[G.R. NO. 175587 : September 21, 2007] PHILIPPINE COMMERCIAL IN ERNA IONAL !AN", Petitioner, v. #OSEPH AN HON$ M.

ALE#AN%RO, Respondent. %ECISION $NARES&SAN IAGO, J.: This Petition for Review assails the May 31, 2006 Decision 1 of the Court of A eals in CA!".R. C# $o. %&200 affir'in( the Au(ust 30, 2000 Decision2 of the Re(ional Trial Court of Ma)ati, which (rante* res on*ent +ose h Anthony M. Ale,an*ro-s clai' for *a'a(es arisin( fro' etitioner Phili ine Co''ercial .nternational /an)-s 0PC./1 invali* (arnish'ent of res on*ent-s *e osits. 2n 2cto3er 23, 144%, etitioner file* a(ainst res on*ent a co' laint 3 for su' of 'oney with rayer for the issuance of a writ of reli'inary attach'ent. 5ai* co' laint alle(e* that on 5e te'3er 10, 144%, res on*ent, a resi*ent of 6on( 7on(, e8ecute* in favor of etitioner a ro'issory note o3li(atin( hi'self to ay P294,&2&,:&&.40 lus interest. .n view of the fluctuations in the forei(n e8chan(e rates which resulte* in the insufficiency of the *e osits assi(ne* 3y res on*ent as security for the loan, etitioner re;ueste* the latter to ut u a**itional security for the loan. Res on*ent, however, sou(ht a reconsi*eration of sai* re;uest ointin( out etitioner-s alle(e* 'ishan*lin( of his account *ue to its failure to carry out his instruction to close his account as early as A ril 144%, when the revailin( rate of e8chan(e of the <5 Dollar to +a anese yen was <5=1.00>+P?12%.:0. 9 .t a ears that the a'ount of P294,&2&,:&&.40 was the consoli*ate* a'ount of a series of yen loans (rante* 3y etitioner to res on*ent *urin( the 'onths of @e3ruary an* A ril 144%.: .n rayin( for the issuance of a writ of reli'inary attach'ent un*er 5ection 1 ara(ra hs 0e1 an* 0f1 of Rule :% of the Rules of Court, etitioner alle(e* that 011 res on*ent frau*ulently with*rew his unassi(ne* *e osits notwithstan*in( his ver3al ro'ise to PC./ Assistant #ice Presi*ent CoraAon /. $e o'uceno not to with*raw the sa'e rior to their assi(n'ent as security for the loanB an* 021 that res on*ent is not a resi*ent of the Phili ines. The a lication for the issuance of a writ was su orte* with the affi*avit of $e o'uceno.6 2n 2cto3er 29, 144%, the trial court (rante* the a lication an* issue* the writ e8 arte % after etitioner oste* a 3on* in the a'ount of P1&,%4&,%39.64, issue* 3y Pru*ential "uarantee C Assurance .nc., un*er /on* $o. 62!96%69!4%. 2n the sa'e *ate, the 3an) *e osits of res on*ent with RiAal Co''ercial /an)in( Cor oration 0RC/C1 were (arnishe*. 2n 2cto3er 2%, 144%, res on*ent, throu(h counsel, file* a 'anifestation infor'in( the court that he is voluntarily su3'ittin( to its ,uris*iction. & 5u3se;uently, res on*ent file* a 'otion to ;uash4 the writ conten*in( that the with*rawal of his unassi(ne* *e osits was not frau*ulent as it was a rove* 3y etitioner. 6e also alle(e* that etitioner )new that he 'aintains a er'anent resi*ence at Calle #ictoria, Ciu*a* Re(ina, /atasan 6ills, DueAon City, an* an office a**ress in Ma)ati City at the Eaw @ir' Ro'ulo Ma3anta /uenaventura 5ayoc C De los An(eles, 10 where he is a artner. .n 3oth a**resses, etitioner re(ularly co''unicate* with hi' throu(h its re resentatives. Res on*ent a**e* that he is the 'ana(in( artner of the 6on( 7on( 3ranch of sai* Eaw @ir'B that his stay in 6on( 7on( is only te' oraryB an* that he fre;uently travels 3ac) to the Phili ines. 2n Dece'3er 29, 144%, the trial court issue* an or*er ;uashin( the writ an* hol*in( that the with*rawal of res on*ent-s unassi(ne* *e osits was not inten*e* to *efrau* etitioner. .t also foun* that the re resentatives of etitioner ersonally transacte* with res on*ent throu(h his ho'e a**ress in DueAon City an*For his office in Ma)ati City. .t thus conclu*e* that etitioner 'isre resente* an* su resse* the facts re(ar*in( res on*ent-s resi*ence consi*erin( that it has ersonal an* official )nowle*(e that for ur oses of service of su''ons, res on*ent-s resi*ence an* office a**resses are locate* in the Phili ines. The *is ositive ortion of the court-s *ecision is as follows> G6HRH@2RH, the <R"H$T M2T.2$ T2 D<A56, 3ein( 'eritorious, is here3y "RA$THD, an* the 2RDHR of 29 2cto3er 144% is here3y RHC2$5.DHRHD an* 5HT A5.DH an* the GR.T 2@ attach'ent of the sa'e is here3y D.5C6AR"HD.

52 2RDHRHD.11 Gith the *enial12 of etitioner-s 'otion for reconsi*eration, it elevate* the case to the Court of A eals 0CA! ".R. 5P $o. :0%9&1 via a etition for certiorari . 2n May 10, 1444, the etition was *is'isse* for failure to rove that the trial court a3use* its *iscretion in issuin( the aforesai* or*er. 13 Petitioner file* a 'otion for reconsi*eration 3ut was *enie* on 2cto3er 2&, 1444.19 2n etition with this Court, the case was *is'isse* for late filin( in a 'inute resolution 0".R. $o. 19060:1 *ate* +anuary 14, 2000. 1: Petitioner file* a 'otion for reconsi*eration 3ut was li)ewise 'e()e' *)t+ ,)(-.)t/ 0( M-r1+ 2, 2000.16 Meanwhile, on May 20, 144&, res on*ent file* a clai' for *a'a(es in the a'ount of P2: Million 1% on the attach'ent 3on* 0 oste* 3y Pru*ential "uarantee C Assurance, .nc., un*er +CE091 $o. 010&1, /on* $o. 62! 96%69!4%1 on account of the wron(ful (arnish'ent of his *e osits. 6e resente* evi*ence showin( that his P1:0,000.00 RC/C chec) aya3le to his counsel as attorney-s fees, was *ishonore* 3y reason of the (arnish'ent of his *e osits. 6e also testifie* that he is a (ra*uate of the Ateneo *e Manila <niversity in 14&2 with a *ou3le *e(ree of Hcono'ics an* Mana(e'ent Hn(ineerin( an* of the <niversity of the Phili ines in 14&% with the *e(ree of /achelor of Eaws. Res on*ent li)ewise resente* witnesses to rove that he is a well )nown lawyer in the 3usiness co''unity 3oth in the Phili ines an* in 6on( 7on(. 1& @or its art, the lone witness resente* 3y etitioner was $e o'uceno who clai'e* that she acte* in (oo* faith in alle(in( that res on*ent is a resi*ent of 6on( 7on(. 14 2n Au(ust 30, 2000, the trial court awar*e* *a'a(es to res on*ent in the a'ount of P2: Million without s ecifyin( the 3asis thereof, thus> G6HRH@2RH, re'ises a3ove consi*ere*, an* *efen*ant havin( *uly esta3lishe* his clai' in the a'ount of P2:,000,000.00, ,u*('ent is here3y ren*ere* or*erin( Pru*ential "uarantee C IAssuranceJ Co., which is soli*arily lia3le with laintiff to ay *efen*ant the full a'ount of 3on* un*er Pru*ential "uarantee C Assurance, .nc. +CE091 $o. 010&1, I/on* $o. 62!96%69!4%J, *ate* 29 2cto3er 144% in the a'ount of P1&,%4&,%39.64. An*, consi*erin( that the a'ount of the 3on* is insufficient to fully satisfy the awar* for *a'a(es, laintiff is here3y or*ere* to ay *efen*ant the a'ount of P6,201,26:.31. 52 2RDHRHD.20 The trial court *enie* etitioner-s 'otion for reconsi*eration on 2cto3er 29, 2000. 21 Petitioner elevate* the case to the Court of A eals which affir'e* the fin*in(s of the trial court. .t hel* that in clai'in( that res on*ent was not a resi*ent of the Phili ines, etitioner cannot 3e sai* to have 3een in (oo* faith consi*erin( that its )nowle*(e of res on*ent-s Phili ine resi*ence an* office a**ress (oes into the very issue of the trial court-s ,uris*iction which woul* have 3een *efective ha* res on*ent not voluntarily a eare* 3efore it. The Court of A eals, however, re*uce* the a'ount of *a'a(es awar*e* to etitioner an* s ecifie* their 3asis. The *is ositive ortion of the *ecision of the Court of A eals states> G6HRH@2RH, the a eal is PART.AEE? "RA$THD an* the *ecision a eale* fro' is here3y M2D.@.HD. The awar* of *a'a(es in the a'ount of P2:,000,000.00 is *elete*. .n lieu thereof, Pru*ential "uarantee C IAssurance, .nc.J, which is soli*arily lia3le with a ellant Iherein etitionerJ, is 2RDHRHD to ay a ellee Iherein res on*entJ P2,000,000.00 as no'inal *a'a(esB P:,000,000.00 as 'oral *a'a(esB an* P1,000,000.00 as attorney-s fees, to 3e satisfie* a(ainst the attach'ent 3on* un*er Pru*ential "uarantee C Assurance, .nc. +CE 091 $o. 010&1. 52 2RDHRHD.22 /oth arties 'ove* for reconsi*eration. 2n $ove'3er 21, 2006, the Court of A eals *enie* etitioner-s 'otion for reconsi*eration 3ut (rante* that of res on*ent-s 3y or*erin( etitioner to ay a**itional P:Million as e8e' lary *a'a(es.23 6ence, the instant etition.

At the outset, it 'ust 3e note* that the rulin( of the trial court that etitioner is not entitle* to a writ of attach'ent 3ecause res on*ent is a resi*ent of the Phili ines an* that his act of with*rawin( his *e osits with etitioner was without intent to *efrau*, can no lon(er 3e asse* u on 3y this Court. More i' ortantly, the conclusions of the court that etitioner 3an) 'isre resente* that res on*ent was resi*in( out of the Phili ines an* su resse* the fact that res on*ent has a er'anent resi*ence in Metro Manila where he 'ay 3e serve* with su''ons, are now 3eyon* the ower of this Court to review havin( 3een the su3,ect of a final an* e8ecutory or*er. 5ai* fin*in(s were sustaine* 3y the Court of A eals in CA!".R. 5P $o. :0%&9 an* 3y this Court in ".R. $o. 19060:. The rule on conclusiveness of ,u*('ent, which o3tains un*er the re'ises, reclu*es the reliti(ation of a articular fact or issue in another action 3etween the sa'e arties even if 3ase* on a *ifferent clai' or cause of action. The ,u*('ent in the rior action o erates as esto el as to those 'atters in issue or oints controverte*, u on the *eter'ination of which the fin*in( or ,u*('ent was ren*ere*. The revious ,u*('ent is conclusive in the secon* case, as to those 'atters actually an* *irectly controverte* an* *eter'ine*.29 6ence, the issues of 'isre resentation 3y etitioner an* the resi*ence of res on*ent for ur oses of service of su''ons can no lon(er 3e ;uestione* 3y etitioner in this case. The core issue for resolution is whether etitioner 3an) is lia3le for *a'a(es for the i' ro er issuance of the writ of attach'ent a(ainst res on*ent. Ge rule in the affir'ative. $otwithstan*in( the final ,u*('ent that etitioner is (uilty of 'isre resentation an* su ression of a 'aterial fact, the latter conten*s that it acte* in (oo* faith. Petitioner also conten*s that even if res on*ent is consi*ere* a resi*ent of the Phili ines, attach'ent is still ro er un*er 5ection 1, ara(ra h 0f1, Rule :% of the Rules of Court since he 0res on*ent1 is a resi*ent who is te' orarily out of the Phili ines u on who' service of su''ons 'ay 3e effecte* 3y u3lication. Petitioner-s contentions are without 'erit. Ghile the final or*er of the trial court which ;uashe* the writ *i* not cate(orically use the wor* K3a* faithK in characteriAin( the re resentations of etitioner, the tenor of sai* or*er evi*ently consi*ers the latter to have acte* in 3a* faith 3y resortin( to a *eli3erate strate(y to 'islea* the court. Thus.n the hearin(s of the 'otion, an* oral ar(u'ents of counsels 3efore the Court, it a ears that laintiff /A$7 throu(h its contractin( officers #ice Presi*ent CoraAon /. $e o'uceno an* H8ecutive #ice Presi*ent +ose Ra'on @. Revilla, ersonally transacte* with *efen*ant 'ainly throu(h *efen*ant-s er'anent resi*ence in MHTR2!MA$.EA, either in *efen*ant-s ho'e a**ress in DueAon City or his 'ain 3usiness a**ress at the Ro'ulo Ma3anta /uenaventura 5ayoc C Delos An(eles in MA7AT. an* while at ti'es follow u s were 'a*e throu(h *efen*ant-s te' orary ho'e an* 3usiness a**resses in 6on()on(. .t is therefore clear that laintiff coul* not *eny their ersonal an* official )nowle*(e that *efen*ant-s er'anent an* official resi*ence for ur oses of service of su''ons is in the Phili ines. .n fact, this fin*in( is further confir'e* 3y the letter of Mr. +26$ "272$"GH., +R. Chair'an, H8ecutive Co''ittee of laintiff /A$7, in his letter *ate* 6 2cto3er 144% on the su3,ect loan to *efen*ant of the sa'e law fir' was a**resse* to the R2M<E2 EAG @.RM in MA7AT.. IAnent theJ secon* (roun* of attach'ent 8 8 8 ItJhe Court fin*s that the a'ount with*rawn was not art of *efen*ant-s eso *e osits assi(ne* with the 3an) to secure the loan an* as roof that the with*rawal was not inten*e* to *efrau* laintiff as cre*itor is that laintiff a rove* an* allowe* sai* with*rawals. .t is even note* that when the Court (rante* the rayer for attach'ent it was 'ainly on the first (roun* un*er 5ection 10f1 of Rule :% of the 144% Rules of Civil Proce*ure, that *efen*ant resi*es out of the Phili ines. 2n the a3ove fin*in(s, it is o3vious that laintiff alrea*y )new fro' the 3e(innin( the *eficiency of its secon* (roun* for attach'ent Ii.e.,J *is osin( ro erties with intent to *efrau* his cre*itors, an* therefore laintiff ha* to resort to this 'isre resentation that *efen*ant was resi*in( out of the Phili ines an* su resse* the fact that *efen*ant-s er'anent resi*ence is in MHTR2 MA$.EA where he coul* 3e serve* with su''ons.

2n the a3ove fin*in(s, an* 'ainly on the 'isre resentations 'a*e 3y laintiff on the (roun*s for the issuance of the attach'ent in the verifie* co' laint, the Court conclu*es that *efen*ant has *uly roven its (roun*s in the M2T.2$ an* that laintiff is not entitle* to the attach'ent. 2: Petitioner is therefore 3arre* 3y the rinci le of conclusiveness of ,u*('ent fro' a(ain invo)in( (oo* faith in the a lication for the issuance of the writ. 5i'ilarly, in the case of Hanil Development Co., Ltd. v. Court of Appeals,26 the Court *e3un)e* the clai' of (oo* faith 3y a arty who 'aliciously sou(ht the issuance of a writ of attach'ent, the 3a* faith of sai* arty havin( 3een reviously *eter'ine* in a final *ecision which voi*e* the assaile* writ. ThusA ro os the A lication for +u*('ent on the Attach'ent /on*, Hsco3ar clai's in its etition that the awar* of attorney-s fees an* in,unction 3on* re'iu' in favor of 6anil is IcontraryJ to law an* ,uris ru*ence. .t conten*s that no 'alice or 3a* faith 'ay 3e i' ute* to it in rocurin( the writ. Hsco3ar-s rotestation is now too late in the *ay. The ;uestion of the ille(ality of the attach'ent an* Hsco3ar-s 3a* faith in o3tainin( it has lon( 3een settle* in one of the earlier inci*ents of this case. The Court of A eals, in its *ecision ren*ere* on @e3ruary 3, 14&3 in C.A.!".R. $o. 5P!19:12, voi*e* the challen(e* writ, havin( 3een issue* with (rave a3use of *iscretion. Hsco3ar-s 3a* faith in rocurin( the writ cannot 3e *ou3te*. .ts Petition for the .ssuance of Preli'inary Attach'ent 'a*e such *a'nin( alle(ations that> 6anil was alrea*y a3le to secure a co' lete release of its final collection fro' the MPG6B it has 'ove* out so'e of its heavy e;ui 'ents for un)nown *estination, an* it 'ay leave the country anyti'e. Gorse, its Ex Parte Motion to Resolve Petition alle(e* that Kafter ersonal verification 3y 0Hsco3ar1 of 06anil-s1 e;ui 'ent in Ca(ayan *e 2ro City, it a ears that the e;ui 'ents were no lon(er e8istin( fro' their co' oun*.K All these alle(ations of Hsco3ar were foun* to 3e totally 3aseless an* untrue. Hven assu'in( that the trial court *i* not 'a)e a cate(orical ronounce'ent of 'isre resentation an* su ression of 'aterial facts on the art of etitioner, the factual 3ac)*ro of this case *oes not su ort etitioner-s clai' of (oo* faith. The facts an* circu'stances o'itte* are hi(hly 'aterial an* relevant to the (rant or *enial of writ of attach'ent a lie* for. @inally, there is no 'erit in etitioner-s contention that res on*ent can 3e consi*ere* a resi*ent who is te' orarily out of the Phili ines u on who' service of su''ons 'ay 3e effecte* 3y u3lication, an* therefore ;ualifies as a'on( those a(ainst who' a writ of attach'ent 'ay 3e issue* un*er 5ection 1, ara(ra h 0f1, Rule :% of the Rules of Court which rovi*es> 0f1 .n an action a(ainst a arty 8 8 8 on who' su''ons 'ay 3e serve* 3y u3lication. .n so ar(uin(, etitioner atte' ts to (ive the i' ression that althou(h it erroneously invo)e* the (roun* that res on*ent *oes not resi*e in the Phili ines, it shoul* not 3e 'a*e to ay *a'a(es 3ecause it is in fact entitle* to a writ of attach'ent ha* it invo)e* the ro er (roun* un*er Rule :%. 6owever, even on this alternative (roun*, etitioner is still not entitle* to the issuance of a writ of attach'ent. The circu'stances un*er which a writ of reli'inary attach'ent 'ay 3e issue* are set forth in 5ection 1, Rule :% of the Rules of Court, to wit> 5HC. 1. "roun*s u on which attach'ent 'ay issue. ! At the co''ence'ent of the action or at any ti'e 3efore entry of ,u*('ent, a laintiff or any ro er arty 'ay have the ro erty of the a*verse arty attache* as security for the satisfaction of any ,u*('ent that 'ay 3e recovere* in the followin( cases> 0a1 .n an action for the recovery of a s ecifie* a'ount of 'oney or *a'a(es, other than 'oral an* e8e' lary, on a cause of action arisin( fro' law, contract, ;uasi!contract, *elict or ;uasi!*elict a(ainst a arty who is a3out to *e art fro' the Phili ines with intent to *efrau* his cre*itorsB 031 .n an action for 'oney or ro erty e'3eAAle* or frau*ulently 'isa lie* or converte* to his own use 3y a u3lic officer, or an officer of a cor oration or an attorney, factor, 3ro)er, a(ent, or cler), in the course of his e' loy'ent as such, or 3y any other erson in a fi*uciary ca acity, or for a willful violation of *utyB

0c1 .n an action to recover the ossession of ersonal ro erty un,ustly or frau*ulently ta)en, *etaine*, or converte*, when the ro erty, or any art thereof, has 3een conceale*, re'ove*, or *is ose* of to revent its 3ein( foun* or ta)en 3y the a licant or an authoriAe* ersonB 0*1 .n an action a(ainst a arty who has 3een (uilty of a frau* in contractin( the *e3t or incurrin( the o3li(ation u on which the action is 3rou(ht, or in the erfor'ance thereofB 0e1 .n an action a(ainst a arty who has re'ove* or *is ose* of his ro erty, or is a3out to *o so, with intent to *efrau* his cre*itorsB 0f1 .n an action a(ainst a u3lication. arty who resi*es out of the Phili ines, or on who' su''ons 'ay 3e serve* 3y

The ur oses of reli'inary attach'ent are> 011 to seiAe the ro erty of the *e3tor in a*vance of final ,u*('ent an* to hol* it for ur oses of satisfyin( sai* ,u*('ent, as in the (roun*s state* in ara(ra hs 0a1 to 0e1 of 5ection 1, Rule :% of the Rules of CourtB or 021 to ac;uire ,uris*iction over the action 3y actual or constructive seiAure of the ro erty in those instances where ersonal or su3stitute* service of su''ons on the *efen*ant cannot 3e effecte*, as in ara(ra h 0f1 of the sa'e rovision. 2% Corollarily, in actions in ersona', such as the instant case for collection of su' of 'oney, 2&su''ons 'ust 3e serve* 3y ersonal or su3stitute* service, otherwise the court will not ac;uire ,uris*iction over the *efen*ant. .n case the *efen*ant *oes not resi*e an* is not foun* in the Phili ines 0an* hence ersonal an* su3stitute* service cannot 3e effecte*1, the re'e*y of the laintiff in or*er for the court to ac;uire ,uris*iction to try the case is to convert the action into a rocee*in( in rem or ;uasi in re' 3y attachin( the ro erty of the *efen*ant.24 Thus, in or*er to ac;uire ,uris*iction in actions in ersona' where *efen*ant resi*es out of an* is not foun* in the Phili ines, it 3eco'es a 'atter of course for the court to convert the action into a rocee*in( in remor ;uasi in re' 3y attachin( the *efen*ant-s ro erty. The service of su''ons in this case 0which 'ay 3e 3y u3lication cou le* with the sen*in( 3y re(istere* 'ail of the co y of the su''ons an* the court or*er to the last )nown a**ress of the *efen*ant1, is no lon(er for the ur ose of ac;uirin( ,uris*iction 3ut for co' liance with the re;uire'ents of *ue rocess. 30 6owever, where the *efen*ant is a resi*ent who is te' orarily out of the Phili ines, attach'ent of hisFher ro erty in an action in ersona', is not always necessary in or*er for the court to ac;uire ,uris*iction to hear the case. 5ection 16, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court rea*s> 5ec. 16. Resi*ents te' orarily out of the Phili ines. ! Ghen an action is co''ence* a(ainst a *efen*ant who or*inarily resi*es within the Phili ines, 3ut who is te' orarily out of it, service 'ay, 3y leave of court, 3e also effecte* out of the Phili ines, as un*er the rece*in( section. The rece*in( section referre* to in the a3ove rovision is 5ection 1: which rovi*es for e8traterritorial service ! 0a1 ersonal service out of the Phili ines, 031 u3lication cou le* with the sen*in( 3y re(istere* 'ail of the co y of the su''ons an* the court or*er to the last )nown a**ress of the *efen*antB or 0c1 in any other 'anner which the court 'ay *ee' sufficient. .n Montal3an v. Ma8i'o,31 however, the Court hel* that su3stitute* service of su''ons 0un*er the resent 5ection %, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court1 is the nor'al 'o*e of service of su''ons that will confer ,uris*iction on the court over the erson of resi*ents te' orarily out of the Phili ines. Meanin(, service of su''ons 'ay 3e effecte* 3y 0a1 leavin( co ies of the su''ons at the *efen*ant-s resi*ence with so'e erson of suita3le *iscretion resi*in( therein, or 031 3y leavin( co ies at the *efen*ant-s office or re(ular lace of 3usiness with so'e co' etent erson in char(e thereof. 32 6ence, the court 'ay ac;uire ,uris*iction over an action in ersona' 3y 'ere su3stitute* service without nee* of attachin( the ro erty of the *efen*ant. The rationale in rovi*in( for su3stitute* service as the nor'al 'o*e of service for resi*ents te' orarily out of the Phili ines, was e8 oun*e* in Montal3an v. Ma8i'o, 33 in this wise>

A 'an te' orarily a3sent fro' this country leaves a *efinite lace of resi*ence, a *wellin( where he lives, a local 3ase, so to s ea), to which any in;uiry a3out hi' 'ay 3e *irecte* an* where he is 3oun* to return. Ghere one te' orarily a3sents hi'self, he leaves his affairs in the han*s of one who 'ay 3e reasona3ly e8 ecte* to act in his lace an* stea*B to *o all that is necessary to rotect his interestsB an* to co''unicate with hi' fro' ti'e to ti'e any inci*ent of i' ortance that 'ay affect hi' or his 3usiness or his affairs. .t is usual for such a 'an to leave at his ho'e or with his 3usiness associates infor'ation as to where he 'ay 3e contacte* in the event a ;uestion that affects hi' cro s u . Thus, in actions in ersona' a(ainst resi*ents te' orarily out of the Phili ines, the court nee* not always attach the *efen*ant-s ro erty in or*er to have authority to try the case. Ghere the laintiff see)s to attach the *efen*ant-s ro erty an* to resort to the conco'itant service of su''ons 3y u3lication, the sa'e 'ust 3e with rior leave, recisely 3ecause, if the sole ur ose of the attach'ent is for the court to ac;uire ,uris*iction, the latter 'ust *eter'ine whether fro' the alle(ations in the co' laint, su3stitute* service 0to ersons of suita3le *iscretion at the *efen*ant-s resi*ence or to a co' etent erson in char(e of his office or re(ular lace of 3usiness1 will suffice, or whether there is a nee* to attach the ro erty of the *efen*ant an* resort to service of su''ons 3y u3lication in or*er for the court to ac;uire ,uris*iction over the case an* to co' ly with the re;uire'ents of *ue rocess. .n the instant case, it 'ust 3e stresse* that the writ was issue* 3y the trial court 'ainly on the re resentation of etitioner that res on*ent is not a resi*ent of the Phili ines. 39 23viously, the trial court-s issuance of the writ was for the sole ur ose of ac;uirin( ,uris*iction to hear an* *eci*e the case. 6a* the alle(ations in the co' laint *isclose* that res on*ent has a resi*ence in DueAon City an* an office in Ma)ati City, the trial court, if only for the ur ose of ac;uirin( ,uris*iction, coul* have serve* su''ons 3y su3stitute* service on the sai* a**resses, instea* of attachin( the ro erty of the *efen*ant. The rules on the a lication of a writ of attach'ent 'ust 3e strictly construe* in favor of the *efen*ant. @or attach'ent is harsh, e8traor*inary, an* su''ary in natureB it is a ri(orous re'e*y which e8 oses the *e3tor to hu'iliation an* annoyance.3: .t shoul* 3e resorte* to only when necessary an* as a last re'e*y. .t is clear fro' the fore(oin( that even on the alle(ation that res on*ent is a resi*ent te' orarily out of the Phili ines, etitioner is still not entitle* to a writ of attach'ent 3ecause the trial court coul* ac;uire ,uris*iction over the case 3y su3stitute* service instea* of attachin( the ro erty of the *efen*ant. The 'isre resentation of etitioner that res on*ent *oes not resi*e in the Phili ines an* its o'ission of his local a**resses was thus a *eli3erate 'ove to ensure that the a lication for the writ will 3e (rante*. .n li(ht of the fore(oin(, the Court of A eals ro erly sustaine* the fin*in( of the trial court that etitioner is lia3le for *a'a(es for the wron(ful issuance of a writ of attach'ent a(ainst res on*ent. Anent the actual *a'a(es, the Court of A eals is correct in not awar*in( the sa'e inas'uch as the res on*ent faile* to esta3lish the a'ount (arnishe* 3y etitioner. .t is a well settle* rule that one who has 3een in,ure* 3y a wron(ful attach'ent can recover *a'a(es for the actual loss resultin( therefro'. /ut for such losses to 3e recovera3le, they 'ust constitute actual *a'a(es *uly esta3lishe* 3y co' etent roofs, which are, however, wantin( in the resent case.36 $evertheless, no'inal *a'a(es 'ay 3e awar*e* to a laintiff whose ri(ht has 3een violate* or inva*e* 3y the *efen*ant, for the ur ose of vin*icatin( or reco(niAin( that ri(ht, an* not for in*e'nifyin( the laintiff for any loss suffere* 3y hi'. .ts awar* is thus not for the ur ose of in*e'nification for a loss 3ut for the reco(nition an* vin*ication of a ri(ht. .n*ee*, no'inal *a'a(es are *a'a(es in na'e only an* not in fact.3% They are recovera3le where so'e in,ury has 3een *one 3ut the ecuniary value of the *a'a(e is not shown 3y evi*ence an* are thus su3,ect to the *iscretion of the court accor*in( to the circu'stances of the case.3& .n this case, the awar* of no'inal *a'a(es is ro er consi*erin( that the ri(ht of res on*ent to use his 'oney has 3een violate* 3y its (arnish'ent. The a'ount of no'inal *a'a(es 'ust, however, 3e re*uce* fro' P2 'illion to P:0,000.00 consi*erin( the short erio* of 2 'onths *urin( which the writ was in effect as well as the lac) of evi*ence as to the a'ount (arnishe*.
LMNONPQPrNR3lNSTU NVNWrXY LZNPl lNPL[ lNW3rNPrQR

Ei)ewise, the awar* of attorney-s fees is ro er when a arty is co' elle* to incur e8 enses to lift a wron(fully issue* writ of attach'ent. The 3asis of the awar* thereof is also the a'ount of 'oney (arnishe*, an* the len(th of ti'e res on*ents have 3een *e rive* of the use of their 'oney 3y reason of the wron(ful

attach'ent.34 .t 'ay also 3e 3ase* u on 011 the a'ount an* the character of the services ren*ere*B 021 the la3or, ti'e an* trou3le involve*B 031 the nature an* i' ortance of the liti(ation an* 3usiness in which the services were ren*ere*B 091 the res onsi3ility i' ose*B 0:1 the a'ount of 'oney an* the value of the ro erty affecte* 3y the controversy or involve* in the e' loy'entB 061 the s)ill an* the e8 erience calle* for in the erfor'ance of the servicesB 0%1 the rofessional character an* the social stan*in( of the attorneyB 0&1 the results secure*, it 3ein( a reco(niAe* rule that an attorney 'ay ro erly char(e a 'uch lar(er fee when it is contin(ent than when it is not. 90 All the afore'entione* wei(he*, an* consi*erin( the short erio* of ti'e it too) to have the writ lifte*, the favora3le *ecisions of the courts 3elow, the a3sence of evi*ence as to the rofessional character an* the social stan*in( of the attorney han*lin( the case an* the a'ount (arnishe*, the awar* of attorney-s fees shoul* 3e fi8e* not at P1 Million, 3ut only at P200,000.00. The courts 3elow correctly awar*e* 'oral *a'a(es on account of etitioner-s 'isre resentation an* 3a* faithB however, we fin* the awar* in the a'ount of P: Million e8cessive. Moral *a'a(es are to 3e fi8e* u on the *iscretion of the court ta)in( into consi*eration the e*ucational, social an* financial stan*in( of the arties.91 Moral *a'a(es are not inten*e* to enrich a co' lainant at the e8 ense of a *efen*ant. 92 They are awar*e* only to ena3le the in,ure* arty to o3tain 'eans, *iversion or a'use'ents that will serve to o3viate the 'oral sufferin( he has un*er(one, 3y reason of etitioner-s cul a3le action. Moral *a'a(es 'ust 3e co''ensurate with the loss or in,ury suffere*. 6ence, the awar* of 'oral *a'a(es is re*uce* to P:00,000.00. Consi*erin( etitioner-s 3a* faith in securin( the writ of attach'ent, we sustain the awar* of e8e' lary *a'a(es 3y way of e8a' le or correction for u3lic (oo*. This shoul* *eter arties in liti(ations fro' resortin( to 3aseless an* re osterous alle(ations to o3tain writs of attach'ents. Ghile as a (eneral rule, the lia3ility on the attach'ent 3on* is li'ite* to actual 0or in so'e cases, te' erate or no'inal1 *a'a(es, e8e' lary *a'a(es 'ay 3e recovere* where the attach'ent was esta3lishe* to 3e 'aliciously sue* out.93 $evertheless, the awar* of e8e' lary *a'a(es in this case shoul* 3e re*uce* fro' P:M to P:00,000.00. @inally, contrary to the clai' of etitioner, the instant case for *a'a(es 3y reason of the invali* issuance of the writ, survives the *is'issal of the 'ain case for su' of 'oney. 5uffice it to state that the clai' for *a'a(es arisin( fro' such wron(ful attach'ent 'ay arise an* 3e *eci*e* se arately fro' the 'erits of the 'ain action.99 G6HRH@2RH, the etition is PART.AEE? "RA$THD. The May 31, 2006 Decision of the Court of A eals in CA! ".R. C# $o. %&200 is A@@.RMHD with M2D.@.CAT.2$5. As 'o*ifie*, etitioner Phili ine Co''ercial .nternational /an) is or*ere* to ay res on*ent +ose h Anthony M. Ale,an*ro the followin( a'ounts> P:0,000.00 as no'inal *a'a(es, P200,000.00 as attorney-s feesB an*P:00,000.00 as 'oral *a'a(es, an* P:00,000.00 as e8e' lary *a'a(es, to 3e satisfie* a(ainst the attach'ent 3on* issue* 3y Pru*ential "uarantee C Assurance .nc.,9: un*er +CE 091 $o. 010&1, /on* $o. 62!96%69!4%. $o ronounce'ent as to costs. SO OR%ERE%.

Substituted service of summons (under the present Section 7,Rule 14 of the Rules of Court) is the normal mode of service of summons that will confer jurisdiction on the court over the person of residents temporarily out of the hilippines! "eanin#, service of summons may be effected by (a) leavin# copies of the summons at thedefendant$s residence with some person of suitable discretion residin#therein, or (b) by leavin# copies at the defendant$s office or re#ularplace of business with some competent person in char#e thereof!%ence, the court may ac&uire jurisdiction over an action in personam

by mere substituted service without need of attachin# the property of the defendant! ( C'( vs! )lejandro, *+4 SCR) 7+,, September -..7