Download PLATINUM v

PLATINUM v. PANLILO

-
orders of Judge Diokno did not affect the
In 1994, Platinum filed a case before the
jurisdiction of the Makati RTC branch 62.
RTC for Collection of money against Pan
Asiatic and its president, Galvez. The
-
The stocks to Manila Polo Club Propriety
Membership was levied and sold to Ms.
Khoo to satisfy the judgement.

PR Panlilo filed for a motion to intervene
claiming that the stocks were mortgaged
by Galvez to him to secure her debt. The
RTC denied this motion. The sale was
later declared null and void.

Galvez and made another attempt to
in
the
first
case
by
incorporating a motion to consolidate.

Judge
Tensuan
(Panlilo
Collection)
granted the motion on the condition that
Judge
Diokno
(Platinum
Collection)
consents. Judge Diokno consented.

Platinum filed for a petition for certiorari
before the CA assailing Judge Diokno’s
order. The CA annulled Diokno’s order
but left it to Diokno to decide to return
Panlilo’s collection suit to Judge Tensuan
or decide it.

Platinum assails the jurisdiction of the
Makati RTC on the ground that the order
of Judge Diokno was annulled.
WON the Makati RTC has jurisdiction?
HELD:
decision rendered therein.
-
Accordingly,
where
a
court
has
jurisdiction over the person and the
subject matter, as in the instant case, the
decision on all questions arising from
the case is but an exercise of such
jurisdiction. Any error that the court may
commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction is
merely an error of judgment which does
Panlilo filed a collection case against
intervene
Jurisdiction refers to the authority to
decide a case, not the orders or the
RTC ruled in favor of Platinum.

YES. The fact that the CA annulled the
not affect its authority to decide the case,
much less divest the court of the
jurisdiction over the case.