Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

indicating that it was received by the fax number to which it was

2015 REMEDIAL LAW sent on the date and time indicated therein."
Circe, sixty (60) days after her receipt of Sheriff Pluto's return, filed a
Motion to Declare Charybdis in default as Charybdis did not file any
I. Lender extended to Borrower a P100,000.00 loan covered by a responsive pleading.
promissory note. Later, Borrower obtained another P100,000.00 a.) Should the court declare Charybdis in default? (2%)
loan again covered by a promissory note. Still later, Borrower
obtained a P300,000.00 loan secured by a real estate mortgage on Answer: No, the court should not declare Charybdis in default.
his land valued at P500,000.00. Borrower defaulted on his payments Under the Rules of Court, the amendment of Rule 14 allowing
when the loans matured. Despite demand to pay the P500,000.00 service of summons by facsimile transmittal refers only to service of
loan, Borrower refused to pay. Lender, applying the totality rule, summons upon a foreign private juridical entity under Section 12 of
filed against Borrower with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Rule 14, not to a non-resident defendant under Section 15 of Rule
a collection suit for P500,000.00. 14. Service of summons by facsimile cannot be effected under
Section 15 unless leave of court was obtained specifically permitting
a.) Did Lender correctly apply the totality rule and the rule on service by facsimile transmittal.
joinder of causes of action? Here the defendant is not a foreign private juridical entity but a non-
resident defendant and no leave of court was obtained to serve
Answer: Yes Lender correctly applied the totality rule and the rule summons by facsimile.
on joinder of causes of action. Hence there was no valid service of summons and thus the court
Under the rule on joinder of causes of action, a party may in could not declare Charybdis in default.
one pleading assert as many causes of action as he may have against
an opposing party. Under the totality rule, where the claims in all
the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the Scylla seasonably filed her answer setting forth therein as a defense
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. that Charybdis had paid the mortgage debt.
Here the causes of action by Lender are all against borrower b.) On the premise that Charybdis was properly declared in
and all the claims are principally for recovery of money. default, what is the effect of Scylla's answer to the complaint? (2%)
Hence the aggregate amount claimed, which is P500,000 shall
be the test of jurisdiction and thus it is the RTC of Manila which has Answer: The effect of Scyllas answer to the complaint is that the
jurisdiction. court shall try the case against both Scylla and Charybdis upon the
Although the rules on joinder of causes of action state that answer filed by Scylla.
the joinder shall not include special civil actions, the remedy Under Section 3(c) of Rule 9, when a pleading asserting a
resorted to with respect to the third loan was not foreclosure but claim states a common cause of action against several defending
collection. Hence joinder of causes of action would still be proper. 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
At the trial, Borrower's lawyer, while cross-examining Lender, judgment upon the evidence presented.
successfully elicited an admission from the latter that the two Here there was a common cause of action against Scylla and
promissory notes have been paid. Thereafter, Borrower's lawyer Charybdis since both were co-signatories to the mortgage deed.
filed a motion to dismiss the case on the ground that as proven only Hence the court should not render judgment by default
P300,000.00 was the amount due to Lender and which claim is against Charybdis but should proceed to try the case upon the
within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial answer filed and the evidence presented by Scylla.
Court. He further argued that lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter can be raised at any stage of the proceedings.
III. Juliet invoking the provisions of the Rule on Violence Against
b.) Should the court dismiss the case? Women and their Children filed with the RTC designated as a Family
Court a petition for the issuance of a Temporary Protection Order
Answer: No, the court should not dismiss the case. (TPO) against her husband, Romeo. The Family Court issued a 30-day
The Supreme Court has held that subject-matter jurisdiction is TPO against Romeo. A day before the expiration of the TPO, Juliet
determined by the amount of the claim alleged in the complaint and filed a motion for extension. Romeo in his opposition raised, among
not the amount substantiated during the trial. (Dionisio v Sioson others, the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262 (The VAWC Law)
Puerto, 31 October 1974). arguing that the law authorizing the issuance of a TPO violates the
Here the amount claimed was P500,000. Even if the claim equal protection and due process clauses of the 1987 Constitution.
substantiated during the trial was only P300,000 that is not The Family Court judge, in granting the motion for extension of the
determinative of subject-matter jurisdiction. TPO, declined to rule on the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262. The
Hence the argument that lack of subject-matter jurisdiction Family Court judge reasoned that Family Courts are without
can be raised at any time is misplaced since in the first place the RTC jurisdiction to pass upon constitutional issues, being a special court
has jurisdiction. of limited jurisdiction and R.A. No. 8369, the law creating the Family
Courts, does not provide for such jurisdiction. Is the Family Court
judge correct when he declined to resolve the constitutionality of
II. Circe filed with the RTC a complaint for the foreclosure of real R.A. No. 9262?
estate mortgage against siblings Scylla and Charybdis, co-owners of
the property and cosignatories to the mortgage deed. The siblings Answer: No, the Family Court judge was not correct when he
permanently reside in Athens, Greece. Circe tipped off Sheriff Pluto declined to resolve the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262.
that Scylla is on a balikbayan trip and is billeted at the Century Plaza The Supreme Court has held that despite its designation as a
Hotel in Pasay City. Sheriff Pluto went to the hotel and personally Family Court, a Regional Trial Court remains possessed of authority
served Scylla the summons, but the latter refused to receive as a court of general jurisdiction to resolve the constitutionality of a
summons for Charybdis as she was not authorized to do so. Sheriff statute. (Garcia v. Drilon, 25 June 2013)
Pluto requested Scylla for the email address and fax number of
Charybdis which the latter readily gave. Sheriff Pluto, in his return of
the summons, stated that "Summons for Scylla was served IV. Strauss filed a complaint against Wagner for cancellation of title.
personally as shown by her signature on the receiving copy of the Wagner moved to dismiss the complaint because Grieg, to whom he
summons. Summons on Charybdis was served pursuant to the mortgaged the property as duly annotated in the TCT, was not
amendment of Rule 14 by facsimile transmittal of the summons and impleaded as defendant.
complaint on defendant's fax number as evidenced by transmission a.) Should the complaint be dismissed?
verification report automatically generated by the fax machine
Answer: No, the complaint should not be dismissed. Immediately, Maingat and STK filed a petition for the issuance of a
The Supreme Court has held that non-joinder of an writ of continuing mandamus against RD-DENR-EMB and WPRI with
indispensable party is not a ground of a motion to dismiss. (Vesagas the RTC of Province I, a designated environmental court, as the RD-
v. CA, 371 SCRA 508). DENR-EMB negligently issued the ECC to WPRI.
Here although Grieg, the registered mortgagee, is an On scrutiny of the petition, the court determined that the area
indispensable party (Metrobank v. Alejo, 364 SCRA 813 [2001]), his where the alleged actionable neglect or omission subject of the
non-joinder does not warrant the dismissal of the complaint. petition took place in the City of Z of Province II, and therefore
cognizable by the RTC of Province II. Thus, the court dismissed
b.) If the case should proceed to trial without Grieg being impleaded outright the petition for lack of jurisdiction.
as a party to the case, what is his remedy to protect his interest?
a.) Was the court correct in motu proprio dismissing the petition?
Answer: The remedy of Grieg is to file a motion for leave to Answer: No, the court was not correct in motu proprio dismissing
intervene. the petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Under Rule 19, a person who has a legal interest in the matter In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that
in litigation may intervene in the action. the requirement that the petition be filed in the area where the
Here Grieg is a mortgagee and such fact was annotated in the actionable neglect or omission took place relates to venue and not
title. to subject-matter jurisdiction. Since what is involved is improper
Hence he has a legal interest in the title subject-matter of the venue and not subject-matter jurisdiction, it was wrong for the court
litigation and may thus intervene in the case. to dismiss outright the petition since venue may be waived. (Dolot
v. Paje, 27 August 2013).

V. Ernie filed a petition for guardianship over the person and


properties of his father, Ernesto. Upon receipt of the notice of Assuming that the court did not dismiss the petition, the RD-DENR-
hearing, Ernesto filed an opposition to the petition. Ernie, before the EMB in his Comment moved to dismiss the petition on the ground
hearing of the petition, filed a motion to order Ernesto to submit that petitioners failed to appeal the issuance of the ECC and to
himself for mental and physical examination which the court exhaust administrative remedies provided in the DENR Rules and
granted. Regulations.
After Ernie's lawyer completed the presentation of evidence in
support of the petition and the court's ruling on the formal offer of b.) Should the court dismiss the petition? (3%)
evidence, Ernesto's lawyer filed a demurrer to evidence. Answer: No, the court should not dismiss the petition.
Ernie's lawyer objected on the ground that a demurrer to evidence is The Supreme Court has held that in environmental cases, the
not proper in a special proceeding. defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies by appealing
a.) Was Ernie's counsel's objection proper? the ECC issuance would apply only if the defect in the issuance of
the ECC does not have any causal relation to the environmental
Answer: No, Ernies counsels objection was not proper. damage.
Under the Rule on Special Proceedings, in the absence of Here the issuance of the ECC has a direct causal relation to
special provisions, the rules provided for in ordinary actions, shall the environmental damage since it permitted the bulldozing of a
be, as far as practicable, applicable in special proceedings. portion of the mountain and the cutting down and buring of several
Here there are no special provisions on demurrer to evidence trees and plants. (See Paje v. Casio, 3 February 2015).
in the rules on guardianship. Hence the provisions on demurrer to
evidence in ordinary actions are applicable to special
proceedings. Such application is practicable since it would be a VII. Plaintiff sued defendant for collection of P1 million based on the
waste of time to continue hearing the case if upon the facts and the latter's promissory note. The complaint alleges, among others:
law, guardianship would not be proper. 1) Defendant borrowed P1 million from plaintiff as evidenced by a
duly executed promissory note;
2) The promissory note reads:
b.) If Ernesto defies the court's order directing him to submit to
physical and mental examinations, can the court order his arrest? "Makati, Philippines
Dec. 30, 2014
Answer: No, the court cannot order Ernestos arrest.
Under Section 3(d) of Rule 29, a court cannot direct the arrest of a For value received from plaintiff, defendant promises to pay plaintiff
party for disobeying an order to submit to a physical or mental P1 million, twelve (12) months from the above indicated date
examination. The court may impose other penalties such as without necessity of demand.
rendering judgment by default or issuing an order that the physical
or mental condition of the disobedient party shall be taken as Signed
established in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the Defendant"
order.
A copy of the promissory note is attached as Annex "A."

VI. A law was passed declaring Mt. Karbungko as a protected area Defendant, in his verified answer, alleged among others:
since it was a major watershed. The protected area covered a
portion located in Municipality A of the Province I and a portion 1) Defendant specifically denies the allegation in paragraphs 1 and 2
located in the City of Z of Province II. Maingat is the leader of of the complaint, the truth being defendant did not execute any
Samahan ng Tagapag-ingat ng Karbungko (STK), a people's promissory note in favor of plaintiff, or
organization. He learned that a portion of the mountain located in 2) Defendant has paid the P1 million claimed in the promissory note
the City of Z of Province II was extremely damaged when it was (Annex "A" of the Complaint) as evidenced by an "Acknowledgment
bulldozed and leveled to the ground, and several trees and plants Receipt" duly executed by plaintiff on January 30, 2015 in Manila
were cut down and burned by workers of World Pleasure Resorts, with his spouse signing as witness.
Inc. (WPRI) for the construction of a hotel and golf course. Upon A copy of the "Acknowledgment Receipt" is attached as Annex "1"
inquiry with the project site engineer if they had a permit for the hereof.
project, Maingat was shown a copy of the Environmental
Compliance Certificate (ECC) issued by the DENR-EMB, Regional Plaintiff filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground
Director (RD-DENR-EMB). that defendant's answer failed to tender an issue as the allegations
therein on his defenses are sham for being inconsistent; hence, no
defense at all. Defendant filed an opposition claiming his answer order divest the title of the party and vest it in the movant or other
tendered an issue. person.
a.) Is judgment on the pleadings proper? (3%)
Answer: No, judgment on the pleadings is not proper.
Under Section 2 of Rule 8, a party may set forth two or more IX. Hades, an American citizen, through a dating website, got
statements of a defense alternatively or hypothetically. The acquainted with Persephone, a Filipina. Hades came to the
Supreme Court has held that inconsistent defenses may be pleaded Philippines and proceeded to Baguio City where Persephone resides.
alternatively or hypothetically provided that each defense is Hades and Persephone contracted marriage, solemnized by the
consistent with itself. (Baclayon v. Court of Appeals, 26 February Metropolitan Trial Court judge of Makati City. After the wedding,
1990). Hades flew back to California, United States of America, to wind up
Hence Plaintiffs contention that defendants answer failed to his business affairs. On his return to the Philippines, Hades
tender an issue as his defenses are sham for being inconsistent is discovered that Persephone had an illicit affair with Phanes.
without merit. Immediately, Hades returned to the United States and was able to
obtain a valid divorce decree from the Superior Court of the County
Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that of San Mateo, California, a court of competent jurisdiction against
there are no longer any triable genuine issues of facts. Persephone. Hades desires to marry Hestia, also a Filipina, whom he
met at Baccus Grill in Pasay City.
b.) Should the court grant defendant's motion for summary a.) As Hades' lawyer, what petition should you file in order that your
judgment? client can avoid prosecution for bigamy if he desires to marry
Hestia? (2%)
Answer: Yes, the court should grant Defendants motion for Answer: As Hades lawyer, I would file a petition for cancellation of
summary judgment. entry of marriage under Rule 108 with prayer for recognition of
Under Section 2 of Rule 35, a defendant may at any time, foreign divorce judgment.
move with supporting admissions for a summary judgment in his In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that a
favor. foreign divorce decree must first be recognized before it can be
Here the Plaintiff had impliedly admitted the genuineness and given effect. The Supreme Court stated that the recognition may be
due execution of the acknowledgment receipt, which was the basis prayed for in the petition for cancellation of the marriage entry
of Defendants defense, by failing to specifically deny it under oath. under Rule 108. (Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas, 628 SCRA 266).
Hence the Defendant may move for a summary judgment on
the basis that Plaintiff had admitted that Defendant had already paid b.) In what court should you file the petition?
the P1 million obligation. Answer: I would file the petition in the regional trial court of Makati
City, where the corresponding civil registry is located. (Section 1 of
Rule 108).
VIII. Aldrin entered into a contract to sell with Neil over a parcel of
land. The contract stipulated a P500,000.00 down payment upon c.) What is the essential requisite that you must comply with for the
signing and the balance payable in twelve (12) monthly installments purpose of establishing jurisdictional facts before the court can hear
of P100,000.00. Aldrin paid the down payment and had paid three the petition?
(3) monthly installments when he found out that Neil had sold the Answer: For the Rule 108 petition, the jurisdictional facts are the
same property to Yuri for P1.5 million paid in cash. Aldrin sued Neil following:
for specific performance with damages with the RTC. Yuri, with leave 1. Joinder of the local civil registrar and all persons who have or
of court, filed an answer-in-intervention as he had already obtained claim any interest which would be affected by petition.
a TCT in his name. After trial, the court rendered judgment ordering 2. Notice of the order of hearing to the persons named in the
Aldrin to pay all the instalments due, the cancellation of Yuri's title, petition.
and Neil to execute a deed of sale in favor of Aldrin. When the 3. Publication of the order of hearing in a newspaper of general
judgment became final and executory, Aldrin paid Neil all the circulation in the province.
installments but the latter refused to execute the deed of sale in
favor of the former. Aldrin filed a "Petition for the Issuance of a Writ
of Execution" with proper notice of hearing. The petition alleged, X. An information for murder was filed against Rapido. The RTC
among others, that the decision had become final and executory and judge, after personally evaluating the prosecutor's resolution,
he is entitled to the issuance of the writ of execution as a matter of documents and parties' affidavits submitted by the prosecutor,
right. Neil filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that it found probable cause and issued a warrant of arrest. Rapido's
lacked the required certification against forum shopping. lawyer examined the rollo of the case and found that it only
contained the copy of the information, the submissions of the
a.) Should the court grant Neil's Motion to Dismiss? prosecutor and a copy of the warrant of arrest. Immediately,
Answer: No, the court should not grant Neils Motion to Dismiss. Rapido's counsel filed a motion to quash the arrest warrant for being
Under Section 5 of Rule 7, a certification against forum void, citing as grounds:
shopping is required only for initiatory pleadings or petitions. a.) The judge before issuing the warrant did not personally conduct a
Here the Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution, searching examination of the prosecution witnesses in violation of
although erroneously denominated as a petition is actually a motion his client's constitutionally-mandated rights;
for issuance of a writ of execution under Rule 39. b.) There was no prior order finding probable cause before the judge
Hence the motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of a issued the arrest warrant. May the warrant of arrest be quashed on
certification against forum shopping should be denied. the grounds cited by Rapido' s counsel? State your reason for each
ground.
Despite the issuance of the writ of execution directing Neil to
execute the deed of sale in favor of Aldrin, the former obstinately Answer: No, the warrant of arrest may not be quashed on the
refused to execute the deed. grounds cited by Rapidos counsel.
a) The Supreme Court has held in Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393
b.) What is Aldrin's remedy? (1988) that Section 2 of Art. III of the Constitution does not
Answer: Aldrins remedy is to file a motion for judgment for specific mandatorily require the judge to personally examine the
act under Section 10(a) of Rule 39. complainant and his witnesses. The judge may opt to personally
Under Section 10(a) of Rule 39, if a judgment directs a party evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the
to execute a conveyance of land and the party fails to comply, the regarding the existence of probable cause and on the basis thereof
court may direct the act to be done at the disobedient partys cost issue a warrant of arrest.
by some other person appointed by the court or the court may by an
b) There is no requirement of a prior order by the judge finding Abuse Law). Oasis Jung's lawyer filed a motion to be admitted to bail
probable cause. The SC has held that the judge may rely upon the but the court issued an order that approval of his bail bond shall be
resolution of the investigating prosecutor provided that he made only after his arraignment.
personally evaluates the same and the affidavits and supporting
documents, which he did. (People v. Grey, 26 July 2010). a.) Did the court properly impose that bail condition?
Answer: No, the court did not properly impose the condition that
the approval of the bail bond shall be made only after the
XI. The Ombudsman found probable cause to charge with plunder arraignment.
the provincial governor, vice governor, treasurer, budget officer, and In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held
accountant. An Information for plunder was filed with the that in cases where it is authorized, bail should be granted before
Sandiganbayan against the provincial officials except for the arraignment, otherwise the accused may be hindered from filing a
treasurer who was granted immunity when he agreed to cooperate motion to quash since his arraignment would necessarily be
with the Ombudsman in the prosecution of the case. Immediately, deferred pending the resolution of the motion to quash. This would
the governor filed with the Sandiganbayan a petition for certiorari amount to a substantial dilution of his right to file a motion to
against the Ombudsman claiming there was grave abuse of quash.
discretion in excluding the treasurer from the Information.
a.) Was the remedy taken by the governor correct? (2%) Before arraignment, Oasis Jung's lawyer moved to quash the other
Answer: No, the remedy taken by the governor was not correct. four separate informations for violation of the child abuse law
The SC has held that the proper remedy from the Ombudsmans invoking the single larceny rule.
orders or resolutions in criminal cases is a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65 filed with the Supreme Court. (Quarto v OMB, 5 Oct b.) Should the motion to quash be granted?
2011; Cortes v. OMB, 10 June 2013). No, the motion to quash should not be granted.
Here the petition for certiorari was filed not with the In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that
Supreme Court but the Sandiganbayan. each act of sexual intercourse with a minor is a separate and distinct
Hence the remedy taken was not correct. offense under R.A. No. 7610.
Hence the single larceny or single offense rule is not
applicable.
b.) Will the writ of mandamus lie to compel the Ombudsman to
include the treasurer in the Information? c.) After his release from detention on bail, can Oasis Jung still
Answer: No, the writ of mandamus will not lie to compel the question the validity of his arrest? (2%)
Ombudsman to include the Treasurer in the information. Answer: Yes, Oasis Jung can still question the validity of his arrest
The Supreme Court has held that mandamus will lie only if the after his release from detention on bail.
exclusion of a person from the information was arbitrary. Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, admission to bail shall
Here the exclusion was not arbitrary but based on Sec. 17 of RA not bar the accused from challenging the validity of his arrest
6770 which empowers the Ombudsman to grant immunity to provided that he does so before entering his plea. (Sec. 26, Rule
witnesses. (Id.). 114).

c.) Can the Special Prosecutor move for the discharge of the budget
officer to corroborate the testimony of the treasurer in the course of XIII. Jaime was convicted for murder by the Regional Trial Court of
presenting its evidence? Davao City in a decision promulgated on September 30, 2015. On
Answer: No, the Special Prosecutor cannot move for the discharge October 5, 2015, Jaime filed a Motion for New Trial on the ground
of the budget officer to corroborate the testimony of the treasurer. that errors of law and irregularities prejudicial to his rights were
Under Section 17 of Rule 119, a requirement for discharge is committed during his trial. On October 7, 2015, the private
that there is no other direct evidence available for the prosecution prosecutor, with the conformity of the public prosecutor, filed an
of the offense and that there is absolute necessity for the testimony Opposition to Jaime's motion. On October 9, 2015, the court granted
of the accused whose discharge is requested. Jaime's motion. On October 12, 2015, the public prosecutor filed a
Here since the budget officers testimony is merely corroborative, motion for reconsideration. The court issued an Order dated
there is no absolute necessity for it. Necessity is not there when the October 16, 2015 denying the public prosecutor's motion for
testimony would simply corroborate or otherwise strengthen the reconsideration. The public prosecutor received his copy of the
prosecutions evidence. (Jimenez v People, 17 September 2014). order of denial on October 20, 2015 while the private prosecutor
Hence the Special Prosecutor cannot move for the discharge of the received his copy on October 26, 2015.
budget officer.
a.) What is the remedy available to the prosecution from the court's
order granting Jaime's motion for new trial? (3%)
XII. Paz was awakened by a commotion coming from a condo unit Answer: The remedy available to the prosecution from the court's
next to hers. Alarmed, she called up the nearby police station. PO 1 order granting Jaime's motion for new trial is a special civil action for
Remus and P02 Romulus proceeded to the condo unit identified by certiorari under Rule 65.
Paz. PO 1 Remus knocked at the door and when a man opened the Under Section 1(b) of Rule 41, no appeal may be taken from
door, POI Remus and his companions introduced themselves as an interlocutory order and the aggrieved party may file an
police officers. The man readily identified himself as Oasis Jung and appropriate special civil action as provided in Rule 65.
gestured to them to come in. Inside, the police officers saw a young Here the order granting the motion for new trial is an
lady with her nose bleeding and face swollen. Asked by P02 Romulus interlocutory order since it does not completely dispose of the case
what happened, the lady responded that she was beaten up by but still leaves something to be done, that is, conducting the new
Oasis Jung. The police officers arrested Oasis Jung and brought him trial.
and the young lady back to the police station. PO 1 Remus took the Hence the available remedy is the special civil action for
young lady's statement who identified herself as AA. She narrated certiorari under Rule 65.
that she is a sixteen-year-old high school student; that previous to
the incident, she had sexual intercourse with Oasis Jung at least five b.) In what court and within what period should a remedy be availed
times on different occasions and she was paid P5,000.00 each time of?
and it was the first time that Oasis Jung physically hurt her. P02 The special civil action for certiorari should be filed with the Court of
Romulus detained Oasis Jung at the station's jail. After the inquest Appeals. It should be filed within 60 days from receipt by the public
proceeding, the public prosecutor filed an information for Violation prosecutor of the order denying the motion for reconsideration
of R.A. No. 9262 (The VAWC Law) for physical violence and five pursuant to Section 4 of Rule 65. The 60-day period should be
separate informations for violation of R.A. No. 7610 (The Child reckoned from the receipt by the public prosecutor who has the
direction and control of the prosecution pursuant to Section 5 of Dissatisfied with the CIAC's judgment, Water Builders, pursuant to
Rule 110. the Special Rules of Court on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR
Rules) filed with the RTC of Pasay City a petition to vacate the
c.) Who should pursue the remedy? arbitral award.
Answer: The remedy should be pursued by the Office of the Solicitor Super Powers, Inc., in its opposition, moved to dismiss the petition,
General. invoking the ADR Rules, on the ground of improper venue as neither
Under Section 35(1), Chapter 12, Title III of Book IV of the of the parties were doing business in Pasay City.
1987 Administrative Code, the authority to represent the Should Water Builders' petition be dismissed?
government in criminal cases before the Court of Appeals and
Supreme Court is vested solely in the Office of the Solicitor General. Answer: Yes Water Builders petition should be dismissed.
(Cario v. De Castro, 30 April 2008). Under Rule 11.3 of the Special ADR Rules, the petition for
vacation of a domestic arbitral award may be filed with the Regional
Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place in which one of the
XIV. Pedro was charged with theft for stealing Juan's cellphone parties is doing business, where any of the parties reside or where
worth P10,000.00. Prosecutor Marilag at the pre-trial submitted the arbitration proceedings were conducted.
judicial affidavit of Juan attaching the receipt for the purchase of the Here neither of the parties were doing business in Pasay City
cellphone to prove civil liability. She also submitted the judicial nor was there a showing that arbitration proceedings were
affidavit of Mario, an eyewitness who narrated therein how Pedro conducted in Pasay City.
stole Juan's cellphone. At the trial, Pedro's lawyer objected to the
prosecution's use of judicial affidavits of her witnesses considering
the imposable penalty on the offense with which his client was XVI. AA, a twelve-year-old girl, while walking alone met BB, a
charged. teenage boy who befriended her. Later, BB brought AA to a nearby
a.) Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting to the judicial affidavit of shanty where he raped her. The Information for rape filed against BB
Mario? states: "On or about October 30, 2015, in the City of S.P. and within
Answer: No, Pedros lawyer is not correct in objecting to the judicial the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the accused, a minor, fifteen
affidavit of Mario. (15) years old with lewd design and by means of force, violence and
The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies to criminal actions where intimidation, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
the maximum of the imposable penalty does not exceed six years. had sexual intercourse with AA, a minor, twelve (12) years old
Here the penalty for theft of property not exceeding P12,000 against the latter's will and consent."
does not exceed 6 years. At the trial, the prosecutor called to the witness stand AA as his first
Hence the Judicial Affidavit Rule applies. witness and manifested that he be allowed to ask leading questions
in conducting his direct examination pursuant to the Rule on the
b.) Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting to the judicial affidavit of Examination of a Child Witness. BB's counsel objected on the ground
Juan? that the prosecutor has not conducted a competency examination
Answer: No, Pedro's lawyer is not correct in objecting to the judicial on the witness, a requirement before the rule cited can be applied in
affidavit of Juan. the case.
The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies with respect to the civil
aspect of the criminal actions, whatever the penalties involved are. a.) Is BB's counsel correct? (3%)
Here the purpose of introducing the judicial affidavit of Juan Answer: No, BBs counsel is not correct.
was to prove his civil liability. Under the Rules on Examination of a Child Witness, there is
no requirement that a competency examination of the child witness
At the conclusion of the prosecution's presentation of evidence, be conducted before leading questions may be asked of her. A
Prosecutor Marilag orally offered the receipt attached to Juan's competency examination may be conducted by the court (not the
judicial affidavit, which the court admitted over the objection of prosecutor) only if substantial doubt exists as to the childs
Pedro's lawyer. After Pedro's presentation of his evidence, the court competency to testify. (Section 6, RECW).
rendered judgment finding him guilty as charged and holding him Here there is no showing of any substantial doubt as to the
civilly liable for P20,000.00. Pedro's lawyer seasonably filed a motion competency of AA to testify. Hence BBs counsel is not correct.
for reconsideration of the decision asserting that the court erred in
awarding the civil liability on the basis of Juan's judicial affidavit, a
documentary evidence which Prosecutor Marilag failed to orally In order to obviate the counsel's argument on the competency of AA
offer. as prosecution witness, the judge motu proprio conducted his voir
dire examination on AA.
c.) Is the motion for reconsideration meritorious? b.) Was the action taken by the judge proper?
Answer: No, the motion for reconsideration is not meritorious. Answer: No, the action taken by the judge was improper.
A judicial affidavit is not a documentary evidence but is Under the Rules on Examination of a Child Witness, a
testimonial evidence. It is simply a witnesss testimony reduced to competency examination may be conducted by the court only if
writing in affidavit form. This is shown by Section 6 of the Judicial substantial doubt exists as to the childs competency to testify.
Affidavit Rule which states that the offer of testimony in judicial (Section 6, RECW).
affidavit shall be made at the start of the presentation of the Here the judges voir dire is in effect a competency
witness. examination. However there is no showing of any substantial doubt
Hence the motion for reconsideration on the ground that as to the competency of AA to testify. Hence the judges action was
Juans judicial affidavit was a documentary evidence which was not improper.
orally offered is without merit.
After the prosecution had rested its case, BB' s counsel filed with
XV. Water Builders, a construction company based in Makati City, leave a demurrer to evidence, seeking the dismissal of the case on
entered into a construction agreement with Super Powers, Inc., an the ground that the prosecutor failed to present any evidence on BB'
energy company based in Manila, for the construction of a mini s minority as alleged in the Information.
hydroelectric plant. Water Builders failed to complete the project c.) Should the court grant the demurrer? (3%)
within the stipulated duration. Super Powers cancelled the contract. Answer: No the court may not grant the demurrer.
Water Builders filed a request for arbitration with the Construction Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, a demurrer to
Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC). After due proceedings, CIAC evidence may be granted on the ground of insufficiency of evidence.
rendered judgment in favor of Super Powers, Inc. ordering Water Here even assuming that minority was not proved, BB may
Builders to pay the former P 10 million, the full amount of the down still be convicted of rape since minority is not an element of rape.
payment paid, and P2 million by way of liquidated damages.
Answer: No, the defense of Mapusok and APKA that they are not
XVII. Hercules was walking near a police station when a police officer agents of the State and hence cannot be impleaded as respondents
signaled for him to approach. As soon as Hercules came near, the in an amparo petition is not tenable.
police officer frisked him but the latter found no contraband. The The writ of amparo is available in cases where the enforced or
police officer told Hercules to get inside the police station. Inside the involuntary disappearance of a persons is with the authorization,
police station, Hercules asked the police officer, "Sir, may problema support or acquiescence of the State. (See Sec. 3[g] of R.A. No.
po ba?" Instead of replying, the police officer locked up Hercules 9851 and Navia v. Pardico, 19 June 2012, e.b.).
inside the police station jail. Here Mapusok and APKA may be considered as acting with
the support or at least the acquiescence of the State since APKA
a.) What is the remedy available to Hercules to secure his immediate serves as an auxiliary force of the police and the police refused to
release from detention? assist in the search for Masigasig.
Answer: The remedy available to Hercules to secure his immediate
release from detention is a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Respondents Mapusok and APKA, in their Return filed with the Court
Under Rule 102, the writ of habeas corpus is available in cases of Appeals, raised as their defense that the petition should be
of illegal detention. Section 5 of Rule 102 provides that a court or dismissed on the ground that ALMA cannot file the petition because
judge authorized to grant the writ must, when the petition therefor of the earlier petition filed by Mayumi with the RTC.
is presented and it appears that the writ ought to issue, grant the
same forthwith, and immediately thereupon the clerk of court shall b.) Are respondents correct in raising their defense?
issue the writ or in case of emergency, the judge may issue the writ Answer: Yes respondents are correct in raising their defense.
under his own hand and may depute any officer or person to serve Under Section 2(c) of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo, the
it. The court or judge before whom the writ is returned must filing of a petition by an authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved
immediately proceed to hear and examine the return. (Section 12, party suspends the right of all others, observing the order in Section
Rule 102). 2 of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo.
Here the petition for writ of amparo had earlier been filed by
the spouse of the aggrieved party Masigasig. Thus it suspends the
b.) If Hercules filed with the Ombudsman a complaint for right of all others, including ALMA, to file the petition.
warrantless search, as counsel for the police officer, what defense
will you raise for the dismissal of the complaint?
Answer: I will raise the defense that the warrantless search was c.) Mayumi later filed separate criminal and civil actions against
authorized as a stop and frisk. Mapusok. How will the cases affect the amparo petition she earlier
Stop and frisk is the right of a police officer to stop a citizen filed?
on the street, interrogate him and pat him for weapons and Answer: The amparo petition shall be consolidated with the criminal
contraband whenever he observes unusual conduct which leads him action. (Section 23, Rule on the Writ of Amparo).
to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot. (Terry v. Ohio, 392
U.S. 1).

c.) If Hercules opts to file a civil action against the police officer, will
he have a cause of action?
Answer: Yes Hercules will have a cause of action.
Under Article 32(4) of the Civil Code, any public officer who
violates the right of a person to freedom from arbitrary or illegal
detention shall be liable to the latter for damages. The action to
recover damages is an independent civil action.
Here Hercules was illegally detained as there was no probable
cause to arrest him without warrant.

XVIII. The residents of Mt. Ahohoy, headed by Masigasig, formed a


nongovernmental organization - Alyansa Laban sa Minahan sa
Ahohoy (ALMA) to protest the mining operations of Oro Negro
Mining in the mountain. ALMA members picketed daily at the
entrance of the mining site blocking the ingress and egress of trucks
and equipment of Oro Negro, hampering its operations. Masigasig
had an altercation with Mapusok arising from the complaint of the
mining engineer of Oro Negro that one of their trucks was destroyed
by ALMA members. Mapusok is the leader of the Association of
Peace Keepers of Ahohoy (APKA), a civilian volunteer organization
serving as auxiliary force of the local police to maintain peace and
order in the area. Subsequently, Masigasig disappeared. Mayumi,
the wife of Masigasig, and the members of ALMA searched for
Masigasig, but all their efforts proved futile. Mapagmatyag, a
member of ALMA, learned from Maingay, a member of APKA, during
their binge drinking that Masigasig was abducted by other members
of APKA, on order of Mapusok. Mayumi and ALMA sought the
assistance of the local police to search for Masigasig, but they
refused to extend their cooperation. Immediately, Mayumi filed with
the RTC, a petition for the issuance of the writ of amparo against
Mapusok and APKA. ALMA also filed a petition for the issuance of
the writ of amparo with the Court of Appeals against Mapusok and
APKA. Respondents Mapusok and APKA, in their Return filed with
the RTC, raised among their defenses that they are not agents of the
State; hence, cannot be impleaded as respondents in an amparo
petition.
a.) Is their defense tenable?

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen