Case Digest: IMELDA O. COJUANGCO et al. v. SANDIGANBAYAN et al. 586 SCRA 790 (2009)

IMELDA O. COJUANGCO et al. v. SANDIGANBAYAN et al. 586 SCRA 790 (2009)

While the general rule is that the portion of a decision that becomes the subject of execution is that ordained or decreed in the dis-positive part thereof, there are recognized exceptions to this rule, one of which is where extensive and explicit discussion and settlement of the issue is found in the body of the decision. The Republic of the Philippines (Republic) filed before the Sandiganbayan a “Complaint for Reconveyance, Reversion, Accounting, Restitution and Damages,” of the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses which have been invested in the Philippine Long Distance Telecommunication Corporation (PLDT). Ramon and Imelda Cojuangco (Spouses Cojuangco) were subsequently impleaded. The Sandiganbayan dismissed the complaint with respect to the recovery of the PLDT shares. The Republic appealed to the Supreme Court, and the same issued a favorable ruling. The Republic thereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan a Motion for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution, praying for the cancellation of the shares of stock registered in the name of Prime Holdings and the annotation of the change of ownership on PTIC‘s Stock and Transfer Book. The Republic further prayed for the issuance of an order for PTIC to account for all cash and stock dividends declared by PLDT in favor of PTIC from 1986 up to the present including compounded interests. The Sandiganbayan granted the same, except its prayer for accounting of dividends. The Republic moved for reconsideration with respect to the denial of accounting of dividends, which the Sandiganbayan granted. The Cojuangcos protested, alleging that the SC‘s decision did not include in its dispositive portion the grant of dividends and interests accruing to the shares adjudicated in favor of the Republic.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Republic is entitled to the dividends and interests accruing to the shares despite its non-inclusion in the dis-positive portion of the decision

HELD:

The Cojuangcos insist on a literal reading of the dis-positive portion of the SC‘s Decision, excluding the dividends, interests, and earnings accruing to the shares of stock from being accounted for and remitted. The SC, in directing the re-conveyance to the Republic of the 111,415 shares of PLDT stock owned by PTIC in the name of Prime Holdings, declared the Republic as the owner of said shares and, necessarily, the dividends and interests accruing thereto. Ownership is a relation in law by virtue of which a thing pertaining to one person is completely subjected to his will in everything not prohibited by law or the concurrence with the rights of another. Its traditional elements or attributes include jus utendi or the right to receive from the thing that it produces. Contrary to the Cojuangcos‘ contention, while the general rule is that the portion of a decision that becomes the subject of execution is that ordained or decreed in the dis-positive part thereof, there are recognized exceptions to this rule, viz: (a) where there is ambiguity or uncertainty, the body of the opinion may be referred to for purposes of construing the judgment, because the dis-positive part of a decision must find support from the decision‘s ratio decidendi; and (b) where extensive and explicit discussion and settlement of the issue is found in the body of the decision. In the Decision, although the inclusion of the dividends, interests, and earnings of the 111,415 PTIC shares as belonging to the Republic was not mentioned in the dis-positive portion of the Court‘s Decision, it is clear from its body that what was being adjudicated in favor of the Republic was the whole block of shares and the fruits thereof, said shares having been found to be part of the Marcoses‘ ill- gotten wealth, and therefore, public money.