Legal Battle Heats Up: Court Rejects Yap's Bid to Merge Vic Sotto's "Pepi Paloma" Cases

The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court has rejected director Darryl Yap's attempt to merge two legal cases filed against him by veteran actor Vic Sotto. The cases stem from the controversial trailer for Yap's film, "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma."

Judge Liezel Aquiatan of Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205 issued an order dated January 14, 2025, denying Yap's motion to consolidate the two lawsuits. One lawsuit is a petition for a writ of habeas data, while the other is a criminal complaint for 19 counts of cyber libel.

“The motion for immediate consolidation is devoid of merit. The two legal actions are inherently distinct in nature, purpose, jurisdiction, and procedure,” the presiding judge stated.

The court clarified that under the Revised procedures of Criminal Procedure, habeas data petitions are subject to different procedural procedures than criminal complaints.

“The petition and the criminal complaint are pending before distinct forums and are governed by separate procedural frameworks. Thus, consolidation is legally impermissible,” stated the court, emphasizing that each case must proceed independently.

The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court has not only rejected director Darryl Yap's attempt to merge two legal cases filed against him by Vic Sotto but also clarified that the previously issued writ of habeas data does not constitute a takedown order. This clarification comes in response to an interpretation by Sotto's legal team.

In a separate ruling, the court also denied Sotto's motion to issue a show-cause order against Yap over a social media post. While the court acknowledged minor deviations from its directives, it found that the post did not violate the gag order. However, the court reminded Yap of the existing gag order and the potential "severe consequences" for future violations.

Sotto initially filed a petition for a writ of habeas data to demand the removal of all promotional materials for Yap's film, "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma," and a separate criminal complaint accusing Yap of spreading "malicious and defamatory statements" after the film's trailer linked him to the alleged assault of Paloma in the 1980s.

Despite these rulings, the preliminary hearing scheduled for January 15th and the summary hearing set for January 17th will proceed as planned.