NATION PETROLEUM GAS,

INCORPORATED et. al vs RCBC

Rule 14 Section 20
De los Santos, Lara Aurea L.
• Rizal Commercial Banking Corp (RCBC) filed against Nation Petroleum
Incorporation and its directors/ officers a complaint for civil damages.
• Its prayer for a writ of preliminary attachment was granted and the
writ was issued.
• The Sheriff served upon Nation Petroleum Inc. a copy of the
summons, complaint, application for attachment, etc.
• Nation Petroleum filed a Motion to Dismiss to which RCBC countered
with an Opposition and a Motion to Declare Nation Petroleum Inc. in
Default.
• The motions were dismissed both by the Regional Trial Court and the
Court of Appeals.
 NATION PETROLEUM INC
• RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over
the corporation since the summons
was improperly served upon Claudia
Abante, who is a mere liaison officer
and not one of the corporate officers
specifically enumerated in Section 11,
Rule 14 of the Rules.
• The sheriff and/or process server did
not personally approach the officers
at their respective address as stated in
the Complaint.
• Neither did he resort to substituted
service of summons, and that, even if
he did, there was no strict compliance
with Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules..
RCBC
• Abante received the summons upon the
express authority and instruction of the
corporate secretary, Melinda Ang.
• The Sheriffs Report reflects that the
officers were served "at their given
addresses, but they refused to
acknowledge receipt thereof." Said
Report is prima facie evidence of the facts
stated therein and that the sheriff enjoys
the presumption of regularity in the
performance of his official functions.
• Oaminal vs. Castillo: Nation Petroleum
already voluntarily submitted to the
court's jurisdiction when they prayed for
the discharge of the writ of attachment,
which is an affirmative relief apart from
the dismissal of the case.
 ISSUE
Whether or not the seeking of an affirmative relief is
tantamount to voluntary submission to the court’s
jurisdiction
 YES
Despite improper service of summons upon their persons, the
individual petitioners (officers of Nation Petroleum) are deemed to
have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court through their
voluntary appearance. The second sentence of Section 20, Rule 14
of the Rules that

"[t]he inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds aside

from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall
not be deemed a voluntary appearance"

clearly refers to affirmative defenses, not affirmative reliefs.

In the present case, the officers of Nation Petroleum prayed, among
others, for the following:

(1) discharge of the writ of attachment on their properties;

(2) denial of the motion to declare them in default;

(3) admission of the Comment/Opposition (to the motion to declare

them in default) filed on December 19, 2006; and

(4) denial of respondent's motion to strike off from the records (their
opposition to the motion to declare them in default).
By seeking affirmative reliefs from the trial court, the officers
of Nation Petroleum are deemed to have voluntarily
submitted to the jurisdiction of said court.

A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure

affirmative relief against his opponent and after obtaining or
failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question that same
jurisdiction.

Therefore, the CA cannot be considered to have erred in affirming the trial court's denial of the
Special Appearance with Motion to Dismiss for alleged improper service of summons.