SC upholds case vs. Tans

The Supreme Court has affirmed a decision of the Court of Appeals denying the petition of three accused to restrain a trial court from hearing further the case against them.

In a decision signed by Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, the SC said the petition for prohibition and injunction—filed by Rolando Tan, Elena Tan and Lamberto Tan—was not proper because it was a form of forum-shopping.

The three were among those charged of estafa case along with the controversial couple, Roderick and Grace Go, whose issued checks in 2002 were dishonored by the bank for insufficient funds.

The estafa case hugged the headlines when the Go couple was later implicated in the kidnapping and murder attempt of businessman James King with whom the couple was indebted with substantial amount of money.

The cases of alleged kidnapping and slay try of Mr. King has been tackled in separate criminal cases in another trial court.

Rolando and Elena Tan, the parents of Roderick‘s wife Grace, went to the Court of Appeals asking to stop the trial court from continuing with the trial of the estafa case against them.

The Tan couple, and Lamberto Tan, argued that the assistant provincial prosecutor erred in saying that they conspired with Roderick in the issuance of the dishonored checks.

When the CA denied the petition, the Tans elevated the case to the High Court. They said, “With due respect, the CA committed a reversible error when it failed to rule that there was no conspiracy from the Tans in the issuance of the checks by Roderick L. Go.”

The SC however said the petitioners committed a form of forum-shopping when they participated in the Department of Justice proceedings in which time King had opposed a DOJ resolution granting Grace’s petition for reinvestigation.

The SC ruled that the petitioners, in “taking two distinct courses of actions,” went for similar and related causes, and sought for same remedies.

This act of forum-shopping would put the case at risk of drawing conflicting decisions from two courts over the same issues, said the SC, adding that the CA was correct in dismissing the petition of the Tans. — Joeberth M. Ocao/RAE