Case Digest: MEDIAN CONTAINER CORPORATION v. METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY

MEDIAN CONTAINER CORPORATION v. METROPOLITAN

BANK AND TRUST COMPANY

561 SCRA 622 (2008), SECOND DIVISION

A complaint for sum of money was filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati by the respondent Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (Metrobank) against petitioner Median Container Corporation (MCC) and Spouses Carlos and Fely Ley, Vice President/Treasurer of MMC, for failure to settle the outstanding balance of loan contracted by MCC which was represented by Fely Ley.

MCC filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the verification on certificate against non-forum shopping was defective. MCC questioned the authority of Atty. Alexander P. Mendoza to sign the same on behalf of Metrobank. MCC contends that the authorization was given only to Atty. Mendoza on June 03, 2003 and the verification and certification against non-forum shopping, which was verified and signed by the said counsel, was dated on May 28, 2003. In effect, the verification and certification by the Metrobank has no valid effect.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati denied MCC‘s Motion to Dismiss. The matter was elevated to the Court of Appeals which denied the appeal.

ISSUE:

Whether there was defective verification and certificate against non-forum shopping on Metrobank‘s part

HELD:

As for the required certification against forum shopping, failure to comply therewith is generally not curable by its submission subsequent to the filing of the petition or by amendment. However, the Court relaxed the application of these requirements upon appreciation of attendant special circumstances or compelling reasons.

In the case at bar, simultaneous with the filing of the complaint, Metrobank submitted both a certification of non-forum shopping and proof that Atty. Mendoza who signed it on its behalf was authorized to do so. The proof of authorization of Atty. Mendoza was dated later than the date of his signing of the certification of non-forum shopping, however, thus giving the impression that he, at the time he affixed his signature, was not authorized to do so. The passing on June 3, 2004 of a Board Resolution of authorization before the actual filing on June 23, 2004 of the complaint, however, is deemed a ratification of Atty. Mendoza‘s prior execution on May 28, 2004 of the verification and certificate of non-forum shopping, thus curing any defects thereof.