Title: RP vs Jose L. Africa et al.
Respondents: Jose Africa, Manuel Nieto, Jr., Ferdinand Marcos, Imelda Marcos, Ferdinand Marcos, Jr.,Roberto S. Benedicto, Juan Ponce Enrile, Potenciano Ilusorio
Court: Sandiganbayan
Nature of the case: Reconveyance, Reversion, Accounting and Damages
Date filed: 07/22/87
Summary of Complaint: The case is already submitted for decision in June 2010. RP filed a Motion to Resolve the Main Case dated 5 October 2015.
Meanwhile, RP filed before the Supreme Court on 12 October 2012 a Petition for Certiorari docketed as G.R. No. 203593 (on the denial by the Sandiganbayan in a Resolution dated 31 July 2012, of its Urgent Petition for Appointment of Receivers or Placing Respondents’ Assets, Funds, and Properties in Custodia Legis with Prayer for a Status Quo Order filed by RP on 28 January 2011). ETPI filed its Comment dated 16 January 2013. The Republic filed its Comment dated 3 April 2017.
In view of the alleged missing transcript of stenographic notes of witnesses of the parties, Nieto and Sen. JPE filed Manifestation and Motion filed by def Manuel H. Nieto Jr. dated July 14, 2016 and Manifestation (Re: Re-Taking of Testimonies of Witnessess) dated August 10, 2016, respectively. On 10 Aug. 2016, JPE filed a manifestation that the retaking of testimonies of his 2 witnesses is no longer feasible because one is already dead and the other can no longer be located. The retaking of testimony of Mila Sabado was scheduled on July 21, 2016.
A Resolution dated 13 July 2016 was issued ordering PCGG to submit to the Court a Certification on the period as to when the Trader’s Royal Bank was under sequestration.
- Meanwile in a resolution dated 18 January 2017 in GR. No. 194277, the Supreme Court dismissed the Petition for Certiorari filed by Victor Africa who sought the review and nullification of Sandigabayan Resolutions issued on 30 April 2010 and 18 October 2010 denying the motion to accept by way of dacion en pago, parcels of land owned by POTC to cover the interests due on the dividends to Polygon.
- In the main case, the Sandiganbayan issued a Resolution dated 15 February 2017 denying Victor Africa’s Motion for the Issuance of Order for the Holding of a Stockholders Meeting at ETPI to Elect a New Board of Directors which he filed on 21 July 2015. A Motion for Reconsideration dated 2 March 2017 was filed by Victor Africa, which was thereafter denied in a Resolution promulgated on 6 July 2017. This was denied in a Resolution issued by the Sandiganbayan on 6 July 2017.
- In said Resolution dated 6 July 2017, the Sandiganbayan likewise noted the Notice of Death with Motion to Substitute dated 2 March 2017 filed by the Counsel of deceased defendant Manuel Nieto, hence, he was directed to submit the NSO-certified Certifcate of Death of Manuel Nieto, Jr. as well as the names and respective addresses of Nietos’s Legal Heirs, and action on the Motion to Subsitute was held in abeyance pending submission of the required documents. This was granted by the Court in its 17 August 2017 Resolution and directed the Heirs to appear and be substituted within 30 days from redeipt thereof.
- Meanwhile, in a Resolution adopted on 24 March 2017, the court partially granted Victor Africa’s Ex-parte Motion to Direct the Land Bank to Submit a History of, and Regular Reports on, the Account Involving Dividends in Custodia Legis and to Allow Movant to Get Copies Thereof by directing the LBP to give a copy of the Report of the High Yield savings Account (LBP-COA) for Acct. No. 1691-1616-21 covering the period from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 be furnished Victor Africa by the Clerk of Court, 3rd Division. In coordination with the SB’s cashier.
- Also, ETPI filed a Manifestation and Motion dated 25 May 2017 asking the court to issue an Order on the proper disposition of the P128,747,679 (P126,086147.64 net of tax) cash dividend for distribution to the sequestered shares. Victor Africa filed a Comment dated 5 June 2017 and Addendum to the Comment dated 13 June 2017. ETPI filed its comment to the Addendum to the Comment of Victor Africa. Victor Africa filed its Comment dated 27 June 2017.
- Victor Africa filed an Urgent Manifestation and Motion for Appropriate Reliefs dated 6 September 2017 involving the call by ETPI of Stockholders Meeting on 12 September 2017. ETPI opposed said Urgent Manifestation and orally argued its arguments on 8 September 2017. Africa filed his Reply and ETPI filed its Rejoinder.
In a Resolution dated 14 September 2017, the Court denied said Urgent Manifestation and Motion for Reconsideration thereof was filed by V. Africa with prayer for Modified Reliefs dated 22 September 2017.
Parties were given a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice to file their comment/s on the Appearance and Motion to be Substituted filed before the Court by Benildo Valdes Nieto, Carlos Valdes Nieto et al. thru counsel on 9/22/17. Sol. Dinopol informed the Court that she is no longer filing any comment on Victor Africa’s Motion for Reconsideration (of the 2017 September 14th Resolution) with Prayer for Modified Reliefs)
Minute Resolution dated Oct. 12, 2017 -Submitted for resolution the ff:
1) Motion for Recon (of 9/14/17 Reso) w/ Prayer for Modified Reliefs filed by Atty Victor Africa on 9/22/17
2) Comment and Opposition (to the Motion for Recon of the 9/14/17 Reso) filed by ETPI on 10/4/17
3) Reply filed by ATty Victor Africa on Oct. 9, 2017
The Court denied Victor Africa’s Africa’s Motion for Reconsideration (of the 2017 September 14 Resolution) with Prayer for Modified Reliefs.
Hearing set on May 4, 2018.
In a Minute Resolution dated May 3, 2018, the court granted the “Appearance and Motion to Substituted” filed before the Court by the surviving legal heirs, through counsel on September 22, 2017 considering that the plaintiff-Republic, through the PCGG and the OSG, did not interpose any objection in their “Comment (On Appearance and Motion to be Substituted dated September 14, 2017)” filed before the Court on November 2, 2017. Accordingly, the deceased-defendant Manuel H. Nieto, Jr., was SUBSTITUTED by the surviving legal heirs.; (2) the “Motion to Resolve the Main Case” filed before the Court by plaintiff-Republic, through the PCGG and the OSG, on February 8, 2018, the “Manifestation (RE: Plaintiff’s Motion to Resolve the Main Case) and Alternative Motion for the Issuance of an Order Relative/Leading to the Holding of a Stockholders’ Meeting at ETPI to Elect a New Board of Directors” filed before the Court by Victor Africa, pro se, as one of the substituted defendants of the late Jose L. Africa, which was received through mail on March 14, 2018, and the “Comment (To Respondent Atty. Victor V. Africa’s Manifestation and Alternative Motion dated February 28, 2018 with Manifestation)” filed before the Court by ETPI, through counsel, which was received through mail on March 28, 2018, are now SUBMITTED for RESOLUTION.
In an Order dated 4 May 2018, the “Supplemental Manifestation With Motion (To the Manifestation with Motion dated May 25, 2017)” filed by ETPI, through counsel for the said corporation appeared. Upon query of the Court, the said counsel informed the Court that he furnished copies of his manifestation with motion to the adverse parties in this case although there is no appearance for any of the adverse parties in this case. The record of this case shows that in its Order dated 6 June 2017, the Court already submitted for resolution the said Manifestation with Motion earlier filed by ETPI. In view of the Supplemental Manifestation with Motion, the Court RECALLED its earlier Order dated 6 June 2017 and resubmits the said Manifestation with Motion for resolution, together with the supplement thereto.
In a Minute Resolution dated 21 May 2018, the Court: [1] NOTED and GRANTED the manifestation with motion and its supplemental manifestation with motion, both filed by ETPI, through counsel. Accordingly, ETPI through Board of Directors, was DIRECTED to REMIT and DEPOSIT the following LBP, COA Branch, Commonwealth Ave., Quezon City. to wit: {a} Cash Dividends declared as of May 3, 2017 in the of Php 128,747,679.00 (net of tax of P 126,086,147.64) representing 5,799,445 Common “A” shares (sequestered shares) at Php 22.20 per shares; and (b) Cash Dividends declared as of March 27, 2018 in the amount of Php 79,220,418.79 (net of tax of P 77,582,737.69) representing 5,799,445 Common “A” shares (sequestered shares) at Php 13.66 per shares; both in High Yield Saving Account (HYSA) deposit under the name of “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof.”; [2] NOTED and GRANTED the manifestation and motion for leave of court file by ETPI through counsel, and EXPUNGED from the records the addendum to the comment filed by Victor Africa, pro se, for being mere restatements of the arguments already raised and passed upon in the other incidents, the Court had consistently upheld that a stockholders’ meeting duly called for the purpose of electing the Board of Directors need not require its prior approval, and that the directive of the Supreme Court in GR No. 184636 can only relate to the Sandiganbayan decreeing to hold a stockholders’ meeting after it shall have determined that the sequestration must stay.
In a Minute Resolution dated 21 May 2018, the Court : (a) GRANTED the motion to submit a statement of account of bank deposit/s; (b) DENIED the prayer to allow the defendants to examine the records of said deposits/s; and (c) NOTED the manifestation of LandBank of the Philippines. Accordingly, the Branch Manager of LandBank of the Philippines, COA Branch was DIRECTED to (a) SUBMIT to the Court the latest/current statement/s of account of deposits, interests and other related income/s that are held in escrow in connection with the case, particularly under the name of “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof;” and (b) FURNISH copies to the parties, both within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice.
In a Compliance dated 13 June 2018, filed by Land Bank Of the Philippines, by counsel, in compliance with the Hon. Court’s Resolution dated 21 May 2018, where a copy of which was received on June 5, 2018, submitted statements of balances of the escrow account under the name of “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof” and the corresponding statements of account.
In a Manifestation Of Compliance (Hon. Court’s Resolution dated 21, May 2018) dated 2 July 2018, filed by ETPI, it manifested that in compliance with the directive of the Hon. Court through Resolution dated 21 May 2018, copy of which was received on 13 June 2018, it remitted and deposited with the LBP-COA Branch last 29 June 2018 two (2) Manager’s Checks with total monetary value of Php 203,668,885,.33 representing the cash dividends due the sequestered shares of ETPI. Pursuant to the Hon. Court’s 21 May 2018 Resolution, ETPI requested LBP-COA Branch to deposit the money “in High yield Savings Account (HYSA) deposit under the name of “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof”.
In a Minute Resolution dated 2 July 2018, the two (2) letters dated 27 June 2018 and 29 June 2018 of Ms. Monina J. Sanchez, Acting Head LBP-COA Branch which were received on 28 June 2018 and 2 July 2018 were NOTED. In her letter/s Ms. Sanchez seeks to clarify the Resolution as to which LandBank account will the proceeds be remitted and deposited. Accordingly, the Court ordered the deposit of the two (2) Cash Dividends declared as of 3 May 2017 and 27 March 2018, respectively, in NEW and SEPARATE High Yield Savings Account (HYSA), both under the name of “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof”. In this connection, the Executive Clerk of Court IV and Cashier III, together with the Acting Head of LBP-COA Branch were DIRECTED to open the separate High Yield Savings Account/s with the LBP-COA Branch, within a period of 5 days from notice. The Court’s Resolution dated 21 May 2018 was MODIFIED accordingly.
In a Compliance dated 20 July 2018, filed by the Executive Clerk of Court IV and Cashier of the Sandiganbayan, 3rd Division, in compliance with the Court’s Resolution dated 2 July 2018, manifestation was made that two separate High Yield Savings Account (HYSA) were opened with the Land Bank of the Philippines, COA Branch, Commonwealth Ave., Quezon City, 17 July 2018 both with Account Name “Sandiganbayan in Escrow for the Person/s Natural or Judicial, Who Would Lawfully be Adjudged to the Entitled Thereto and the Interest Earnings Thereof” and wit Account Numbers 1691-1687-31 and 1691-1687-40.
In a Resolution promulgated on 30 July 2018, the Court (1) DENIED Victor Africa’s Alternative Motion for the issuance of an Order relative/leading to the “holding of a Stockholders’ Meeting at ETPI to elect a new Board of Directors” dated February 28, 2018, for lack of merit; and (2) NOTED the plaintiff’s Motion To Resolve the Main Case dated 1 February 2018 and Victor Africa’s Manifestation (re Plaintiff’s “Motion To Resolve the Main Case”).
A Motion For Reconsideration/Clarification (of the Resolution promulgated on July 30, 2018), dated 20 August 2018 was filed by Victor Africa – pro se, as one of the substituted defendants of the late Jose L. Africa, praying that the Hon. Court RECONSIDER/CLARIFY its Resolution promulgated on 30 July 2018 … so as to (i) withdraw its denial of the “Alternative Motion”… and instead (ii) consider and “NOTE” the said “Alternative Motion” as a “Motion for an Early Implementation of the Supreme Court Directive”.
In a Resolution dated September 18, 2018, the CA REFERRED the Motion for Reconsideration (to the denial of the Motion for Exclusion dated 22 February 2018) filed by the PCGG to adverse parties for comment within 10 days from notice.
In the Minutes held on October 15, 2018, The Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification (of the Reso prom on 2018 July 30th) filed before the Court by Victor Africa, pro se, as one of the substituted defendants of hte late Jose L. Africa, on August 20, 2018, the Comment (to resp Atty Victor V. Africa’s MR/Clarification (of the Reso prom on 2018 July 30th dated 20 July 2018 with Manifestation) filed before hte Court by ETPI thru counsel, on Sept. 24, 2018, and the Comment (on Victor Africa’s Motion for Recon/Clarification of the Reso prom on July 30, 2018) filed before the Court by plaintiff-Rep., rep by the PCGG thru OSG on Sept. 14, 2018, are now SUBMITTED FOR RESOLUTION.
In a Resolution dated January 14, 2019, the Sandiganbayan granted Victor Africa’s Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification (of the Resolution promulgated on July 30, 2018). Hence, the Court treated Victor Africa’s motion for reconsideration that his alternative motion be treated as a motion for an early implementation of the Supreme Court’s directive in Africa vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 172222, Nov. 11, 2013. The Court NOTED Victor Africa’s alternative motion.
Notice of Minute Resolution dated January 30, 2019:
The Court NOTED the letter transmittal dated Nov. 22, 2018 of Pagwadan S. Fonacier, SC Assistant Chief, Judicial Records Office, SC, 3rd Division and the Entry of Judgment on May 7, 2018.
Status: Submitted for Resolution
Date Entered Status : 06/19/10
Relevant Case/s: GR No. 147214, 107789, 174493, 172222, 184363, 203592
Remarks: RP filed its Memorandum on 18 June 2010 while the Africas’ submitted their Memorandum on 7 February 2010.