Sie sind auf Seite 1von 108

CIVIL PROCEDURE

I. JURISDICTION

A. CLASSES OF JURISDICTION

1. General vs. Special

General Jurisdiction – the power to adjudicate all controversies except those expressly withheld from the plenary powers of the court;

Special Jurisdiction – restricts the court’s jurisdiction only to particular cases and subject to such limitations as may be provided by the governing law.

E.g.,

Environmental Court.

Drugs

Court;

Intellectual

2. Original vs. Appellate

Property

Court;

Commercial

Court;

Original Jurisdiction - the power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for the first time under conditions provided by law.

Appellate Jurisdiction - the authority of a court higher in rank to reexamine the final order of judgment of a lower court which tried the case now elevated for judicial review.

3. Exclusive vs. Concurrent

Exclusive Jurisdiction - the power to adjudicate a case or proceeding to the exclusion of all other courts at that stage.

e.g. Declaratory Relief and Ejectment cases – RTC; Ejectment Cases – MTC; Annulment of Marriage – Family Court.

Concurrent Jurisdiction (Concurrent or Confluent) - the power conferred upon different courts, whether of the same or different ranks, to take cognizance of the same case in the same or different judicial tribunals.

Where concurrent jurisdiction exists in several tribunals, the body that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion

of the others (see Pat-og vs. Civil Service Commission)

Concurrent Jurisdiction applies only to original and not appellate. In appeals, there is only one court that has jurisdiction.

The RTC, CA and SC have concurrent jurisdiction over: petitions for certiorari, mandamus, quo warranto, writ of amparo and writ of habeas data, among others, subject to the principle of the Hierarchy of Courts.

matters within its exclusive jurisdiction, and to prevent further over- crowding of the Court’s docket.

The SC will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts, and exceptional and compelling circumstances justify the availment of the extraordinary remedy of writ of certiorari, calling for the exercise of its primary

jurisdiction. (see Liga ng mga Barangay vs. City of Manila)

However, when cases brought before the appellate courts do not involve factual but legal questions, a strict application of the rule of hierarchy of courts is not necessary. (see Agan vs. PIATCO)

Moreover, when the rights of the parties have been extremely prejudiced because of the delay in the ruling of the court and damage has already set in, then the SC can take action and rule on the matter.

2. Doctrine of Transcendental Importance (see Liga ng mga Barangay vs.

City of Manila);

3. Supreme Court is not a trier of facts.

Exception: in the interest of substantial justice.

Administrative Proceedings against public school teachers: the CSC,

the Department of Education (DepEd) and the Board of Professional Teachers- Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) have concurrent jurisdiction over administrative cases against public school teachers. (Pat-og vs. CSC)

4. Other Classes

Delegated Jurisdiction - under BP 129, the grant of authority to inferior courts to hear and determine cadastral and land registration cases under where the assessed value does not exceed P100,000 and there are no oppositions. (See Sec 34)

Appeal from the exercise of a lower court of delegated jurisdiction is with the Court of Appeals not with the RTC.

Primary Jurisdiction – authority of administrative bodies to take cognizance certain cases before it can be brought before regular courts.

Special Jurisdiction - under BP 129, the power of inferior courts to hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in the absence of RTC judges in the trial or city

Territorial Jurisdiction - refers to the geographical area within which its powers can be exercised.

Important

Principles

of

Jurisdiction

relative

to

concurrent

Residual Jurisdiction – jurisdiction of the trial courts that remains even

jurisdiction:

after losing jurisdiction over the case because of appeal. A trial court loses

1.

Hierarchy of Courts

 

complete jurisdiction over a case when an appeal is perfected and the period to appeal has expired.

The concurrence of jurisdiction in the RTC, CA and SC, is not, however, to be taken as according to parties seeking any of the writs an absolute, unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to which application therefor0 will be directed. There is after all a hierarchy of courts. That hierarchy is determinative of the venue of appeals, and also serves as a general determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the extraordinary writs. A becoming regard of that judicial hierarchy most certainly indicates that petitions for the issuance of extraordinary writs against first level ("inferior") courts should be filed with the Regional Trial Court, and those against the latter, with the Court of Appeals. A direct invocation of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor, clearly and specifically set out in the petition. This is [an] established policy. It is a policy necessary to prevent inordinate demands upon the Court’s time and attention which are better devoted to those

Distinguished from Residual Prerogatives – which is the authority of the

appellate court to dismissal case motu propio. (see Katon vs. Palanca) When?

a. Rule 17, Sec. 3:

i. Failure of the plaintiff to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief for a unreasonable period of time;

ii. Failure of the plaintiff to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time;

iii. Failure of the plaintiff to comply with an order of the court.

b. Rule 9, Sec. 1:

i. Lack of jurisdiction

ii. Res judicata

iii. Litis pendentia;

iv. Prescription.

c. In cases governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Jurisdiction vs. Venue

JURISDICTION

VENUE

The authority to hear and determine a case.

The place where the case is to be heard.

Matter of substantive law.

Matter of procedural law.

Establishes a relation between the court and the subject matter.

Establishes a relation between the plaintiff and defendant or petitioner and respondent.

Fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the parties.

May be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties.

Venue is jurisdiction in criminal cases. Territories are essential in determining the venue and court which has jurisdiction over the case, unlike in civil cases, where territorial jurisdiction of the courts are essential only for venue purposes.

B. REQUISITES FOR THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION

1. Jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner - acquired by the filing of the complaint, petition or initiatory pleading before the court by the plaintiff or petitioner.

2. Jurisdiction over the defendant or respondent - acquired by the voluntary appearance or submission by the defendant or respondent to the court or by coercive process issued by the court to him, generally by service of summons.

In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is necessary for the court to validly try and decide the case. (Biaco vs.

Philippine Countryside Rural Bank)

3. Jurisdiction over the subject matter - conferred by law; unlike jurisdiction over the parties, CANNOT be conferred on the court by the voluntary act or agreement of the parties.

4. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case - determined and conferred by the pleadings or by agreement during pre-trial or by the parties’ implied consent such as when they fail to object to the admissibility in evidence.

5. Jurisdiction over the res (property/ thing subject of litigation) - acquired by the actual or constructive seizure by the court of the thing in question, thus placing it in custodial legis or by provision of law which recognizes in the court the power to deal with the property or subject matter within in its territorial jurisdiction.

The court need not acquire jurisdiction over the res as long as it acquires jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. However, if it cannot acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, it may acquire jurisdiction over the res to continue with the proceedings.

Decision is limited to the value of the property if jurisdiction is not acquired over the person of the defendant: while the trial court

acquired jurisdiction over the res, its jurisdiction is limited to a rendition of judgment on the res. It cannot extend its jurisdiction beyond the res and issue a judgment enforcing petitioner’s personal liability. In doing so without first having acquired jurisdiction over the person of petitioner, as it did, the trial court violated her constitutional right to due process, warranting the annulment of the judgment rendered in the case. (Biaco

vs. Philippine Countryside Rural Bank)

Judicial foreclosure proceedings is quasi in rem: the judicial

foreclosure proceeding instituted by respondent PCRB undoubtedly vested the trial court with jurisdiction over the res. A judicial foreclosure proceeding is an action quasi in rem. As such, jurisdiction over the person of petitioner is not required, it being sufficient that the trial court is vested with jurisdiction over the subject matter. (Biaco vs. Philippine

Countryside Rural Bank)

BAR QUESTION: if the pleading alleged that the claim is more than P400,000, but in the course of the trial, it was proven that the claim is only P200,000. Should the RTC dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction?

ANSWER: No. Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the pleadings which guide the judge whether a particular case falls within his jurisdiction as conferred by law.

Criminal Case: The jurisdiction of the court over criminal cases is determined by the allegations in the Information or the Complaint and the statute in effect at the time of the commencement of the action, unless such statute provides for a retroactive application thereof. The jurisdictional requirements must be alleged in the Information. Such jurisdiction of the court acquired at the inception of the case continues until the case is terminated. (Escobal vs.

Garchitorena)

C. JURISDICTION OF REGULAR COURTS

CLASSIFICATION OF COURTS:

Kind Of Court

Description

Courts of

those competent to decide their own jurisdiction and take cognizance of all kinds of cases

General

Jurisdiction

 

Example: RTC

Courts of

those which have no power to decide their own jurisdiction and can only try cases permitted by statute.

Limited

Jurisdiction

Example: MTC, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court (under BP 129, JDRC has been integrated into the RTC to form a branch thereof.

Courts of

those which, under the law, actions may originally be commenced

Original

Jurisdiction

 

Courts of

those which have the power to review on appeal the decisions or orders of a lower court

Appellate

Jurisdiction

 

Superior Courts

those which have the power of review or supervision over another and lower court

Inferior Courts

those which, in relation to another court are lower in rank and subject to review and supervision by another.

now called "lower courts" under the 1987 Constitution.

*

Courts of

those whose proceedings are enrolled and which are bound to keep a written record of all trials and proceedings handled by them.

Record

all inferior courts are now courts of record (prior to RA 6031, they were courts not of record).

*

Courts Not of Record

those which are not required to keep a written record or transcript of proceedings held therein

Constitutional

those which owe their creation and existence to the Constitution hence cannot be legislated out of existence or deprived by law of their jurisdiction and powers which were unqualifiedly vested to them by the Constitution.

SC and SB only (BUT the better view is that the SB is ONLY a constitutional-mandated court since its creation was by statutory enactment ALTHOUGH its existence is provided for by the Constitution.

Courts

Statutory

those which were created, organized and with jurisdiction exclusively determined by law.

Courts

All courts except SC and Sandiganbayan are considered statutory courts.

1. SUPREME COURT

1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:

All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.

All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto.

All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.

All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.

All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such temporary assignment shall not exceed six months without the consent of the judge concerned.

Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.

NOTE: Only appeals from the following are allowed to done directly to the Supreme Court:

1. Court of Appeals;

2. Court of Tax Appeals (en banc);

3. Sandiganbayan;

4. COMELEC;

5. COA;

6. Shariah Appellate Courts.

All other bodies, tribunals or courts may file an appeal with the Court of Appeals.

Actions to discipline judges is different from a criminal case filed

against the same judge: A criminal case against an attorney or judge is distinct and separate from an administrative case against him. The dismissal of the criminal case does not warrant the dismissal of an administrative case arising from the same set of facts. The quantum of evidence that is required in the latter is only preponderance of evidence, and not proof beyond reasonable doubt which is required in criminal cases. (Office of the Court

Administrator vs. Sardido)

2. COURT OF APPEALS

BP Blg. 129, Section 9. Jurisdiction. – The Court of Appeals shall Exercise:

1. Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;

2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments of Regional Trial Courts; and 3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, resolutions, orders or awards of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commission, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security Commission, the Employees Compensation Commission and the Civil Service Commission, Except those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, the provisions of this Act, and of subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph of Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948. The court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or Appeals must be continuous and must be completed within three (3) months, unless extended by the Chief Justice. (as amended by R.A. No. 7902.)

3. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

BP Blg 129, Section 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:

(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation; (2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) or for civil actions in Metro Manila, where such the value exceeds Fifty thousand pesos (50,000.00) except actions for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts; (3) In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where he demand or claim exceeds One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or , in Metro Manila, where such demand or claim exceeds Two hundred thousand pesos (200,000.00); (4) In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate exceeds One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or, in probate matters in Metro Manila, where such gross value exceeds Two hundred thousand pesos (200,000.00); (5) In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations; (6) In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising jurisdiction or any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions; (7) In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Courts of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and (8) In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs or the value of the property in controversy exceeds One hundred thousand pesos (100,000.00) or, in such other abovementioned items exceeds Two hundred thousand pesos (200,000.00). (as amended by R.A. No. 7691*)

Title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein: the

basis is the assessed value, for determining whether which court has jurisdiction. EXCEPT: quieting of title and removal of cloud under Rule 63, which falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the RTC. (Sabitsana vs. Murtegui)

Amended Amounts: no longer P100,000 and P200,000. Now, exceeding P300,000 outside Metro Manila; P400,000 in Metro Manila. Applicable to the following cases:

1. Claims for money;

2. Actions purely for damages;

3. Estate proceedings;

4. Cases in admiralty and maritime jurisdictions.

Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation: the claim or the issue is cannot be

reduced into an amount. Examples:

1. Annulment or rescission of contract;

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

2. Specific performance;

3. Cancellation of title – the ultimate relief is the cancellation of the title, the subject is only the title itself; this is different from actions involving title to, or possession of, real property, the jurisdiction of which may be determined by the assessed value;

4. Cancellation of mortgage.

Ruby Shelter case: initially assessed by the clerk of court as incapable of pecuniary estimation. Later on, it was determined that the ultimate result of the case is that title would pass on, not merely for recovery of title (document), but the title to the property itself (ownership). The RTC then assessed filing fees. CA sustained the RTC. The Supreme Court sustained RTC and CA. the petitioner’s complaint involved not only the annulment of the deed of sale but also the recovery of the real properties identified in the documents. In other words, the objective of the petitioner in filing the case were to cancel the deed and ultimately to recover possession. Therefore, the value of the property determines the filing fees.

Section 20. Jurisdiction in criminal cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, except those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken cognizance of by the latter.

Section 21. Original jurisdiction in other cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise original jurisdiction:

(1) In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective regions; and (2) In actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls.

Section 22. Appellate jurisdiction. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions. Such cases shall be decided on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by the Regional Trial Courts. The decision of the Regional Trial Courts in such cases shall be appealable by petition for review to the Court of Appeals which may give it due course only when the petition shows prima facie that the lower court has committed an error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision or judgment sought to be reviewed.

Section 23. Special jurisdiction to try special cases. – The Supreme Court may designate certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts to handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies, and/or such other special cases as the Supreme Court may determine in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice.

a. FAMILY COURTS

RA No. 8369 dated Oct. 28, 1997

Section 5. Jurisdiction of Family Courts. - The Family Courts shall have exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases:

a) Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age or where one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may have incurred.

The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of application pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the "Child and Youth Welfare Code";

b) Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation

to the latter;

c) Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof;

d) Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage

and those relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains;

e) Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment;

f) Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Executive Order No. 209, otherwise known as the "Family Code of the Philippines";

g) Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent

or neglected children, petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children; the suspension, termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under Presidential Decree No. 603,

Executive Order No. 56, (Series of 1986), and other related laws;

h) Petitions for the constitution of the family home;

i) Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act, as amended;

j) Violations of Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the "Special

Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act," as amended by Republic Act No. 7658; and

k)

Cases of domestic violence against:

1)

Women - which are acts of gender based violence that results, or are

likely to result in physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other forms of physical abuse such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a woman's personhood, integrity and freedom movement; and

2) Children - which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect,

cruelty, exploitation, violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to their development.

If an act constitutes a criminal offense, the accused or batterer shall be subject to criminal proceedings and the corresponding penalties.

If any question involving any of the above matters should arise as an incident in any case pending in the regular courts, said incident shall be determined in that court.

NOTE: Family Courts are creations of law, as distinguished from Special Commercial Courts and Intellectual Property Courts which are created by Supreme Court issuances.

b. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COURTS

Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 113-95: Designation of Special Courts for Intellectual Property Rights

In the interest of an efficient administration of justice and to ensure speedy disposition of cases involving violation of Intellectual Property Rights, the Branches of the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts and Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, presently presided over by their respective trial judges as herein below indicated, are hereby specially designated to try and decide cases for violations of Intellectual Property Rights such as, but riot limited to,:

1. Violations of Art. 188 of the Revised Penal Code (Substituting and Altering Trademarks, Trade Names, or Service Marks),

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

2. Art. 189 of the Revised Penal Code (Unfair Competition, Fraudulent

Registration of Trade Name, Trademark or Service Mark, Fraudulent Designation of Origin, and False Description),

3. Presidential Decree No. 49 (Protection of Intellectual Property Rights),

4. Presidential Decree No. 87 (An Act Creating-the Videogram Regulatory

Board),

5. Republic Act No. 165 "as amended (The Patent Law), and

6. Republic Act 166 as amended' (The Trademark Law) committed within

their respective territorial areas:

4. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS AND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT COURTS

Section 32. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in criminal cases. – Except in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:

(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and (2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount thereof: Provided, however, That in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. (as amended by R.A, No. 7691)

Section 33. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in civil cases. – Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:

(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including the grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not exceed One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or, in Metro Manila where such personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not exceed Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) exclusive of interest damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged: Provided, That where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions; (2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer: Provided, That when, in such cases, the defendant raises the question of ownership in his pleadings and the question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of possession. (3) Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which involve title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value of the property or interest therein does not exceed Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) or, in civil actions in Metro Manila, where such assessed value does not exceed Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs: Provided, That value of such property shall be determined by the assessed value of the adjacent lots. (as amended by R.A. No. 7691)

Jurisdiction of the MTC:

1. RTC cases where the amount is exactly P300,000/P400,000 or less;

2. Small Claims: amount has been increased from P100,000 to P200,000;

3. Ejectment cases: forcible entry and unlawful detainer governed by Rule

70.

4. Family cases where no

Section 34. Delegated jurisdiction in cadastral and land registration cases. – Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts may be assigned by the Supreme Court to hear and determine cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or contested lots the where the value of which does not exceed One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00), such value to be ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant or by agreement of the respective claimants if there are more than one, or from the corresponding tax declaration of the real property. Their decisions in these cases shall be appealable in the same manner as decisions of the Regional Trial Courts. (as amended by R.A. No. 7691)

Section 35. Special jurisdiction in certain cases. – In the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges in a province or city, any Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal Trial Judge, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in criminal cases in the province or city where the absent Regional Trial Judges sit.

5.

SANDIGANBAYAN

PD 1606, Sec. 4. Jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan shall exercise original jurisdiction in all cases involving:

a. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as

the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where

one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:

(1) Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional

director and higher, otherwise classified as Grade '27' and higher, of the

Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:

(a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang

panlalawigan and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other

provincial department heads;

(b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod,

city treasurers, assessors engineers and other city department heads;

(c) Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and

higher;

(d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers

of higher rank;

(e) Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position

of provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent

or higher;

(f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and

prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;

(g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned

or -controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations;

(2) Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade'27'and

up under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;

(3) Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the

Constitution;

(4) Chairmen and members of Constitutional Commissions, without

prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution; and

(5) All other national and local officials classified as Grade'27'and higher

under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.

b. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other

crimes committed by the public officials and employees mentioned in

subsection a of this section in relation to their office.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

c. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.

1. The offense is committed by public officials and employees mentioned in Section 4(A) of P.D. No. 1606, as amended, and

2. That the offense is committed in relation to their office. (Serrana vs.

In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to salary grade '27' or higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military or PNP officers mentioned above, exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional trial court, metropolitan trial court, municipal trial court and municipal circuit trial court ' as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdiction as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended.

The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders or regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.

The Sandiganbayan shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive Order Nos. 1,2,14 and 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided, That the jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.

The procedure prescribed in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as well as the implementing rules that the Supreme Court has promulgated and may hereafter promulgate, relative to appeals/petitions for review to the Court of Appeals, shall apply to appeals and petitions for review filed with the Sandiganbayan. In all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.

In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.

 

Sandiganbayan)

Private Persons in conspiracy with public officers with a salary grade of 27 are also under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, even after the death of the said public officer: private persons, when acting

in conspiracy with public officers, may be indicted and, if found guilty, held liable for the pertinent offenses under Section 3 of R.A. 3019, in consonance with the avowed policy of the anti-graft law to repress certain acts of public officers and private persons alike constituting graft or corrupt practices act or which may lead thereto.

It is true that by reason of public officer’s death, there is no longer any public officer with whom respondent can be charged for violation of R.A. 3019. It does not mean, however, that the allegation of conspiracy between them can no longer be proved or that their alleged conspiracy is already expunged. The only thing extinguished by such death is the public officer’s personal criminal liability. His death did not extinguish the crime nor did it remove the basis of the charge of conspiracy between him and private respondent.

The requirement before a private person may be indicted for violation of Section 3(g) of R.A. 3019, among others, is that such private person must be alleged to have acted in conspiracy with a public officer. The law, however, does not require that such person must, in all instances, be indicted together with the public officer. If circumstances exist where the public officer may no longer be charged in court, as in the present case where the public officer has already died, the private person may be indicted alone. (People vs. Henry Go)

6.

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), created by RA No. 1125, has been held to be a part of the judicial system vested with special jurisdiction to act only on protests of private persons adversely affected by the tax, customs or assessment laws. (Ursal vs. CA)

Jurisdiction:

 

Sec. 7. Jurisdiction. - The CTA shall exercise:

Any provisions of law or Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate courts, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such civil action separately from the criminal action shall be recognized: Provided, however, That where the civil action had therefore been filed separately but judgment therein has not yet been rendered, and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, said civil action shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, as the case may be, for consolidation and joint determination with the criminal action, otherwise the separate civil action shall be deemed abandoned." (as amended by RA

a. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided:

1.

Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving

disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other

charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;

2.

Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving

disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal Revenue Code provides

specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed a denial;

a

No. 8249)

 

3.

Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax

NOTE: Sandiganbayan is not a constitutional court, it is a constitutionally mandated court created by law as required by the Constitution.

cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction;

4.

Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for

To exercise jurisdiction:

customs duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release

1. What: Crimes enumerated above plus estafa and falsification of

of

property affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto,

documents (see Serrana vs. Sandiganbayan and Gen. Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan)

or

other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered

by the Bureau of Customs;

2. Who: any public officer with a salary grade of “27” and such other officers enumerated above.

3. How: in relation to his public office. The public office must be an essential ingredient to the commission of the offense or that the office facilitated the commission of the offense.

Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of

its appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;

5.

6.

Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him

 

automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs

Requirements for jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan:

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

which are adverse to the Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;

 

If

this Court were to sustain petitioners' contention that jurisdiction over

their certiorari petition lies with the CA, this Court would be confirming

Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of

nonagricultural product, commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing duties under Section 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.

7.

the exercise by two judicial bodies, the CA and the CTA, of jurisdiction over basically the same subject matter – precisely the split-jurisdiction situation which is anathema to the orderly administration of justice.

grant of appellate jurisdiction implies that there is included in it the

power necessary to exercise it effectively, to make all orders that will preserve the subject of the action, and to give effect to the final determination of the appeal. It carries with it the power to protect that jurisdiction and to make the decisions of the court thereunder effective. The court, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, has authority to control all auxiliary and incidental matters necessary to the efficient and proper exercise of that jurisdiction.

A

b.

Jurisdiction over cases involving criminal offenses as herein

provided:

Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from

violations of the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs: Provided, however, That offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos

1.

3.

Section 1 of RA 9282: states that the CTA shall be of the same level

as

the CA and shall possess all the inherent powers of a court of justice.

(P1,000,000.00) or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the regular Courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate. Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability for taxes and penalties shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in the same proceeding by the CTA, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such civil action separately from the criminal action will be

Indeed, courts possess certain inherent powers which may be said to be implied from a general grant of jurisdiction, in addition to those expressly conferred on them. These inherent powers are such powers as are necessary for the ordinary and efficient exercise of jurisdiction; or are essential to the existence, dignity and functions of the courts, as well as to the due administration of justice; or are directly appropriate, convenient and suitable to the execution of their granted powers; and include the power to maintain the court's jurisdiction and render it effective in behalf of the litigants.

recognized.

 

2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses:

 

Thus, this Court has held that "while a court may be expressly granted the incidental powers necessary to effectuate its jurisdiction, a grant of jurisdiction, in the absence of prohibitive legislation, implies the necessary and usual incidental powers essential to effectuate it, and, subject to existing laws and constitutional provisions, every regularly constituted court has power to do all things that are reasonably necessary for the administration of justice within the scope of its jurisdiction and for the enforcement of its judgments and mandates.

(City of Manila vs. Judge Cuerdo)

a. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional

Trial Courts in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respected territorial jurisdiction.

b.

Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the

Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax

cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.

c.

Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:

7.

QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES

1.

Exclusive original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and

 

executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties: Provides, however, that collection cases where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.

Quasi-judicial bodies are not regular courts. The enumeration under Rule 43 is not exclusive, because every now and then, quasi-judicial bodies are created, mostly under the Executive department, e.g., ERC, HLURB.

8. QUASI COURTS

2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases:

9. SHARIA’H COURTS

a. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional

Trial Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by them, in their

 

a. APPELLATE – equivalent to Court of Appeals

respective territorial jurisdiction.

b. DISTRICT – equivalent to the Regional Trial Courts in rank, which were established in certain specified provinces in Mindanao where the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines is being enforced.

c. CIRCUIT

b.

Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the

Regional Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective

jurisdiction. (as amended by RA No. 9282)

 

CTA has the authority to issue writs of certiorari:

1. Art. VIII, Sec. 1 of the 1987 Constitution: On the strength of this constitutional provision, it can be fairly interpreted that the power of the CTA includes that of determining whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC in issuing an interlocutory order in cases falling within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the tax court. It, thus, follows that the CTA, by constitutional mandate, is vested with jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari in these cases.

2. Section 6, Rule 135 of the Rules of Court: provides that when by law, jurisdiction is conferred on a court or judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to carry it into effect may be employed by such court or officer.

Jurisdiction of Sharia’h District Courts:

Exclusive original jurisdiction over the following:

1. All cases involving custody, guardianship, legitimacy, paternity and

filiation arising under Presidential Decree No. 1083;

2. All cases involving disposition, distribution and settlement of the estate

of a deceased Muslim, probate of wills, issuance of letters of administration or appointment of administrators or executors regardless of the nature or

the aggregate value of the property;

3. Petitions for declaration of absence and death and for cancellation and

correction of entries in the Muslim Registries mentioned in Title VI, Book

Two of Presidential Decree No. 1083;

4. All actions arising from customary contracts in which the parties are

Muslims, if they have not specified which law shall govern their relations;

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

5. All petitions for mandamus, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, habeas

corpus, and all auxiliary writs and processes in aid of its appellate

jurisdiction;

Concurrent original jurisdiction over the following:

1. Petitions by Muslims for the constitution of the family home, change of

name and commitment of insane person to any asylum;

2. All other personal and real actions not mentioned in paragraph 1(d)

wherein the parties involved are Muslims except those for forcible entry and unlawful detainer which shall fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Municipal Circuit Courts; and

3. All special civil actions for interpleader or declaratory relief where the

parties are Muslims or the property involved belongs exclusively to a Muslim.

Appellate jurisdiction over all cases tried in the Shari'a Circuit Courts within their territorial jurisdiction.

It shall decide every case on the basis of the evidence and the records transmitted as well as such memoranda, briefs or oral arguments as the parties may submit.

ESTOPPEL BY LACHES:

GENERAL RULE: The fundamental rule is that, the lack of jurisdiction of the court over an action cannot be waived by the parties, or even cured by their silence, acquiescence or even by their express consent. Further, a party may assail the jurisdiction of the court over the action at any stage of the proceedings and even on appeal. (Duero vs. CA)

EXCEPTION: estoppel by laches: active participation in the proceedings in the court which rendered the order or decision will bar such party from attacking its jurisdiction. (Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy) While an order or decision rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity and may be assailed at any stage, active participation in the proceedings in the court which rendered the order or decision, including invoking the court’s authority to grant affirmative relief, effectively estops and will bar such party from attacking its jurisdiction.

(Sps. Gonzaga vs. CA, see also Manila Bankers Life Insurance Corporation vs. Eddy Ng Kok Wei)

NOTE STILL: That estoppel must be applied only in exceptional cases, as its misapplication could result in a miscarriage of justice. (Duero vs. CA)

The general rule should, however, be, as it has always been, that the issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal, and is not lost by waiver or by estoppel. Estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant from asserting the court’s absence or lack of jurisdiction, only supervenes in exceptional cases similar to the factual milieu of Tijam v. Sibonghanoy.

To apply the Tijam doctrine, a considerable period must have already elapsed for laches to attach. In applying the principle of estoppel by laches in the exceptional case of Sibonghanoy, the Court therein considered the patent and revolting inequity and unfairness of having the judgment creditors go up their Calvary once more after more or less 15 years. (Figueroa vs. People)

DOCKET FEES

DOCKET FEES: a pleading is only considered filed upon payment of the correct docket fees. Payment of the docket fees is jurisdictional.

The court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case, unless the docket fees are paid. And where the filing of the initiatory pleading is not accompanied by payment of the docket fees, the court may allow payment of the fee within a reasonable time but in no case beyond the applicable prescriptive or reglementary period. (Mercado vs. CA)

Appeals: the payment of docket fees within the prescribed period is mandatory for the perfection of an appeal. Without such payment, the appeal is not perfected. The appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction over the

subject matter of the action and the decision sought to be appealed from becomes final and executory.

The payment of the docket fees within this period is a condition sine qua non to the perfection of the appeal.

The payment of the appellate docket and other lawful fees is not a mere technicality of law or procedure. It is an essential requirement, without which the decision or final order appealed from would become final and executory

as if no appeal was filed at all (Antonio Navarro vs. Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company, see also Saint Louie University, Inc. vs. Cobarrubias)

Petition for Certiorari: the Court likewise does not acquire jurisdiction if the docket fees are not paid within the 60 day period for filing a petition for

certiorari. (Mercado vs. CA)

Sun Insurance case:

1. When filing of initiatory pleading is unaccompanied by payment, court may allow extension of time for payment but NOT beyond reglementary period to file said pleading.

2. Same rule applies to permissive counterclaims, third-party claims, similar pleadings.

3. When court acquires jurisdiction by filing and payment, BUT judgment later on awards a claim which is not specified in the pleading or if specified, the amount has been left for the determination of court, the additional filing fee shall constitute a lien on the judgment which shall be enforced and collected by the Clerk of Court. (Sun Insurance Office,

Ltd. V. Hon. Maximiano Asuncion, mentioned in Alday vs. FGU Insurance Corporation)

No Automatic Dismissal: qualifications to the rule on non-payment

of docket fees: although the payment of the prescribed docket fees is a jurisdictional requirement, its non-payment does not result in the automatic dismissal of the case provided the docket fees are paid within the applicable prescriptive or reglementary period. (Suson vs. CA)

Notwithstanding the mandatory nature of the requirement of payment of appellate docket fees, we also recognize that its strict application is

qualified by the following:

1. first, failure to pay those fees within the reglementary period allows only discretionary, not automatic, dismissal;

2. second, such power should be used by the court in conjunction with its exercise of sound discretion in accordance with the tenets of justice and fair play, as well as with a great deal of circumspection in consideration of all attendant circumstances. (Antonio Navarro vs.

Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company)

Not subject to waiver: If the defendant filed an answer but did not raise the non-payment of the docket fees or paid an incorrect amount, it may still be raised at any time. This is because the payment of the filing or docket fees is jurisdictional. As such, it is not subject to waiver as provided under Sec. 1, Rule 9.

Until docket fees are paid, no need to file answer: there is obviously no

need to file an answer until petitioner has paid the prescribed docket fees for only then shall the court acquire jurisdiction over such claim. (Alday vs. FGU

Insurance)

Damages: which are stated in the complaint are included in the computation of the docket fees.

Lien on the Judgment Award: where the docket fees not paid would constitute a lien on the judgment award, such as when:

1. Interest accrued during the pendency of the case. (Proton case);

2. Award was given by the court even if the same was not originally prayed for.

Supplemental complaint: a supplement complaint covers events or occurrences that have taken effect after the filing of the pleading sought to be implemented. Filing fees should be paid only for the supplemental complaint for claims not part of the original complaint.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Counter-claims:

1. Permissive – docket fees are required to be paid for permissive

counterclaims.

2. Compulsory – no need to pay for docket fees.

In Korea Technologies vs. Lerma, it was held that effective August 16, 2004 under Sec. 7, Rule 141, as amended by A.M. No. 04-2-04-SC, docket fees are now required to be paid in compulsory counterclaim or

cross-claims.

However, the above rule has been suspended. As such, as it stands, there is no need to pay docket fees for compulsory counterclaims.

Exemptions granted by the SC:

1. Legal Aid Chapter of the IBP, subject to two requirements:

11. in the name of substantial justice and fair play;

12. importance of the issues involved; and

13. exercise of sound discretion by the judge, guided by all the attendant circumstances.

Thus, there should be an effort, on the part of the party invoking liberality, to advance a reasonable or meritorious explanation for his/her failure to comply

with the rules. (Saint Louis University Inc. vs. Cobarrubias)

The Court ruled in Aranas v. Endona, the strict application of the jurisdictional nature of the above rule on payment of appellate docket fees may be mitigated under exceptional circumstances to better serve the interest of justice. It is always within the power of this Court to suspend its own rules, or to except a particular case from their operation, whenever the purposes of

justice require it. (Bautista vs. Unangst)

a. Merits test – the case must have merit;

b. Means test – the party does not have capacity to bring the action

to court, as such, the party must be an indigent.

2. Unicapital vs. Consing (unusual case) – claim for filing fee was based on “metered” damages. People claim the right to sell properties in behalf of

the corporation. They were thus sued for such misrepresentation, for recovery of sum of money, for P2M a month. Defendants claim that no filing fees were paid for the claim. SC: it is allowed. This can be considered as a lien on the judgment award. Since it accrues while the action is pending.

SC: it is allowed. This can be considered as a lien on the judgment award. Since

DOCTRINE of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: before a party is allowed to seek the intervention of the court, it is a pre-condition that he should have availed of all the means of administrative processes afforded him. Hence, if a remedy within the administrative machinery can still be resorted to by giving the administrative officer concerned every opportunity to decide on a matter that comes within his jurisdiction, then such remedy should be exhausted first before the court’s judicial power can be sought. The premature invocation of a court’s intervention is fatal to one’s cause of action. (UP vs.

premature invocation of a court’s intervention is fatal to one’s cause of action. ( U P
premature invocation of a court’s intervention is fatal to one’s cause of action. ( U P
premature invocation of a court’s intervention is fatal to one’s cause of action. ( U P

Catungal, Jr.)

Exceptions:

Environmental Cases: while the Rules require that the docket or filing fees are to be paid at the filing of the complaint to acquire jurisdiction over the case, in environmental cases, the filing fees are deferred until judgment on the case.

1.

There is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine;

2.

The challenged administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of jurisdiction;

3.

There is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the complainant;

Writ of Amparo: there are no docket or filing fees required. Unlike in the Writ of Habeas Data which requires the payment of such fees, unless the party is an indigent.

4.

The amount involved is relatively so small as to make the rule impractical and oppressive;

5.

The question involved is purely legal and will ultimately have to be decided by the courts of justice;

Actions to recover title to or possession of real property: In computing

6.

Judicial intervention is urgent;

the docket fees for cases involving real properties, the courts, instead of relying on the assessed or estimated value, would now be using the fair market value of the real properties (as stated in the Tax Declaration or the Zonal Valuation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, whichever is higher) or, in the absence thereof, the stated value of the same. (Ruby Shelter Builders

7.

The application of the doctrine may cause great and irreparable damage;

8.

The controverted acts violate due process;

9.

The issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been rendered moot;

and Realty Development Realty Corporation vs. Formaran)

10.

There is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy;

11.

Strong public interest is involved; and

Non-payment within the reglementary period; strict compliance;

exceptions; While procedural rules are liberally construed, the provisions on reglementary periods are strictly applied, indispensable as they are to the prevention of needless delays, and are necessary to the orderly and speedy discharge of judicial business.

12.

Quo warranto proceedings

II.

RULES 1 TO 5

 

RULES OF COURT

Viewed in this light, procedural rules are not to be belittled or dismissed simply because their non-observance may have prejudiced a party's substantive rights; like all rules, they are required to be followed.

However, there are recognized exceptions to their strict observance, such as:

1. most persuasive and weighty reasons;

2. to relieve a litigant from an injustice not commensurate with his failure to comply with the prescribed procedure;

3. good faith of the defaulting party by immediately paying within a reasonable time from the time of the default;

4. the existence of special or compelling circumstances;

5. the merits of the case;

6. a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension of the rules;

7. a lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory;

8. the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby;

9. fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence without the appellant's fault;

10. peculiar, legal and equitable circumstances attendant to each case;

Pursuant to the provisions of section 5 (5) of Article VIII of the Constitution, the Supreme Court hereby adopts and promulgates the following rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged:

Constitutional Basis for Rules of Court:

1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5)

Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

RULE 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Section 1. Title of the Rules. — These Rule shall be known and cited as the Rules of Court.

Section 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of. Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.

A.

ACTIONS; COMMENCEMENT

 

Section 2. Cause of action, defined. — A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.

Section 3. Cases governed. — These Rules shall govern the procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal and special proceedings.

The cause of action lies with the defendant, because he is the violator or cause of the “act or omission” which gives rise to the same.

(a)

A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the

enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. A civil action may either be (1) ordinary or (2) special. Both are governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action.

Rule 6, Sec. 3 should thus refer to a plaintiff’s right of action, not cause of action.

ELEMENTS of a cause of action are:

 

1.

A

right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever

(b)

A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes a person

law it arises or is created;

for an act or omission punishable by law.

2.

An obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not to violate such right; and

(c)

A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to

3.

An act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the right

establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.

of

the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the defendant

Action vs. Suit: There is no difference between an action and a suit; but if there is, “action” is generally confined with the proceedings in a court of law, while “suit” is equally applied to prosecutions at law or in equity. However, in the Philippines, there is no such distinction because there are no courts of equity in this jurisdiction.

Section 5. Commencement of action. — A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court. If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the dated of the filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether the motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the court.

Significance: of the above provision is for purposes of determining the reglementary period, which is particularly important when the defense of prescription is raised.

Filing of complaint by registered mail: is deemed filed from the date it is

mailed, not when received. However, if the docket fees are paid on a subsequent date, the date of such payment is deemed the date of filing of the pleading.

APPLICABILITY OF RULES:

Section 2. In what courts applicable. — These Rules shall apply in all the courts, except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court.

APPLICABILITY AS TO CASES:

Section 4. In what case not applicable. — These Rules shall not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character and whenever practicable and convenient.

Naturalization case: the rule on formal offer of evidence (Rule 132, §34) is not applicable to a case involving a petition for naturalization. The only instance when said rules may be applied is by analogy or suppletorily in such cases is when it is "practicable and convenient.” (Ong Chia vs. Republic)

CONSTRUCTION:

Section 6. Construction. — These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.

CIVIL ACTIONS ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS

RULE2: CAUSE OF ACTION

to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action for recovery

of damages. (Relucio vs. Lopez)

Cause of action that has not ripen yet: not allowed; premature. Even if

the cause of action ripened during the pendency of the action. The SC explained that you cannot amend a pleading to give it a cause of action when in the outset it had no cause of action. This cannot be corrected by an amendment.

B. ONE SUIT FOR ONE ACTION

Section 3. One suit for a single cause of action. — A party may not

institute more than one suit for a single cause of action.

A single act will rise to a single cause of action; whereas two acts or omissions, call for two complaints, etc.

SPLITTING OF A SINGLE CAUSE OF ACTION

Section 4. Splitting a single cause of action; effect of. If two or

more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others.

Splitting of a Single Cause of Action is the act of dividing a single cause of action, claim or demand into two or more parts, intending to reserve the rest for another separate action; filing of two complaints for a single cause of action will be a ground for dismissal of one and amendment of the other.

Acts should be understood to include a series of transactions.

Purpose of the proscription:

1. In order to avoid harassment and vexation to defendant;

2. To obviate multiplicity of suits.

Remedies of defendant:

1. File motion to dismiss on the ground of litis pendentia, if one action is ending and another one is filed from the same cause of action;

2. File motion to dismiss on the ground of res judicata, if there is already

a final judgment on one action and another one is instituted based on the same cause of action.

Installments: In a loan payable in installments, non-payment of one installment is a cause of action in itself. Hence, may be raised in separate cases, or alleged in supplemental pleadings in the same case.

JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

Section 5. Joinder of causes of action. — A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party, subject to the following conditions:

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

(a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on

joinder of parties;

(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed

by special rules;

(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain

to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein; and

(d) Where the claims in all the causes action are principally for recovery of

money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.

Purpose: to avoid multiplicity of suits.

Permissive: joinder of causes of action is permissive, not mandatory. As such, it is upon the plaintiff on whether he wants to join the causes of action in one case or not.

Compliance with the requirements of joinder of parties: necessary that the right of relief from said (1) causes of action should arise out of the same transaction or series of transactions and (2) a question of law and fact common to all the plaintiffs or defendants may arise in the action.

No special civil actions: only causes of action for ordinary civil actions may be joined. This is because special civil actions are governed by special rules that may not be allowed in regular proceedings, e.g., certiorari, where the court does not necessarily acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent by summons.

Example: Collection of sum of money with foreclosure of real estate mortgage covering another loan.

REMEDY FOR MISJOINDER: Should the plaintiff include the special civil action, is this a ground for dismissal? No. Sec. 6 of Rule 2 provides:

Section 6. Misjoinder of causes of action. — Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for dismissal of an action. A misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on the initiative of the court, be severed and proceeded with separately.

As such, the proper remedy is to file for severance.

Section

15.

Entity

without

juridical

personality

as

defendant. When two or more persons not organized as an entity with juridical personality enter into a transaction, they may be sued

under the name by which they are generally or commonly known.

In the answer of such defendant, the name and addresses of the persons composing said entity must all be revealed.

Summons, upon the entity may be served upon any one of these persons or upon the person in charge thereof.

The individual members cannot sue under the name of the entity but may, however, may sue in their own name.

Section 2. Parties in interest. — A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. Unless otherwise authorized by law or these Rules, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest.

A party, not a real party in interest is included: maybe the subject of a

motion to dismiss on the ground that the pleading asserting the claim does not state a cause of action.

Direct Injury Test

Transcendental Importance

Far-reach implication test

Section 3. Representatives as parties. — Where the action is allowed to be prosecuted and defended by a representative or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity, the beneficiary shall be included in the title of the case and shall be deemed to be the real property in interest. A representative may be a trustee of an express trust, a guardian, an executor or administrator, or a party authorized by law or these Rules. An agent acting in his own name and for the benefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or be sued without joining the principal except when the contract involves things belonging to the principal.

BAR QUESTION: Distinguish representative party and a class suit.

Jurisdiction: shall be with the RTC who has jurisdiction or venue over one of the causes of action, even if the other is under the jurisdiction of the MTC. For purposes of determining jurisdictional amount, par. (d) above provides

ANSWER: Improper question. A class suit is a “suit” whereas a representative party is a “party” to the suit. No distinguishing or common ground.

that in recovery of money, the aggregate amount shall be the test of

A

parties in a class suit are those under a common interest in a question

jurisdiction.

of

law or fact that it would be impractical to bring them all to court; whereas

SPLITTING VS. JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION: In joinder, several

class suit is one where the parties in interest are so numerous that it is impractical to bring them all to court.

acts or omissions are put in one complaint, in splitting, there was only one act or omission, where only one complaint should be filed, but were separated.

Impracticality refers not only to physical but also to procedure, e.g., filing of the complaint.

JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTIONS (Rule 2, Sec. 5) VS. PARTIES (Rule 3, Sec. 6): the latter refers to multiplicity of parties, while the former refers to multiplicity of causes of actions, where only one action is filed.

RULE 3: PARTIES TO A CIVIL ACTION

C. PARTIES TO A CIVIL ACTION

Section 1. Who may be parties; plaintiff and defendant. — Only

natural or juridical persons, or entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action. The term "plaintiff" may refer to the claiming party, the counter-claimant, the cross-claimant, or the third (fourth, etc.) — party plaintiff. The term "defendant" may refer to the original defending party, the defendant in a counter-claim, the cross-defendant, or the third (fourth, etc.) — party defendant.

Entity without juridical personality: cannot sue as such entity, but may

be sued:

Representative party, on the other hand, is one who is not a party in interest but he represents a party in interest, e.g., trustee in an express trust, administrator/executor of an estate, guardians ad litem.

Section 4. Spouses as parties. — Husband and wife shall sue or be sued jointly, except as provided by law.

Exceptions:

1. Crime committed by one spouse;

2. Administrative case against a spouse in relation to the exercise of one’s profession;

3. Suit of one spouse against another;

4. If there is judicial separation of property, or if the subject of the case is the exclusive property of one spouse.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Section 5. Minor or incompetent persons. — A minor or a person alleged to be incompetent, may sue or be sued with the assistance of his father, mother, guardian, or if he has none, a guardian ad litem.

JOINDER OF PARTIES

Section 6. Permissive joinder of parties. — All persons in whom or against whom any right to relief in respect to or arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, may, except as otherwise provided in these Rules, join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one complaint, where any question of law or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all such defendants may arise in the action; but the court may make such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being embarrassed or put to expense in connection with any proceedings in which he may have no interest.

INDISPENSABLE AND NECESSARY PARTIES

Section 7. Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties. — Parties

in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants.

Section 8. Necessary party. — A necessary party is one who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.

Indispensable Party is one without whom there can be determination of the case.

no

final

Necessary

determination of the case. Accordingly, the case may proceed.

Party

is

one without whom there

can

be

no complete

However, the reasons for the non-inclusion of a necessary party must be stated in the complaint, otherwise, it may be deemed that the claim against him has been waived.

See Relucio vs. Lopez under cause of action.

Effect of not impleading an indispensable party: if one indispensable

party is not brought to court the judgment of the court is null and void, not only as to those who were not brought in the complaint, but also those who were brought in the case.

The joinder of indispensable parties is mandatory and courts cannot proceed without their presence. Whenever it appears to the court in the course of a proceeding that an indispensable party has not been joined, it is the duty of the court to stop the trial and order the inclusion of such party. (De Castro vs.

CA)

Solidary liability does not connote being indispensable parties:

solidarity does not make a solidary obligor an indispensable party in a suit filed by the creditor. Article 1216 of the Civil Code says that the creditor `may proceed against anyone of the solidary debtors or some or all of them simultaneously.’ (De Castro vs. CA)

Co-owners: In a co-ownership, the co owners are indispensable parties when they are impleaded as defendants, but if they file a case as plaintiffs, even one of the co-owners can file it without including the other co-owners. This is because the co-owner(s) who bring the suit is presumed to bring it for an in behalf of the other co-owners.

In suits to recover properties, all co-owners are real parties in interest. However, pursuant to Article 487 of the Civil Code and relevant jurisprudence, any one of them may bring an action, any kind of action, for the recovery of co-owned properties. Therefore, only one of the co-owners, namely the co- owner who filed the suit for the recovery of the co-owned property, is an indispensable party thereto. The other co-owners are not indispensable parties. They are not even necessary parties, for a complete relief can be

accorded in the suit even without their participation, since the suit is presumed to have been filed for the benefit of all co-owners. (Navarro vs. Escobido)

Note, however, that when a co-owner is sued as a principal (whether in his own or representative capacity) in an agency to sell the property, he may be sued even without the other co-owners. (De Castro vs. CA)

Judicial Partition: however, if the case is for judicial partition, all co-owners are indispensable parties. Such that, failure to implead one, will result in the judgment rendered being void.

Effect of not impleading a NECESSARY party:

Section 9. Non-joinder of necessary parties to be pleaded. —

Whenever in any pleading in which a claim is asserted a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set forth his name, if known, and shall state why he is omitted. Should the court find the reason for the omission unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person may be obtained.

The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be deemed a waiver of the claim against such party.

The non-inclusion of a necessary party does not prevent the court from proceeding in the action, and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of such necessary party.

Remedy for Non-Joinder of indispensable or necessary party: is to ask for their inclusion NOT DISMISSAL. The court may, upon motion, or in its own initiative order that the other parties be impleaded, as provided under Sec. 11:

Section 11. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. — Neither

misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately.

However, after such order is given, and the plaintiff refuses or fails to implead the:

1. Indispensable party, the court may dismiss the complaint/petition for the petitioner/plaintiff’s failure to comply therefor, as provided above.

Moreover, if an indispensable party was not impleaded and judgment was rendered. Such judgment is void. Note that the case was not dismissed, but the judgment was void for failure to implead an indispensable party.

2. Necessary party, the non-inclusion is not a ground for dismissal, but the claim against the necessary party is deemed waived. Moreover, if a judgment has been rendered despite non-inclusion, such judgment is valid.

Strangers to a case: No man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and strangers to a case are not bound by any judgment rendered by the court. In the same manner, a writ of execution can be issued only against a party and not against one who did not have his day in court. Only real parties in interest in an action are bound by the judgment therein and by writs of execution and demolition issued pursuant thereto. (Orquiola

vs. CA)

CLASS SUIT

Section 12. Class suit. — When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Any

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.

Requisites:

1. The controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons.

Examples:

a. Residents of a subdivision whose right of way was blocked. Their interests are common – i.e., access to the road;

b. Oposa vs. Factoran – the common or general interest is the intergenerational responsibility to protect ecology. However, under the Rules on Environmental Laws, this is now known as a Citizen’s Suit.

There is no common or general interest:

a. In a vehicular mishap, the victims of the car crash, where some

died, some were injured, some were traumatized, cannot sue as a class since they do not have a common or general interest.

b. In a ship that sank, the victims are doctors, lawyers and some common people – they do not have common interests.

They may, however, sue by joinder of parties.

2. The persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join all the parties and to bring them all to court;

3. There is adequate representation:

a. Whether the interest of the named party is co-extensive with the interest of the class;

b. The proportion of those made as a party in relation to the total number of persons in the class;

c. Other factors bearing on the ability of the named party to speak for the rest of the class.

Section 11. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. — Neither

misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately.

DEATH OR SEPARATION OF PARTY

Section 16. Death of party; duty of counsel. — Whenever a party to

a pending action dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall

be the duty of his counsel to inform the court within thirty (30) days after

such death of the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with his duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.

The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.

The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives

to

appear and be substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.

If

no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party,

or if the one so named shall fail to appear within the specified period, the court may order the opposing party, within a specified time to procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of the deceased

and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs.

Applicability: of this rule is only if the action survives the death of the party. The question as to whether an action survives or not depends on the nature of the action and the damage sued for.

In the causes of action which survive, the wrong complained of affects primarily and principally property and property rights, the injuries to the person being merely incidental, while in the causes of action which do not

survive, the injury complained of is to the person, the property and rights of property affected being incidental. (Carabeo vs. Sps. Dingco)

Duty of the Lawyer: to inform the court within 30 days after notice of such death and to name a legal representative.

Duty of the Court: to issue an order requiring the substitute or legal representative to appear and order substitution.

Effect on judgment: both of the above duties are necessary for proper substitution. Otherwise, the judgment rendered without a valid substitution may be void. Except, if the legal representative/s actively participated.

Note that the requirement of substitution is for purposes of due process, not for jurisdiction.

A formal substitution by heirs is not necessary when they themselves

voluntarily appear, participate in the case, and present evidence in defense of the deceased. These actions negate any claim that the right to due process

was violated. (Sps. Dela Cruz vs. Joaquin)

Substitution is not a matter of jurisdiction but of due process: the

rule on the substitution by heirs is not a matter of jurisdiction, but a requirement of due process. Thus, when due process is not violated, as when the right of the representative or heir is recognized and protected, noncompliance or belated formal compliance with the Rules cannot affect the validity of a promulgated decision. Mere failure to substitute for a deceased plaintiff is not a sufficient ground to nullify a trial court’s decision. The alleging party must prove that there was an undeniable violation of due process. (Sps.

Dela Cruz vs. Joaquin)

Legal Representative: an heir, executor or administrator.

Section 17. Death or separation of a party who is a public officer.

When a public officer is a party in an action in his official capacity and during its pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the action may be continued and maintained by or against his successor if, within thirty (30) days after the successor takes office or such time as may be granted by the court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by any party that there is a substantial need for continuing or maintaining it and that the successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or continue to adopt or continue the action of his predecessor. Before a substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected, unless expressly assenting thereto, shall be given reasonable notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard.

Requisites:

1. The public officer is a party in an action in his official capacity;

2. He dies, resigns or otherwise ceases to hold office;

3. The successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or continue to adopt or continue the action of the predecessor.

If it cannot be determined that the successor will adopt or continue to adopt the acts of his predecessor, he must be notified before substitution can be made.

TRANSFER OF INTEREST

Section 19. Transfer of interest. — In case of any transfer of interest, the action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party.

Actions of the court:

1. The court may validly render judgment even without substitution or impleading the transferee;

2. The court may require that the transferee be impleaded;

3. The court may require that the transferee be substituted.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

PROBLEM: During his lifetime and the pendency of the case, A transferred his property to B. A continued to be a party to the case and died during its pendency. Which provision will apply?

ANSWER: Sec. 16. Transfer of interest can only be effected during the lifetime of the party. Thus, the proper party to be substituted is either the heir, executor or administrator and not the transferee of the property.

Section 18. Incompetency or incapacity. — If a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, the court, upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be continued by or against the incompetent or incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem.

CONTRACTUAL MONEY CLAIMS

Section 20. Action and contractual money claims. — When the

action is for recovery of money arising from contract, express or implied, and the defendant dies before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending at the time of such death, it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in these Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person.

Action for contractual money claims survives the death of the defendant

and such death is not a ground for dismissal, it shall continue until entry of final judgment.

A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff shall be proceeded against in accordance with Rule 86 of the Rules of Court: Claims against the estate.

Claim must be based on a contract: As such, if for example, it arise from quasi-delict, it shall not fall within the provisions of the above.

Claims which may be proceeded against the estate:

1. Funeral Expenses;

2. Expenses of last illness;

3. Judgment for money arising from contract, whether express or implied;

4. Damages. (Rule 86, Sec. 5)

All other claims may be filed under Rule 87: Action By or Against Executor or Administrator.

NOTE:

1. Sec. 20, Rule 3 above comes within the claims against the estate under

no. 3 in the above enumeration;

2. The favorable judgment obtained must be filed as a claim against the estate, which presupposes that settlement thereof has already begun. Otherwise, the judgment creditor may initiate settlement proceedings, as such.

3. Once filed and approved, must await final settlement of estate and its distribution.

Compared with Sec. 16:

1. Applies only if the one who dies is the defendant;

2. The case concerns sum of money arising from contract;

3. No substitution; the case will continue against the estate of the defendant.

OTHER PROVISIONS UNDER RULE 3:

Section 10. Unwilling co-plaintiff. If the consent of any party who should be joined as plaintiff cannot be obtained, he may be made a defendant and the reason therefor shall be stated in the complaint.

Section 13. Alternative defendants. — Where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative, although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right of relief against the other.

Section 14. Unknown identity or name of defendant. — Whenever

the identity or name of a defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown owner heir devisee, or by such other designation as the case may require, when his identity or true name is discovered, the pleading must be amended accordingly.

Section 21. Indigent party. — A party may be authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as an indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for himself and his family.

Such authority shall include an exemption from payment of docket and other lawful fees, and of transcripts of stenographic notes which the court may order to be furnished him. The amount of the docket and other lawful fees which the indigent was exempted from paying shall be a lien on any judgment rendered in the case favorable to the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides.

Any adverse party may contest the grant of such authority at any time before judgment is rendered by the trial court. If the court should determine after hearing that the party declared as an indigent is in fact a person with sufficient income or property, the proper docket and other lawful fees shall be assessed and collected by the clerk of court. If payment is not made within the time fixed by the court, execution shall issue or the payment thereof, without prejudice to such other sanctions as the court may impose.

Indigent Party: is defined under Sec. 18, Rule 141 as that party whose income or that of his immediate family does not exceed double the monthly minimum wage and does not own any real property with a fair market value exceeding P300,000. The court does not require to exercise discretion. If the party falls within such definition, he is considered an indigent party. (Sps.

Algura vs. Local Government of Naga)

If one of the above is not met, the indigency test may be resorted to, under Sec. 21, Rule 3, i.e., that the party is one who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for himself and his family. The court may declare him indigent.

As an indigent, the party is:

1. Not required to pay docket fees for the time being but in case of a favorable decision, such fees shall be a lien on the judgment award;

2. Not required to pay for the copy of the transcripts of stenographic case.

Rule 141, Sec. 19

Section 22. Notice to the Solicitor General. — In any action involving the validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, executive order, presidential decree, rules or regulations, the court, in its discretion, may require the appearance of the Solicitor General who may be heard in person or a representative duly designated by him.

RULE 4: VENUE

D. VENUE OF ACTIONS; REAL ACTIONS; PERSONAL ACTIONS

Section 1. Venue of real actions. — Actions affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.

Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.

Venue of Real Actions is the place where the property is located. However, not all actions which may involve real property may be considered as “real actions” for purposes of the venue, what is controlling, is that the actions affect “title to or possession of” real property.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Example, the following are personal actions:

1. Action to recover purchase price of the land (Garcia vs. Velasco)

2. Action to compel mortgagee to accept payment (Hernandez vs. Rural

Bank of Lucena)

3. An action filed by the husband for damages, based on the wife’s adulterous acts, and for his share in the fruits of the conjugal partnership, with a prayer for injunction to restrain her from selling real property belonging to the conjugal partnership. (De Guzman vs. Genato)

Section 2. Venue of personal actions. — All other actions may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.

General Rule: Sections 1 and 2 provide for the basic rules on venue of actions or the default rules. Note that the general rule for venue of civil actions may be waived or agreed upon or may be otherwise fixed by law or rules, as provided under Sec. 4 of Rule 4.

Venue of other actions as set by the Rules:

1. Adoption – resident of the petitioner;

2. Guardianship – resident of the ward;

3. Quo Warranto – resident of the respondent;

Parties’ Agreement as to venue: must contain exclusivity for the agreement to apply. Otherwise, the general rule shall be applicable.

Residence as used under Sec. 2 above, should mean his personal, actual or physical habitation or his actual residence or place of abode (Fule, et al. vs. CA) not his permanent home or residence. (Koh vs. CA)

Improper Venue as ground for dismissal: improper venue not raised as

a ground in a motion to dismiss can still be raised as an affirmative defense and not considered waived.

Section 3. Venue of actions against nonresidents. — If any of the

defendants does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant located in the Philippines, the action may be commenced and tried in the court of the place where the plaintiff resides, or where the property or any portion thereof is situated or found.

Section 4. When Rule not applicable. — This Rule shall not apply.

(a)

In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or

(b)

Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the

action on the exclusive venue thereof.

Words of exclusivity: There can be a valid venue stipulation concerning real property provided, there are words of exclusivity, the stipulation concerning venue is valid even if it concerns title to, possession of or interest in, real property.

While they are considered valid and enforceable, venue stipulations in a contract do not, as a rule, supersede the general rule set forth in Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court in the absence of qualifying or restrictive words. They should be considered merely as an agreement or additional forum, not as limiting venue to the specified place. They are not exclusive but, rather permissive. If the intention of the parties were to restrict venue, there must be accompanying language clearly and categorically expressing their purpose and design that actions between them be litigated only at the place named by them.

Examples: "only," "solely," "exclusively in this court," "in no other court save —," "particularly," "nowhere else but/except —," or words of equal import

were stated in the contract. (Pacific Consultants International Asia, Inc. vs. Schonfeld)

There is a specific law or rule providing for the venue, but the parties

stipulated on the venue: the law or rule will apply. Basic is the rule that stipulations must not be contrary to law.

RULE 5: UNIFORM PROCEDURE IN TRIAL COURTS

Section 1. Uniform procedure. — The procedure in the Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same as in the Regional Trial Courts, except (a) where a particular provision expressly or impliedly applies only to either of said courts, or (b) in civil cases governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure.

Ordinary Procedure vs. Summary Procedure:

 

ORDINARY PROCEDURE

 

SUMMARY PROCEDURE

Complaint/Answer

Complaint/Answer

Answer to be filed generally within 15 days

Answer to be filed within 10 days

Motion for Extension to File Answer is allowed

Said motion is a prohibited pleading

Plaintiff may file a Reply although not mandatory

Reply is a prohibited pleading

Pre-trial/Mediation/Judicial Dispute

Preliminary Conference

Resolution

Pre-trial under Rule 18, Sec. 1, the plaintiff has the duty to file an ex- parte motion to set the case for pre-trial “promptly”; in 2004, in the guidelines issued by the SC on pre-trial and modes of discovery, within 5 days from the filing of the reply or the last pleading as confirmed in the Lapu Lapu case.

Preliminary Conference takes place within 30 days from the filing of the last pleading

A

motion to dismiss on any of the

Motion to Dismiss is a prohibited pleading, except if the ground is

grounds under Rule 16 may be

 

filed

lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter or non-compliance with barangay conciliation proceedings

A

petition for certiorari may be

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus are prohibited pleadings

filed against interlocutory orders,

such as denial of a motion to

dismiss

 

EXCEPTIONS, certiorari was granted:

*

case of Bayog – a farmer who

had tuberculosis was not able to file an answer, a petition for relief was granted even if it is a prohibited pleading, due to the special circumstance;

*

case of Go – the preliminary

conference was held in abeyance

Trial – presentation of testimonial evidence subject to the Judicial Affidavit Rule covering direct

No trial in the strict sense. Parties are only required to submit judicial affidavits or position

examination

paper.

Within 60 days, submitted for

Within 30 days, submitted for

decision

decision

Motion for reconsideration may be filed against a judgment

Motion for reconsideration of a judgment is a prohibited pleading (but does not include an MR against an interlocutory order). As such, the remedy is to file an ordinary appeal.

Petition for relief may be filed against an executory order

Prohibited pleading subject to the exception in the case of Bayog

MTC to RTC appeal: the RTC can review based on the entire records of the

case. (Rule 40, Sec. 7 and Sec. 18 of Rule 70) As such, the RTC may rule

upon matters not originally raised on appeal.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

SUMMARY PROCEDURE VS. SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

SUMMARY PROCEDURE

SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

Lawyers may be present to litigate

No lawyer is allowed to appear

Terms: Complaint/Answer

Terms: Application/Reply

Section 2. Meaning of terms. — The term "Municipal Trial Courts" as used in these Rules shall include Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts.

III. RULES 6 TO 9

RULE 6: KINDS OF PLEADINGS

Section 1. Pleadings defined. — Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.

Section 2. Pleadings allowed. — The claims of a party are asserted in

a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention.

The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading asserting

a claim against him.

An answer may be responded to by a reply.

KINDS OF PLEADINGS:

Criminal Proceedings: in criminal proceedings:

1. Complaint – Complaint Affidavit;

2. Answer – Counter Affidavit;

3. Reply – Rejoinder;

4. Reply to a Rejoinder – Sur Rejoinder.

But the above are administrative in nature, because they are not in filed in court but with the fiscal’s office. After finding probable cause, the fiscal will

file an information.

Exceptions: when may a criminal action be filed directly with the court:

1. Under Rule 110, Sec. 1 (2), where the penalty for the offense is less than 4 years, two months and one day or that which does not require a preliminary investigation as provided under Rule 112, Sec. 1;

2. When a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant, and the inquest prosecutor is unavailable, the complaint-affidavit may be filed directly with the court by the complainant or the peace officer.

COMPLAINT

Section 3. Complaint. — The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's cause or causes of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the complaint.

ANSWER

Section 4. Answer. — An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his defenses.

DEFENSES: NEGATIVE AND AFFIRMATIVE

Section 5. Defenses. — Defenses may either be negative or affirmative.

(a) A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of the claimant essential to his cause or causes of action.

(b) An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him. The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of confession and avoidance.

Negative defense: must be raised through a specific denial in accordance with Rule 8, Sec. 10. Otherwise, a general denial, or that which denies the allegations but does not state the truth of the matter, may be regarded as an admission.

From there, the plaintiff may move for Summary Judgment or Judgment on the Pleadings, as the case may be.

COUNTERCLAIMS

Section 6. Counterclaim. — A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing party.

Different from the Answer: a counterclaim is the claim of the defendant against the plaintiff, so that the plaintiff may be declared in default with respect to the counterclaim if he does not file an answer thereto.

compulsory

counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature thereof, except that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court, the counter-claim may be considered compulsory regardless of the amount.

Section

7.

Compulsory

counterclaim.

A

determining whether a

counterclaim is compulsory or permissive, summarized as follows:

1. Are the issues of fact and law raised by the claim and counterclaim largely the same?

The

criteria or tests

that may

be

used

in

2. Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant's claim absent the compulsory counterclaim rule?

3. Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff's claim as well as defendant's counterclaim?

4. Is there any logical relation between the claim and the counterclaim?

(Valencia v. Court of Appeals)

Another test, applied in the more recent case of Quintanilla v. Court of Appeals, is the "compelling test of compulsoriness" which requires "a logical relationship between the claim and counterclaim, that is, where conducting separate trials of the respective claims of the parties would entail a substantial duplication of effort and time by the parties and the court." (Alday vs. CA)

Jurisdiction: must be with the same court, except when the original action is with the RTC.

Example: A filed a complaint for sum of money amounting to P150k against B. B filed a counterclaim in the amount of P500k.

1. The counterclaim should be dismissed since the jurisdiction thereof is with the RTC and not with the MTC.

2. However, if the original action is P500k and the counterclaim is P150k, there is no dismissal, since the original action is with the RTC, the latter may then take cognizance of the counterclaim.

3. The same is true if the counterclaim interposed arises out of an Employer-Employee relationship, or intracorporate disputes, which should be filed with the NLRC or the Special Commercial Courts, respectively.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Section 8. Cross-claim. — A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may include a claim that the party against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross-claimant for all or part of a claim asserted in the action against the cross-claimant.

Section 9. Counter-counterclaims and counter-crossclaims. — A

counter-claim may be asserted against an original counter-claimant.

A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross-claimant.

Counter-claim not raised in the answer: is considered waived under Rule

9, Sec. 2.

Rule 9,

claim, not set up barred. — A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-

Section 2. Compulsory counterclaim, or cross-

claim, not set up shall be barred.

Exception to the above rule: Rule 11, Sec. 10: “When a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-claim through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before judgment.” The counterclaim may be set-up with leave of court through amendment.

Money Claim: not raised within the time prescribed in estate proceedings may only be prosecuted as a counter-claim for a case filed by an executor or administrator against the creditor.

REPLY

Section 10. Reply. — A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which

is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters alleged by

way of defense in the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new matters. If a party does not file such reply, all the new matters alleged

in

the answer are deemed controverted.

If

the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters

so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental

complaint.

When not necessary: when the answer consists only of denials, these are deemed controverted. But if the answer raises or allege facts in denial or avoidance, a reply should be filed to specifically deny the same. Denials will be a matter of evidence and no longer a matter of pleading.

Different from counterclaim: a reply is an answer to an Answer, while the Answer to a counterclaim is the answer to the claim of defendant.

Matters raised in the answer is a basis for a new/additional cause of

action: the plaintiff has the option to file a supplemental complaint rather than a reply to seek additional/new relief not raised in the complaint.

The bringing of a third-party defendant is proper if he would be liable to the plaintiff or to the defendant or both for all or part of the plaintiff's claim against the original defendant, although the third-party defendant's liability arises out of another transaction. The defendant may implead another as third-party defendant:

(a) On an allegation of liability of the latter to the defendant for

contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief;

(b) On the ground of direct liability of the third-party defendant to the

plaintiff; or (c) The liability of the third-party defendant to both the plaintiff and

the defendant. (ACDC vs. CA)

the

proceedings governed by the Interim Rules, and the allowance of the filing of third-party complaints is premised on one objective, the expeditious disposition of cases. Moreover, following the rule of liberal interpretation found in the Interim Rules, and taking into consideration the suppletory application of the Rules of Court under Rule 1, Sec. 2 of the Interim Rules, the Court finds that a third-party complaint is not, and should not be prohibited in controversies governed by the Interim Rules. The logic and justness of this conclusion are rendered beyond question when it is considered that Sy Tiong Shiou and Juanita Tan are not complete strangers to the litigation as in fact they are the moving spirit behind the filing of the principal complaint for accounting and damages against the Spouses Sy. (Sy-Tiong vs.

Sy Chim)

Intra-Corporate

Dispute:

the

summary

nature

of

Section 12. Bringing new parties. — When the presence of parties other than those to the original action is required for the granting of complete relief in the determination of a counterclaim or cross-claim, the court shall order them to be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over them can be obtained.

Section 13. Answer to third (fourth, etc.)—party complaint. — A

third (fourth, etc.) — party defendant may allege in his answer his defenses, counterclaims or cross-claims, including such defenses that the third (fourth, etc.) — party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiff's claim. In proper cases, he may also assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of the latter's claim against the third-party plaintiff.

Leave of Court: is not required for counterclaims, either permissive or compulsory, even cross-claim. However, a third-party complaint requires leave of court before it is filed.

Filing Fees: is required to be paid for permissive counter-claims, cross-claims and third-party complaint, but not in a compulsory counter-claim.

Certification Against Forum Shopping: is required in permissive counter-

claims but not in a compulsory counter-claim, this is because a permissive counter-claim is in itself a separate case, unlike a compulsory counter-claim, where the court already acquired jurisdiction over the defendant therein (plaintiff in the case).

THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT AND REPLY THERETO

Such certification is likewise required for a third-party complaint.

Section 11. Third, (fourth, etc.)—party complaint. — A third (fourth,

etc.) — party complaint is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the action, called the third (fourth, etc.) — party defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim.

Purpose: the defendant wants the third-party, in case the former loses the case, to contribute, indemnify or subrogate the defendant to the claim.

Applicability: The test to determine whether the claim for indemnity in a third-party complaint is, whether it arises out of the same transaction on which the plaintiff's claim is based, or the third-party plaintiff's claim, although arising out of another or different contract or transaction, is connected with the plaintiff's claim.

RULE 7: PARTS OF A PLEADING

Section 1. Caption. — The caption sets forth the name of the court, the title of the action, and the docket number if assigned.

The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be named in the original complaint or petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party on each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties.

Their respective participation in the case shall be indicated.

Section 2. The body. — The body of the pleading sets forth its designation, the allegations of the party's claims or defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading. (n)

the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading. (n) Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

(a) Paragraphs. — The allegations in the body of a pleading shall be divided

into paragraphs so numbered to be readily identified, each of which shall contain a statement of a single set of circumstances so far as that can be done with convenience. A paragraph may be referred to by its number in all succeeding pleadings. (3a)

(b) Headings. — When two or more causes of action are joined the statement of the first shall be prefaced by the words "first cause of action,''

of the second by "second cause of action", and so on for the others.

When one or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed to one of several causes of action in the complaint, they shall be prefaced by the

words "answer to the first cause of action" or "answer to the second cause

of action" and so on; and when one or more paragraphs of the answer are

addressed to several causes of action, they shall be prefaced by words to that effect. (4)

(c) Relief. — The pleading shall specify the relief sought, but it may add a

general prayer for such further or other relief as may be deemed just or

equitable. (3a, R6)

(d) Date. — Every pleading shall be dated.

Section 3. Signature and address. — Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating in either case his address which should not be a post office box.

The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading; that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for delay.

An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court may,

in its discretion, allow such deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that

the same was due to mere inadvertence and not intended for delay.

Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or signs a pleading in violation of this Rule, or alleges scandalous or indecent matter therein, or fails promptly report to the court a change of his address, shall be subject

to appropriate disciplinary action.

Signature: all pleadings must be signed by either the party or his counsel. However, once there is a counsel, he must ALWAYS sign. This is because notice to the party is not notice to the counsel, but a notice to the counsel is notice to the party.

Lawyer’s Signature: signifies that

1. he has read the pleading;

2. that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and

3. that it is not interposed for delay.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

Section 4. Verification. — Except when otherwise specifically required by law or rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit.

A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading

and that the allegations therein are true and correct of his knowledge and belief.

A pleading required to be verified which contains a verification based on

"information and belief", or upon "knowledge, information and belief", or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading.

Purpose: the verification requirement is simply intended to secure an assurance that the allegations in the pleading are true and correct, and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is filed in good faith. (Medado vs. Heirs of Consing)

Verification of the party: signifies that the party:

1. has read the pleading; and

2. that the allegations therein are true and correct of his knowledge and belief.

Examples of pleadings required to be verified:

1. Complaint under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Law;

2. Complaint in Ejectment Cases;

3. Complaint in ordinary procedures praying for a provisional remedy;

4. Petition for Review as an appeal;

5. Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65.

Who should verify: the party itself. Otherwise, the case may be dismissed. If there are more than one, all should verify. If only one signed, it is generally not valid. However, the court, in a number of cases allowed such verification as substantial compliance if there is commonality of interest.

Where the petitioners are immediate relatives, who share a common interest in the property subject of the action, the fact that only one of the petitioners executed the verification or certification of forum shopping will not deter the court from proceeding with the action. It is deemed substantially complied with when one who has ample knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the verification; and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and

correct (Medado vs. Heirs of Consing)

Section 5. Certification against forum shopping. — The plaintiff or

principal party shall certify under oath in the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (a) that he has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if he should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.

Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. The submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal actions. If the acts of the party or his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative sanctions.

Forum shopping is the act of a party litigant against whom an adverse judgment has been rendered in one forum seeking and possibly getting a favorable opinion in another forum, other than by appeal or the special civil action of certiorari, or the institution of two or more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause or supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.

Forum shopping happens when, in the two or more pending cases, there is identity of parties, identity of rights or causes of action, and identity of reliefs sought. Where the elements of litis pendentia are present, and where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in the other,

there is forum shopping. (In Re: Reconstitution of Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 303168 and 303169 and Issuance of Owner’s Duplicate Certificates of Title In Lieu of Those Lost, Rolando Edward G. Lim cited in the case of Alma Jose vs. Javellana)

Certiorari and Appeal questioning different orders do not constitute

forum shopping: For forum shopping to exist, both actions must involve the same transaction, same essential facts and circumstances and must raise identical causes of action, subject matter and issues. Clearly, it does not exist where different orders were questioned, two distinct causes of action and issues were raised, and two objectives were sought.

The appeal and the petition for certiorari actually sought different objectives. In his appeal in C.A.-G.R. CV No. 68259, Javellana aimed to undo the RTC’s erroneous dismissal of Civil Case No. 79-M-97 to clear the way for his judicial demand for specific performance to be tried and determined in due course by

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

the RTC; but his petition for certiorari had the ostensible objective "to prevent (Priscilla) from developing the subject property and from proceeding with the ejectment case until his appeal is finally resolved," as the CA explicitly determined in its decision in C.A.-G.R. SP No. 60455.

Who should certify in case of multiple parties: the signature of only one

of the petitioners in the certification against forum shopping substantially complied with [the] rules because all the petitioners share a common interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense. (HLC Construction and

 

Development

Corporation

v.

Emily

Homes

Subdivision

Homeowners

Nor were the dangers that the adoption of the judicial policy against forum

Association)

shopping designed to prevent or to eliminate attendant. The first danger, i.e., the multiplicity of suits upon one and the same cause of action, would not

Difference of non-compliance between verification and certification:

materialize considering that the appeal was a continuity of Civil Case No. 79-M-97, whereas C.A.-G.R. SP No. 60455 dealt with an independent ground of alleged grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC. The second danger, i.e., the unethical malpractice of shopping for a friendly court or judge

Verification is a formal requirement, whereas certification against forum shopping is a substantial requirement. As such, non-compliance with the former may be corrected by a liberal court through a belated verification. Whereas non-compliance with the requirement of certification is not correctible by amendment.

to ensure a favorable ruling or judgment after not getting it in the appeal, would not arise because the CA had not yet decided C.A.-G.R. CV No. 68259

Non-Compliance with Forum Shopping Certification:

 

as of the filing of the petition for certiorari. (Alma Jose vs. Javellana)

1. NO CERTIFICATION: dismissal without prejudice;

Forum shopping exists even if one action is for rescission of a contract of sale and the other one is for its enforcement: It does not

even matter that one action is for the enforcement of the parties' agreements, while the other action is for the rescission thereof. In the similar case

of Victronics Computers, Inc. v. RTC, Branch 63, Makati, we discussed:

Civil Case No. 91-2069 actually involves an action for specific performance; it thus upholds the contract and assumes its validity. Civil Case No. 91-2192, on the other hand, is for the nullification of the contract on the grounds of fraud and vitiated consent. While ostensibly the cause of action in one is opposite to that in the other, in the final analysis, what is being determined is the validity of the contract. x x x Thus, the identity of rights asserted cannot be disputed. Howsoever viewed, it is beyond cavil that regardless of the decision that would be promulgated in Civil Case No. 91-2069, the same would constitute res judicata on Civil Case No. 91- 2192 and vice versa. (emphasis supplied)

The test of identity of causes of action lies not in the form of an action but on whether the same evidence would support and establish the former and the present causes of action. (Casil vs. CA cited in

Medado vs. Consing)

Which case should be dismissed: the relevant factors that courts must consider when they have to determine which case should be dismissed, given the pendency of two actions, to wit:

(1) The date of filing, with preference generally given to the first action filed

to be retained;

(2) Whether the action sought to be dismissed was filed merely to pre-empt

the latter action or to anticipate its filing and lay the basis for its dismissal; and

(3) Whether the action is the appropriate vehicle for litigating the issues

between the parties. (Medado vs. Consing)

Contents of the Certification:

(a) that he has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim

involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;

(b) If there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of

the present status thereof; and

(c) If he should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has

been filed or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom

to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.

Not jurisdictional but mandatory: such that failure to comply with

verification and certification requirements is actionable against the one who cause non-compliance.

Who should sign for juridical entities: the established rule is that it must

be executed by the plaintiff or any of the principal parties and not by counsel.

(Commission on Appointments vs. Paler)

2. FALSE CERTIFICATION: dismissal with prejudice; indirect contempt of court without prejudice to the administrative or criminal actions;

3. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF THE UNDERTAKINGS:

dismissed with prejudice; indirect contempt of court without prejudice to the administrative or criminal actions;

4. WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE FORUM SHOPPING: summary dismissal WITH prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt as well as cause for administrative sanctions.

THREE WAYS BY WHICH FORUM SHOPPING MAY BE COMMITTED:

1. Multiple cases, all pending, with the same prayer;

2. Multiple cases, based on the same cause of action, with the same prayer, and there is a judgment on the merits on one – res judicata;

3. Multiple cases, identical causes of action, varying prayers – splitting

cause of action. (Chua vs. Metrobank)

EXAMPLE; VERIFICATION: “I, pedro santos, is the plaintiff in the above entitled case. I caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint. I have read the allegations therein and the same are true and correct of my personal knowledge.”

EXAMPLE: CERTIFICATION: “I, Predo santos, the plaintiff in this case state and depose, that I have not filed any other case of this nature before any court, tribunal, body or agency; that there is no pending case similar to this before any court, tribunal, body or agency; that should I come to know of any I will inform the honorable court within 5 days from notice thereof.”

Writ of Execution: even if the pleading was worded as a “petition”, it is a mere motion which is an incident of the case which does not require a certification of non-forum shopping. Such certification is required only for initiatory pleadings.

RULE 8: MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS IN PLEADINGS

Section 1. In general. — Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defense, as the case may be, omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts.

If a defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof and their applicability to him shall be clearly and concisely stated.

Evidentiary matters: are not required to be stated in the pleading

Malice/intent: can be through general averments, since they cannot be alleged with particularity because they are conditions of the mind.

Section 2. Alternative causes of action or defenses. — A party may

set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in one cause of action or defense or in separate causes of action or defenses. When two or more statements are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

Section 3. Conditions precedent. — In any pleading a general averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent shall be sufficient.

Section 4. Capacity. — Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of person that is made a party, must be averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, shall do so by specific denial, which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader's knowledge.

Section 5. Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind. — In all averments

of fraud or mistake the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, or other condition of the mind of a person may be averred generally.

Section 6. Judgment. — In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it.

ACTIONABLE DOCUMENTS

Section 7. Action or defense based on document. — Whenever an

action or defense is based upon a written instrument or document, the substance of such instrument or document shall be set forth in the pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading, or said copy may with like effect be set forth in the pleading.

Actionable documents: not all documents are actionable, only those upon which an action or a defense is based, e.g., promissory note as a basis for collection of a sum of money.

How to use:

1. State the substance of the document in the pleading, in verbatim; and attach a copy of the document in the pleading;

2. State the text of the document, in verbatim, in the pleading. Attaching a copy of the document is not stated in the provision for this mode but in practice, attaching a copy is still made.

Section 8. How to contest such documents. — When an action or

defense is founded upon a written instrument, copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading as provided in the preceding section, the genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies them, and sets forth what he claims to be the facts, but the requirement of an oath does not apply when the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or when compliance with an order for an inspection of the original instrument is refused.

Denial and effect of failure thereof: denial must be under oath, i.e., the

defendant did not sign the document or that his signature was forged. Otherwise, there is an admission as to the genuineness and due execution. In general, answering an initiatory pleading, does not require a verification. But if the complaint made use of actionable documents, the answer must be under oath, i.e., it must be verified. If the actionable document is in an Answer, the reply should be verified to deny specifically the document under oath.

The truth as to the statements therein may still be contested, since this is not part of the genuineness and due execution of the document. What is being admitted is that the document is not authentic and not spurious.

The admission of the due execution and genuineness of a document simply means that "the party whose signature it bears admits that he signed it or that it was signed by another for him with his authority; that at the time it was signed it was in words and figures exactly as set out in the pleading of the party relying upon it; that the document was delivered; and that any

formal requisites required by law, such as a seal, an acknowledgment, or revenue stamp, which it lacks, are waived by him. When the law makes use of the phrase 'genuineness and due execution of the instrument' it means nothing more than that the instrument is not spurious, counterfeit, or of different import on its face from the one executed.” (Benguet Exploration Inc.

vs. CA)

The admission covers:

1. Existence of the document;

2. It was properly executed;

3. Signatures therein are authentic.

As such, during trial, the one presenting the document need not authenticate the document since its genuineness and due execution have been admitted.

Exceptions:

1. When the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument; or

2. When compliance with an order for an inspection of the original instrument is refused.

Section 9. Official document or act. — In pleading an official document or official act, it is sufficient to aver that the document was issued or the act done in compliance with law.

SPECIFIC DENIAL

Section 10. Specific denial. — A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made to the complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial.

Purpose: of requiring respondents to make a specific denial is to make them disclose facts which will disprove the allegations of petitioner at the trial, together with the matters they rely upon in support of such denial. Our jurisdiction adheres to this rule to avoid and prevent unnecessary expenses and waste of time by compelling both parties to lay their cards on the table, thus reducing the controversy to its true terms. (Republic vs. Sandiganbayan)

Three Kinds:

1. Specific Denial – specifying the allegation of fact which is not admitted and setting forth the substance of the matters upon which the denial is based;

2. Qualified Denial – denying only a part and specifying which parts are denied and setting forth the substance of matters upon which the denial is based and specifying matters which are admitted;

3. Lack of knowledge – the party must so state and such shall have the effect of denial.

However, lack of knowledge is NOT applicable to matters which are within the personal knowledge of the party; the denial should have positively stated how it was that they were supposedly ignorant of the facts alleged. Otherwise, the same may be considered a negative

pregnant. (see Republic vs. Sandiganbayan)

NEGATIVE PREGNANT: a denial pregnant with admission. Example: “We don’t have 11 deposit accounts in Switzerland” denies not having 11 deposit accounts but admits that there may be more or less than 11, and thus admits

that there are swiss accounts. (Republic vs. Sandiganbayan)

Simple declarative statements; NO negative pregnant: “B specifically denies

that he borrowed P100k from A” – there is no negative pregnant because the allegation is a simple declarative statement.

Compound complex sentence: “B specifically denies that he borrowed P100k when the latter was on his way to the market” – there is denial as to WHEN

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS

Cesar Nickolai F. Soriano Jr. Arellano University School of Law 2011-0303 REMEDIAL LAW 1: DISCUSSIONS UNDER THE CLASS OF ATTY. BRONDIAL (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE) and BAR REIVEW LECTURES

B borrowed from A, but there is admission that B borrowed money from A on some other time.

Denial by lack of knowledge: when the fact alleged is within the knowledge of the defendant, the same is considered a negative pregnant. (see Republic

vs. Sandiganbayan)

Failure to specifically deny: the matters not specifically denied are deemed admitted under Section 11, to wit:

Section 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed

admitted. — Material averment in the complaint, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be deemed admitted when not specifically denied. Allegations of usury in a complaint to recover usurious interest are deemed admitted if not denied under oath.

Section 12. Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein.

Upon motion made by a party before responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by these Rules, upon motion made by a party within twenty (20) days after the service of the pleading upon him, or upon the court's own initiative at any time, the court may order any pleading to be stricken out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter be stricken out therefrom.

RULE 9: EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD

WAIVER OF DEFENSES AND OBJECTIONS

Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded. — Defenses and

objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. However, when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss the claim.

Residual Prerogatives is the authority of the appellate court to dismiss a case motu proprio on the following grounds:

1. Lack of jurisdiction

2. Res judicata

3. Litis pendentia;

4. Prescription.

Also in cases governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure. Other grounds are found under Rule 17, Sec. 3:

1. Failure of the plaintiff to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief for a unreasonable period of time;

2. Failure of the plaintiff to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time;

3. Failure of the plaintiff to comply with an order of the court.

DEFAULT

Section 3. Default; declaration of. If the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of court.

(a) Effect of order of default. — A party in default shall be entitled to notice of subsequent proceedings but not to take part in the trial. (b) Relief from order of default. — A party declared in default may at any time after notice thereof and before judgment file a motion under oath to set aside the order of default upon proper showing that his failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence and that he has a meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may

be set aside on such terms and conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice.

(c) Effect of partial default. — When a pleading asserting a claim states a

common cause of action against several defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the court shall try the case against all

upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence presented.

(d) Extent of relief to be awarded. — A judgment rendered against a party

in default shall not exceed the amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor award unliquidated damages.

(e) Where no defaults allowed. — If the defending party in an action for

annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the prosecuting attorney to investigate whether or not a collusion between the parties exists, and if there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that the evidence submitted is not fabricated.

Summary Procedures: motion to declare party in default is a prohibited pleading in summary procedures.

Criminal Cases: Court acquires jurisdiction over the accused through arrest (Rule 113), not arraignment (which is a mere compliance with the due process requirement that the accused must be informed).

Motion: a motion is required. Thus, the court cannot declare a party in default motu propio, only through a motion.

The motion is a litigated motion, as such, Sections 4, 5 and 6