Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT


Branch -City of Manila
ESMERALDA,
Plaintiff,
-versus-

Civil Case No. ----For: Forcible Entry

SPS. JOSE,
Defendants,
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
(FOR THE DEFENDANTS)

DEFENDANTS, by themselves, and unto this Honorable Court,


most respectfully submits this Pre-Trial Brief, to wit:
I.

POSSIBILITY OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT

The DEFENDANTS manifest that are willing to explore


possibilities for an amicable settlement that is fair and reasonable
under the circumstances.
II.

SUMMARY OF ADMITTED AND PROPOSED STIPULATION


OF FACTS
A.

SUMMARY OF ADMITTED FACTS


Defendants admits the following facts, to with:
1.

The Defendants are in possession of the subject


property;

2.

The identities of the parties;

3.

The location of the subject properties;

III.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS

Defendants proposes the following facts to be admitted by the


Plaintiff, to wit: -THAT1.
Defendants alleged ownership over the subject property
as evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale dated September 08,
1996 . The subject property was bought by the Defendants from
Analyn Castro.
2.
property;

Plaintiff is not entitled to possession of the subject

3.
Defendants and their family have been in prior
possession of the subject property since 1996.
4.
Defendants firmly believe that, they are the owners of the
subject property by virtue of the Deed of Absolute Sale. Up to this
date, Defendants have been in the concept of an open, continuous,
exclusive, actual and notorious possession of the subject property;
5.
It is incontrovertible fact that Plainttiff failed to allege in
her Complaint that she sent a Demand letter to Plaintiffs. There is
therefore no notice to vacate sent to Defendants, hence, a fatal
defect in ejectment cases.
6.
Moreover, records show that there is NO PROPER/
VALID NOTICE TO PAY AND VACATE as required in ejectment
cases. More so, this Honorable Court has no jurisdiction in the
instant case considering that the grounds raised by the Plaintiff in her
complaint are NOT AMONG THOSE GROUNDS ENUMERATED IN
EJECTMENT CASES since herein defendants are NOT
USURPERS/INTRUDERS of the subject property but OWNERS.
7.
Plaintiff miserable FAILED to allege in her Complaint her
prior physical possession of the subject property and not legal
possession.
IV.

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES


A.

Whether or not the Defendant has legal rights over the


property in litis.

C.

Whether or not the demand letter to pay and vacate was


personally received by the defendant.

V.

D.

Whether or not the defendant was validly/legally served


with summons and copy of the complaint.

E.

Whether or not Defendant is entitled to DAMAGES.

APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE

1. Pertinent provisions Civil Code and Rules on Summary


shall be applicable in the instant case.

Procedure

2. 1Section 16, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court;


3.Gaitero vs. Almeria, G.R. No. 181812, June 8, 2011

VI.

4.

Ruben C. Corpuz, represented by Attorney-in-Fact


Wenifreda C. Agullana vs. Sps. Hilarion Agustin and Justa
Agustin G.R. No. 183822, January 18, 2012;

5.

Heirs of Demetrio Melchor vs. Mechor, 415 SCRA 726,


G.R. No. 150633, November 12, 2003;

6.

Tirona v. Alejo, G.R. No. 129313. October 10, 2001;

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Defendants shall present the following documentary pieces of


evidence:
1.

Original copy of the Deed of Sale dated September 1996


and marked as Annex 1;

2.

Original copy of the Certification dated 15 May 1997

Defendants reserves thier rights to present additional documentary


evidence during the proceedings upon permission of this Honorable Court.

VII.

MODES OF DISCOVERY PROCEDURE

Defendants intends to avail of discovery procedures or referral


to commissioners when necessary.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully
prayed of this Honorable Court that the PRE-TRIAL BRIEF be
NOTED.
1

Other reliefs just and equitable under the foregoing are likewise
being prayed for.
Respectfully submitted.
City of Manila. ______.

Spouses Jose
COPY FURNISHED:
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Public Attorney I
Department of Justice
PUBLIC ATTORNEYS OFFICE
4th Floor, Godino Building
Antonio Villegas Street, Manila
EXPLANATION: Copy of the foregoing Pre-Trial Brief was served to
the adverse party by registered mail in lieu of personal service due to
traffic situation.
Spouses Jose