CIVIL PROCEDURE - JUDGE MARINAS

JUNE 13, 2013

CIVIL ACTION
>Civil Actions: Sum of Money, Recovery of Possession, Forcible Entry, Damages, Specific
Performance, etc.
>Multiple Issues Multiple parties
>Parties: Plaintiff (Brings the Action) and Defendant (One whom action is brought against)
>Whoever is aggrieved must have a Cause of Action (COA)
>COA Elements:
1. Plaintiff (petitioner) has a Right
2. Defendant (respondent) has the obligation to respect said Right
3. Defendant violates the plaintiffs Right
4. The violation causes damages to the plaintiff
>Eg 1. Plaintiff and defendant enter into a contract of loan. The defendant executes a
promissory note (which states that loan is due on May 1, 2013). Does the plaintiff have a
right? Yes - the right to be paid. The plaintiff parted with his money and thus has the right
to be paid. (Proof is promissory note which the defendant executed). The defendant has
the obligation to respect said right. Thus, defendant has the obligation to pay.
(Considering that he executed the PN).

Upon due date, no payment was made by

defendant. Come weeks, still, no payments were made. Is there a violation of the right of
the plaintiff? YES, since the plaintiff has the right to be paid. Violation of plaintiffs right
caused damage (plaintiff loses money). Are all the elements of COA present? If yes, then
there is a COA.
>Eg 2. Loan Due May 1, 2013. Secured January 1, 2013. March 1, 2013, the plaintiff
already made a demand for the payment. Defendant asserts due date on PN so he does
not pay plaintiff. Plaintiff files a case. Is there a COA? None. Plaintiff has the right to be
paid, and defendant has the obligation to pay, but the latter has not yet violated the
Plaintiffs right because said violation will only come if on the due date there is no
payment. Due date is May 1, 2013, not March 1, 2013. Thus, if there is no violation, then
how can it cause damages? Thus, plaintiffs case can be dismissed for lack of cause of
action. Elements 3 and 4 of COA are not satisfied.
> The moment that a plaintiff has a COA, can he now proceed to court? NOT YET. WHY?
Remember the law on LGC (PD 1508) as to referral to the Barangay Lupon. Barangay

Lupon: Lupon Chairman (Brgy Capt). Mode by which the Lupon gathers the plaintiff and
defendant to forge a settlement/agreement to prevent clogging of dockets of court. Even
criminal procedures penalty below 1 year and fine of P5000.00. In civil cases- ALL CASES
regardless of what nature will have to be referred to the Brgy. Lupon.
>If no settlement is reached in the Brgy, the Brgy issues a Certificate to file action. This is
to be attached in the complaint (pleading) that is to be filed before the Court. That this
case was referred to the Brgy but no settlement has been reached, the Cert to file action is
hereto attached as Annex XXThis shows compliance to referral to the Lupon.
>What is the effect if there is failure of referral to Lupon and there are no exceptions to
nonreferral? Action is dismissible under Rule 16, Par J Failure to comply with the condition
precedent Referral to the Lupon is a condition precedent (Grounds for Motion to Dismiss
are contained in Rule 16 Pars. A-J). The only ground where nonreferral to the lupon is
clearly stated as a ground is found in the Rules of Summary Procedure (Rule 70 pa, under
Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer)

EXCEPTIONS FROM REFERRAL TO LUPON

1) FIRST EXCEPTION:
>Parties are residents of different Cities or Municipalities. Eg. Plaintiff is a resident of Brgy.
ABC, and so is the defendant.

Should they refer their problem to the Lupon? Yes.

Supposing plaintiff is a resident of Brgy. ABC and respondent is a resident of Aurora Hill,
should they bring the case before the Lupon? Yes. Even if belonging to different Brgys in
the same City or Municipality, referral to the Lupon is still a must. Supposing P is from
Baguio and D is from LTB, must they still refer the case to the Lupon? No more. This is an
exception.
>Take note that no lawyer must appear as a counsel before the Lupon.

What if the

plaintiff or any of the parties is incapable/ is disabled/ is incapacitated? Then can be

assisted by a next of kin who is not a lawyer.

Supposing there is an exception (eg.

Residents of different Cities/ Municipalities), then state that this case has not been
referred to the Lupon because plaintiff and defendant are residents of different
Cities/Municipalities.
2.) SECOND EXCEPTION:
>One of the Parties is the Government or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof. If you
are suing the Govt, Municipality, or Brgy, then bring the action to Court.

State in the

complaint that, This has not been referred to the Lupon because one of the parties is a
Govt institution/subidivision/instrumentality
3.) THIRD EXCEPTION:
>One of the Parties is an Artificial Person (A creation of law, eg. Corporation, association,
partnership, organization, etc.). State in the complaint the above reason.
4.) FOURTH EXCEPTION:
If the properties subject of the case are located in different Cities/Municipalities (Real
Properties)

VENUE
1.) BARANGAY:
>If parties reside in different Brgys (Same City/Municipality), then complaint may be
brought before either Brgy Lupon (under the law, any of the 2 Lupons).
>For enforcement of settlement, it is much better that said complaint is brought before a
defendants Brgy.

Eg. Plaintiff (Brgy. ABC) and Defendant (Aurora Hill).

May 1, 2013,

demand letter was ignored. Plaintiff brings case before Aurora Hill Lupon. Lupon calls for
the defendant and a settlement is reached. Plaintiff allows defendant to pay in installment
(1st installment June 10, and every 10th of the month thereafter P20,000.00). Defendant
binds himself to do so.

Settlement signed by plaintiff and defendant. (The moment a

settlement is reached in the Brgy, it becomes final and executory from the execution of
the settlement within 10 days. If neither would question or repudiate the settlement after
the end of the 10-day period, the agreed settlement becomes final and has the binding
force and effect of a decision between the parties.

If there is repudiation, then get a

Certificate of no action and file the case in court.

>Whose responsibility is it to enforce the settlement in the Brgy? The Lupon. The Lupon
will find it easier to enforce settlement against their own constituent

and thus avoid

inconvenience and delay.

>Another scenario. Eg. Defendant pays for 2 months but then fails to pay later. The Brgy
Lupon has 6 months to enforce settlement. 6 months went by and still no payment. Brgy.
Is helpless and cant enforce. What is the Remedy of plaintiff? He can now go to Court.
File for the Enforcement of a Brgy Settlement. (Like implementing a decision). If the COA
arises from the business place, workplace, or school, the case can be filed the the Lupon
where said places are located.

2.) COURT (with COA)

>Jurisdiction- Authority of a court to hear and determine a case. Authority is given by the
law (BP 129 as amended by RA 7651). Jurisdiction can either be Original or Appellate.
Original- Court can hear it for the first time. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction- A Court that
can solely hear a case. Concurrent OJ- Several Courts can hear a case. Appellate- Case
has been decided by another court but a second look is given

LEVELS OF COURTS
1.) FIRST LEVEL COURTS(MTC)- Formerly Justice of Peace. They all have the same
jurisdiction
>Municipal Trial Court (MTC) In capital towns. Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) - Two
or more adjoining Municipalities are circuitized and grouped together where there is only
one Court, located in the town/municipality closest to civilization or the town that has the
biggest population. (MCTC of Municipality A, Municipality B, and Municipality C, etc).
Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) - Only in Metro Manila (only one court with several
branches). Municipal Trial Court in Cities- One in each city with several branches
2.) REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC)- Formerly referred to as the CFI
>Country is divided into Judicial Regions (Baguio belongs to the 1 st Judicial Region). One
RTC for each Judicial Region, with several branches.
3.) COURT OF APPEALS (CA)- Formerly IAC
>One per major island. 69 justices in the CA (1 division = 3, 23 all in all). Head of CA is
the Presiding Justice
4.) SUPREME COURT (SC)
>15 justices. Can sit en banc, in different divisions depending on what is being decided.
Chief Justice of the Philippines

JUNE 19, 2013

FIRST HOUR
>Original- Covers both Exclusive and Concurrent and Appellate Jurisdiction
>In cases of Concurrent Jurisdiction, we apply the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts, which
simply means that when Courts exercise concurrent jurisdiction, then file it before the
lower court (Respect for the higher courts, lesser expenses (cheaper), and most important
reason is that it affords more remedies of appeal.
>There is only one case under the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the CA (Annulment
of RTC judgments)

JURISDICTION
RTC
>Does it have an original and appellate jurisdiction? YES. Under original, does it have
exclusive jurisdiction? Yes. How about concurrent? Yes.

RTCs concurrent jurisdiction is

with the CA and the SC as to petition for Certiorari, petitions of Mandamus for MTCs. RTCs
concurrent jurisdiction with the SC would involve actions affecting ambassadors, consuls,
and ministers.
1.) RTCs Exclusive Jurisdiction would cover actions that are incapable of pecuniary
estimation (PE).

Pecuniary capable of being equated with money. (eg. Specific

Performance)
>Eg. Contract with an Engineer to build a house. Contract period expired but house is still
unfinished. Four posts were agreed upon but only 3 posts were made. A year was given for
the completion; however, the year has lapsed, with money having been given and the
house unfinished. What are the COA incapable of PE? If the COA is for the Engineer to
finish the house as agreed upon, then it is incapable of PE, as it is Specific Performance
(Principal) plus Damages (Incidental). Thus, the case is to be filed before the RTC.
>2 VIEWS/TESTS of determining whether a case is incapable of PE.
>1. Nature of the Action Test (NAT): Read the complaint (Eg. Specific Performance I want
my house completed). Above example is incapable of PE
>2. Ultimate Objective Test (UOT): Look at the ultimate goal of the complainant.

>Eg. Plaintiff entrusted his certificate of stocks to the defendant because the former had
to leave for abroad. After years petitioner comes home and asks defendant to turn over
the Certs of Stocks. Defendant avoids petitioner, and the latter goes to the company that
issued the stocks and gets surprised that he did not have any share in the company, that
these have been cancelled and are now in the name of the defendant. The defendant
executed a DOS purportedly from the plaintiff to the defendant forging the signature of the
Plaintiff making it possible the cancellation and transfer to the defendant. Plaintiff files a
case of Cancellation of Certificates of Stocks in the name of defendant, Declaration of
Nullity of the Deed of Sale, and Damages.
>Using the Nature of the Action test, is it now capable or incapable of PE? It is incapable
because there is no monetary equivalent (Cancellation, Declaration). Thus, file this with
the RTC.
>Using the Ultimate Goal (End Goal). If the End Goal is money, then the case is capable of
PE. What does the defendant want in the end? He wants the certificate of stocks back to
his name. What do the Certificates of Stocks represent? Shares in the company, which
means money is invested in the company. The Certificates of Stocks represent an amount
(shares). Thus, the Ultimate Objective of the Plaintiff is to get back the monetary value of
the Certificate of Stocks.

Thus if the Ultimate Objective Test is used, then the case is

capable of PE
> In the Philippines, the Prevailing Jurisprudence, we make use of the Nature of the Action
Test.
Expropriation Cases (Exercise of the power of eminent domain). This is a special action
wherein the State takes private property for public use upon payment of just
compensation. When NAT is applied, then the case is incapable of PE. But if we use the
UOT, then we will have to go to the assessed value of the property, and the value would
then set jurisdiction. But the SC settled the issue in a case saying that it is the NAT that
prevails since Expropriation is incapable of PE, thus filed before the RTC regardless of the
value of the property.
2.) Recovery of Real Property (or ownership of real property or any interest therein).
Eg. Acion Publiciana (Recovery of Possession) vs Acion Reinvindicatoria (Recovery of
Ownership). Whether the former or later for a real property or any interest therein, the
assessed value of the real property must be determined (refer to the TAX
DECLARATION of the property, whether or not covered by a title. Tax declarations are not
proofs of ownership; rather, they only show that they are paying taxes over said property)
Shows good faith that person intends to own the property. Real property taxes are paid

every year.

Assessed Value is not the same as Market Value.

Market Value is always

higher. Market value is the amount that the seller is willing to accept and the buyer is
willing to pay. It is not constant (fluctuates depending on prevailing conditions). Assessed
Value, however, is constant (unless tax mapping is made depending on changes, wherein
assessed value may change).

Assessed Value is used to determine Court Jurisdiction

because it is a constant figure.

>If the assessed value is above P20,000.00, file before the RTC. If the assessed
value is P20,000.00 and below, file before the MTC.
outside Metro Manila.

This refers only to places

>In Metro Manila, above P50,000.00 for RTC, and

P50,000.00 and below for MeTC. Standards of Living in Manila is much higher.
>Remember, or any interests therein. Eg. Moving Fence. Plaintiff files a case for
Recovery of Possession of land encroached upon. Assessed value of the entire property of
the plaintiff is P50,000.00. Thus, petitioner filed before RTC. Defendant moves for Motion
to Dismiss because he alleges that the RTC has no jurisdiction. Defendant alleges that
50m2 of land does not amount to P50,000.00, but only P5,000.00, thus to be filed before
the MTC.

Therefore, defendant alleges that the case is to be dismissed for lack of

jurisdiction. (Can the court, on its own, without any motion, dismiss a case when it has no
jurisdiction? YES). You are now the Judge. Will you grant the motion? No. Deny the motion
to dismiss because the court has jurisdiction. The Law says that, recovery of property or
ownership or any interest therein the assessed value prevails.
whether you are after the entire property or just a portion.

So it doesnt matter

What you look at is the

assessed value of the entire value of the property. The law was not created in order to
provide that every time there is a portion involved, mathematical calculation is then called
for.

The intent of the law is to take the entire assessed value of the property into

consideration.
>When asked in the quiz or exam about the problem above, answers must
always be authoritative (must have basis). Avoid using phrases such as in my
opinion because no one cares, unless you are an expert witness. When asked
to rule on a motion, either grant or deny. NEVER DISMISS. Eg. I will deny the
motion because the RTC has jurisdiction. Under the law granting jurisdiction to
courts, it states that recovery of ownership or possession of any real property
or any interest therein, the assessed value should determine the jurisdiction of
the court.

Even if he is only claiming an interest in the property, the law (no

need to give specifics) says that it is the assessed value of the entire property

to be considered.

Since the assessed value of the entire real property is

P50,000.00, which is above P20,000.00, then the RTC has jurisdiction.

YOUR ANSWERS COMPLETE, COMPREHENSIVE, and AUTHORITATIVE.

MAKE

Avoid qualifying if

facts are clear.

SECOND HOUR
3.) Actions in Admiralty or Maritime Jurisdiction. Law of the Sea. Jurisdictional
amount of Courts: Look at the amount of the claim. If the claim is above P300,000.00,
then it belongs to the RTC.

(In Metro Manila RTC, above P400,000.00).

However, if

P300,000.00 and below, then MTC (In Metro Manila MeTC, P400,000.00 and below).

Eg.

Your cargo is jettisoned off of a ship and you want the shipper to pay it. Determine the
amount of the cargo to arrive at its jurisdiction.
4.) Matters of Probate, whether testate or intestate (settlement of estates).

Apply the

same Jurisdictional Amount. (No will shall pass property unless probated. 2 stages, 1 st
whether will was executed as required by law. 2 nd - ). Look at the GROSS VALUE of the
Estate of the deceased (total value). Afterwards, apply jurisdictional amounts.
5.) Claims for damages (and Monetary claims- contracts involving money, like a
Promissory Note) or Actions involving personal property (movables). Eg. Car borrowed but
was never returned, then file Recovery of Personal Property (No theft, because property
was lent with consent). Basis would be Jurisdiction Amounts (amount of damages or
value of personal property).

If Monetary Claims, to determine jurisdiction, exclude the

interests, the penalties, the surcharges. It is only the principal amount that will determine
jurisdiction. But if damages, add everything to determine jurisdiction.
>Eg. Collection of sum of money (MONEY CLAIM PROM NOTE). Principal obligation is
P150,000.00.

Since there is delay, interest is in the amount of P50,000.00.

In the

Promissory Note, there are also Penalties and Surcharges for delay amounting to
P100,000.00. Attorneys fees of P107,000.00. Total of P407,000.00. Where to file? MTC,
because we will only consider the principal amount of the loan which is P150,000.00. The
term used by the law is other cases where the demand exclusive of interest, damages,
attorneys fees, litigation expenses..
>Eg. But if it is a claim of damages Actual damages of P150,000, Moral damages of
P150,000, Attorneys Fees of P107,000, amounting to P407,000.00. File before the RTC.

Include all because we are dealing with damages. (No interests because damages). Total
amount determines jurisdiction.
6.) All cases not falling within the jurisdiction of any other courts, tribunals, quasi
judicial agencies, or administrative agencies, file before the RTC COURT OF GENERAL
JURISDICTION.
7.) Intracorporate Controversies, Intercorporate controversies, disputes between
stockholders against stockholders, disputes between stockholders against the corporation,
etc. All under the jurisdiction of the RTC (previously under jurisdiction of SEC)
>Appellate Jurisdiction of RTC- Over decisions of the MTC within their respective
territories.

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT:

>Does the MTC have Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction? Yes. How about Original and
Concurrent Jurisdiction? None. How about Appellate Jurisdiction? None. (Ejectment Cases)
Forcible Entry (Action interdictal), Unlawful Detainer.

Do not look at the assessed

value. Forcible Entry- Illegal intrusion of property, unlawful deprivation of property thru
(Force, Intimidation, Strategy, Threat, Stealth).

Unlawful Detainer- Lawful entry.

Upon

renewal of contract, owner refuses and asks tenant to leave. Tenant refuses to leave even
with non-renewed lease contract. Illegally detaining property? YES. Owner can file a case
of unlawful detainer.

Since tenant also refuses to pay rent, this accumulates up to

P600,000.00. Can the MTC take jurisdiction? YES. Regardless of the amount, because the
case belongs to the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the MTC.

Forcible Entry and

Unlawful Detainer are also special proceedings to be discussed in meeting before the final
exams (Under Rules on Summary Proceedings). Recovery of Possession/Ownership of Real
Property with an assessed value of P20,000.00 outside Metro Manila (P50,000.00 and
below within Metro Manila MeTC). Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction with a Jurisdictional
Amount of P300,000.00 and below (P400,000.00 and below MeTC). Probate of Estate
Gross Value of the Estate as to Jurisdictional Amount. Damages Jurisdictional Amount.

FAMILY COURTS:
>Most cases under said courts are mostly criminal procedures or under special
proceedings, and not under civil procedures. The Family Courts, as envisioned by the law,
have not yet come into existence ( no budget daw). So the SC designated RTCs to be
Family Courts.

>There should be a Family Court in each City and Province (Capital Town) of the Country.
If the Capital Town is also a City, then that is where the FC is to be found.
>Jurisdiction in criminal cases- Where the accused is a minor / victim is a minor.
>RTC 6 years, 1 day and up. MTC 6 years and below.
>Eg. Crime is Reckless Imprudence (under Art. 365 of RPC ) resulting in homicide. A 4year-old was sideswiped. Parents file a criminal case. Accused is an adult. Accused raised
Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction daw. He says that he is not a minor, and that
private complainant are not minors as well. NO. Victim is a minor (Law uses the term
victim, not private complainant). There is a difference between victim and private
complainant. (MTC has jurisdiction over all reckless imprudence cases regardless of the
resulting injury.
>When does the RTC have jurisdiction over Reckless Imprudence? When accused
abandons the victim, or death occurs, and at the time of Reckless Imprudence the accused
was violating any traffic laws).
>Eg. There are 5 accused ages 16, 21, 23, 25, and 26. Where to file the case? Family
Court.
>Civil Cases- In the Family Court, a civil case may be filed as to Annulment of Marriage,
Legal Separation, etc. Anything involving the Family goes to the Family Court.

SPECIAL JURISDICTION OF THE MTC

>In criminal law, every person has the right to bail (unless for capital offenses and
evidence of guilt is strong).
>Eg. A person is charged with homicide. Is homicide bailable? Yes. Murder is not. But we
can apply for bail and prove that the evidence of guilt is not strong. Now accused is in jail
and wants to post bail. But no judges are available. The only one left is an MTC judge.
However, the MTC has no jurisdiction over Homicide (Reclusion Temporal 12 years, 1 day
to 20 years). Still, accused wants to post bail. (Its easier to kill your wife than to kill her).
The MTC judge can step in Special Jurisdiction only in the absence of all the RTC judges.

JUNE 20, 2013

>Land Registration RTC (Regardless of the Assessed Value, which does not need to be
alleged). Proceedings in rem (action versus the whole world)
COA- Now, with a COA, we can now file a Civil Action
>RULE: 1 COA is equal to 1 Civil Action (1 right violated, 1 civil case to file. Avoid Forum
Shopping)
>Eg. Plaintiff files a case against defendant for Sum of Money based on a PN. That was
the first case filed. In this first case of Sum of Money, the plaintiff in complaint was
collecting the principal loan of P100,000.00. Since it is P100,000.00, where to file? MTC.
So he files it there. Judgment is rendered in his favor. After he won, he realizes how stupid
he is because he only asked for the principal amount. He wonders about the interests, the
surcharges, the attorneys fees, etc. So, he files a second case against same defendant
for Sum of Money collecting the interests, surcharges, penalties, and attorneys fees
emanating from the principal loan. What did he do? He broke the rule of 1COA=1CVA.
What happened was 1COA=2CVA.

Is that allowed? No.

That is the concept of

SPLITTING A SINGLE CAUSE OF ACTION.

>There is a SPLITTING if there is only 1 right violated. There should only be one case
related to one right violated.

In the first case in the above example, the right of the

plaintiff to be paid was violated. How about in the second case? The same The right to
be paid.

When we say the right to be paid, it does not only include any principal

amount, but all subsequent amounts by virtue of the principal amount because when
there is no principal amount, then there are no interests, surcharges, penalties, or
attorneys fees to talk about.

The only reason why the latter came into existence is

because of the principal amount. Therefore, there is only 1 COA = 1 CVA.

>What is the result then when there is a SPLITTING?

THE SECOND CASE WILL BE

DISMISSED. On what ground? None. (Refer to Rule 16 again and Rule 2 Lack of COA).
However, since splitting does not belong to any of those grounds mentioned, the 2 nd case
is dismissed due to RES JUDICATA in relation to the first case disposed of. If the first case
is still pending at the time the second case is filed, the GROUND FOR DISMISSAL IS LITIS
PENDENTIA.
>One COA is equivalent to only one Civil Action. For every right violated, we can only file
one case to enforce that right that has been violated. Otherwise, if we split a single COA,
the second case will be dismissed.
>However, there is also a rule that says 2 or more COA is equal to 1 CVA.
>Always remains 1 CVA, regardless whether 1 or several COA. Splitting of COA vs Joinder
of COA

>Joinder of COA: The regular Joinder one plaintiff and one defendant, but plaintiff has
several rights violated by the defendant. Because he has several rights violated, he can
file one case for every right violated. This is to avoid multiplicity of suits (avoid splitting).
>Eg. The plaintiff wants to sue defendant for: Unpaid loan (right to be paid), failure to
return car (recovery of personal property right to recover property). Two separate cases
may be filed. However, under Joinder, he can file 1 case For collection of sum of money
and recovery of personal property.
>Eg. A, B, and C are all passengers of a bus. Along the way, the bus met an accident
(bumped the mountain) so passengers were not able to reach their destination and also
suffered injuries. Passengers wanted to file a case of damages against bus company (each
sustaining damages amounting to A-100k, B-100k, and C-100k). Is it possible for each to
separately file cases against bus company? Yes. (All MTC due to amount). However, can
the 3 passengers file together? Yes.

Joinder of Actions.

Where? Individually, MTC.

However, if they jointly file it and its all for damages, apply the Totality Rule: In cases of
monetary claims and damages, the total amount of the claim shall determine the
jurisdiction of the court (100k + 100k + 150k = 350k, thus RTC). This joinder of actions,
however, is only permissive.
>Joinder of Actions rule Limitations.
>First Limitation is that there should be a proper joinder of parties. Is there a
common question of fact and law? If yes, then there is proper joinder of parties. Second,
there must be a common question of law. Is there? Yes. Breach of contract of carriage.
>Eg. Plaintiff is an owner of a hardware store. He discovers in his books that there
are several unpaid accounts. A has an unpaid account amounting to P10,000.00 (former
employee ran away). B also has several unpaid amounting to P20,000.00 (loan - ran
away and disappeared). C has an account amounting to P30,000.00 (roving salesman, did
not remit payments agent). Can hardware store file individual cases against defendants
separately? Yes. But can he file one case pursuant to the joinder of actions rule against A,
B, and C?

No. Because no common question of fact and law. Thus, store owner must file

separately.
>Second Limitation- Jurisdiction.

However, such limitation would usually come

when one case belongs to the MTC while the other to the RTC.
>Eg. Plaintiff sum of money (P400,000.00 - RTC) and recovery of possession of a
parcel of land (assessed value of P10,000.00 -MTC ). Since plaintiff believes that the land
case is more controlling, he files both cases in the MTC (for sum of money and recovery of
possession). Is there a proper joinder? None. The MTC will dismiss the first case (lack of
jurisdiction, and not misjoinder) and proceed against the 2 nd case.

>Eg. A, B, and C. (None.

Separate jurisdictions under the rule, resulting to

Misjoinder of Causes of Action.

The rule says that Misjoinder is not a ground for

dismissal of the case, but the court will separate the misjoinder, and the court will proceed
against each.
>Eg.

Plaintiff (Recovery of Property P30,000.00 and Sum of Money

P100,000.00).

Plaintiff wants to join these COA so he files them before the RTC bec

assessed value of the property is P30,000.00 which is in the jurisdiction of the RTC.
However, the sum of money is within the juris of the MTC. Can this be? Yes. Because the
RTC is a court of General Jurisdiction can award amounts lower than its jurisdictional
amount. Is there a limit of the amount that the RTC can award? None. The MTC has a limit
though.
>Basic Rule- Jurisdiction is conferred by law (BP 129 as amended by RA 7651), but
determined by the allegations in the complaint. It is not for the parties to decide as to
what court to file the case in.
>Eg. Complainant claims total damages in the amount of P450,000.00. By reading the
complaint and applying the Nature of the Action Test, we see that the amount is
P450,000.00, which should be filed in the RTC according to the law. Look at the allegation
for determination of jurisdiction. RTC cannot suddenly lower the allegation and pass it to
the MTC. The RTC must accept based on the allegation. After trial, a decision is rendered
wherein plaintiff has not totally proven his/her COA. RTC judge found that plaintiff is only
entitled to P100,000.00. The RTC thus may award P100,000.00 which is lower than its
jurisdictional amount.
>Eg. Complainant P100,000.00 filed before the MTC. It was then found out as supported
by evidence that damages amounted to P350,000.00. Can MTC award said amount? NO.
P350,000.00 is beyond its jurisdictional amount. Res judicata would set in, and plaintiff
cant file another case to recover the increased amount.
>If a case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, said case can be filed in the court that has
jurisdiction.
JUNE 25, 2013
FIRST HOUR
> Recall Splitting and Joinder, both concerning the avoidance of multiplicity of suits.
>Proper Joinder of Parties There must be a common question of fact and law (common
link).
>Joinder sum of money / damages totality of sum of claims shall apply (totality rule).

>Limit to joinder Jurisdiction Cant join 2 COAs with different jurisdictions applies only
in the MTC, but can be done in the RTC, so long as one COA belongs to the RTC (Court of
General Jurisdiction).
>Plaintiff (recovery of personal property P500,000.00 RTC).

Further claims that

defendant has not paid him his salaries for the duration of his employment as a boy
Friday, claims amounting to P300,000.00. He joins both in the RTC. Is this possible? No.
Because salaries, ER-EE relationship fall under the jurisdiction of the NLRC. You cannot use
general jurisdiction of the RTC because it has no jurisdiction over claims arising from
employer-employee relationships because such belongs to another jurisdiction. No joinder.
RTC will take cognizance over action for recovery of personal property but dismiss the
claims for unpaid salaries for lack of jurisdiction.
>Third Limitation- Venue. Do not confuse Venue with Jurisdiction.
>Jurisdiction What court? MTC? RTC? That is jurisdiction.
>Venue Where is that Court? Place / Address
>Eg. RTC (jurisdiction), La Trinidad, Benguet (venue).
>Distinguish whether action is a real action or a personal action.
>Real Action Anything involving real property. (eg. Recovery of possession of real
property / ownership / accion reinvidicatoria / acion publiciana / judicial forclosure of REM
>Rule for Real Action Where the real property is located. If the real property is in
Baguio, then the venue must be in Baguio. Eg. Action for Recovery of a Real Property. The
assessed value is P10,000.00, in Baguio City. Where to file? MTC of Baguio.
>Personal Action (A real action is any action involving real property. All others are
PERSONAL) where no real property is involved. Eg. Specific performance, collection of
sum of money, damages, breach of contract. As to venue, it is either plaintiffs residence
or defendants residence, at the option of the plaintiff. If there are several defendants,
plaintiff must choose the majority address where most of the defendants reside.
>Residence Where person is actually found. As opposed to domicile, this is where
a person intends to return to.
>Plaintiff (damages 500k).

Plaintiff is a resident of Baguio and defendant is a

resident of LTB. Plaintiff must file case before the RTC, either in Baguio or LTB.
>There are special rules on venue, eg. Settlement of estate multiple properties
comprising estate. Where to file? Place where he stayed upon death. The moment the
court takes cognizance, excludes all other courts.

What if he died abroad but his

properties are in the Philippines? How can his heirs settle his estate? Where can they file?
Where any of his properties are located, and when such court takes cognizance, it is to the
exclusion of all other courts.

>What is the rule when there is a nonresident plaintiff/defendant? When plaintiff is

a non-resident, he may file the rule on real action (So that court can acquire jurisdiction
over the res the thing or subject matter - property), but as to personal action, must file it
where defendant resides in only.
>How about non-resident defendant? How can a court acquire jurisdiction over said
person? If real action, same rule. If personal action, then where the plaintiff resides.
>How is venue a limitation on joinder of parties? Plaintiff is a resident of BC and
defendant a resident of LTB. He has a case for damages against defendant in the amount
of 500k (RTC). However, aside from the damages, he wants to recover a parcel of land
located in Bauang, LU.

The assessed value is 35k (RTC).

All belong to the RTC.

Can

plaintiff join damages and recovery of property? YES. But if he joins them, then where
shall he file? RTC of LU, because the res is located there. If venue is wrong, then there
is improper venue.

He is bound by the res.

But, he can also file cases separately.

Limitation arises when we join a real and a personal action.

The rules are clear as to

where real actions are to be filed. What if property is LU but the assessed value is 5k only
(MTC). Can it be joined with the case for damages in Baguio? No. RTC yung nasa Baguo.
But supposing damages in Baguio amounts to 200K (MTC), then both can be joined in LU
where the res is located. When we join a real action and a personal action, we have to
follow the rules (Place of real action).
>Fourth Limitation- There is no joinder of an ordinary civil action and a special
civil action.
>Special Civil Action (Rule 62 on interpleader up to Rule 71). Special because they
have their own rules and peculiarities that are not present in ordinary civil cases, making
them impossible to join with ordinary civil actions. Eg. Lessor files a case of unlawful
detainer (Special) against tenant, plus damages as to unpaid rent and reasonable
attorneys fees. However, lessor discovers that tenant accumulated unpaid water bills,
phone bills, etc totaling to 200k. Is there a proper joinder? No. Unlawful detainer is a
SCVA, while damages as to bills are OCVA. The only allowable damages under SCVA are
unpaid rent and reasonable attorneys fees, as under the rules. SCVA are usually dealt
with summary procedures (no more trial).
SECOND HOUR
>PARTIES
>Plaintiff / Petitioner person who files the case. Plaintiff OCVA (initiated by the filing of
a complaint, while Petitioner, as there is a right violated as opposed to SCVA (initiated by
the filing of a petition not that because a right has been violated but because you want

to establish a right.). Criminal cases Plaintiff parin (People of the Philippines). Against
whom? Plaintiff as to defendant, while petitioner as to respondent.
>Kinds of parties :
>Indispensible party- In every case, there has to be an indispensible plaintiff (the
very person who claims that his right has been violated) and an indispensible defendant (a
person who is claimed to have violated the right)
>Necessary party- For complete relief (eg. B)
>Joint vs Solidary. X and Y are debtors of C.
>Eg. C wants to file a case against X who is a joint debtor of Y (joint obligation with
Y). Is the relief complete? No. Must include Y to complete relief. However, to sue X is
enough. Y is a necessary party.
>Nominal Party (Pro Forma)- According to rules, they should be included
because of circumstances of the law.
>Eg.

If a case is filed (Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus) because a judge

allegedly gravely abused his discretion.

Who are the parties?

Complainant is the

petitioner (indispensable plaintiff). And the defendant (private defendant indispensible

defendant) would be the person who benefited from the judgment of the judge (public
respondent nominal defendant).

Defendant private respondent is the one who is

supposed to file an answer, not the public respondent.

Judge may make an answer when

there are direct attacks. Otherwise, pro forma lang.

>Married woman If the plaintiff is a married woman, she must be assisted by the
husband versus the defendant (plaintiff, assisted by husband, versus defendant). If the
married woman is the defendant, she must also be assisted by the husband (plaintiff
versus defendant, assisted by husband. (Civil Code- husband is the administrator, head of
the household, etc) In this case, the husband is the nominal or pro forma party. A married
woman can sue alone suits involving her husband, paraphernal properties, personal
profession, quasi-delicts, or if they have been living away from each other for at least 1
year (separation de facto).
>Quasi-parties Not actually a part of the suit, but suit is for their benefit. Eg.
Class suit- two requisites.

First, there must be a common or general interest among

everybody. Second, they are too numerous that it would be impracticable to bring them
all to court.
>Eg. There is a factory in the middle of the community. The factory emits heavy
smoke in a radius of 100 meters, affecting 500-1000 individuals.

Can they all file a

complaint (abatement of nuisance)? Yes, via class suit (Common interest is to stop the
factory, and numerous parties).
(specified).

There must be representatives for the class suit

President, Secretary, and Spokesperson (indispensible plaintiffs) in a class

suit (the others who are represented quasi-parties) versus the smoke-emitting dragon
(indispensable defendant).

The courts shall determine whom shall be rightfully

represented. If it includes claims for damages, cant be filed as a class suit because there
is no common or general interest.

>Eg. Numerous squatters are occupying a property. Can they be sued in a

class suit? No. (They may be too numerous, but there is no common or general
interest). Each squatter is interested in the land that they are occupying. Remedy
is to file cases against them individually. Action may also be joined.
>Can

domestic

corporations

be

parties?

Yes.

How

about

foreign

corporations? Can they sue and be sued in the Philippiens? (cant be brought to the
Lupon, duh).

Determine whether it is doing business in the Philippines. If yes, is

such business legal? If it is legal, then they can sue and be sued in the Philippines.
If it is illegally doing business (no necessary authority or license), then they can be
sued but they cannot sue. Supposing it is a foreign corporation that is not doing
any business, then it cannot be sued, but it can sue in an isolated transaction
(Universal Studios versus Pinoy pirate).

Foreign corporations must state their

capacity to sue.
MAKEUP CLASS JULY 27, 8AM up to 12NN

JULY 11, 2013

>In criminal procedure, the judge has the power of outright dismissal of cases.

The

moment the judge sees no probable cause, he can dismiss it outright. But if there is, then
he may order the issuance of a warrant of arrest.
>In civil procedure, can the court dismiss the case motu propio? Yes, but only on 2
grounds: Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and prescription.
>Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.

Jurisdiction is conferred by law and

determined by allegations in the complaint. Eg. Filed in the RTC, but is a complaint for
unlawful detainer. The RTC can dismiss the case outright as the case ought to have been
filed in the MTC.

Or claims for damages in the MTC for the amount of 500k can be

dismissed outright due to lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.

>Prescription. Period within which to file the case, otherwise forever barred. The court
may dismiss on the grounds of prescription if the material dates are apparent on the face
of the complaint.

Eg.

Case of recovery possession, and plaintiff states sometime in

1940, the predecessor of the defendant entered the property, which at that time was in
the possession of the plaintiffs predecessors interest.
defendants predecessor refused to vacate.

Etc.

After several negotiations,

It is now respectfully prayed that

defendant and all of his successors interests be ordered to vacate the properties. Dated
July 11, 2013. Are there material dates mentioned? Yes 1940s. Clearly, prescription has
set in (30 years for bad faith on real properties Open, continuous, exclusive, notorious,
uninterrupted, adverse can ripen to ownership).

Spells out that COA of plaintiff has

expired.
>Eg. Motion for reconsideration for denial of Petition for mandamus , should be filed 60
from denial. Filed beyond the 60 days, outright dismissal. Material dates were shown on
the face.
>Supposing there is no allegation in the complaint as to specific dates sometimes in the
distant past, defendants predecessor in interest took possession of the disputed land
the court cannot immediately dismiss the case. The court now takes cognizance of the
case. However, court cannot proceed without having jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant.
>In a criminal case, the court acquires jurisdiction over defendant via warrant of arrest.
>In civil cases, there is Summons. Summons is a writ issued by the court directed to the
defendant for the latter to answer the complaint. Once properly served, writ entitles the
court to have jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Defendant is ordinarily given
15 days to respond to the summons (in summary procedures, rules are different).
>Please refrain from filing a motion to dismiss.
defenses to the answer.

Instead, include them as affirmative

>How many copies of the complaint to be filed? One for the Court, and one for each
summons (summons is attached to the complaint) served to the defendant by the
Sheriff of the Court.
Modes of Service of Summons:
>First Mode (Priority Mode) Personal Service of Summons: Do not confuse this
with personal service of pleadings. In this case, the sheriff goes to the defendant and
hands to the latter the summons. Then, the defendant signs on the summons indicating
the date of signing (reckoning point of 15 days for defendant to answer Just add 15 to
that date to arrive at the deadline). Sheriff must give this directly to the defendant. The
rule says By giving it personally to the defendant or by tendering him
>Tender Sufficient, even if defendant refuses to accept.

The sheriff has to make a

return of summons. If able to give it to defendant personally this is to make a return

stating that the summons with the attached copy of the complaint has been served to the
defendant personally on July 13, 2013 as can be seen on the signature of the defendant
appearing on the face of the summons.
>Sheriff also furnishes a copy of the return of summons to plaintiffs counsel this is to
guide the plaintiffs counsel that such has been served as well as with the 15-day period.
The moment there is a lawyer, service should be done on the lawyer.

Service on the

lawyer is service to the client.

>What if defendant refuses to take the summons? How should this be indicated in the
return of summons? I went to serve it on the defendant personally but he refused to
receive it and so I tendered it to him.
>Priority Mode- Sheriff must exert all efforts and exhaust all remedies possible to serve it
to the defendant personally.
>If all possible remedies have been exhausted, then use the next mode.
>Second Mode (Substituted Service of Summons) Since it cannot be served to the
defendant personally, then to somebody else (home, office, place of work/business).
Sheriff must outline in detail all the approaches done to serve the summons to the
defendant personally.
>Home qualification Give it to a person of (1) sufficient age and discretion, (2) residing
therein.
>Office qualification Serve it to the competent person in charge of the office. Usually,
the manager, or office secretary, managing partner, whoever is in charge.
>Prisoner Serve it to the warden. The warden will give it to the prisoner.
>In the return, sheriff must justify substituted service of summons.
>What if summons did not really reach defendant (was given to a qualified person at
home but said person lost it or forgot about it)

>Date of reckoning of 15-day period signature of the receiver on the face of the
summons

JULY 17, 2013

FIRST HOUR
>Warrant of arrest is to Criminal Procedure, whereas Summons is to Civil Procedure.
>Summons is to acquire jurisdiction over a defendant.
>A case cannot proceed when court does not have jurisdiction over defendant so a
summons must be served.
>A copy of complaint is attached to summons served by sheriff.
>Modes:
1) Personal Service Priority Mode. If all efforts have been exerted failed then:
2) Substituted Service of Summons consist of bringing summons to home, office,
or place of work of defendant. To constitute it as valid, home-person of sufficient age and
discretion residing in the place therein, office/place of work competent person in charge.
Those are the only valid means for substituted service of summons.

It doesnt matter

whether defendant himself receives summons. Court thus acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant.
>3) Constructive Service of Summons available in any action (in personam, in rem,
quasi rem) provided there is a resident defendant (the defendant resides in the Philippines
but his whereabouts are unknown, or he is an unknown defendant .
>Criminal actions John Doe. How about in Civil Actions? There are unknowns as well. Eg.
Someone builds a structure in a private property, but builder is unknown. Upon filing of
civil action, who can be the defendant? Presumably, such person is living in the
Philippines, but person is unknown or cannot be found.
>How is Constructive Service done? Via PUBLICATION.

However, Leave of Court or

permission from the Court is required. What then should be filed for such? File for Motion
for Leave of Court followed by whatever it is that you are asking a permission for. Eg.
Motion for Leave of Court to summon defendant by Publication.
>Explanation is needed (eg. Whereabouts of defendant is unknown). If the court finds
merit to motion, it will direct summons by publication (newspaper of general circulation in
the Philippines Phil Star, Daily Inquirer, Manila Bulletin, etc). Very costly.
>First, summons is published.

Next, the entire complaint.

A newspaper, in order to

publish legal notices, must acquire accreditation (submit a petition for accreditation with
office of executive judge in a province where they publish however, if accredited in a
province within a judicial region, newspaper cant get accreditation in another province
belonging to the same judicial region. However, city within a province is not prohibited.

>Requirements of accreditation: Length of period of circulation must have been in

circulation for the past year, and judge determines whether to be accredited or not
submit all that have been put into circulation plus accreditation fees. Actions affecting
public interest need for publication. Accreditation needs to be renewed every 5 years
(subject to yearly compliance with fees). Valid business permit.
>If last known address cannot be determined, then Newspaper of General Circulation in
the Philippines.
>Publication once a week for three consecutive weeks
>Substituted Service 15 days to answer.

But for Publication 60 days from the last

publication.
>Does it matter whether defendant reads publication?
jurisdiction is not acquired.

Is jurisdiction acquired? No,

But why bother with publication? TO COMPLY WITH

REQUIREMENT OF DUE NOTICE.

>4) Extraterritorial Service of Summons Outside of our territory.

This mode of

service only applies to nonresident defendants. As compared to constructive summons

which applies to resident defendants, extraterritorial service has limitations. Applies only
to actions affecting the STATUS of CLAIM.
>Eg. Plaintiff files a case for Sum of money (Personal Action). 1 million. Defendant is out
of the country (nonresident).
Publication.

Files a Motion for Leave of Court to issue summons by

Does the action affect the personal status?

No because it is a Personal

Action. It does not affect the status of the plaintiff, neither does it relate to the property of
the defendant in the Philippines.
>Eg. A Filipina meets a foreigner. Latter meets the former in the Philippines. Foreigner
leaves with promises of bullshit and stuff, but he was never heard of again. The marriage
was valid, so Filipinas status remain as married. She no longer cant marry another.
She then files for Annulment.

But defendant is not a resident.

Can an extraterritorial

summons then be served and resorted to? Yes, because her status is affected. She wants
to go back to having a single status.
>ESS is also applicable to those that relate to PROPERTY OF DEFENDANT IN THE
PHILIPPINES.
>Eg. Recovery of possession of property against defendant (nonresident). ESS can be
resorted to, so long as Res is within the Philippines.
>How can ESS be resorted to then in a Personal Action (Claim for sum of money)? Apply
for a Writ of Preliminary Attachment look for properties of defendant in the Philippines
and ask Court to bring properties of defendant in the Philippines under Custodia Legis.
Then, Personam action becomes Quasi-Rem (because properties are now involved). Once

attached, defendant cant do anything about the properties.

Upon favorable action of

Court, such properties may now be sold in a public auction to the highest bidder. The
proceeds shall now pay the obligation of the defendant.
>The above are the only 2 actions where ESS is allowed.
>How can ESS be done?
>1)Personal Service Send sheriff to where the defendant can be found (impractical). Or,
resort to PUBLICATION. However, a copy of the summons with the attached complaint
must be sent to the last address of the defendant (WON defendant receives it doesnt
matter). Almost similar with the summons via publication. Motion for Leave of Court must
still be acquired. ESS via publication Newspaper of general circulation in the last known
area of residence of defendant. Once a week for 3 consecutive weeks, defendant has 60
days from the last date of publication to file a reply. Doesnt matter WON defendant reads
it, so long as due process requirement (notice) has been complied with.
>The moment summons is served on defendant, Court acquires jurisdiction over
defendant.
>In a criminal court, how can the Court acquire jurisdiction over an accused even without
a warrant of arrest? Via voluntary surrender (goes to Court). Commitment Mitimus.
>How about in Civil Procedure, is there a voluntary surrender? >>> VOLUNTARY
APPEARANCE.
>VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE- Any act of defendant by which he submits himself to the
jurisdiction of the court, without the court having acquired jurisdiction over him.
>Eg. Defendant hears of a case filed against him. He has not received any summons yet
but he immediately files an answer. That would be considered as a voluntary appearance.
>Or, summons was issued (but defective), and defendant files an answer. Is the defect
cured? YES. Tantamount to voluntary appearance.
>Eg. Counsel of defendant enters an appearance with Motion for extension of time to file
an answer. Extension was then granted. Thereafter, counsel of defendant files a motion to
dismiss grounded on invalid substituted of summons because it was served to a visitor of
the defendants house. Should the motion to dismiss be granted? NO. Because when the
counsel entered his appearance as counsel of defendant to file motion for extension of
time, it was TANTAMOUNT TO VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE. You cannot go to court and ask
for a relief and subsequently question jurisdiction over defendants person. Any act of
defendant which would tend to show that he is accepting jurisdiction over his person
either by voluntarily filing an answer or asking for a relief Tantamount to voluntary
appearance.
SECOND HOUR

>Now that court has jurisdiction over defendant, ano na?

>Defendant has four choices:
1) Ignores (Doesnt file an answer)
2) File a Motion for a Bill of Particulars (MBOP)
3) File a Motion to Dismiss
4) File an answer
>1) Ignores- 15-day period has lapsed and there is no answer filed. Would plaintiff know
that no answer has been filed? Yes. Based on Sheriffs Return of Summons date of
service of summons indicated therein, along with mode of service. Copy is furnished to
Plaintiffs counsel.
>Eg. Served on July 1. Just add 15. Defendant has until July 16 to answer. By the way,
what if plaintiff was never able to serve summons? Unserved summons plaintiff must
furnish the court new address, else case is going to be dismissed- failure to prosecute. In
crim case archived.

In civil cases no archiving- case is dismissed.

Since it is the

plaintiff who comes to court to allege violation of his right, it is his duty to furnish the court
the address of the defendant for the court to furnish Alias Summons (Contains new
address). If defendant still cant be found in the new address, then Second Alias Summons
(third summons). Is there such a thing as Alias Warrant of Arrest? Yes. Why? Warrant of
Arrest is addressed to the police of a certain territory. Eg. Warrant of Arrest issued to PNP
Baguio-valid anywhere in the country, but police officers of Baguio cant go to Ifugao with
such warrant because they are encroaching in a different territory.

They have to

coordinate with Ifugao police officers. The Court can issue a warrant of arrest to Ifugao
police officers (Alias Warrant of Arrest). It contains a new address of the accused which is
outside the territorial jurisdiction of the first warrant of arrest. Similar to Alias Summons,
until able to serve on the defendant.
>Finally able to serve to defendant, but no answer beyond July 16. What will plaintiff do?
Can now file a Motion to Declare defendant in default (MDDD).
>Motion vs Pleading.

A complaint is a pleading.

An answer is a pleading.

What is a

Motion? It is not a pleading, vice versa. A motion is any application for relief other than a
pleading. What does it mean? A pleading is also asking for a relief. A motion is more
specific, however. Eg. Motion for postponement, Motion for Extension of time to file an
answer, MDDD, etc. Specific.
>MOTIONS
Non Litigated
-Does not affect the rights of the adverse

Litigated (need to go to court)

-Affects the rights of the adverse party

party.
-The court can act on this ex parte.

-A hearing is required.

NO

NEED FOR A HEARING. Court can act on it

Due process- Give

both sides a chance to be heard. Movant-

right away.

one who files a motion against whom the

motion is filed.

-Eg. Motion for Extension of Time to File an

Answer,

Motion

for

-Eg. Motion to Dismiss

Postponement

(sometimes)
>After stating the Motion (Non-Litigated) Notice to the branch clerk of court:

Please

submit the foregoing motion immediately for the consideration of the court. (then signed
by the lawyer).
>The Rules require that every pleading, motion, manifestation furnish the Adverse Party
(number 1 req)
>Adverse Party refers to the counsel. Service to the lawyer is service to the client, but
service to the client is not a service to the lawyer.
>Eg. Motion to Declare a Defendant in Default.
>Service of Pleadings vs. Filing of Pleadings.
>Service of Pleadings is the act of furnishing the adverse party all copies of pleadings,
motions, etc.
>Only pleading not served to adverse party Complaint.

The court via the sheriff

serves the complaint (attached to summons) to the defendant. Courts job, aside from
gaining jurisdiction over defendant.
>Filing of Pleadings is the act of pleadings to Court.
>What comes first, service or filing? Service comes first, because what is filed in court
should bear the proof of service. If Proof of Service of pleading is not present, the court
is not bound to accept pleading. It is the first thing that the court looks for.
>How do we serve pleadings to the adverse party? Similar to summons.
>(1) Personal Service of Pleadings (Priority Mode)- Delivering pleading to the adverse
party (lawyer), which is different from personal service of summons (wherein summons is
served to defendant himself).
>Eg. Copy Furnished Let adverse party sign the motions. The one that bears lawyers
signature is the one that is filed (proof of service).
>Aside from the lawyer, is there anybody else who can receive? Yes. If in the lawyers
office, anybody in charge or working in the office can receive such (still considered
Personal service of pleading, unlike in summons substituted).

Received, date, and

signature of secretary (one who receives in the office) Still personal proof of service.
How about in the lawyers home? Yes.

Must it be to a person of sufficient age and

discretion? The rules require that when such is served to the house, hours are observed
(8am-6pm) and privacy is respected, unlike service of summons.

>(2) Registered Mail Post office. Registry Receipt (attached near where lawyer signs).
The one that bears the Registry Receipt is the one filed in court because it bears the proof
of service. Is that sufficient? No. The rules say that when it comes to service of pleadings,
priority mode is always personal service.

If other modes are resorted to, there is a

required WRITEN EXPLANATION (TO OBVIATE DELAY) as to why it was not served
personally.

Put explanation below registry receipt (eg.

Service was done through

registered mail due to the distance between the plaintiff counsels office, or due to lack of
personnel in the defendant counsels office to make service).
pleading is treated as a mere scrap of paper.

Without explanation,

As if nothing was ever filed.

Failed to

comply with the rule (if no personal service, then via registered mail, with written
explanation). Such rule was incorporated was to OBVIATE DELAY. Date of mailing is the
date of filing. 15 days to file an answer. Eg. July 16 deadline to file an answer. Served to
plaintiffs counsel, and a copy is filed in court. Court receives it July 27. Is it late? No
because via registered mail.
provided via REGISTERED MAIL.

Because the date of mailing will be the date of filing,

JULY 18, 2013

>RECAP:
>Defendant may not opt to file anything at all, or proceed with the 3 other moves.
>Plaintiff can file a Motion to Declare Defendant in Default.
>Motion- Anything asking for relief from court aside from a pleading
>Litigated and Non-litigated Motion How they affect rights necessitating hearing
>Furnish adverse party every pleading, motion, etc.
>Service of Pleadings- Priority Mode is Personal Service (to the lawyer). Second mode is
via registered mail. With the second mode, explanation is required as to why service was
not done personally.
>Service of Pleading comes first prior to filing of pleadings because the latter should
contain the proof of service. Registered Mail- date of mailing is the date of filing.
>LESSON PROPER:
>Even envelopes are attached to the records because they contain the date of mailing
(stamped on the face of the envelope), showing likewise the date of filing.
>Pleadings may be served via ORDINARY MAIL BUT THE DATE OF RECEIPT IS THE DATE OF
SERVICE AND FILING. Private couriers are equivalent to ordinary mail.
>(3) Substituted Service of Pleadings (vs Substituted Service of Summons)- If pleadings
cannot be served via the first 2 modes (eg. Address of Plaintiffs counsel cannot be
determined). Substituted service is furnishing a copy of pleading to the CLERK OF COURT.
Furnishing is not sufficient- Attached to the pleading must be an explanation. Explain why
such is being done via Substituted Service. Supposedly, a complaint prepared by a
Plaintiffs lawyer contains the lawyers address, just below his signature. But in case
address cannot be determined, then Substituted Service of Pleadings may now be done.
> If nonlitigated, notice is addressed to the clerk of court (please submit the foregoing
motion for the consideration of the court immediately upon receipt thereof. .Copy Furnish
Adverse Partys Counsel). Clerk then submits to court.
>If litigated, since it affects rights of party, notice of hearing is needed. Instead of being
addressed to the Clerk of Court, NOTICE OF HEARING IS NOW ADDRESSED TO THE LAWYER
OF THE ADVERSE PARTY. Not to the Clerk of Court, as if to be treated ex parte. For
movant, after addressing adverse partys counsel should say (Please take notice that this
motion will be submitted for hearing on __date__) Motion Days should be Friday at 2pm,
as the rules say.
>Notice of Hearing (Litigated) must comply with the 3-DAY NOTICE RULE and THE 10-DAY
HEARING RULE.

>3-day notice rule refers to the service of motion to the adverse party. The adverse
party must receive the motion at least 3 days before the intended hearing. In other words,
the proof of service must show that the counsel of the adverse party received it before 3
days the scheduled hearing. This is to give them time to prepare for hearing. (Eg.
Hearing is set July 26, 2013. Adverse Party must receive notice not later than July 23).
>10-day hearing rule Created to obviate delay. Hearing should be set within 10 days
from the date of filing. (Eg. Hearing is on July 26. Filing should have been from July 16
and up). Take note, filing comes AFTER service. So if it has been filed on the 16 th, a proof
of service should be existent. Can the date of service be the same with the date of filing?
Yes. Naturally, if 10-day hearing rule is complied with, automatically the 3-day notice rule
would have been complied with because service comes first prior to filing.
>Motion Day why Friday? Because fly-day. Potanginah. Tuesdays-Thursdays daw ay
hearing day. Right to a neutral and impartial judge. Judges fly back to their homes.
However, the rule as to appointment in home stations has been relaxed. According with
the Rules Committee, motions should not be heard together with the trial of the case.
Motions are disposed off quickly, except when there is a witness.
>Eg. Accused was convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for 1 year (double
registration during the election). His counsel (defense) filed an MR and asked that it be
set for a hearing; however, he never addressed it to the adverse party (prosecutor), but to
the clerk of court. The defense lawyer only copy furnished the prosecutor, but never
addressed it to him. The court regarded it as a mere scrap of paper. Within 15 days after
promulgation, decision may be appealed. But if acquittal, final. When decision becomes
final, it becomes executor. In the case at bar, the 15 days lapsed and decision became
final, thus a warrant of arrest was issued. Notice of hearing should always be addressed
to the adverse party (Prosecutor).
>MDDD- Technically, it is a nonlitigated motion because defendant had 15 days and he did
not make use of it and therefore he no longer has any right, letting the 15-day period
lapse. Can the court act on it immediately? Yes. However, rules say that they should be
given a liberal interpretation kanu ta decide on the merits. If MDDD is granted, the court
issues an order declaring defendant in default.
>What is the effect when a defendant is declared in default? Defendant LOSES HIS
STANDING IN COURT. A defendant declared in default is entitled to notices but he cannot
do anything he can also be present in hearings but he cannot object, because he loses
his standing. He cannot do anything anymore already. Two things can happen when he is
declared in default and loses standing: (1) Court can render judgment by default. Since
there is no longer a defendant, the court looks at the contents of the complaint. If
allegations in the complaint are sufficient to warrant a judgment, judgment is rendered,
usually in favor of plaintiff. Otherwise, court will direct plaintiff to present evidence ex
parte. Court can even authorize clerk of court to receive evidence ex parte, provided COC
is a member of the bar. In the MTCs, COCs are not required to be lawyers. It is only in the
RTCs that COCs and Branch COCs are required to be lawyers.
>What if a case is for damages? Can there be a judgment by default? Or must there be a
presentation of evidence ex parte? The latter. Cardinal rule in damages Must be proven
with certainty. Not everything alleged in a complaint is a gospel truth. Eg. Actual
damages receipts . He must show that he suffered. In every case where damages is

involved, sum of money with damages, sum of money arising from contracts, plaintiff is
always required to present evidence ex parte.
>If defendant loses his standing, can he regain it? Yes. The defendant, in order to regain
his standing, has to file a motion to lift order of default.
>Is this motion litigated? YES, definitely. Because it will affect the plaintiff.

JULY 23, 2013

VN-20130723-00001

1ST HOUR
>2nd QUIZ From summons up to what is to be finished by July 27, 2013 (Summons,
service of summons, declaration of default, service and filing of pleadings, motions, etc.)
>Tim Burtons (Canadian Coffee shop na malayong sosyal kumpara sa Starbucks daw)
>MDDD- This is filed by plaintiff if defendant does not file an answer within the
reglementary period of 15 days. Technically, nonlitigated motion. Defendant already lost
all his rights so there is no adverse party to be affected. Rules of court are to be construed
liberally to fully thresh out all cases filed in court.
>2 things can happen when defendant is declared in default. (1) Judgment in default
based on plaintiffs complaint if the court believes that allegations in the complaint are
sufficient to warrant judgment. (2) If allegations in the complaint are not sufficient to
warrant judgment, or when there is a claim for damages, then Court asks plaintiff to
present evidence ex parte to prove allegations. As to damages, they have to be proven
with certainty. Clerks of Courts (lawyers) are authorized by court to receive evidence ex
parte, but it is the judge who makes decision. Thereafter, there can be a judgment in
default (with evidence. The first judgment of default is without evidence).
>The only thing a defendant can do is to file a motion to lift order of default. This motion
is a litigated motion as it would affect plaintiffs rights. Thus, has to comply with 3-day
notice rule, 10-day hearing rule, and addressing pleading to adverse party.
>Ground for motion to lift order of default- FAME (Fraud, Accident, Mistake, and Excusable
Negligence). Should always be accompanied with Affidavit of Merits. It is the lawyer who
prepares the pleading, but it is defendant who personally knows about the grounds
mentioned. So a sworn statement (affidavit) is needed. Eg. Defendant met plaintiff.
Defendant willing to pay and wonders why friend plaintiff files a case. Plaintiff then
promises to withdraw case, but defendant is surprised by a motion to declare defendant in
default. This can be an extrinsic fraud. The defendant has to execute an affidavit of
merits about this. He has to state that he has a meritorious defense. Not all 4 grounds
can be raised altogether. Circumstances must be stated. Excusable negligence may be

because of lawyer or client. Mistake, accident, whatever you call it, an affidavit of merits
must be made and attached to the motion to lift order declaring defendant in default.
>Can the court motu propio declare defendant in default? NO. Every litigant has the right
a cold neutrality of an impartial judge. If judge declares default motu propio, judge is
siding with plaintiff. (15-day period has lapsed- determined from sheriffs return of
summons wherein date of receipt by defendant is shown). Plaintiffs counsel is also guided
of said date for him to know to file a motion to declare defendant in default.
>If court finds merit in affidavit, then court will grant the motion and lifts the order of
default, wherein defendant regains his standing in court and directed to file his answer.
>If there is already a judgment rendered by the court which doesnt become final and
executory, can defendant file for a motion to lift order of default? YES. What happens to
the judgment? It will be vacated because it has become a one-sided judgment.
>If the first thing a defendant can do is not to do anything, THE SECOND thing a
defendant can do is to FILE A MOTION FOR A BILL OF PARTICULARS (MBOP)
>Particulars- details. MBOP because there are complaints that are vague, ambiguous, or
unclear. Defendant cannot understand what plaintiff wants. An MBOP can both be a
litigated and nonlitigated motion, depending on how judge would see it. RULES FOR
LITIGATED MOTIONS NEED TO BE COMPLIED WITH. Setting of hearing would then be
discretionary upon the judge.
>If the judge looks at the MBOP and looks at the complaint and agrees with the defendant
that complaint cannot be understood, the judge would grant MBOP immediately and asks
plaintiff to comply with the BOP (nonlitigated).
>However, if judge finds the complaint clear, the judge would then set the motion for
hearing (litigated).

2ND HOUR
01:04:40
>MBOP- on the hearing because court believes that complaint is clear enough but giving
benefit of the doubt to defendant, court now tries to clarify with defendant allegedly vague
complaints (eg. defendant acted in bad faith thus plaintiff is entitled to damages and
defendant wishes this clarified).
>How does plaintiff comply with MBOP? First, he can file an amended complaint. If it is an
amended complaint, how can it be shown that there is an amended. Underline the
amendments (or capitalize, bold, italicized, open-close quotation, etc). Eg. Plaintiff wants
to explain bad faith so goes that the bad faith consists of chorva chorva (notice
underline- to show amendment).
>Must an amended complaint be served again with summons to defendant? No need. A
summons is served just for the court to acquire jurisdiction over defendant. Since
jurisdiction has already been acquired, plaintiff would just furnish a copy of the amended
complaint to the defendant follow the priority mode.

>Second way is for plaintiff to submit a compliance or a manifestation. He says, in

compliance with the order of the court granting the MBOP, the plaintiff submits
compliance. As the details to the bad faith, chorva chorva chorva. Fully explain
ambiguous provisions. Such is then furnished to the adverse counsel via personal or
registered mail.
>What if the court has granted MBOP but plaintiff did not comply? First, the court can
order that all those vague allegations in the complaint will be stricken off of the complaint.
Worse, the court can direct the plaintiff to show cause why his case should not be
dismissed because he failed to comply with the order.
>If COA is stricken off, then defendant may file an MD on the grounds of Lack of COA. So
plaintiff should comply with MBOP.
>THIRD THING A DEFENDANT CAN DO IS TO FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS (Rule 16, A-J)
>This is always a litigated motion, thus requirements must be complied with.
>Summons discourages filing of motion to dismiss. It asks defendant to put grounds for
MD as affirmative defenses in the answer. Affirmative defenses are actually grounds for
MD.
>If answer is filed and there are affirmative defenses, the court conducts a preliminary
hearing.
>The discouragement of filing of MD is for the quicker administration of justice. Thing is, if
you still wish to push through with an MD, a counterclaim may not be filed along with it.
There is no such animal. If MD is granted, whatever claim that defendant has over plaintiff
may also disappear.
>Can the defendant also have a claim against plaintiff? Of course Counterclaim.
>But if in the ANSWER THE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES ARE GRANTED and the case is
dismissed, such dismissal is only limited to the complaint of the plaintiff. How about the
defendants claim? It can now be pursued.
>GROUNDS FOR MD:
>(1) Lack of Jurisdiction over the subject matter. Jurisdiction is conferred by law and
determined by allegations in the complaint. This is a NONWAIVABLE ground. Jurisdiction
of the court over the subject matter can be questioned anytime during the proceedings.
Opposition to such must be raised as early as possible.
>Eg. Jurisdiction over damages more than 300k belongs to jurisdiction of RTC (BP 129). In
the complaint, and incurred damages in which defendant is to be made to pay 500k of
damages to plaintiff. The plaintiff files it in the RTC. Does the RTC now have jurisdiction?
Yes, in line with the law and the allegation. Court says, Huff!!! How ambitious naman this
plaintiff. He just suffered bruises. He cannot do anything about his face if it is in the first
place deformed. Too much!!! The way I look at it, he is only entitled to 10k. And thus, I
dont have jurisdiction so I will dismiss the case. Can the judge do that? NO. Because he
has jurisdiction according to law and what is spelled out in the complaint. And true

enough, at the end of the trial, plaintiff only proves 10k. Can the RTC award 10k only?
YES. Because that was what was proven.
>Eg. Opposite. The law says 300k and below, MTC. After trial, the plaintiff is able to prove
that he incurred more than 300k 400k in fact. Can the MTC award 400k? No. Such is
beyond its jurisdiction. Its limitation is only up to 300k. It can never go beyond its limit,
unlike the RTC that can go below coz it is a court of general jurisdiction. Plaintiff kase is so
bobo he should have filed it before the RTC. Moral Lesson of the story, bloat your
damages to be able to bring it to the RTC.
>You can question the courts jurisdiction over the subject matter at any stage of the
proceedings even on the first time on appeal, unless jurisdiction by estoppel has set in.
>Jurisdiction of Estoppel- Person is aware that court has no jurisdiction, but this was never
questioned. In fact, person took advantage of this and participated in all proceedings.
However, upon promulgation of decision, person loses and now raises the question of
jurisdiction.
>Grounds basis is on BP 129.
>The court should only not have jurisdiction over the subject matter but also over the
person of the defendant.
>(2) Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. In order for court to
acquire jurisdiction over defendant, it has to issue summons which has to be validly
served to defendant via person, substituted, constructive, or extraterritorial service
(actions affecting status of plaintiff, or relating to property of defendant in the Philippines).
>Is this ground waivable? YES, this is a waivable ground. Must be questioned at the
earliest possible opportunity, otherwise he is deemed to have waived said ground for
motion to dismiss.
>Eg. Defendant cant be located despite all efforts. And sooooooOOO, the sheriff
resorted to substituted service of summons. The defendant was made aware that there
was a summons issued against him so he goes to a lawyer. Upon receipt, lawyer files his
favorite motion MFEFA. Needs time to prepare an intelligent answer daw, so asks for 15
more days from tomorrow. Court grants motion. Then lawyer finds out that summons was
served to an usi neighbor via substituted, so within the 15 days of extension, lawyer files
an MD on the ground of Lack of Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Grant or
Deny? Deny the MD. He is deemed to have waived the second ground because he already
asked for a relief, and thus cannot go back and question jurisdiction of court. By asking for
relief (MFEFA), lawyer has waived 2 nd ground. Instead of MFEFA, lawyer should have
immediately filed MD grounded on MFEFA.
>In Crim Pro Voluntary Surrender. Just like in Civ Pro voluntary appearance - asking for
relief. Jurisdiction upon this time could no longer be questioned. Another voluntary
appearance is filing of an answer even without receiving a summons.
>Is filing of MD for lack of jurisdiction over subject matter asking for relief from court? Yes.
All motions ask for relief. So, Aside from Lack of Jurisdiction over person of defendant (eg.
MD for lack of jurisdiction over subj matter, lack of juris over person of defendant, and LOJ
bec of improper venue, all in one motion). The MD based on the first ground was denied.

Are the other grounds deemed to have been waived by seeking these 3 together? NO.
OMNIBUS MOTION RULE.
>Omnibus Motion Rule states that any and all grounds for a motion to dismiss should be
indicated in only one motion, otherwise you are deemed to have deemed those grounds
except for those that are nonwaivable.
>What if defendant only alleges 2 and doesnt include a 3 rd nonwaivable ground, and the
court denies the 2, can defendant raise the 3 rd? NO.

JULY 24, 2013

VN-20130724-00001
1ST HOUR
>Waivable should be raised at the earliest possible opportunity.
>Deemed waiver- voluntary appearance in court to ask for relief, or filing of an answer
without summons.
>Any waivable grounds not raised would be considered waived. Note the omnibus motion
rule.
>There are 4 nonwaivable grounds- Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter, litis
pendentia, res judicata, and prescription.
>(3) Improper Venue- Must be raised at the first possible opportunity, otherwise
deemed waived.
>Can venue be agreed upon? Yes, provided it is in (1)writing, (2)executed before any case
is filed, and (3) should be couched in mandatory terms (shall, should, will) Eg. Venue
should be in the proper court of Baguio City.
>Eg. Bus ticket venue fixed in Pasay (shall be in the corporate offices of the bus corp in
Pasay City). Passenger was unable to reach destination. Passenger files a case in Baguio
City against bus company, and the latter files an MD on the grounds of Improper Venue.
Shall the courts grant or deny the motion? Deny the MD, because it is a contract of
adhesion. There is only one party making the terms. There should be consent between
the 2 parties. In a contract of adhesion, the other party is just asked to consent.
>(4) Lack of Capacity to Sue- Personal character of the parties. When such is raised as
a ground by defendant, he is targeting the plaintiff.

Rules require that all civil actions

should be executed in the name of the real party in interest.

>Real Party in Interest- Party who stands to be benefited, injured, or prejudiced by
whatever decision that the court makes.

In other words, all civil actions must be

prosecuted by a real party in interest. Refers to the indispensible party (someone who
should bring the case) vs indispensible defendant (someone who is to be sued).
>Eg. O entrusted the title of a property to X. O discovers that X sold the property to Y, the
latter selling it to Z. Now O wants to get back his title; however, the title is now in the
name of Z. Who is the indispensible plaintiff (real party in interest)? It is O, because he is
the owner of the property, and whatever the court decides, he stands to be either
benefited or injured (prejudiced). Who is the indispensible defendant? It is Z because the
title is in his name. A case filed against X or Y will not return title to O. If against Z, title
may be recovered, making him the indispensible defendant. However, O may also include
X as an indispensible defendant for DAMAGES.
against Z would be sufficient.

But simply for recovery of title, then

>Necessary Party (Proper)-

Indispensible (cant be done without) vs Necessary (for

complete relief).
>Eg. Landowner mortgages his property to X (1 st mortgage).
mortgages it to Y (2n mortgage). He doesnt his loan to X or Y.

However, he again
Now, X, the first

mortgagee, wants to forclose the property. If he files X vs Landowner, is that sufficient?

Yes, contains indispensible parties. Sufficient, however there is still the issue with Y who
also has a justified claim, being the 2 nd mortgagee. So in order to have complete relief to
settle issue once and for all, X should include Y. X is the indispensible plaintiff, Landowner
is the indispensible defendant, and Y is the necessary defendant. Because even without Y,
there can still be a case. However, the issue of 2 nd mortgage must be settled so include Y.
>Pro Forma (Nominal) Party married woman sues.

For form, needed because the law requires so.

Eg.

The rules require that she should be assisted by the husband.

Married woman is the indispensible plaintiff, while the husband is the Pro Forma Party.
Such is the case except as provided by law (concerns paraphernal property, profession,
career, tort or quasi-delict, civil liability arising from crime, separation de facto for 1 year,
etc). Another eg. In a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, the Judge is a pro
forma party and is not required to file an answer, else ignorance of the law.

Private

respondent is the person who will file an answer because said party stands to benefit or be
prejudiced by a decision.
>Quasi-Party- Those who really do not appear in court but are affected by the decision
that the court makes. Why? Kasi nagadu da. Class suit. 2 requisites. (1) Common or
General Interest. (2) The parties are too numerous that it is impracticable to bring them
all to court. A representative few is then selected (sufficient enough to represent common
and general interest). Eg. A, B, C, D, and F and all others similarly situated in a class suit.
>Eg. New company brings out a new car. Unknown to the customers, there is a defect in
the car (explodes). A complainant files a case, but discovers numerous complainants with
the same complaint 2000 complainants. Common General Interest- give back money or
new car. Class suit. If damages is to be included, this now cant be taken in a class suit, as
each complainant would have a differing interest no more common interest among
complainants to constitute a class suit.

Only a few will go to court, while the thousand

others will be the quasi-parties. They will not go to court, but when the court renders
judgment, they stand to be benefited or prejudiced.
>Eg. Landowner wants to evict all squatters from his property. Landowner vs X, Y, Z, and
all other persons occupying land. Will this prosper as a class suit? No. Because there is no
common or general interest among the defendants.

This is because they are only

interested in their particular portion of land occupied. So landowners remedy is to sue

each and every iskwater.

2ND HOUR
>Lack of Capacity to Sue vs Lack of Personality to Sue.

Different from each other.

General Rule All actions must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. Eg.
Principal (owner of car) commissions agent to sell his car. Agent finds a buyer and sells it
to the latter.

However, buyer doesnt pay full price so agent files a case against the

former. Buyer files an MD. Who is the real party in interest (RPII)? In other words, who
gets to be affected by a decision? Of course, the Principal. So, if Agent vs. Buyer, is the
action in the name of the real party in interest? No. Buyer can now file an MD on the
ground Lack of capacity to sue (agent not a real party in interest). However, agent may
amend the complaint and state, Principal, as represented by the agent to cure defect.
Now, action is in the name of the real party in interest.

The agent now becomes the

representative party because he acts in representation of another person. But what would
be a better ground? Lack of Cause of Action. Why? Go over the elements. As to right,
agent doesnt have any; rather, the principal. First element palang waley na.
>Whom else can be a representative party? Guardian over ward. Fiduciary Capacity.
>Lack of Capacity to Sue- We speak more of characteristic of plaintiff. Eg. Minority. A
minor cannot sue. However, minor must be assisted by parents or a guardian. Must reach
the age of emancipation (21 daw).

Insanity.

Civil Interdiction (accessory penalty)

regains capacity when penalty is served and all rights are restored.
>As to juridical persons: Domestic Corporation must state in its complaint for capacity
that it is a corporation organized and operating under the laws of the Republic of the
Philippines, and duly registered under the Securities and Exchange Commission. As an
artificial person, it can sue and be sued just like a natural person. Supposing it is a foreign
corporation: Can it sue and be sued? Qualify. Yes, can sue and be sued if it is engaged in a
legal business in the Philippines. No, it cannot sue but it can be sued if it is doing illegal
business in the Philippines.
>So what should corporation state to give it legal capacity to sue? It should state that it is
legally engaged in business in the Philippines, and its authority to do so can be seen in
the etc. etc.

whatever authority gives it authority.

For a foreign corp illegally doing

business, since it cannot sue, in a complaint against it there it must be stated that it is a
foreign corporation illegally engaged in business in the Philippines.
>What if foreign corp is not engaged in business in the Philippines? It can only sue in an
isolated transaction. Eg. Marvel Comics against pirates. What should be alleged? That it
is a foreign corporation, not engaged in business in the Philippines, but suing in an isolated
capacity.
>Where are corporate cases filed? Used to belong to the SEC, but now transferred to the
RTC. In Manila, there are RTCs designated as Corporate/Commercial Courts.

>Lack of Capacity to sue is WAIVABLE. Thus it must be raised at the earliest possible
opportunity, else deemed to have been waived.
>Legal capacity is stated and alleged in the complaint, also citing its authority. Defendant
can verify. If capacity is fictitious, then file MD based on lack of capacity to sue because
their documents are spurious. Same may apply for other grounds used for lack of capacity
to sue. Defendant must prove that basis for capacity are inexistent, fake, etc.
>Can a plaintiff be subjected to a psychiatric exam? Modes of discovery is applicable if the
physical or mental condition of a person is in issue. If it is not in issue (eg. For sum of
money), then no. But if psychological incapacity as a ground for annulment, then modes
of discovery may be applied. Or appointment as a guardian over an insane person. The
person may then be subjected since it is in issue.
>(5) Failure to State a Cause of Action- This is different with LACK OF COA (rule 2).
Failure to State a COA is more of how complaint was stated. More external. Form and
substance of the complaint. This is also a WAIVABLE GROUND. Can the defect be cured
by plaintiff if said ground was not raised in the earliest possible opportunity? Yes.
>Eg.

In the complaint of plaintiff who claims ownership over land, he stets (sic) he

states that I erected a swimming pool and planted palm trees and cattages (sic) and
benches over the land. I own all these improvements, and thus files a quieting of title
against a defendant also claiming ownership over property. His title is noisy jeje. Plaintiff
alleges that since he put up all the improvements on the land, therefore he owns the land.
What is wrong? There is a failure to state a cause of action.

JULY 25, 2013

VN-20130725-00001
>Failure to State a COA is not the same as Lack of COA. Form and Substance.
>Back to the earlier case of quieting. Defendant files an MD for failure to state a COA.
Grant or Deny? Go back to the complaint. Plaintiff states that since he introduced
improvements, it means that he owns the land. Going back to the laws of property, the
land is the principal and the improvements are the accessories. Accessories follow the
principal. So whoever owns the principal owns the accessories. But what plaintiff is trying
to say is that since he owns the accessories, therefore he owns the principal. Plaintiffs
mistake is the failure to allege by what right he has to introduce improvements over the
land. Therefore, there is a failure to state a COA.
>Test. Look at allegations. Do you believe all of it? Can you give the plaintiff what he
wants? If both gets a YES, then there is a COA. But if YES as to allegations but NO to
giving of what plaintiff wants, then there is failure to state COA. Said ground is waivable.
>What if defendant files an answer and does not question failure to state COA nor includes
it in his affirmative defenses, and then during trial plaintiff is now showing evidence that
he owns land which is why he made improvements, can defendant now raise the
abovementioned ground? The defendant is too late. Ground has been waived. Must have
been questioned at the earliest possible time.
>Lack of Capacity to Sue vs Lack of Personality to Sue.

Different from each other.

General Rule All actions must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. Eg.
Principal (owner of car) commissions agent to sell his car. Agent finds a buyer and sells it
to the latter.

However, buyer doesnt pay full price so agent files a case against the

former. Buyer files an MD. Who is the real party in interest (RPII)? In other words, who
gets to be affected by a decision? Of course, the Principal. So, if Agent vs. Buyer, is the
action in the name of the real party in interest? No. Buyer can now file an MD on the
ground Lack of capacity to sue (agent not a real party in interest). However, agent may
amend the complaint and state, Principal, as represented by the agent to cure defect.
Now, action is in the name of the real party in interest.

The agent now becomes the

representative party because he acts in representation of another person. But what would
be a better ground? Lack of Cause of Action. Why? Go over the elements. As to right,
agent doesnt have any; rather, the principal. First element palang waley na.
>Whom else can be a representative party? Guardian over ward. Fiduciary Capacity.
>Lack of Capacity to Sue- We speak more of characteristic of plaintiff. Eg. Minority. A
minor cannot sue. However, minor must be assisted by parents or a guardian. Must reach
the age of emancipation (21 daw).

Insanity.

Civil Interdiction (accessory penalty)

regains capacity when penalty is served and all rights are restored. As to juridical persons:
>(6) Litis Pendentia- A pending case. One of the NONWAIVABLE GROUNDS. Can be
raised at any stage in the proceedings. Check Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping, as it

would state the presence or absence of similar cases filed in other courts and speak of
their status.
>In order to know that there is Litis Pendentia, (1) There must be an identity of the parties,
(2) There must be identity of the subject matter, and (3) identity of the relief sought:
These are in relation to previous cases.
>Eg. Plaintiff vs Defendant for recovery of possession of a parcel of land. During the
proceedings, defendant gave said land to defendants son. Now, plaintiff files a second
case (P vs Ds son) for recovery of the parcel of land. Can Ds son file an MD on the
ground of Litis Pendentia? Is there identity of parties? Yes. Identity of parties refers to the
identity of interests that parties represent, and not the literal identity. The interest is over
the parcel of land. Since said interest is found in both cases, there is identity of parties.
Now, is there an identity of subject matter? Yes. As to relief? Yes! So is there a Litis
Pendentia now? YES. There is a pending case (P vs D). What is plaintiffs remedy? Amend
the first case and include Defendants son as another defendant to resolve issues in one
case. Further, this is to avoid multiplicity of suits. What is the danger of allowing the 2
separate cases? Conflicting decisions.
>Eg. Plaintiff vs Defendant for Forcible Entry. Subsequently, Defendant files a case
against Plaintiff for quieting of title. Plaintiff files an MD on the ground of Litis Pendentia.
Grant? NO. Is there identity of parties? Yes, they just exchanged roles, but interest is the
same. Is there identity of subject matter? Yes. Is there identity as to reliefs sought? NO.
Forcible Entry (better right to possess) is different from Quieting (ownership is the issue).
Thus, these are 2 separate cases.
So deny the MD.
Can these cases proceed
simultaneously? Yes. Can there be 2 different judgments? Yes.
>As a rule, what gives rise to Litis Pendentia? A second case. But it is not always true that
the second case is always the one to be dismissed due to Litis Pendentia.
>Eg. Both P and D claims ownership of land, and D is in possession of said land. 1 year
period is over so forcible entry - ejectment can no longer be filed, so plaintiff files a case of
accion publiciana or recovery of possession (1 st case). Then, in the 2nd case, the defendant
files a MD on the ground of Litis Pendentia and quieting of title. There is Litis Pendentia,
but the 1st case is to be dismissed and the 2 nd case is retained, because this is the case
that will thresh out the issues between the parties. Defendant is already in possession
and thus files quieting. Retain the case that will resolve all the issues between parties and
Dismiss the other under the ground of LP. However, P may file a counterclaim for recovery
of possession.
>Supposing the first case is on Appeal, then a second case is filed. Can defendants son
raise Litis Pendentia? Yes. For as long as a decision as to the first case has not yet become
final, there is still Litis Pendentia. If decision becomes final and executor, ground now
becomes Res Judicata.
>RES JUDICATA Law of the case. Decision is final and executor. For Res Judicata to set
in, the above 3 requirements must be present in addition to (4) a judgment that has
become final and executory, (5) rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, (6) and
court rendered judgment under trial on the merits.

>Trial on the merits- parties were given equal opportunity to present their respective
evidence (unlike judgment by default where evidence are presented ex parte).
>Because these are the additional requirements, there is no longer an issue as to what
case is to be dismissed. The decision in the first case is already the law of the case, and
therefore that law of the case will prevail all throughout. Any other subsequent cases shall
be dismissed. Will result in the dismissal of the 2 nd and subsequent cases.
>Eg. P vs D for accion reinvindicatoria (recovery of ownership). Defendant filed his
answer. Case went to trial and a judgment was rendered in favor of P. Thus, he recovers
ownership. Judgment becomes final and executory, rendered by a court of competent
jurisdiction after trial on the merits. Subsequently, P and D died. Their children now have
grown up. (well no body watches Dallas). Ds son now files a case against Ps son for
recovery of possession of Ps property where P was declared as the owner. Ps son then
files an MD on the grounds of Res Judicata. Lets check, in the first case: (1) Is there ID of
parties? Yes, they both represent interests of their fathers. (2) Is there ID of subject
matter? Yes parcel of land. (3) ID of relief sought? Yes, both want the property. (4) Has a
judgment become final and executory? YES. P has been declared an owner. (5) Has the
judgment been rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction? YES. (6) Was judgment
rendered under trial on the merits? YES. Therefore, grant MD of the 2 nd case on the ground
of Res Judicata. No longer necessary to determine as to what case shall thresh out all
issues. LAW OF THE CASE: PLAINTIFF IS THE OWNER. THUS PLAINTIFFS SON IS ALSO THE
OWNER, DERIVING FROM HIS FATHER.
>There are 2 aspects of Res Judicata: (1) Barred by Former Judgment Law of the case.
Example is given above (regular Res Judicata). (2) Conclusiveness of judgment different
from Law of the case. All but 2 of the 6 requisites must be present.
>Eg. P vs. D for cancellation of DOS. P claims he never executed such DOS and the
signature appearing in the DOS is a forgery, and further, the property is a conjugal
property requiring consent of wife, and consent in the DOS was also a forgery. After trial
on the merits, the court renders a decision dismissing the case, because the plaintiffs
claim of forgery has not been proven and therefore the DOS is a genuine document. Since
in said DOS the P sold the property to D, the latter becomes the owner. Hence, this first
case became final and executory. After several years, P and D died. Ds son then leased
the property to X, and the latter built a factory on the premises in question, paying rentals
to the former. Here comes Ps son, filing a 2 nd case (P vs X for damages). X files an MD on
the ground of Res Judicata basing on the first case, settling issue over said property. Is
there Res Judicata? All requisites are present, except: ID of parties (Ds interest is as an
owner, and Xs interest is as a lessee) and ID of Reliefs sought (P cancellation of DOS, Ps
son damages, different COAs). THUS, THERE IS RES JUDICATA AS TO THE 2 ND ASPECT
CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT.

JULY 27, 2013

VN-20130727-00001
First Hour
>STATUTE OF FRAUDS (refer to notes of classmates)
>WAIVABLE
>Sale of MV must always be in writing in order to effect a transfer.
>How about on the internet? Person orders red Ferrari but gets a yellow pickup truck and
pays with credit card. Is there a breach? Yes. How does person prove that he did order a
red Ferrari considering the Statutes of Frauds in consideration of the E-commerce Act?
The E-commerce Act provide that for those transactions that require written documents
under Statutes of Frauds, these requirements are deemed to have been complied with
provided there are documents that can be produced that can be authenticated what of
an electronic transaction? Credit Card Statement of Transaction.
credible.

It is where the person made a purchase.

purchase as evidenced by Credit Card Statement.

Proofs website is

Person used credit card to make

If these can be authenticated, then

deemed to have complied with Statute of Frauds.

>(10)Failure to Comply with a Condition Precedent (waivable) Before one goes to
court, all other requirements must have been complied with (Eg. Referral to Lupon as
provided by the LGC). Other cases Actions between family members require earnest
efforts towards compromise. If in Barangay, certificate to file an action. What about suits
between family members? State allegations in the complaint, this is a suit between family
members and earnest efforts were exerted via several family meetings in order to arrive at
a compromise; however, all efforts failed to be proven in a trial. Family would refer to
cases involved parents and children immediate family members (parents vs children,
children vs children). What if Brother vs. Brother and Brothers Wife? No need to exhaust
all efforts because a stranger is involved (wife).
exhaustion of administrative remedies.

Another case, Administrative cases

Outline in the complaint the steps taken to

exhaust all administrative remedies.

>MOTION TO DISMISS CAN EITHER BE GRANTED OR DENIED.
>IF GRANTED, CASE WILL BE DISMISSED. However, the remedy of appeal is available
to a plaintiff.
>IF DENIED, DEFENDANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO FILE HIS ANSWER, within the
remaining period he has left after he filed the motion to dismiss.

>Eg. Defendant receives summons July 1, 2013. Thus, he had 15 days to file an answer.
Instead of filing an answer, D files an MD on July 5. Since an MD is a litigated motion, this
was heard on July 12. However, the court denied it on July 22. However, Ds counsel
received this on July 26. How many days does D have left to file an answer? and up to
when? According to NCC, exclude the 1st day and include the last day. Also, the filing of
the motion interrupts the period.

When counting the days, we include weekends and

holidays. And if the last day falls on a weekend or on a holiday, it does not continue to run
until the next working day. Thus, based on said rules, what are the answers?
>Supposedly, he had up to July 16 to file an answer. So we exclude July 1 when summons
was received, according to the NCC, and also exclude filing of MD on July 5, since this
interrupts running of period. Given so, 3 days has lapsed (July 2, 3, and 4). 15 -3 = 12.
Thus, he had 12 remaining days. Then, count 12 days from July 26 (again, exclude July
26 from counting since it is a 1 st day). We arrive at August 7 after counting 12 days,
including the 12th day (last day as according to the NCC). Thus, he has 12 days left to file
an answer, and he has up to August 7 to file an answer.
>Why start counting from July 26? Because it was the date when defendant received
notice of the denial of the MD.
>Supposing a Motion for a Bill of Particulars? Same. Anything that interrupts. General
rule- do not include the day you received the summons or the day that interrupted the
period. Start counting again from the time of the receipt (not the denial per se) of the
denial.
>However, if Motion for Reconsideration, we have a fresh 15 days from denial of said
motion.

>DEFENDANT NOW FILES AN ANSWER.

>Remember that Plaintiff files the initiatory pleading (starts the ball rolling), which
requires a CONFS and Verification.
>What about an Answer? This is a RESPONSIVE PLEADING. Will this require a CONFS? No.
This is only mandatory in initiatory pleading. How about a verification? Not necessarily;
however, there are instances where such is required in an answer.
>Answer contains the defenses of the defendant. These defenses can either be Negative
Defenses (ND) or Affirmative Defenses (AD).
>ADs are all the grounds for MD. Yes, even if all those things that you are saying are
true, still you cannot recover from me because GROUND.
admissions of plaintiffs allegations.
>Instead of filing an MD, D might as well include AD in his answer.

ADs are hypothetical

>Can a Ds answer include both AD and ND? YES. Why? Just in case his AD are denied,
then the ND can compensate.
>ND are specific denials.
>Right after an answer is filed containing AD, a hearing is conducted (litigated) to
determine whether grounds are sustainable.

If the court denies the AD, the hearing

continues and looks at the remaining defenses, the ND (Specific Denials).

>An answer may both have AD and ND, or only the ND.
>Answers, defenses, etc are numbered for easier reference.
>If it is an ABSOLUTE DENIAL, must state reason behind denial.
>Eg. In an allegation, it says that D signed a PN.

The D then absolutely denies said

allegation by stating that D does not know how to write. Absolute Denial + Explanation.
What if only the absolute denial was given but was never explained? This is what is called
a Negative Pregnant (Open to multiple interpretations).
>PARTIAL DENIAL may also be given (admit some, deny some).
>Eg. In the allegation- That defendant appeared in the house of the plaintiff and signs
promissory note. The D can make a partial denial, That defendant admits being in the
house of the plaintiff but denies signing the promissory note because the defendant does
not know how to write.
>LITERAL DENIAL Denial is made because there is no sufficient knowledge to form a
belief as to the truth or falsity of plaintiffs statement.
>Eg. In an allegation, it says- Because of the act of defendant, Plaintiff suffered
depression and couldnt eat or sleep, thus defendant must be made to pay damages.
Defendant has no knowledge of such so he makes a LITERAL DENIAL, having no basis to
say whether such are true or not.
>Look at the answers filed by defendants and try to identify what kind of denials are
made.
>Avoid blanket denial. The defendant denies everything!!!. A blanket denial is deemed
an admission.
>Who brings out the issues in every case? It is the DEFENDANT. Why? Because defendant
is the one who denies or admits. In the plaintiffs complaint, we just have a story about
how his right is violated. We still dont have an issue because we do not know whether
such allegations are true or false.

Upon the answer of the defendant, admissions and

denials are made. Upon admission, there is no issue; however, upon denial, a conflict is
created giving birth to an issue. If defendant admits everything, then a judgment based
on the pleadings may be rendered, there being no issues.

Second Hour
>The answer of the defendant usually need not contain verification. But when should an
answer contain a verification?

Verification becomes necessary when the complaint is

based on an actionable document (any instrument that becomes the basis of the case, eg.
Promissory Note collection of sum of money from an unpaid loan based on a Promissory
Note. Breach of Contract Contract is the actionable document). So what if it is based on
an actionable document? A document contains an agreement put in writing, which could
be a gospel truth unless proven otherwise. What is its connection with the verification?
The rules require that when such document is to be denied, then it is to be specifically
denied under oath. How? In verifications, there must be a sworn statement to the effect
that everything stated by the lawyer is the truth and that client can prove such claims as
truth, and signed by the client. To determine that the specific denials of defendant are
under oath, there must be a verification. If there is no verification to a specific denial,
then the defendant is deemed to have admitted the due execution of and genuineness of
the actionable document.
>Eg. P vs D based on a Promissory Note. In the complaint, P alleges that D borrowed 100k
for which he executed a PN stating that, I, D, promise to pay P the amount of 100k on or
before June 1, 2013. Is the PN an actionable document? Yes, because it is the basis for
the sum of money, showing that a loan has been incurred. In the Ds answer, he says, I
specifically deny that I signed the PN because that signature on the PN is a forgery. That is
not how I sign my name. I just scribble my initials, and yet in the PN, my name is clearly
spelled out.

Did the D specifically deny it? YES.

However, there is no verification

(because the lawyer forgot). Plaintiff files a Motion for Judgment on the Pleading (available
only to a Plaintiff, based on an answer filed by defendant that tenders no issue). What is
the effect? Defendant is deemed to have accepted the due execution and genuineness of
the document. He can no longer question this. Due execution done willingly (under no
duress) and Genuineness Real signature, and he was the one who signed it. If this would
be the case, as a judge, should you grant the motion for judgment on the pleading? YES.
Why? Because defendant brought out an issue but admitted it, because he did not make a
specific denial under oath.
>What if in Ds answer, he says, yes, I signed the PN in his presence, but P did not give
me the money. In effect, what D is saying is that there is no consideration for the PN.

>The given denial was not supported with a verification, so the P files for a Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings.

Grant or Deny? Deny.

Why? Because denial was merely

partial. Verification is needed for denials where due execution and genuineness (DEG) is

involved. D never raised fraud or forgery. Lack of consideration is a different matter and
has nothing to do with (DEG). Consideration refers to the intrinsic part, unlike DEG which
refers to the extrinsic part. The actionable document rule only presupposes due execution
and genuineness of the document itself and does not talk of any other thing aside from
that.
>Every signature is MONEY! Absurd.
>All allegations must be captured in one statement and sworn in the verification, which is
signed by the D.
>If complaint is not based on an actionable document (eg. Damages- I promise not to run
you over, or Specific Performance), is verification necessary in an answer? OF COURSE
NOT. However, if it is based on an actionable document, a verification is necessary in
order to show that the requirement of a specific denial under oath has been complied with.
What we are saying is that if it is an actionable document, you have to specifically deny
that document, that it is untrue, and saying that needs to be under oath, presupposing
telling the truth.
>The defendant must execute a statement under oath in the verification to the effect that
everything his lawyer wrote was the truth. Again, if not under oath, the D is deemed to
have admitted the DEG of a document. Thus, P can now file a Motion for Judgment on the
pleadings.
>Must the D furnish a copy of his answer to the P? YES. How? Same with service of
pleadings Personal, Registered Mail, etc.
>Supposing D furnished a copy to Ps counsel via registered mail, and acquired a proof of
service. D then files the same in Court, however absent the explanation. P now files a
Motion to declare D in default. Must the Court grant the motion? YES. Why? Because D
failed to include a written explanation as to why personal service was not done and
registered mail was resorted to. The answer is deemed a mere scrap of paper, as if no
answer was filed.
>Aside from the answer, the D may also couple another pleading with his answer
COUNTERCLAIM (CC). Is there a CC that goes on its own? None. It must be coupled with
an answer.

Answer will merely contain Ds defenses, but the CC contains the COA of the

D. For plaintiff, COA against defendant is embodied in a complaint, while for defendant,
COA against plaintiff is embodied in a CC (not another complaint).
>SOOOoooOOooww, its like dot! You think you are di only one? Me I also have!
>Recoupment another term for CC.
>How will the plaintiff file the CC?
Counterclaim.

By coupling it with the answer.

Answer with

>In one document, the D has 2 pleadings: 1 st pleading is the answer containing all his
defenses, while the 2nd pleading is the CC containing the COA.
>What if D forgot to include the CC in the answer? Can he bring it in the same case?
Depends on the court, but must be brought before judgment is rendered. Also, there are 2
kinds of CCs, either compulsory or permissive.
>Compulsory Counterclaim (CCC)- One that arises from the same transaction subject
matter of the complaint. Meaning, it is compulsory because it is related to the complaint
filed by plaintiff. If there is no complaint from the plaintiff, then there is no ground for the
CCC of the defendant.
>Because this case was filed against me, my reputation in the community got
besmirched
>Because of a ruined reputation, I should be entitled to moral damages in the amount of
P20.00
>Hyat: Maam, time na.
>Judge M: uuuUUoooOOhhh you just let me finish dis! Thats the problem. You should have
never let me start.
>I have to defend myself, which is why I hired a lawyer to whom I promise to give
P500,000.00 because he took the bar 5 times
>And that is a CC. Is it compulsory? Yes, because it would not have arisen if not for the
suit filed by the P.
>Ill see you on Tuesday for the quiz, and Ariel, thank you so much for the pens. Next time
bring them again.

JULY 31, 2013

VN-20130731-00002
FIRST HOUR
>RECAP:
>Negative defenses- Specific Denials
>Affirmative denials Grounds for MD
>Must they be verified? General Rule, NO.

But if answer is based on an actionable

document, then specific denial must be under oath. Via sworn statement of defendant in
the verification. Based on an answerable document verified.
>The answer can be coupled with a counterclaim. A CC is the claim of the defendant
against the plaintiff.
>Eg. Defendant files a claim against Plaintiff if D himself has a claim against the P. That is
called a CC.
>In other words, a CC is the claim of the D against the P.
>How about the Answer, is that also a CC? No, the A contains the defenses. From the
word itself, it is an answer against the complaint. But for a CC, it also contains a complaint
against P.
>It is called Recoupment in other books (to get back).
>A CC can either be Compulsory or Permissive.
>If Compulsory, it arises from the same transaction subject matter of the complaint.
>Regular CC, Because of this case filed against me by the P, I was constrained to hire the
services of a lawyer for which the P should be made to pay. I suffered sleepless nights
thinking about what this case is going to do to me, for which the P should be made to pay
moral damages. My reputation in the community is now destroyed because everyone is
talking about me. Etc
>Those are all compulsory complaints because they arise from the same subject matter of
the complaint. Because it is compulsory, what is the requirement? To be compulsory, it
must be within the jurisdiction of the court.
>Eg. P vs D for sum of money. Because this was only for 300k, it was filed in the MTC.
However, the D had a CC. In his CC, he says that, I am an outstanding citizen in my
community, and I already paid that measly 300K.

Now, because of what you did, you

should pay me. But since I am not only worth 300k and more than that, my counterclaim
is now 1M.

>Is that a compulsory CC? NO. Why not? It may arise from the same subject matter of
the complaint but definitely it is outside the jurisdiction of the MTC. So can the MTC take
cognizance of the CC? It cannot because it is outside of its jurisdiction. If the D insists on
maintaining his CC there, the MTC can dismiss it outright. So even if it arises from the
same transaction, to be compulsory it must be within the jurisdiction of the same court.
>Are we saying then that the D can file another separate case in the RTC, this time the D
as P, and the P as D as a CC? YES, provided that he has grounds. Will it be for sum of
money? No. Damages, based on Malicious Prosecution.
>Supposing the first case was dismissed in the MTC because the D was able to prove that
he paid. How about the case filed in the RTC? Will it continue or will it be dismissed?
Since it is now a separate case, the RTC can decide accordingly (either dismiss it because
the case from where it arose was dismissed, or can continue to hear it if there are indeed
grounds for malicious prosecution).
>But the point is, if it is really a CCC, it must be within the jurisdiction of the court.
>Eg. P vs D for sum of money (300k). D has a CC claiming that for the past 2 years, he
worked as a caretaker for P and has never been paid for 2 years amounting to 200k.
Further, D asks for offsetting which would amount now to 100k. Is this now a CCC and
within the jurisdiction of the MTC? The amount is within the jurisdiction of the MTC, BUT
THE NATURE IS NOT. Why? Employer-employee relationship is involved, unpaid salaries,
wages, belong to the NLRC and not the regular courts. So is it a CCC? No, because the
regular courts have no jurisdiction.
>What is a CCC? If it is a CCC, it has to be included in the main case, otherwise it may
never be filed anymore.
>What if the CCC was not included in the answer, will you be allowed to raise it anytime?
Yes, the court will allow anytime before judgment. On what grounds? FAME.
>EG. P vs D for recovery of personal property (car). D just files an answer without a CCC.
Decision D, return the car to the P, the latter is the rightful owner of the car. Decision
becomes final and executory. After returning the car, D realizes that he forgot about all
the improvements he made on the car. So D now files for damages against P to recover
the expenses he incurred when he made improvements on the car. As the P, have the
case dismissed and grounded on RES JUDICATA. There is now a law of the case from the
1st case. The D should have raised the damages in the CC, because it would have been a
CCC as it arises from the same transaction subject matter of the complaint.
>GUIDE QUESTION: Will the evidence needed in the first case (in the complaint filed) be
the same evidence that will have to be produced in the 2 nd case? In fthe first case, P had to
prove that he owned the car, and therefore was entitled to it. What about D? D also had
to prove that he had a reason to own and thus keep the car in order for the case to be

dismissed. So, those are the sets of evidence needed proof that P owned the car and
that D also had a right to the car. You go to the next case for damages. What evidence
now does the D have to prove? He will have to prove that he was the owner of the car
which is why he installed all the improvements. And what does the P have to prove so
that he wont be liable for damages? He would have to prove that he was the owner of the
car so the D would have no right to introduce improvements.
>Are those sets of evidence the same with the 1 st case? YES. Thus, a CCC and should be
raised in the main complaint with the answer or anytime before judgment. If filed with the
answer, then OK. But if filed before judgment, LEAVE OF COURT IS NEEDED. Done via
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE CC. Attach a CC with the motion.
>When you file a motion for leave of court, you have to attach what you want the court to
consider (CC).
>This is because the Court must first read the CC to determine whether they would grant
the motion.
>If meritorious, MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT may be granted. The CC attached to the
Motion may now be admitted and made part of the records of the case.
>Is a CC an initiatory pleading?

It depends.

If it is compulsory, it is not an initiatory

pleading because it is a continuation of the first case. But if it is a permissive CC, it is an

initiatory pleading.
>Eg. Refer to a pleading with a CC.
Prayer
1) That the complaint is to be dismissed
2) That on his CC, the Court order the P to pay the Defendant
>D is asking for the dismissal of the case and is also asking for P to pay.
>Does a prayer need to be verified? Yes, because it has a complaint.

And complaints

always need to be verified.

>Must there be a certificate of nonforum shopping? Depends.
>CCC doesnt need a CNFS. But for PCC, CNFS is needed, plus docket fees.
>A PCC is separate and independent, and does not arise from the same transaction
subject matter of the case.
>Eg. P vs D for recovery of real property. However, D alleges that when they were good
friends, P borrowed money from him for which P signed a PN the amount of which is 500k.
Therefore, D now wants P to pay him the 500k loan. Is there a connection between the
recovery of real property with the PN?
separate case? YES.

None.

So meaning, can the D file an entirely

But in order to avoid multiplicity of suits, D can include it as a

Counterclaim via PCC + Verification + CNFS + Docket Fees (A separate complaint

altogether).
>For CCC, initially there is no docket fees, but upon judgment on the CCC in favor of D, the
docket fees will constitute the first lien on the judgment in favor of the D. At first, the D

need not pay because its a CCC, but if he wins, docket fees are deducted from what is to
be awarded to him.
>PCC, may be included in the first case, or may also be filed entirely separate from the
main case.
>Eg. Interesting case daw. A truck and a van had a collision along a bend in the road. Van
landed in the ravine and was totally wrecked, while the truck only suffered some damages
on the front part. The first one who filed the case was the truck owner against the van
owner, claiming that the damages amounted to 120k, thus filing it in the MTC. The van
owner, upon filing of the case against him, also filed a case against truck owner. Because
the van was totally wrecked, the van owner filed a claim of 450k against truck owner
before the RTC.

The truck owner filed an MD based on litis pendentia.

subject matter, and reliefs sought in both cases.

Same parties,

Truck owner said that D should have

instead filed a CCC, because his claim arises from the same transaction subject matter of
the complaint.

But van owner questioned the possibility of this since his claims was

outside the jurisdiction of the MTC. Truly, Ds case is a CCC, but because of the amount, it
is taken out of the jurisdiction of the RTC. If 2 cases are allowed to continue, there may be
conflicting decisions.

What then can be done? CASES ARE TO BE CONSOLIDATED IN ONE

COURT. WHERE? RTC COURT OF GENERAL JURISDICTION.

>Consolidation is allowed in the RTC provided one of the cases is cognizable by the RTC.
>If it is a CCC and is included with the answer, and the main complaint is dismissed, is it
automatic that the CCC is also dismissed? Not necessarily. When a complaint is dismissed,
it does not carry with it the dismissal of a CC. Remember, affirmative defenses contain
grounds for MD. Upon hearing and court finds merit in the affirmative defenses in the
answer and dismisses the case, the dismissal is only limited to the complaint.
>The decision further continues, The D is given 15 days from the receipt of this
order/resolution stating whether he will pursue his CC in the same case, or choose to
separately pursue.
>If D pursues it in the same case, such is set for reception of evidence.
>That is why do not file an MD else you foreclose (once MD is granted) your chance to file
a CC. Because there is no such animal as a MD with CC. Instead, file an Answer with CC
so that you can pursue the CC even if the case is dismissed by merit of affirmative
defenses.

SECOND HOUR
>Students: Maam rest, REEEST!!!
>Judge M: No. Ill finish this.
>Another Eg. 1st case was filed by P against H&W for cancellation of a deed of sale (DOS)
claiming that the DOS was not signed by the W, the property being conjugal, and that any
disposition thereof needed wifes consent. In the DOS, it is alleged that the Ws signature
was a forgery. Another ground that was mentioned was that the DOS was null and void
because the H&W are members of the indigenous people.

Under the NCIP, for the

disposition of a land by someone from the IP, it should bear the approval of the NCIP.
Why? To show that IP understand what they are disposing of that it is an ancestral land.
Anyway, as alleged, the DOS had no approval from the NCIP.

However, the case was

dismissed because it turned out that there was no forgery and that the NCIP approved it.
The H&W was able to produce a DOS with the approval of the NCIP. What was attached to
the complaint was a DOS without the NCIP approval.

The P, not contented, filed a case

(2nd case) against the H (W passed away) for damages because H rented out the property
to somebody else, and that P was claiming the rentals alleging that he was the owner. But
because of Res Judicata, the case was dismissed. The H then also died, and the P filed a
3rd case against H&Ws children, reiterating the above-2 claims (which landed in Judge Ms
court). The children filed an Answer with CC. Their answer contained affirmative defenses
Res Judicata, while the CC (enough is enough)- we incurred several expenses because of
these expenses from the time of our parents by the same old man. Thus we should be
entitled to damages. Thus, the 3 rd case was dismissed, and the children of H&W were
allowed to manifest whether they would like to pursue the CC in the same case or file
another case. The children decided on the former, thus the court set the CC for hearing to
receive evidence.

No more pretrial.

Was P notified? Yes.

However, during the

presentation of the evidence of the CC, the P did not appear. The children testified about
the cases filed by the old disgruntled fellow. Now the children were claiming for attorneys
fees and damages. The court rendered favorable judgment on their CC.
>Was that a CCC? Yes. So far, that is the only CCC I granted in favor of the D. All the
other CCCs had no basis.
>Weak Heart Doctrine Dismiss CCC hahaha. It takes more than saying you could not
eat or sleep to prove moral damages. Anxiety and depression must be shown.
>P vs D1 and D2. P (complaint), D (counterclaim). But is it possible for a D to have a
claim against another D?

Yes.

It is called a Cross Claim (XC).

It is a claim of one

defendant against a co-defendant arising from the same transaction subject matter of the
complaint.
>If it is a CC, it can be compulsory or permissive. What about a XC? By its very nature, it
can only be compulsory.

It is just called an XC. If a D has an XC against another D, then

they should have different lawyers.

>P lends money (1M) to D and E. But since D is the thinker and doer (manager), E takes
care of the finances. Their arrangement as far as the 1M is concerned, D manages the
business while E manages the finances in order to pay P. D gives money to E for the latter
to pay their debt to P. But then, D receives a complaint from P for collection of sum of
money so D goes to E and asks him about the finances. D asks, what have you been
doing with the money, bitch? D files his answer and also files an XC against E for the
latter to take responsibility.

>Answer + XC. Check sample pleadings. D says, if the court finds me liable for my share,
then by way of XC, I want E to shoulder everything (that E be made to pay all the loan
including what I may be liable for).
>XC, by its very nature, is compulsory. So, if the main case is dismissed, will it carry with
the dismissal of the XC? YES, because it has no more legs to stand on. The complaint
gives rise to the XC. Were it not for the complaint, there would not be an XC. So when you
dismiss the main complaint, then there would no longer be an XC to speak of. The XC is
dependent on the main case.
>Must an XC be verified? An XC is a COMPLAINT by one D against a Co-D. So must it be
verified? YES.
>Does an XC require a CNFS? An XC, as a general rule, is not an initiatory pleading.
HOWEVER, in a Supreme Court Circular, they consider an XC an initiatory pleading for the
purposes of DOCKET FEES.
>If taxes are the lifeblood of the nation, docket fees are the lifeblood of the courts.
>Thus, being included among those considered as an initiatory pleading, an XC require a
CNFS.
>Also, because it concerns matters separate from the P but only between 2 Ds, then it
would also need CNFS.
>Despite that, an XC derives its life from the main complaint. No main complaint, no XC.
>Otherwise, dismissing the main complaint and letting E pay D would be UNJUST
ENRITSMENT.
>Since by its very nature a XC is compulsory, it then has be raised in the main case.
>Can it be raised at any time before judgment (like a CC)? YES, but with Leave of Court.
The court will allow filing of XC on grounds of FAME, before the judgment is rendered. If XC
not raised in the same case, then it is forever barred. That is why an XC has the same
effect as a CCC.
>Question? Yes Valentines Day.
>Val: Maam can E file a CC against the XC filed by D against him?
>Judge M: So can E have a CC also against D?
>Val: Yes maam.
>Judge M: You know, you dont call it a CC because the CC is only against the person who
filed the case. E

can file 2 answers- Answer to a complaint, and ANSWER TO XC. Not

Answer to the XC with CC.

End of
midterms