Case Digest (G.R. No. 212904)
Facts:
Yolanda Villanueva-Ong v. Juan Ponce Enrile, G.R. No. 212904, November 22, 2017, the Supreme Court First Division, Tijam, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Yolanda Villanueva-Ong is a columnist who on October 16, 2012 published an opinion piece in the Philippine Star criticizing respondent Juan Ponce Enrile, then a public official and senatorial candidate’s father. On December 4, 2012, respondent filed a civil complaint for damages for libel against petitioner in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasay City, Branch 118 (Civil Case No. R-PSY-12-12031-CV), alleging the article charged him with being a liar, fraud, manipulator and implicated him in car-smuggling.
On January 17, 2013, petitioner filed an Answer that included two compulsory counterclaims alleging harassment, malice and bad faith in respondent’s filing of the libel suit and seeking damages under Article 32 of the Civil Code for alleged obstruction of her freedom of speech. Respondent moved to dismiss the counterclaims, arguing they were permissive and thus required compliance with initiatory pleading requirements (payment of docket fees and certification against forum shopping).
The RTC, in an April 26, 2013 Order, required petitioner to pay docket fees within 15 days or face dismissal of the counterclaims; that Order was affirmed on reconsideration in a July 22, 2013 Order. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA, in a Decision dated March 4, 2014 (authored by Associate Justice Celia C. Librea-Leagogo, with Justices Franchito N. Diamante and Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles concur...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Are petitioner’s counterclaims compulsory or permissive in nature? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)