Sandiganbayan junks civil cases vs Cojuangco Jr, Enrile, Marcoses | ABS-CBN

Welcome, Kapamilya! We use cookies to improve your browsing experience. Continuing to use this site means you agree to our use of cookies. Tell me more!
Sandiganbayan junks civil cases vs Cojuangco Jr, Enrile, Marcoses
Sandiganbayan junks civil cases vs Cojuangco Jr, Enrile, Marcoses
The Sandiganbayan building in Quezon City on February 19, 2020 Jonathan Cellona, ABS-CBN News/File

MANILA – The Sandiganbayan has junked two civil cases against Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Juan Ponce Enrile, the late tycoon Eduardo "Danding" Cojuangco Jr., former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr., former First Lady Imelda Marcos and several others in relation to their alleged ill-gotten wealth.
MANILA – The Sandiganbayan has junked two civil cases against Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Juan Ponce Enrile, the late tycoon Eduardo "Danding" Cojuangco Jr., former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr., former First Lady Imelda Marcos and several others in relation to their alleged ill-gotten wealth.
The Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) filed the civil suits on July 31,1987. The anti-graft court said the original case "was a civil action for the recovery of ill-gotten wealth allegedly acquired by the defendants through the misuse and appropriation of the Coco Levy funds."
The Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) filed the civil suits on July 31,1987. The anti-graft court said the original case "was a civil action for the recovery of ill-gotten wealth allegedly acquired by the defendants through the misuse and appropriation of the Coco Levy funds."
In a resolution promulgated on December 6, 2024, the Second Division's dismissal of Civil Cases No. 0033-A and 0033-F came after the government's withdrawal of the cases.
In a resolution promulgated on December 6, 2024, the Second Division's dismissal of Civil Cases No. 0033-A and 0033-F came after the government's withdrawal of the cases.
"WHEREFORE, premises considered, plaintiff’s manifestation and the attached PCGG Resolution to the effect that it is no longer pursuing the remaining causes of action for damages against the defendants in Civil Cases Nos. 0033-A and 0033-F is NOTED," the resolution stated.
"WHEREFORE, premises considered, plaintiff’s manifestation and the attached PCGG Resolution to the effect that it is no longer pursuing the remaining causes of action for damages against the defendants in Civil Cases Nos. 0033-A and 0033-F is NOTED," the resolution stated.
ADVERTISEMENT
"Civil Case No. 0033-A is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice as between plaintiff Republic and the defendants therein, due to the withdrawal of plaintiff Republic," it added.
"Civil Case No. 0033-A is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice as between plaintiff Republic and the defendants therein, due to the withdrawal of plaintiff Republic," it added.
The PCGG in a resolution stated that it "will no longer pursue its claim for the actual, moral, temperate, nominal and exemplary damages as prayed for" in its third complaint.
The PCGG in a resolution stated that it "will no longer pursue its claim for the actual, moral, temperate, nominal and exemplary damages as prayed for" in its third complaint.
The anti-graft court cited Section 2 Rule 17 of the Rules of the Court.
The anti-graft court cited Section 2 Rule 17 of the Rules of the Court.
"In the PCGG Resolution, attached to the said motion, plaintiff clearly and unequivocally states that it will no longer pursue the claims for damages in these cases. It is a hornbook rule that it is not the caption of a pleading but the allegations thereat that determines its nature," the resolution stated.
"In the PCGG Resolution, attached to the said motion, plaintiff clearly and unequivocally states that it will no longer pursue the claims for damages in these cases. It is a hornbook rule that it is not the caption of a pleading but the allegations thereat that determines its nature," the resolution stated.
"As such, this Court rules that plaintiff Republic's Manifestation and Motion dated July 15,2024, which amounts to a motion to withdraw, must be granted," it said.
"As such, this Court rules that plaintiff Republic's Manifestation and Motion dated July 15,2024, which amounts to a motion to withdraw, must be granted," it said.
During a July 2024 hearing, there were no objections from the defendants so the anti-graft court granted the withdrawal of the remaining causes for action of damages.
During a July 2024 hearing, there were no objections from the defendants so the anti-graft court granted the withdrawal of the remaining causes for action of damages.
Civil Case No. 0033-A involves the alleged anomalous purchase and use of First United Bank, now known as United Coconut Planter's Bank, by Cojuangco Jr. in 1975.
Civil Case No. 0033-A involves the alleged anomalous purchase and use of First United Bank, now known as United Coconut Planter's Bank, by Cojuangco Jr. in 1975.
The complaint alleged that Cojuangco Jr. "took advantage of his association and acted in unlawful concert" with the Marcoses to use the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) and the Coconut Consumers Stabilization Fund (CCSF) in the purchase of 72.2 percent capital stock of First United Bank, later converted to United Coconut Planters Bank.
The complaint alleged that Cojuangco Jr. "took advantage of his association and acted in unlawful concert" with the Marcoses to use the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) and the Coconut Consumers Stabilization Fund (CCSF) in the purchase of 72.2 percent capital stock of First United Bank, later converted to United Coconut Planters Bank.
It prayed for the return of the 72.2 percent outstanding capital stock in UCPB, among others, including a prayer for actual, moral, temperate, nominal and exemplary damages, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and triple judicial costs.
It prayed for the return of the 72.2 percent outstanding capital stock in UCPB, among others, including a prayer for actual, moral, temperate, nominal and exemplary damages, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and triple judicial costs.
Civil Case No. 0033-F was filed in 1995, alleging Cojuangco and associates "unlawfully used the Coco Levy Funds" to buy two blocks stock purchases of shares in San Miguel Corporation (SMC) through various intermediary companies.
Civil Case No. 0033-F was filed in 1995, alleging Cojuangco and associates "unlawfully used the Coco Levy Funds" to buy two blocks stock purchases of shares in San Miguel Corporation (SMC) through various intermediary companies.
Following the Supreme Court's dismissal of both cases, the government said it would waive the claims for damages.
Following the Supreme Court's dismissal of both cases, the government said it would waive the claims for damages.
However, the Second Division said it could not fully dismiss Civil Case No. 0033-A due to ongoing discussions on the complaint-in-intervention of Subic Air.
However, the Second Division said it could not fully dismiss Civil Case No. 0033-A due to ongoing discussions on the complaint-in-intervention of Subic Air.
"Civil Case No. 0033-A shall REMAIN ACTIVE until the final disposition of Subic Air’s complaint-in-intervention," the Sandiganbayan said.
"Civil Case No. 0033-A shall REMAIN ACTIVE until the final disposition of Subic Air’s complaint-in-intervention," the Sandiganbayan said.
The intervention seeks to "enable the third party to protect or preserve a right or interest that may be affected by those proceedings."
The intervention seeks to "enable the third party to protect or preserve a right or interest that may be affected by those proceedings."
"As manifested by plaintiff Republic in its Motion and Manifestation dated June 15,2024, it is currently negotiating a possible compromise agreement with intervenor Subic Air. In the interest of substantial justice, this Court shall allow the parties the opportunity to amicably settle Subic Air's intervention in Civil Case No. 0033-A," the anti-graft court said.
"As manifested by plaintiff Republic in its Motion and Manifestation dated June 15,2024, it is currently negotiating a possible compromise agreement with intervenor Subic Air. In the interest of substantial justice, this Court shall allow the parties the opportunity to amicably settle Subic Air's intervention in Civil Case No. 0033-A," the anti-graft court said.
Following the dismissal of the civil suits against the original defendants, the Second Division said the Motion to Dismiss filed by Enrile is now "moot and academic."
Following the dismissal of the civil suits against the original defendants, the Second Division said the Motion to Dismiss filed by Enrile is now "moot and academic."
"Civil Case No. 0033-F is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice due to the withdrawal of plaintiff Republic," the Sandiganbayan added.
"Civil Case No. 0033-F is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice due to the withdrawal of plaintiff Republic," the Sandiganbayan added.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT