Gesmundo v JRB Realty Corp (Civil Procedure)

Gesmundo v. JRB Realty Corp

Facts:

·       Virgilio Gesmundo (lessee) and JRB Realty Corp. (lessor)

·       Both entered into a lease contract covering Room 116 at Pasay City

·       Petitioner was “shocked and stunned” for sudden termination of lease contract because he is an employee of a corporation who did not pay respondent his retainer’s fee (he did not want any of its employees in its premises;

Lower court decisions:

·       RTC of Makati (complaint for damages):

-       Trial court dismissed because of “improper venue”;

-       There was an agreement in the contract that any action relating to the lease contract should be filed before the RTC of Pasay;

-       Petitioner argues it only constitutes as an alternative forum;

·       Went directly to SC

Issue:

WON the venue was properly laid in RTC of Makati.

Ruling: No, venue improperly laid.

-       Rule 4, Sec. 3:Venue by agreement. By written agreement, the venue of an action may be changed or transferred from one province to another

-       Petitioner contention 1: neither party lives in pasay city (SC: this issue is irrelevant since parties do stipulate concerning venue of an action without regard to their residence)

-       Petitioner contention 2: cause of action is not based on the lease contract (SC: their cause of action is ultimately anchored  on their right under the lease contract)

Ultimate doctrine:

-       Petitioner contention: ground for improper venue is a “mere technicality”, which does not even pretend to invoke justice

“Procedural rules are not to be belittled or dismissed simply because their non-observance may have resulted in prejudice to a party’s substantive rights. Like all rules, they are required to be followed only for the most persuasive reasons when they may be relaxed to relieve litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed.”