[ad_1]
This is an AI-generated summary and may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
A 2014 Supreme Court ruling ordered the release of seized palm company shares and funds, but it took the companies nine years to file motions for enforcement, a delay Sandiganbayan said was unjustified
MANILA, Philippines — The Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) will take custody of the stocks and funds of seized companies owned by the presidential family, the Sandiganbayan court ruled. The late Benjamin “Coco” Romualdsbrother of former first lady Imelda Marcos and father of current House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
A 2014 Supreme Court ruling ordered the release of the assets of Palm Avenue Holdings (Palm Companies) and Palm Avenue Real Estate Development, but because the two companies did not file a motion for execution until April 2024, it was considered too late.
“Palm Corp. can only file a motion for execution before February 10, 2020 (the last day of the five-year period, Sunday, February 9),” reads the six-page resolution issued by the Sandiganbayan Sixth Division on Friday, July 19.
what happened
The disputed assets are the subject of litigation in Civil Case 0035, a government action seeking forfeiture of real properties valued at P10.34 billion and stocks of various companies valued at P164 million.
In November 2010, the Sandiganbayan Branch 5 rejected the government lawyers’ argument that the palm company’s shares and funds were illegally obtained.
The anti-corruption court insisted that the assets belonged to the family of former ambassador Romualdez and ordered the government to lift the assets of the two companies.
The PCGG, the agency tasked with recovering ill-gotten gains from the Marcos family, filed a case with the Supreme Court in 2011 seeking to overturn the Sandiganbayan ruling, but the high court upheld the anti-graft court’s decision in 2014.
The Supreme Court’s ruling became final and effective in February 2015, but Palm did not file a motion to enforce it until nine years later.
According to Supreme Court rules, “a final, enforceable judgment or order may be enforced upon motion within five years from the date on which it was entered.”
The Sandiganbayan court claimed that Palmetto failed to justify the delay in filing its motion for execution.
“Any writ of execution issued on motion outside the said five-year period shall be void,” the ruling reads. “However, the Supreme Court has held that an enforceable judgment or order may be enforced on motion even after the said five-year period, in exceptional circumstances or where justifiable grounds are shown.”
The decision was written by Associate Judge Sarah Jane Fernandez; Associate Judges Michael Frederick Musngi and Kevin Narce Vivero concurred. – Rappler.com
[ad_2]
Source link
