Galedo, Abegail P.

124. UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORP VS. LIM

PETITIONER : Universal Robina Corp

RESPONDENT : Albert Lim
DATE : October 5, 2007
PONENTE : Sandoval-Gutierrez, J.
TOPIC : Venue

FACTS:

 URC and Albert Lim entered into a Contract of Sale. Petitioner sold to respondent grocery
products amounting to 808,059.88 but only partial payment was made. Respondent refused to
settle his obligations.
 Petitioner filed with RTC a complaint for sum of money. The trial court dismissed the complaint
motu proprio on grounds of lack of jurisdiction and improper venue. It alleged that plaintiff
corporation has principal office in Pasig while defendant is from Laoag City.
 Petitioner filed an amended complaint alleging that the parties agreed that proper venue for any
dispute is Quezon City.
 Respondent failed to file an answer and trial court dismissed the complaint since there is no
connection between quezon city and the parties.

ISSUE:

WON trial court may dismiss motu proprio complaint on ground of improper venue

HELD:

 Where the parties validly agreed in writing before filing of the action on exclusive venue, the court
may not dismiss an action motu proprio on the ground of improper venue as it is not one of the
ground wherein court may dismiss an action motu proprio on the basis of pleadings.
 Defendants fails to challenge timely venue in a motion to dismiss as provided under Rule 4 of the
Rules of court and allows trial to be held and decision rendered. He cannot on appeal or in special
action be permitted to challenge the wrong venue which is deemed waived.
 It is grossly erroneous for trial court to motu proprio dismissed the complaint without allowing
procedure outline in the rules of court to take proper course.