Dear Atty. Gab

Musta Atty?

I’m writing to you today because I’m in a confusing situation regarding my property. I own a small plot of land in Cavite, which has been vacant for a few years. Recently, I received a formal letter, looks like a court summons, saying someone has filed an ejectment case against me, claiming I’m illegally occupying it!

The complaint was filed not by the person claiming ownership directly, but by someone who says they are that person’s ‘representative’ or ‘attorney-in-fact’. I was doing some checking, and I have reason to believe that this representative might not have had the proper legal document, like a Special Power of Attorney (SPA), signed by the supposed owner at the exact time they filed the case in court. The SPA they presented later seems to have been executed weeks after the case was already initiated.

Does this make the case against me invalid? Can someone just file a lawsuit on behalf of another person without having the official authority ready from the very beginning? I’m really worried and don’t know how to respond to this. Any guidance you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Ricardo Cruz

Dear Ricardo Cruz

Thank you for reaching out and sharing the details of your situation. Receiving a court summons, especially one you believe is improperly filed, can certainly be stressful. Let’s address your concern about the authority of the person who filed the ejectment case on behalf of the alleged owner.

You’ve touched upon a crucial point in legal procedure: the requirement for a representative to have proper authorization from the principal (the actual party) at the time a lawsuit is initiated. Philippine law is quite clear on this matter, and the authority of the person filing a case directly impacts the validity of the complaint and the court’s power to hear the case.

Does the Person Suing You Have the Legal Right To Do So?

Under the Rules of Court, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest. A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. While a party may be represented by an agent or attorney-in-fact, that representative must be duly authorized.

A critical aspect highlighted in jurisprudence is that the authority, often in the form of a Special Power of Attorney (SPA), must exist at the time the complaint is filed in court. It is not enough that the authority is obtained later or presented only after the case has begun. The legal basis for the action must be complete from the moment it is initiated.

Hence, the present petition, where one of the important issues for resolution is the effect of Rosauro Diaz’s (respondent’s representative) failure to present proof of his authority to represent respondent (plaintiff before the MeTC) in filing the complaint.

As illustrated in various cases decided by the Supreme Court, the absence of proof of authority at the time of filing is not a mere technicality that can be easily cured later. The representative’s lack of authority at that specific moment has a fundamental impact on the legal standing of the complaint itself.

…said SPA was executed only on November 16, 1994, or more than a month after the complaint was filed, appearing to have been notarized by one Robert F. McGuire of Santa Clara County.

When a complaint is filed by someone who is not properly authorized to act on behalf of the plaintiff at the time of filing, the legal consequence is severe. The complaint is considered effectively non-existent from a legal standpoint.

“[i]f a complaint is filed for and in behalf of the plaintiff [by one] who is not authorized to do so, the complaint is not deemed filed. An unauthorized complaint does not produce any legal effect. Hence, the court should dismiss the complaint on the ground that it has no jurisdiction over the complaint and the plaintiff.”

This principle emphasizes that the court’s power to proceed with the case, known as jurisdiction, is not properly invoked if the initiating document (the complaint) was filed by someone without the necessary legal standing or authority at that specific point in time. Without a validly filed complaint, the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiff or the case’s subject matter.

“[i]n order for the court to have authority to dispose of the case on the merits, it must acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties. Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiffs upon the filing of the complaint, and to be bound by a decision, a party should first be subjected to the court’s jurisdiction. Clearly, since no valid complaint was ever filed with the [MeTC], the same did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of respondent [plaintiff before the lower court].”

Therefore, if you have strong reason to believe, and can later prove, that the representative who filed the ejectment case against you did not possess a valid and effective SPA at the moment they filed the complaint, this could be a significant ground for the dismissal of the case. The court cannot proceed with a case that was not validly initiated.

Practical Advice for Your Situation

• Carefully examine the date indicated on the Special Power of Attorney (SPA) presented by the representative.
• Compare the SPA’s execution date with the exact date the complaint was filed in court.
• If the SPA is dated after the complaint was filed, highlight this discrepancy.
• Note any issues with the SPA’s formal requirements, such as notarization or authentication if executed abroad.
• Consult with a lawyer immediately to help you prepare your Answer to the complaint.
• In your Answer, specifically raise the defense of lack of the representative’s authority to file the suit at the time of its commencement.
• Be prepared to present evidence supporting your claim that the authority was lacking or defective when the case was filed.
• Act promptly within the period given by the court to file your response.

Addressing the issue of the representative’s authority early in the proceedings is crucial. If successful, it could lead to the dismissal of the ejectment case against you on jurisdictional grounds, without even needing to delve into the merits of who rightfully owns the property.

Hope this helps!

Sincerely,
Atty. Gabriel Ablola

For more specific legal assistance related to your situation, please contact me through gaboogle.com or via email at connect@gaboogle.com.

Disclaimer: This correspondence is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please schedule a formal consultation.