SEC Adm. Case No. 07-98-6025 Mariano G. Tituan, et. al.

Securities and Exchange Commission SEC Bldg. EDSA, Greenhills, Mandatuyong City Republic of the Philippines

IN RE: PEtItIOn FOr voLuntARY DISSOLUTION OF AEROSPACE TRADERS CORPORATION,

Mariano G. Tituan, et al. Petitioners. SEC Case No. 07-98-6025 For: Voluntary Dissotution

ORDER

Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. (MBTC). This resolves the Motion to Dismiss dated 21 June 2010 filed by creditor

scheduled hearing last 17 June 2010. They did not file any prior motion for will appear in petitioners' behaif. Petitioners explained that their counsel was suddenly unavailable due to its commitments in another case for another client. postponement of the hearing. It was only during the scheduled hearing date itself that petitioners' counsel sent its liaison officer to inforim this Office that no counsel The following facts are. settled: Petitioners failed to appear during the

culpabie for. want of due diligence in failing "to proceed with reasonable failure to prosecute is whether, unde the prevailing circumstances, the plaintiff is promptitude.1 The true test for the exercise of the power to dismiss a case on the ground of

regardless of counsel's availability, the petitioners themselves should have appeared. should afford equal attention to all the cases they handle. We find it irregular that all members of the law firm suddenly became unavailable on the hearing date. Further We cannot accept their explanation as a valid excuse. Petitioners' counsel

proceedings before the Regional Trial Court. We note that ever since the said 28 the Commission's 28 October 2002 Order directing petitioners to initiate the submission of a Joint Manifestation regarding the adoption of the pre-trial More importantly, as of the present time, petitioners have yet to comply with

Suarez v. Judge Villarama, Jr., G.R. No. 124512, 27 June 2006, 493 SCRA 74, 84.

SEC Case No. 07-98-6025 Order re: Motion to Dismiss Page 2 of 2 Petition for Dissolution of Aerospace Traders Corp

October 2002 Order was issued there was no further feedback or action on the part of the petitioners. It was only when the Commission, motu proprio, set this case for hearing starting this year that proceedings in this case continued.

lack of initiative cause the proceedings to remain dormant for a period of more than seven years. the same to the creditors for approval as eariy as 07 February 2003, this fact sill does agree on the Joint Motion. Sadly, petitioners did not do anything. Their inaction and not excuse petitioners from being at fault for the delay in this case. Petitioners shouid have then issued an appropriate Order if it appeared that the creditors were unwilling to have updated the Commission on the status of the Joint Motion. The Commission could Indeed, even if it is true that petitioners drafted a Joint Motion and submitted

petitioners. Further, petitioners' actions undermined the dignity of the proceedings and of the Commission. Undoubtedly, there is manifest negligence and lack of interest on the part of

GRANTED. The Petition for Voluntary Dissolution of AEROSPACE TRADERS CORPORATION is hereby DISMISSED with finality. WHEREFORE, all premises considered, the Motion to Dismiss is hereby

SO ORdEREd.

Mandaluyong City, 22 Juiy 2010.

FE B. BArin S

Chairperson

MA. JUANITA E. CUETO S 9&w`C RAUL J. PALABRICA

Commissioner Commissioner

Manuel H Commissioner UBERTO B. GAITE ELAdIo Mi JAlA Commjssioner