CASE DIGEST
Pioneer Insurance &
Surety Corp. v. TIG Insurance Co.
G.R. No. 256177, [June 27, 2022]
SECOND, LOPEZ, M.V
Civil Procedure;
Verification and Non-forum shopping; ADR Rules
The enforcement of a foreign arbitral
award will not be refused on the grounds of public policy unless the award
violates fundamental principles of justice and morality or is blatantly
injurious to public interests. Additionally, failure to attach a secretary's
certificate or special power of attorney authorizing the person who signed the
verification and certification against forum shopping does not invalidate a
petition filed under the Special Rules on Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Pioneer Insurance & Surety
Corporation (Pioneer), a domestic corporation, entered into an agreement with
Clearwater Insurance Company (Clearwater), a foreign entity, regarding
reinsurance contracts. Clearwater filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court
of Makati City to confirm, recognize, and enforce an arbitral award issued in
its favor. The arbitral award stemmed from Pioneer's failure to pay Clearwater
certain outstanding amounts, leading Clearwater to initiate arbitration
proceedings in New York. The arbitral panel awarded Clearwater a substantial
sum, which Pioneer failed to pay despite receiving the final award.
Whether or not the Philippine courts
should confirm, recognize, and enforce the arbitral award in favor of
Clearwater despite Pioneer's objections regarding procedural irregularities,
prescription of claims, and violation of public policy.
YES.
The Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts and confirmed, recognized,
and enforced the arbitral award in favor of Clearwater. It found that
Clearwater's petition complied with the Special Rules on Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) regarding verification and certification against forum
shopping, and failure to attach a secretary's certificate did not invalidate
the petition. The Court also dismissed Pioneer's arguments regarding
prescription of claims, noting that Pioneer failed to prove the illegality or
immorality of the arbitral award. Enforcement of the award was deemed not
contrary to public policy, as it did not violate fundamental principles of
justice and morality or injure public interests. Therefore, the Court affirmed
the decisions of the lower courts and upheld the enforcement of the arbitral
award in favor of Clearwater.
No comments:
Post a Comment