Practice question
The defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines. An applicant properly invokes Section 1(f) and establishes all its other requirements. The opponent insists that this paragraph additionally requires proving imminent departure with intent to defraud under Section 1(a). Which is sound?
- The distinct statutory grounds must not be collapsed into one universal departure test.
- Every ground incorporates all elements of every other ground.
- Section 1(f) has no independent meaning.
- Nonresidence itself conclusively proves all fraud allegations on the merits.
- The applicant need not establish any other attachment requisite.
Legal references
- Rules of Court, Rule 57 Sections 1-4 and 12-13, attachment grounds, issuance and discharge: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html
- Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Pobre, G.R. No. 259709, August 30, 2023, main decision, distinct attachment requirements and discharge avenues: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/aug2023/gr_259709_2023.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.