G.R. No. 179018 Case Digest

G.R. No. 179018, April 17, 2013

Paglaum Management and Dev't Corp. and Health Marketing Technologies, Inc., petitioners

vs Union Bank of the Philippines, etc., respondents

Ponente: Sereno

Facts:

Union Bank filed this motion for reconsideration saying that restructuring agreement is null and void because the borrower has not complied with the condition precedent of the bank. It is also unenforceable because it was only between Health and Union bank. Paglaum was a party only to the real estate mortgages and not in the restructuring agreement. The venue is exclusively in Cebu City, and the assumption of the RTC's jurisdiction was without basis.

Held:

We deny the Motion for Reconsideration.

Issues raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration before this Court are deemed waived, because these should have been brought up at the first opportunity.7 Nevertheless, there is no cogent reason to warrant a reconsideration or modification of our 18 June 2012 Decision.

Union Bank raises three new issues that require a factual determination that is not within the province of this Court.8 These questions can be brought to and resolved by the RTC as it is the proper avenue in which to raise factual issues and to present evidence in support of these claims.

Anent Union Bank's last contention, there is no need for the Court to discuss and revisit the issue, being a mere rehash of what we have already resolved in our Decision.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, we DENY the Motion for Reconsideration with FINALITY.