Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ROSARIO T. FLORENDO v. PARAMOUNT INSURANCE CORP.

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 145817 2011-10-19	URBAN BANK v. MAGDALENO M. PEÑA SERENO, J.
In Florendo v. Paramount Insurance, Corp.,[312] the Court explained that the execution pending appeal is an exception to the general rule that execution issues as a matter of right, when a judgment has become final and executory: As such exception, the court's discretion in allowing it must be strictly construed and firmly grounded on the existence of good reasons. "Good reasons," it has been held, consist of compelling circumstances that justify immediate execution lest the judgment becomes illusory. The circumstances must be superior, outweighing the injury or damages that might result should the losing party secure a reversal of the judgment. Lesser reasons would make of execution pending appeal, instead of an instrument of solicitude and justice, a tool of oppression and inequity. (Emphasis supplied)
	GR No. 145817 2011-10-19	URBAN BANK v. MAGDALENO M. PEÑA SERENO, J.
As an exception to the general rule that only final judgments may be executed,[333] the grant of execution pending appeal must perforce be based on "good reasons." These reasons must consist of compelling or superior circumstances demanding urgency which will outweigh the injury or damages suffered, should the losing party secure a reversal of the judgment or final order.[334] The circumstances that would reasonably justify superior urgency, demanding interim execution of Peña's claims for compensation and/or damages, have already been settled by the financial capacity of the eight other co-defendants, the approval of the supersedeas bonds, the subsequent takeover by EIB, and the successor bank's stable financial condition,[335] which can answer for the judgment debt. Thus, Peña's interest as a judgment creditor is already well-protected.
	AM No. RTJ-07-2060 2011-07-27	NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. JUDGE SANTOS B. ADIONG VILLARAMA, JR., J.
In Florendo v. Paramount Insurance Corp.,[30] the Supreme Court held: x x x "Good reasons," it has been held, consist of compelling circumstances that justify immediate execution lest the judgment becomes illusory. The circumstances must be superior, outweighing the injury or damages that might result should the losing party secure a reversal of the judgment. Lesser reasons would make of execution pending appeal, instead of an instrument of solicitude and justice, a tool of oppression and inequity.