1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

Rule 01

GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION 1. Title of the Rules. These Rules shall be known and cited as the
Rules of Court.
SEC. 2. In what courts applicable. These Rules shall apply in all the
courts, except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court.

Section 1 provides the title of the Rule Rules of Court. And Section 2, these rules
shall apply in all the courts except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court. Meaning,
applicable to all courts except when the SC say otherwise. For example: The SUMMARY
RULES on procedure which is applicable to some cases in the MTC.
Another example of when the SC say otherwise is Section 4 that the rules shall not
apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization, insolvency proceedings
and other cases not herein provided for except by analogy. That is formerly Rule 143.
Ngayon nilagay nila sa umpisa. The placement is better so that we will see it immediately.
That is actually not a new provision. Thats an old one. It used to be in Rule 143, now it is
in Rule 1.
Sec. 3. Cases governed. These Rules shall govern the procedure
observed in actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings.
x x x x x x

to

be

Now, some people are asking me, Akala ko ba civil procedure ito, bakit merong
criminal? How come it mentions criminal cases and definitions when it is supposed to be
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure?
NO, Rule 1 is the general provision for the entire Rules of Court. You look at the title,
These rules shall be known as the Rules of Court. This is the common denominator
from the first to the last Rule. Thats why it says there special proceedings, civil cases
and criminal cases. Now we are not interested in criminal cases of course. Civil action na
larg tayo muna.
x x x x x
(a) A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement
or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.
A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are governed by the
rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific rules prescribed for a
special civil action.
x x x x x

Well the definition of a civil action is there. The definition now becomes shorter
compared to the previous definition. Its the same definition. It has only been shortened.
A CIVIL ACTION is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection
of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. So, that is the purpose of a civil suit to
enforce or protect your right or you sue somebody for the purpose of preventing or
redressing a wrong.
CLASSIFICATION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
Q: Classify civil actions.
A: The following:
I.

As to NATURE (Section 3 [a])

a.) Ordinary Civil Actions
b.) Special Civil Actions

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

52

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

II. As to CAUSE or FOUNDATION:

a.) Real Actions
b.) Personal Actions
c.) Mixed Actions
III. As to PLACE OF FILING
a.) Local Actions
b.) Transitory Actions
IV. As to OBJECT
a.) Action In Personam
b.) Action In Rem
c.) Action Quasi In Rem
I. CIVIL ACTION; CLASSIFICATION AS TO NATURE
ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS and SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
The special civil actions are governed by Rules 62 to 71. And the actions not among
those mentioned is automatically ordinary. And even at this stage, you should be able to
give already what. are the special civil actions. So, it is a matter of looking at the table of
contents.
Rules 62 to 71: Interpleader, Declaratory Relief, Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus, Quo
Warranto, Expropriation, Foreclosure of Mortgage, Partition, Forcible Entry, Unlawful
Detainer and Contempt. There is a new one Review of Final Decisions or Resolutions of
the COMELEC and COA under Rule 64. But actually it says there, it is governed by Rule 65.
So in other words Certiorari (Rule 65) pa rin although its a new rule now. Rule 64 is
entitled Review of Decisions of the COMELEC and the COA, but it shall he governed by Rule
65 on Certiorari .
Q: What is so important in distinguishing a special civil action from an ordinary civil
action?
A: What makes an action special is simply because of the fact that there are some
specific rules prescribed for them which are not found in other rules. But to say that the
rules on ordinary civil actions do not apply to special civil actions is false. The law is very
clear. Both are governed by the rules on ordinary civil actions subject to the specific rules.
Therefore, in case of conflict between the specific rule governing a particular type of
civil action and the ordinary, then you follow the specific provision. But if the rules on
special civil actions are silent, apply the ordinary rules.
Give an example of a case where in the absence of a special provision in the rules on
special civil actions the court had to apply the rules on ordinary civil actions by analogy.
The case of
AMBERTI vs. COURT OF APPEALS
195 SCRA 659 [1991]
FACTS: This case involved a petition for certiorari (special civil action under
Rule 65) and then before the respondent could answer the petition, he withdrew
the petition. And then later on he changed his mind. He re-filed the petition. The
question that was asked by the SC is when you file a special civil action for
certiorari and then before the other party could answer you withdraw it, is the
withdrawal with or without prejudice? Can you re-file it?
There is no rule in Rule 65 answering that question so the SC had to resort to
the ordinary rules by analogy.
HELD: Certiorari is similar to appeal although it is not really an appeal. And
the SC looked at the law on appeal. What happens when you perfect your appeal

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

53

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

and then later on you withdraw your appeal? What will happen to the order or
judgment? Rule 50 says that if you withdraw the appeal, the judgment appealed
from will now become final and executory. Therefore, since it is now final and
executory, you cannot change it anymore.
Applying the foregoing rules in a supplementary manner (or by analogy),
upon the withdrawal of a petition in a special civil action before the answer or
comment thereto has been filed, the case shall stand as though no appeal has
been taken, so that the judgment or order of the lower court being questioned
becomes immediately final and executory. Thus, a resolution granting the
withdrawal of such a petition is with prejudice and petitioner is precluded from
bringing a second action based on the same subject matter.
So thats a perfect example of the application of ordinary rules in special civil actions.
Now, there are other classifications of civil actions which are not expressly stated in
Section 3. The only one stated there is ordinary and special.
II. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO CAUSE OF FOUNDATION:
REAL, PERSONAL or MIXED ACTIONS
An action is either a real or personal action. And that is important because of Rule 4
the venue for real actions is different from the venue for personal actions.
A REAL ACTION is briefly described as an action where the issue or the subject involved
is title, ownership, possession or interest over a real property like accion publiciana,
forcible entry, unlawful detainer, foreclosure of mortgage or real property, partition of real
property. (c.f. Section 19, BP 129 controversy relates to real property)
On the other hand, when the issue is not one of those meaning, it is founded on
privity of contract, or on quasi-delict, such as actions for a sum of money, or damages, for
the enforcement or resolution of a contract, or for recovery of personal property, these are
the PERSONAL ACTIONS. (Casilan vs. Tomassi, 90 Phil. 765; Cachero vs. Manila Yellow
Taxicab, 101 Phil. 523; Bautista vs. Piguing, L-10006, Oct. 31, 1957)
Some textwriters give a third classification: the MIXED ACTIONS where there is a
mixture of real and personal actions. Mixed actions are such as pertain in some degree to
both real and personal and, therefore, are properly reducible to neither of them, being
brought for the specific recovery of land and for damages sustained in respect of such
land. (Dela Cruz vs. Seminary of Manila, 18 P{hil. 330)
Like an action for recovery of a piece of land with damages. So thats a mixed action.
Although it is more of real rather than personal. If the damage is only incidental, then it is
more of a real action rather than a personal action like the case of TACAY. The claim for
damages is incidental, the main purpose is recovery of possession of land.
III. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO THE PLACE OF FILING:
LOCAL ACTIONS and TRANSITORY ACTIONS
A LOCAL ACTIONS is an action which can only be instituted in a particular place
whereas a personal action follows the residence of the parties. Good examples of local
actions are real actions. Real actions are also automatically local actions. They can only be
instituted in the place where the property is situated. This is already provided by law (e.g.
accion publiciana, forcible entry, unlawful detainer can only be filed where the land is
situated.)
TRANSITORY ACTIONS are those which follow the party wherever he may reside. (1 Am.
Jur. 430) Personal actions are transitory it is based on where the plaintiff or where the
defendant resides at the option or election of the plaintiff. It is based on the residence of
the parties.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

54

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

We will go to the fourth classification as to object of the suit.

IV. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO OBJECT:
ACTIONS IN PERSONAM, IN REM and QUASI IN REM
ACTIONS IN PERSONAM vs. ACTIONS IN REM
How do we differentiate one from the other? The SC in the past has given the definition
in some cases which definition appears in many books as quoted by authors. But the
trouble with these definitions, sometimes, the more you read it the more you dont
understand what the definition is all about. For example:
If the technical object of the suit is to establish a claim generally against
some particular persons, with a judgment which, in theory, at least, binds his
body. or to bar some individual claim or objection, so that only certain persons
are entitled to be heard, the action is IN PERSONAM. (Grey Alba vs. Dela Cruz,
17 Phil. 49; Sandejas vs. Robles, 81 Phil. 421)
But, if the object of the suit is to bar indifferently all who might be minded to
make an objection of any sort against the rights sought to be established, and if
anyone in the world has a right to be heard on the strength of alleging facts
which, if true, show an inconsistent interest, the action is IN REM. (Grey Alba vs.
Dela Cruz, 17 Phil. 49; Sandejas vs. Robles, 81 Phil. 421)
To simplify the definition:
ACTION IN PERSONAM any judgment that the court will render in that case binds
only the parties to the action and their privies or their successors-in-interest.
ACTION IN REM any judgment with the court will render in the case binds not only
the parties to the case but the whole world, then the action is in rem.
To follow the language of the SC in the case of:
CHING vs. COURT OF APPEALS
181 SCRA 9
HELD: Actions in personam and actions in rem differ in that the former are
directed against specific persons and seek personal judgments, while the latter
are directed against the thing or property or status of a person and seek
judgments with respect thereto as against the whole world.
Action in personam; EXAMPLE:
ILLUSTRATION: Recovery of land, accion publiciana: Momma Jessa vs. Little Lulu. Sabi
ng court: Alright Momma Jessa, you are the winner and you are entitled to the land. Now,
here comes Baby Maya. Momma Jessa says, Wala na iyan, tapos na iyan. In the case, that
was already decided that I am entitled. Sabi ni Baby Maya, Ah, that is between you
(Momma Jessa) and Little Lulu. But Im different. I have evidence to prove that my right is
better than yours. I am not bound by that decision.
Q: Is the judgment rendered in the case between Momma Jessa and Little Lulu binding
on Baby Maya?
A: NO, because Baby Maya is not a party to that case. She cannot be bound by a
judgment where she is not a party. Hence, the action between Momma Jessa and Little
Lulu is an action in personam.
Action in Rem; Example:
ILLUSTRATION #1: Action for annulment of marriage or declaration of nullity of
marriage. Suppose the husband (Joshua) files a case against his wife (Tekla) to annul their
marriage. After trial, the court rendered judgment annulling the marriage of Joshua and

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

55

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

Tekla. It became final. Now, the status of the parties is SINGLE na naman because the
marriage is annulled. Joshua meets another girl, Maying, and courted her and told Maying,
I would like to marry you. Maying said, I cannot marry you because I know you are
married. How can I marry you when you are already married? Joshua said, Not anymore.
Im no longer married because my marriage with Tekla is already annulled and here is the
decision. So, Im single. According Maying, No, I am not bound by that judgment
because I was not a party to that case.
Q: When the court ruled in the case between Joshua and Tekla that the marriage is
annulled and that now you are single, is the judgment binding on anybody?
A: YES. Your status is single and whether you are a party in the case or not, you are
bound by the judgment because it is directed against the whole world. Your status is to
be respected.
ILLUSTRATION #2: When a son, Carlo the Spokes, files a case against the father, Rod
the Tenor
( most outstanding student of Pavarotti ), to be considered a recognized
child and the court said, Yes, you are declared a child of the defendant, Rod the Tenor is
now compelled to recognize you. Your status as a recognized child is not only binding on
your father but is binding on the whole world. Your status is no longer unrecognized.
Take note, an action in rem and in personam have often been confused with the
classification of real and personal action. They sound almost the same. That an action in
personam is also a personal action, or, when an action is in rem it is also a real action it
is not true. That is a different classification. An action could be as to cause it could be
real. As to object, it could be in personam. In the same manner, it could be personal action
but an action in rem. So, these are two different classification.
ILLUSTRATION: Eugenia files a case against Concon to recover the possession of a piece
of land. It is a REAL action. In real action, the subject is possession or ownership of real
property. Any judgment therein binds only the parties, and not the whole world. So, it is
also an action IN PERSONAM. It is a real action as to cause, but as to object, it is in
personam.
ILLUSTRATION: Papa Paul filed a case to annul his marriage with his wife. It is a
PERSONAL action because it does not involved his property. It is about status. But it is also
IN REM because the judgment therein is binding the whole world.
So, magka-iba yan!!! As a matter of fact, it is not only students but even lawyers and
judges interchange one with the other. Last year, I was reading the SCRA, I cannot
remember the decision where before deciding, the SC gave a lecture: The trouble with this
case, the basic error of the court is that it confused real action with an action in rem and
an action in personam with a personal action a real action could be in personam and a
personal action could be in rem. So do not be confused.
QUASI IN REM
Text writers gave a sort of third classification as to object. This is called action quasi in
rem. QUASI means almost. So, quasi in rem is almost in rem. Actually, it is in personam
but almost in rem.
Q: Define action quasi in rem.
A: An action quasi in rem is actually in personam because it is directed only against a
particular individual but the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his property to the
obligation of lien burdening it. The object of the case is the sale or other disposition of
property of the defendant over which you have a right or lien over the property.
EXAMPLE: Foreclosure of Mortgage. Somebody borrows money from you and mortgages
his land as security for the loan. Then later, he cannot pay. You decide to institute
foreclosure proceedings over the mortgage property. I presume you know the object of the
foreclosure. If the property is foreclosed, the property over which you have a lien a right

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

56

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

because it is mortgaged to you that property will be sold at public auction and the
proceeds will be given to the mortgagee or creditor in payment of the obligation.
ILLUSTRATION: An action to foreclose a mortgage is the best example of a civil action
quasi in rem because there is a defendant (mortgagor) and the object of the case is to
have the property mortgaged sold or disposed of in order to satisfy the mortgage lien of
the mortgagee. It is in personam because it is directed only against person who
mortgaged to you. But once the property is foreclosed, practically everybody has to
respect it. Wala ka ng right doon sa property. Naunahan ka na. Thats why it is called quasi
in rem.
Or, to borrow the language of the SC in simplifying the term quasi in rem, quasi in rem
means against the person in respect to the res, against the mortgagor in respect to the
thing mortgaged.
CIVIL ACTIONS vs. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
Q: Define a special proceeding.
A: Rule 1, Section 3 [c]:
c) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a
status, a right, or a particular fact. (2a, R2)

Special proceedings should not be confused with a civil action. Special Proceedings are
governed by Rules 72-109 of the Rules of Court. You look at the table of contents and you
will see them. That is a third year subject.
BAR QUESTION: Distinguish a civil action from a special proceeding.
A: The following:
1.) A CIVIL ACTION is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong, whereas,
A SPECIAL PROCEEDING is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status,
a right, or a particular fact;
2.) In a civil action, there are two (2) definite and particular adverse parties, the
party who demands a right, called a plaintiff, and the other whom the right is
sought, called a defendant, whereas,
In a SPECIAL PROCEEDING, while there is a definite party petitioner, there is no
definite adverse party as the proceeding is usually considered to be against
the whole world;
3.) A CIVIL ACTION requires the filing of formal pleadings, whereas
In a SPECIAL PROCEEDING, relief may be obtained by mere application or
petition;
4.) The period to appeal in CIVIL ACTIONS is generally 15 days and the requirement
is the filing of a notice of appeal, whereas
In SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS the period to appeal is 30 days and aside from notice
of appeal, the law requires the filing of a record on appeal.
Of course the basic distinction is found in Section 3 a civil action is one by which a
party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or
redress of a wrong. Whereas, a special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to
establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.
The object of a civil action is to enforce or protect a right or to prevent or redress a
wrong. But the object of a special proceeding is only to establish a status, a right or a
particular fact.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

57

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

If a creditor sues the debtor to collect an unpaid loan, is that a civil action or a special
proceeding? That is a civil action because the creditor wants to enforce or protect his right
to collect. The creditor is compelling the debtor to pay. It is adversarial.
A good example of a special proceeding is a petition for ADOPTION. It is a special
proceeding because the purpose is to establish a status of parents and child who were not
related to each other. In other words, to create a relation of parents and child under the
law between two people. The procedure in the law of adoption will be studied in the
subject on special proceedings.
There was one article which I read about adoption. This is how the author describes
adoption:
Adoption is one of the sacred mysteries of the law. It concerns the
making of a natural person as a legitimate child of another person without
the intervention of sex. A man becomes a father of the child he did not sire.
A woman becomes the mother of a child she did not bear. It is through the
magic or fiction of the law that adopters become parents of children
unrelated to them by blood, or if related, the relationship is one of
illegitimacy.
So you can adopt you own illegitimate child for the purpose of improving his status. So,
when you file a petition for adoption, you are not suing somebody to enforce or protect a
right or prevent or redress a wrong. The purpose is to create a status of parent and child
between 2 people who are not related to each other.
And when you file a petition for adoption, you are not filing a case against anybody.
Wala ka namang kalaban, eh. There is a petitioner, the one who files, but there is no
definite party. But it is directed against the whole world because once the adoption is
granted, then, as far as the whole world is concerned, they have to respect the status that
this is now your child. Kaya nga, it is in rem. Generally, special proceedings are in rem.
But since it is directed against the whole world, anyone in the world can come forward
and oppose the petition. Kaya nga may publication. You go to court and file your
opposition. So wala kang kalaban na particular person but in reality, anybody in the world
can come forward and oppose it. That's the difference between a special proceeding and
a civil action.
Sec. 4. In what cases not applicable. - These Rules shall not apply to
election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency
proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a
suppletory character and whenever practicable and convenient. (R143a)

The Rules of Court do not apply to certain proceedings in court. A good example is
Section 2 these rules shall apply in all the courts except as otherwise provided by the SC.
Q: What court proceedings where the Rules of Court are not applicable?
A: Election cases, land registration cases, cadastral cases, naturalization cases,
insolvency proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for except by analogy of for
suppletory purposes.
In these cases, the Rules of Court are suppletory in character. In case of conflict
between election law and the Rules of Court, forget the Rules of Court. But when the
Election Code is silent, you apply the Rules of Court by analogy or for suppletory purposes.
There are some election cases which fall within the jurisdiction of the courts, not
necessarily COMELEC. For example, violation of election code where the party may be
adjudged to go to jail. That is a criminal case. That is governed by the rules on criminal
procedure. It is more on imprisonment.
58
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

Sec. 5. Commencement of an action. - A civil action is commenced by the

filing of the original complaint in court.
If an additional defendant is
impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the
date of the filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether the motion
for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the court. (6a)

Q: When is a court action deemed commenced?

A: A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court . Of course
this is not really complete. The filing of the original complaint in court must be
accompanied by the payment of the correct docket fee. A complaint is not deemed filed
until the docket fee is paid. This is important to determine the exact date that the action
has commenced because it is from that moment that the running of the prescriptive
period is interrupted.
The second sentence of Section 5 states that, If an additional defendant is impleaded
in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of
such later pleading
Example: Today (November 19, 1997), I filed a complaint against A. So, the action is
commenced on Nov. 19, 1997. However next month, say, December 19, if there is an
additional defendant, the date of the commencement of the action with regards to the
additional defendant is not the date when the original action is filed, but on the date when
he was included in the amended pleading.
Last section. How do you interpret or construe the Rules of Court?
Sec. 6. Construction. - These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to
promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition
of every action and proceeding. (2a)

So, the Rules of Court shall be interpreted liberally in order to promote their object
which is to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition
of every action and proceeding. The purpose of Procedural Law is to hasten litigation. So
you do not interpret it to prolong a case. That is based on the principle of liberal
construction. According to the SC in one case commenting on this:
DE GUZMAN vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
256 SCRA 171, (en banc)
HELD: The Rules of Court was conceived and promulgated to set forth
guidelines in the dispensation of justice but not to bind and chain the hand
that dispenses it, for otherwise, courts will be mere slaves to or robots of
technical rules, shorn of judicial discretion. That is precisely why courts in
rendering real justice have always been, as they in fact ought to be,
conscientiously guided by the norm that when on the balance, technicalities
take a backseat against substantive rights, and not the other way around.
Truly then, technicalities, should give way to the realities of the situation.
So, the purpose of procedure is to help the hand that dispenses justice and not to tie
these hands. Otherwise, the courts will become mere robots. And, as much as possible,
courts should avoid technicalities. To give way to the realities of the situation.
In one case, Lawsuits, unlike duels, are not to be won by a rapiers thrust. (Alonzo vs.
Villamor, 16 Phil. 315) Hindi yan espadahan na ang unang magsaksak, daog . That is not
the concept of litigation. You do not lie in ambush. Thats another pronouncement.
Thats why the SC said in another case:

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

59

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

SANTOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS

198 SCRA 806
HELD: Procedural rules are not intended to hamper litigants or complicate
litigation but, indeed, to provide for a system under which suitors may be heard
in the correct form and manner and at the prescribed time in a peaceful
confrontation before a judge whose authority they acknowledge. The other
alternative is the settlement of their conflict through the barrel of a gun.
Meaning, the purpose of the rules is for people to fight each other in a civilized way. If
you cannot accept the judicial system, what is your alternative? The only alternative is to
shoot your opponent. We will settle our conflict through the barrel of a gun. Barilan na lang
tayo. So if you do not accept the system of justice, that is your alternative.
For all its shortcomings and its defects, the judicial system is still the civilized way of
dealing with your opponent.
BAR QUESTION: When may lapses in the literal observance in the Rules of Court be
excused?
A: In the case of
ETHEL CASE, ET AL vs. FERNANDO JUGO, ET AL
77 Phil. 523
HELD: Lapses
overlooked:
1.) when
2.) when
3.) when
4.) when

in the literal observance of a rule of procedure will be

they
they
they
they

do not involved public policy;

arose from an honest mistake or unforeseen accident;
have not prejudiced the adverse party; and
have not deprived the court of its authority.

One final note, while it is true that the Rules of Court should be liberally construed as a
general rule, there are certain provision which according to the SC, should be strictly
construed because they were intended precisely to minimize delay.
A good example would be provisions which prescribe the time during which certain acts
are going to be done, like the filing of an answer, because if you will disregard this, it will
promote more delay rather than expedite litigations.
Another example is the filing of a notice of appeal. Hindi mo pwedeng palitan yan.
These are the provisions which are to be strictly construed because while it is true that the
Rules of Procedure are to be liberally construed, it is not a license to completely ignore
these rules. Even the SC made the warning. Like in the cases of
ANTONIO vs. COURT OF APPEALS
167 SCRA 127
HELD: It is the common practice of litigants who have no excuse for not
observing the procedural rules to minimize the same as mere technicalities.
Then they cry for due process. These procedural rules are in fact intended to
ensure an orderly administration of justice precisely to guarantee the enjoyment
of substantive rights.
LIMPOT vs. COURT OF APPEALS
170 SCRA 367
HELD: Procedural rules are not be belittled or dismissed simply because their
non-observance may have resulted in prejudice to a party's substantive rights,
as in this case. Like all rules, they are required to be followed except only when

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

60

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors >

Rule 01
General Provisions

for the most persuasive of reasons they may be relaxed to relaxed to relieve a
litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness
in not complying with the procedure prescribed. While it is true that a litigation is
not a game of technicalities, this does not mean that the Rules of Court may be
ignored at will and at random to the prejudice of the orderly presentation and
assessment of the issues and their just resolution.
This reminds me of a lawyer who did not comply with the rules and he was arguing that
the rules should be liberally construed. And then the judge says: There is a thin line
between liberal construction of the rules and gross ignorance of the rules! Yaan! It is
either you did not follow the rules strictly or you do not really know the rules.

published by
LAKAS ATENISTA 1997 1998: FOURTH YEAR: Anna Vanessa Angeles Glenda Buhion Joseph
Martin Castillo Aaron Philip Cruz Pearly Joan Jayagan Anderson Lo
Yogie Martirizar Frecelyn Mejia Dorothy Montejo Rowena Panales Regina Sison
Ruby Teleron Marilou Timbol Maceste Uy Perla Vicencio Liberty Wong Jude Zamora
Special Thanks to: Marissa Corrales and July Romena
SECOND YEAR: Jonalyn Adiong Emily Alio Karen Allones Joseph Apao
Melody Penelope Batu Gemma Betonio Rocky Cabarroguis Charina Cabrera
Marlon Cascuejo Mike Castaos Karen de Leon Cherry Frondozo Jude Fuentes Maila Ilao
Ilai Llena Rocky Malaki Jenny Namoc Ines Papaya Jennifer Ramos Paisal Tanjili

LAKAS ATENISTA 20012002: REVISION COMMITTEE: Melissa Suarez Jessamyn Agustin

Judee Uy Janice Joanne Torres Genie Salvania Pches Fernandez Riezl Locsin
Kenneth Lim Charles Concon Roy Acelar Francis Ampig Karen Cacabelos
Maying Dadula Hannah Examen Thea Guadalope Myra Montecalvo Paul Ongkingco
Michael Pito Rod Quiachon Maya Quitain Rina Sacdalan Lyle Santos Joshua Tan
Thaddeus Tuburan John Vera Cruz Mortmort

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

61