1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 26 Admission by

2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Adverse Party

Rule 26 When request may be made: court may allow on motion,

ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY the party to whom the
At any time after the issues have been request is directed files and
joined (after the responsive pleading has been serves upon the party
Rule 26 is also known as REQUEST FOR ADMISSION. served). requesting the admission a
Admission by adverse party or request for admission is sworn statement either
similar to interrogatories. You send questions to your Q: So, what will you request the other party denying specifically the
opponent and hes bound to answer in writing within 15 days to admit? matters of which an
under oath but the framing of the questions are different. A: 1. The genuineness of any material and admission is requested or
relevant document described in and exhibited with setting forth in detail the
In a request for admission, you are requiring the the request and/or of reasons why he cannot
opposing party to admit the truth or authenticity of certain 2. the truth of any material and truthfully either admit or
documents. For example: Do you admit the genuineness of relevant matter of fact set forth in the request orin deny those matters.
the documents marked as Annex A? We are talking here of the request; or Objections to any
DOCUMENTS which are NOT ACTIONABLE because if the 3. a matter of fact not related to any request for admission shall
document is actionable then it has to be pleaded properly. documents may be presented to the other party for be submitted to the court
admission or denial. by the party requested
In other words, if I have 20 documents, to find out within the period for and
whether you will admit them or not, I will send you a copy Q: When do you apply this mode of prior to the filing of his
and ask, Do you admit the genuineness of this? Do you discovery? sworn statement as
admit the truth? A: At anytime after issues have been contemplated in the
joined. Meaning, there is already an answer. preceding paragraph and
So, the main difference between Rule 26 and Rule 25 his compliance therewith
is in the framing of the question. If the question is framed in Q: Is LEAVE OF COURT required under Rule shall be deferred until such
such a way that the premise is laid down and I ask you 26? objections are resolved,
whether or not you admit, then the question is proper under A: It is totally UNNECESSARY but a request which resolution shall be
Rule 26. BUT if the question if framed in such a way that it is for admission under Rule 26 can only be started made as early as
not answerable by yes or no, then apply Rule 25. according to Section 1, At any time after issues practicable.(2a)
have been joined. So it presupposes that there is
Example: Suppose my question is like this who was already an answer. Unlike in interrogatories, you
with you? That is proper under Rule 25. Pero sabi ko, A can do it even before an answer is served provided Implied admission. Each of the matters of
and B were with you, admitted? That is Rule 26. Kaya nga there is leave of court. This is the second which an admission is requested shall be deemed
the way the questions were framed determines wohat kind difference between Rule 25 and Rule 26. admitted unless, within a period designated in the
of mode of discover are you going to apply. request, which shall not be less than fifteen (15)
Request for admission and actionable days after service thereof, or within such further
document time as the court may allow on motion, the party
Section 1. Request for to whom the request is directed files and serves
admission. At any time after The former is proper when the genuineness upon the party requesting the admission a sworn
issues have been joined, a of an evidentiary document is sought to be statement either denying specifically the matters
party may file and serve upon admitted. If not denied under oath, its genuineness of which an admission is requested or setting
any other party a written is deemed impliedly admitted. Essentially it is a forth in detail the reasons why he cannot
request for the admission by mode of discovery; while the latter must be truthfully either admit or deny those matters.
the latter of the genuineness of attached to the complaint or copied therein. Its
any material and relevant genuineness and due execution is deemed The remedy of the party, in this case, is to file a
document described in and impliedly admitted unless specifically denied under motion to be relieved of the consequences of the implied
exhibited with the request or of oath, by the adverse party. admission. The amendment of the complaint per se
the truth of any material and cannot set aside the legal effects of the request for
relevant matter of fact set forth Sec. 2. Implied 23
admission since its materialty has not been affected
in the request. Copies of the admission. Each of the by the amendment.
documents shall be delivered matters of which an
with the request unless copies admission is requested Q: So, if I send to you a request for admission,
have already been furnished. shall be deemed what is your duty?
(1a) admitted unless, A: Within 15 days, you must answer my request
within a period under oath, whether admitting or denying my request.
designated in the Take note, under oath also, parang interrogatories.
Purpose of written request for admission: request, which shall
To expedite trial and relieve the parties of the costs of not be less than fifteen Q: Suppose you ignore my request within 15 days.
proving facts which will not be disputed on trial and the truth (15) days after service You did not do anything. You did not bother to file any
of which can be ascertained by reasonable inquiry. thereof, or within such answer to my request for admission. What is the effect
further time as the of failure to answer the request?
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 26 Admission by
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Adverse Party

A: You are deemed to have admitted. There is an Now, under Section 2, if

implied admission of all the things that I asked you to admit. the party as requested to make Sec. 3. Effect of
Section 2 says, each of the matters of which an admission is an admission does not make so admission. Any admission
requested shall be deemed admitted unless you file your within 15 days, the matter made by a party pursuant to
answer to the request. Meaning, if you will not answer my requested is deemed admitted - such request is for the
request, under the law, all the matters which I request you impliedly admitted - that is the purpose of the pending
to admit are deemed impliedly admitted. That is the penalty penalty. action only and shall not
for not bothering to file your reply under Rule 26. If you do not want to constitute an admission by
respond to my request, him for any other purpose
BAR QUESTION : A sends a request for admission to B everything that I requested will nor may the same be used
and B made an admission. However, during the trial, A did be impliedly admitted. Now, you against him in any other
not offer in evidence the answers to the request. Can the already denied the allegation in proceeding.(3)
court take judicial notice of the answers? my complaint specifically in your
A: Based on THE OLD RULES, it would seem NO answer, I repeated it in a Use: An admission under this Section is for the
because a request for admission is purely an extrajudicial request for admission and this purpose of the pending action only and cannot be used
matter between the parties. But if the same question is time, you failed to respond. in other proceedings.
asked NOW, the answer would be YES, because under the Now, under Rule 26, the
NEW RULES, you are already required to file and serve. plaintiff can claim, Well, since Section 3 is for the purpose of evidence. An
Therefore the court may now take judicial notice because it you did not respond, then it is admission made by a party pursuant to a request for
already forms part of the record. already deemed admitted. admission is only good for that case. It cannot be used in
Suppose the other party would any other case or proceeding. It limits therefore the
BAR QUESTION: Suppose, I will file a case against say, No, I already denied that effectivity of an admission. It is only valid for the
you and I will attach to my complaint a Promissory Note in my answer. There is no pending case.
actionable document. In your answer, you deny the obligation for me to the deny
genuineness and due execution of the Promissory Note. the same all over again under Sec. 4. Withdrawal. The
Meaning, as a defense you allege that your signature is Rule 26. court may allow the party
forged. There was a proper denial because it was under making an admission under
oath. ISSUE: Is there a need this Rule, whether express
After a week, I will now send to you a request for for another denial in the request or implied, to withdraw or
admission under rule 26, where I attach the same for admission? amend it upon such terms
promissory note, and I will ask you, Do you admit the as may be just. (4)
genuineness and due execution of this promissory note? HELD: NO NEED. When a
Now, when you receive the request, you ignore it because matter is already effectively Admissions made, expressly or impliedly (failure or
you already denied the promissory note under oath in your denied in the pleading, then refusal to respond) are nevertheless binding.
answer. So you argue, Why do I have to deny it again there is no need to ask it all
under Rule 26 when I already denied it under Rule 8? There over again. In other words, Q: Is the party admitting allowed to withdraw,
is no need for me to deny it all over again. I can also argue, what has already been denied is change or amend his previous admissions?
Even if you denied it under Rule 8, under Rule 26 you are denied and therefore you cannot A: YES, but with leave of court.
obliged to deny it all over again. Otherwise, you are deemed say that for failure to deny it is
to have admitted the genuineness and due execution of the already deemed admitted.
document. Who is right between the two of us? A request for admission Sec. 5. Effect of failure
ANSWER: There was an old decided case where the is not intended to merely to file and serve request for
SC seemed to imply that even if the matter is already denied reproduce or reiterate the admission. Unless otherwise
in your pleading, if it is reiterated under Rule 26 (request for allegations of the requesting allowed by the court for
admission) it has to be denied all over again otherwise partys pleading but should set good cause shown and to
youre impliedly admitting it. To my mind, that is already forth relevant evidentiary prevent a failure of justice, a
answered in the 1988 case of: matters of fact, or documents party who fails to file and serve a
described in and exhibited with request for admission on the 24
PO vs. COURT OF APPEALS the request, whose purpose is adverse party of material and
164 SCRA 668 to establish said partys cause of relevant facts at issue
action or defense. Unless it which are, or ought to be,
FACTS: There was an allegation serves that purpose, it is within the personal
made by the plaintiff in his complaint pointless, useless, and a mere knowledge of the latter,
which allegation was specifically denied in redundancy. shall not be permitted to
the answer. Plaintiff asked the same present evidence on such
question in a request for admission. Inulit If we have to answer the same question facts. (n)
niya ang tanong and this time the under the ruling in PO, it would seem that the
defendant did not answer the request for defendant is correct. Why do I have to deny, if I This is one of the more controversial sections in
admission. have already denied it? So, there is no implied the new Rules. This is a mandatory mode of discovery.
admission. A party who FAILS to FILE and SERVE a request for
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 26 Admission by
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Adverse Party

admission on the adverse party of material and relevant otherwise allowed by the court for good cause and But the case of REBONIA should not be confused
facts in issue which are or ought to be within the personal to prevent a failure of justice. So thats an with the case of
knowledge of the latter shall not be permitted to present exception.
evidence on such facts. This is A VERY HARSH RULE a PSCFC FINANCING CORP.
new rule which again shows the intention of the law to So, even if you are correct, the judge may vs. COURT OF APPEALS
compel the lawyers to avail of the modes of discovery. say that its too much. Even if you invoke it, the 216 SCRA 838 [1992]
judge may still say that there will be failure of
An example of the section: Lets assume that there is justice if he will apply it. With more reason, no FACTS : A request for
a fact which I want to prove and I know that you know but I judge will use it if you will not invoke it. It is admission was sent to a party. The
do not know whether youll admit it or not. Under the rules, I practically barring the party from proving his case. party told his lawyer to answer the
have to send you a request for admission to confirm it. That is why even if you invoke this, judges are very request. So, it was the lawyer who
careful not to apply this. So, you have to invoke answered the request for admission
Suppose I do not send you a request because anyway this at least, to call the attention of the judge under oath.
there are very few lawyers who do that. So, I did not send a though the judge may still refuse because there
request and then during the trial, I will just try to prove it. might be a failure of justice. ISSUE: Was there an effective
Then the adverse party says, Teka muna, what are you answer or reply to the request for
trying to prove? You should have sent me a request for The only purpose I see for these is to admission as it was the lawyer who
admission. And then you say that you forgot to send one. compel the parties and lawyers to avail of the made the reply ?
Modes of Discovery.
So, the adverse party here objects because he argues HELD : YES, because under the
that I cannot present evidence to prove something which he Rules, a client can always act through
could have admitted in a request for admission. This is Lets go to some interesting cases on request the lawyer and he is bound by the
something which the party could have admitted had I for admission. actuations of his lawyer. This is
resorted to a request for admission under Rule 26, and since practically the rule on Agency. If we
I did not, then he can now prevent me from proving it. REBONERIA vs. COURT will say that the lawyer has no
OF APPEALS authority even if ordered by the client ,
Hence, this is a very dangerous provision. Though, we 216 SCRA 627 [1992] then we are altering the Rules on
still have to see a judge applying this rule because it is Agency and also the rule that the
practically placing the other party in estoppel. Basically the FACTS: A request for lawyer can always act in behalf of his
argument will go like this: admission was sent by a party client.
(Plaintiff) to the lawyer of the And assuming that a lawyer is
NASTY MACK: Why did you not defendant (because anyway, not authorized to make the complaint,
send me a request for under Rule 13, the general rule then why is the adverse party the one
admission? Had you is that everything should be complaining? It is the client who has
sent me, I would have coursed through the lawyer) So, the authority to impugn the acts of his
easily admitted that the request was sent to the lawyer and not the adverse party.
but since you did not, lawyer. Since there was no Timang!!
then I will bar you form response, can there be an
proving it. (practically implied admission?
every fact aimed to be Principles to remember in the case of REBONERIA
proved can be objected HELD: NONE. In a and PSCFC:
to request for admission, since we 1. A request must be directed to the party
BEN-DEATHA: How could I have are questioning the party, we whose admission is sought. Service of request to any
known what facts you should address it to him, and other person is not a valid request at all.
will admit and not not to the lawyer. A request for
admit? admission should be served 2. A request must always be directed to
NASTY MACK: Precisely, that is upon the party, not his counsel. the party whose admission is sought, but the latter
why you should have The general rule under Rule 13 may delegate to his lawyer the right to answer the 25
sent me a copy, cannot apply where the law request. Such is valid so long as there is a valid
STUPID! expressly provides that notice authorization.
must be served upon a definite
See how dangerous this provision is? I can bar you person.
from proving anything simply because you failed to avail of In such cases, service
the modes of discovery. This was not found in the Old Rules. must be made directly upon the
person mentioned in the law
Generally, matters which are objectionable should be and upon no other in order for
pushed by the party concerned or affected. That is because the notice to be valid.
it is for his benefit. I do not think it involves public policy
thats why even if you invoke it, the court may still refuse to
apply it. Look at the opening of the first paragraph: Unless