) that Lapuz resided in the residence of the Spouses Galura. Consequently, the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the Spouses Galura, and thus the Spouses Galura are not bound by the RTC's 27 June 2001 Decision and 10 November 2004 Order.[20] | |||||