Boston Equity Resources vs. CA G.R. No.

173946, June 19, 2013

Facts:

On December of 1997 Petitioner field a complaint for a sum of money with a prayer for
the issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment against the spouses Toledo . The latter filed an
answer in which she alleged that her husband Manuel and co-defendant has already died in
1995. Thus petitioner filed a motion to require respondent to disclose the heirs of Manuel.
Petitioner filed a motion for substitution praying that his children be substituted as party-
defendants, which was granted. Pre-trial ensued and plaintiff presented his evidence.

Six years after filing the amended answer respondent was given a period of fifteen days
to file a demurrer to evidence, however she instead filed for a motion to dismiss alleging that that
Jurisdiction over the person of the parties namely Manuel was not acquired by the court and
failure to implead an indispensable party entitled her to a dismissal of the case against her. The
RTC denied the motion to dismiss on grounds that the answer should have been filed before the
filing of an answer and upon its reconsideration it was denied on grounds of estoppel, since
respondent failed to raise the issue despite several chances to do so.
Upon certiorari, the petition was granted on grounds that the estate of Manuel should have been
impleaded in order to proplery acquire jurisdition and that issue on jurisdiction may be raised at
any stage of the proceedings. Petitioner filed this petition before the CA contending that the
mere non-joinder of parties does not warrant dismissal and that respondent is already estopped
from questioning the trial courts jurisdiction

Issue:
WON there is estoppel
Held:

NO. The aspect of jurisdiction which may be barred from being assailed as a result of
estoppel by laches is jurisdiction over the subject matter. Thus, in Tijam, the case relied upon by
petitioner, the issue involved was the authority of the then Court of First Instance to hear a case
for the collection of a sum of money in the amount of P1,908.00 which amount was, at that time,
within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the municipal courts. In any case, respondent cannot
claim the defense since "lack of jurisdiction over the person, being subject to waiver, is a
personal defense which can only be asserted by the party who can thereby waive it by
silence.he principle of estoppel by laches finds no application in this case. Instead, the principles
relating to jurisdiction over the person of the parties are pertinent herein. Since the defense of lack of
jurisdiction over the person of a party to a case is not one of those defenses which are not deemed
waived under Section 1 of Rule 9, such defense must be invoked when an answer or a motion to
dismiss is filed in order to prevent a waiver of the defense. 37 If the objection is not raised either in a
motion to dismiss or in the answer, the objection to the jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff or
the defendant is deemed waived by virtue of the first sentence of the above-quoted Section 1 of Rule
9 of the Rules of Court

In the case at bar, the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of Manuel
since there was no valid service of summons upon him, precisely because he was already dead
even before the complaint against him and his wife was filed in the trial court. However, The
courts failure to acquire jurisdiction over ones person is a defense which is personal to the
person claiming it. Neither can petitioner invoke such ground, on behalf of Manuel, so as to reap the
benefit of having the case dismissed against all of the defendants. Failure to serve summons on
Manuels person will not be a cause for the dismissal of the complaint against the other defendants,
considering that they have been served with copies of the summons and complaints and have long
submitted their respective responsive pleadings.

since Manuel was already dead at the time of the filing of the complaint, the court never
acquired jurisdiction over his person and, in effect, there was no party to be substituted.