This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-03-23 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| aggrieved party must initiate a criminal action where the employee's delict and corresponding primary liability are established.[47] If the present action proceeds from a delict, then the trial court's jurisdiction over Foronda is necessary. However, the present action is clearly for the quasi-delict of Mrs. Cerezo and not for the delict of Foronda. The Cerezo spouses' contention that summons be served anew on them is untenable in light of their participation in the trial court proceedings. To uphold the Cerezo spouses' contention would make a fetish of a technicality.[48] Moreover, any irregularity | |||||