Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the Petition being sufficient in form and substance, a stay order pursuant to Section 6, Rule 4 of the Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate Rehabilitation is issued as follows: (a) Staying enforcement of all claims, whether for money or otherwise and whether such enforcement is by court action or otherwise, including the extra-judicial foreclosure proceedings in EJF Case No. 0102, entitled “Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. vs.
WHEREFORE, the Petition being sufficient in form and substance, a stay order pursuant to Section 6, Rule 4 of the Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporate Rehabilitation is issued as follows: (a) Staying enforcement of all claims, whether for money or otherwise and whether such enforcement is by court action or otherwise, including the extra-judicial foreclosure proceedings in EJF Case No. 0102, entitled Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. vs. Nautica Canning Corporation, of the Regional Trial Court of General Santos City, against petitioner FDPHI Group of Companies, comprising of petitioners First Dominion Prime Holdings, Inc., and its subsidiaries, petitioners Nautica Canning Corporation, Maranaw Canning Corporation and Clearwater Tuna Corporation, their guarantors and sureties not solidarily liable with the petitioners; (b) Prohibiting petitioner FDPHI Group of Companies from selling, encumbering, transferring, or disposing in any manner any of its properties, except in the ordinary course of business; (c) Prohibiting petitioner FDPHI Group of Companies from making any payment of its liabilities outstanding as [of] the date of filing of the Petition; x x x x Mr. Monico V. Jacob is appointed rehabilitation receiver who can assume the position upon his taking an oath and after posting a bond in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand (P500,000.00) Pesos, executed in favor of petitioner FDPHI Group of Companies, to guarantee that he will faithfully discharge his duties and the orders of this Court. Let this Stay Order be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks from date of the Order. All creditors and all interested parties (including the Securities and Exchange Commission) are directed to file and serve on the petitioner FDPHI Group of Companies, their verified comment on, or opposition to, the Petition, with supporting affidavits and documents, not later than ten (10) days before the date of the initial hearing. x x x [8] The FDPHI Group of Companies caused the publication of the stay order to give notice to the whole world of the filing and pendency of the rehabilitation proceedings. Thereafter, after due proceedings, the Rehabilitation Court approved the rehabilitation plan submitted by FDPHI and its subsidiaries. On October 24, 2003, the Rehabilitation Court likewise issued an Order [9] approving the Amended Rehabilitation Plan for the FDPHI Group of Companies. The fallo of the October 24, 2003 Order reads: WHEREFORE, petitioners Motion to Amend their Rehabilitation Plan is GRANTED and the Amended Rehabilitation Plan (as of August 26, 2003) which is attached as Annex A and made integral part of this Order is APPROVED. All provisions of the original Rehabilitation Plan approved by this Court on February 22, 2002 that are not inconsistent or incompatible with the said Amended Rehabilitation Plan (as of August 26, 2003) shall remain in effect. Consequently, petitioners are strictl
G.R. No. 196637 - FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, V. UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES [NOW SUBSTITUTED BY BAYAN DELINQUENT LOAN RECOVERY 1 (SPV-AMC), INC.].
G.R. No. 196637 -
CaseROBINSON’S BANK CORPORATION (FORMERLY THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND [PHILS.], INC.), VS. HON. SAMUEL H. GAERLAN, HON. HAKIM S. ABDULWAHID AND HON. RICARDO R. ROSARIO, IN THEIR CAPACITY AS ASSOCIATE JUSTICES RESPECTIVELY OF THE TENTH DIVISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, AND TRADE AND INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT
G.R. No. 195289 -
CaseG.R. No. 206150 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. FASTECH SYNERGY PHILIPPINES, INC. (FORMERLY FIRST ASIA SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY, INC.), FASTECH MICROASSEMBLY & TEST, INC., FASTECH ELECTRONIQUE, INC., AND FASTECH PROPERTIES, INC..DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 206150 -