Presidential Commission on Good Government v.

Sandiganbayan FACTS: PCGG filed with Sandiganbayan a complaint against Cuenca for the sequestration of PNCC for acquiring in an illegal manner assets in the Cuenca-owned corporations. WUTIC, a foreign corp not registered to do business in the Phil., claiming to be an assignee of Asia Hardwood Ltd., a Hongkong based company owned by Cuenca, filed with RTC a complaint against Phil. Natl. Construction Corp. (PNCC) to enforce foreign judgment which WUTIC obtained in Hongkong against PNCC owned corporation. RTC rendered judgment in favor of WUTIC. CA affirmed decision of RTC. PCGG issued en banc a resolution enjoining PNCC and/or any person, agent, representative acting in its behalf and stead from taking any action that would dissipate and/or affect the assets of PNCC, without getting prior clearance and approval from Sandiganbayan. Sandiganbayan dismissed petition and ruled it had no jurisdiction to annul judgment of RTC because not every claim against a sequestered asset falls within its jurisdiction.

ISSUE: WON Sandiganbayan was correct in dismissing the complaint?

HELD: NO, Sandiganbayan abused its discretion in summarily dismissing the complaint without MTD from any of the parties. SANDIGANBAYAN HAS THE JURISDICTION TO ANNUL THE DECISION OF RTC. Sandiganbayan has original and exclusive jurisdiction not only over principal causes of action involving recovery of ill gotten wealth, but also over all incidents arising from or related to such cases. The civil case in the RTC is considered as arising from or related to the recovery of ill gotten wealth, then the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction to annul the decision of the RTC in such case.