Ruby Shelters Builders vs. Hon. Pablo C. Formaran III CASE DIGEST - Civil Procedure - Commencement of action

Ruby Shelters Builders vs. Hon. Pablo C. Formaran III

FACTS: RSB filed a complaint with the RTC against Tan. It paid the sum of P13,644.25 for docket and other legal fees, as assessed by the Office of the Clerk of Court. The Clerk of Court initially considered the case as an action incapable of pecuniary estimation and computed the docket and other legal fees due thereon according to Section 7(b)(1), Rule 141 of the Rules of Court.

Tan filed a motion contending that the case involved real properties, the docket fees for which should be computed in accordance with Section 7(a), not Section 7(b)(1), of Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, as amended. Thus, since RSB did not pay the appropriate docket fees, the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over the said case. Hence, respondent Tan asked the RTC to issue an order requiring petitioner to pay the correct and accurate docket fees.

Issue: WOR the RTC acquired jurisdiction over the case.

Held: No. In Manchester Dev. Co v. CA, the court acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon the payment of the prescribed docket fee." Hence, the payment of docket fees is not only mandatory, but also jurisdictional.

In Sun Insurance v. Asuncion, the payment of the prescribed docket fee is a jurisdictional requirement, even its non-payment at the time of filing does not automatically cause the dismissal of the case, as long as the fee is paid within the applicable prescriptive or reglementary period, more so when the party involved demonstrates a willingness to abide by the rules prescribing such payment.

RSB did not pay the correct amount of docket fees. It should pay docket fees in accordance with Sec 7(a), Rule 141, as amended. Consistent with the liberal tenor of Sun Insurance, the RTC, instead of dismissing outright petitioner’s Complaint, granted petitioner time to pay the additional docket fees. Despite the seeming munificence of the RTC, petitioner refused to pay the additional docket fees assessed against it, believing that it had already paid the correct amount before, pursuant to Section 7(b)(1), Rule 141.

The docket fees under Section 7(a), Rule 141, in cases involving real property depend on the fair market value of the same: the higher the value of the real property, the higher the docket fees due. In contrast, Section 7(b)(1), Rule 141 imposes a fixed or flat rate of docket fees on actions incapable of pecuniary estimation.

RTC is affirmed and RBS was required to pay additional docket/filing fees, computed based on Section 7(a), Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, as amended.