valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer of
CIVIL PROCEDURE
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
What are the rules on docket fees vis-à-vis its commencement?
• Specify the amount of damages being prayed for not only in the
body of the pleading but also in the prayer.
• Any pleading that fails to comply with this requirement shall not be
accepted nor admitted, or shall otherwise be expunged from the
record.” (Manchester Development Corp. v. Court of Appeals, No. L-
75919, 7 May 1987)
• If the judgment awards a claim not specified in the pleading, or
• if specified the same has been left for determination by the court,
 the additional filing fee therefor shall constitute a lien on
the judgment.
(Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. v. Asuncion, G.R. Nos. 79937-38, 13
February 1989)
What are the actions governed by the Rules of Court?
•Civil Action - action that seeks to enforce or protect a right or to
prevent a wrong
•Special Civil Action - an independent action based on specific
grounds
•Criminal Action - action that seeks to prosecute an act or omission
punishable by law
•Special Proceeding - a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a
status, right or a particular fact. To initiate a special proceeding, a
petition and not a complaint should be filed.
Rules of Court not applicable in certain cases
•Election case
•Land Registration
•Cadastral
•Naturalization
•Insolvency
•Rehabilitation
•Other cases
EXCEPTION is when the application of the provisions of the Rules of
Court is only by analogy or in a suppletory character and it is
practicable and convenient.
When is an action deemed commenced?
•On the date of the filing of the original complaint
EXCEPTION - when an additional defendant is impleaded, the action
is commenced as to him on the date of the filing of the amended
pleading. BUT, with regard to the other parties, the action is
commenced still on the date of filing of the original complaint.
RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION
Elements:
1. A right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under
whatever law it arises or is created;
2. An obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or
not to violate such right; and
3. Act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the
right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the
defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action
for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief.
(Swagman v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161135, 8 April 2005)
•The test of the sufficiency of the facts alleged in the complaint is
whether or not, admitting the facts alleged, the court can render a
plaintiff.
•The focus is on the sufficiency, not the veracity, of the material
allegations.
•Failure to make a sufficient allegation of a cause of action in the
complaint warrants its dismissal.
(Anchor Savings Bank v. Furigay, G.R. No. 191178, 13 March 2013).
RULE 2
Failure to State a Cause of Action v. Lack of Cause of Action
Failure to State a Cause of Action is a ground to dismiss;
Lack of cause of action is NOT.
Examples:
•Plaintiff filed case against defendant to compel the latter to extend
a contract of lease (consensual contract). Even assuming the
allegations of the complaint are true, this does not give rise to an
actionable right as the extension of a contract of lease must be
mutually agreed upon and not compelled by court action.
•In an action for injunction by a plaintiff against a defendant who is
allegedly encroaching on his property, defendant raised the defense
of “lack of cause of action” because he allegedly had title over the
property. Defendant argued that in effect, plaintiff was seeking to
nullify his title. The Supreme Court ruled that plaintiff had stated a
sufficient cause of action because his allegations (as to ownership
and alleged encroachment) are hypothetically admitted as true.
(Ceroferr v. CA, 5 February 2002)
HYPOTHETICAL ADMISSIONS DO NOT EXTEND TO CONCLUSIONS
(Westmont Bank v. Funai, 8 July 2015).
•(Unless the plaintiff has a valid and subsisting cause of action at the
time his action is commenced), GR: the defect cannot be cured or
remedied by the acquisition or accrual of one while the action is
pending, and a supplemental complaint or an amendment setting up
such after-accrued cause of action is not permissible
(Swagman v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161135, 8 April 2005)
WHAT IS ANTICIPATORY BREACH?
•“If the contract is divisible in its performance and the future
periodic deliveries are not yet due, and if the obligor has already
manifested his refusal to comply with his future periodic obligations,
‘the contract is entire and the breach total’, hence, there can only
be one action for damages.”
•(Danfoss, Inc. v. Continental Cement Corp., G.R. No. 143788, 9
September 2005, citing Blossom & Company, Inc. v. Manila Gas
Corporation, G.R. No. L-32958, 8 November 1930)
WHAT IS THE RULE ON CAUSES OF ACTION?
•A party cannot split a single cause of action but may JOIN as many
causes of action against an opposing party.
TEST AS TO WHETHER THE CASE INVOLVES THE SAME CAUSE OF
ACTION:
(a)whether the same evidence would support and sustain both the
first and second causes of action (also known as the "same evidence"
test),
(b) whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate
the complaint in the other.
(c) whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time
of the filing of the first complaint.
(Umale v. Canoga, G.R. No. 167246, 20 July 2011)
Examples of splitting a cause of action:
•In Riviera v. CCA, 17 June 2015, the SC ruled that two cases which
are based on (a) failure to pay license fees and (b) damages due to
unearned profits, respectively, SPLIT a cause of action because they
are “ultimately anchored” on the breach of one agreement.
•In Marilag v. Martinez, 22 July 2015, a petitioner instituted an
action for JUDICIAL foreclosure and later on filed a personal action
for collection of the debt. This was considered as SPLITTING a CAUSE
OF ACTION. But note that this does not preclude a filing for motion
for the deficiency judgment after the foreclosure sale.
•When there are several installment payments due, each payment
due constitutes one cause of action. However, ALL due as of the
time of filing must be brought in the same action. (BPI v.
Coscolluela, 27 June 2006)
Q: In one case, a lessee who violated the terms of its lease was
subjected to an unlawful detainer case. (Case 1) While Case 1 was
pending appeal, the lease agreement expired and the lessor filed
another unlawful detainer case (Case 2). Is this considered as
“splitting a cause of action”?
A: No. In Umale v. Canoga, 20 July 2011, the Supreme Court ruled
that the violations of the terms of the lease and the eventual
expiration of the lease constitute separate causes of action, and they
do not constitute a “SPLITTING”.
RULES ON JOINDER:
Sec. 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:
(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 actons or actions
governed by special rules;
(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but
pertain to different venues or jurisdiction, 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 of action are principally for
recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test
of jurisdiction. (5a)
EFFECT OF SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION:
•If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of
action, the filing of one or a judgment on the merits in any one is
ground for the dismissal of the others. (Umale v. Canoga, G.R. No.
167246, 20 July 2011).
•NOTE: It need not be the second action that is dismissed.
•Considerations to determine which action should prevail:
1. The date of the filing, with preference generally to the first action
filed to be retained;
2. Whether the action sought to be dismissed was filed merely to
preempt the later action or to anticipate its filing and lay the basis for
is dismissal; and
3. Whether the action is the appropriate vehicle for litigating the
issues between the parties.”
•The dismissal may occur while the two actions are pending (based
on litis pendentia) or, after the first case is filed and terminated, a
second case may be barred by res judicata.
(Benavidez v. Salvador, G.R. No. 173331, 11 December 2013)
Joinder of causes of action allowed in the RTC even if other causes
of action pertain to the MTC provided one of the causes of action
falls within its jurisdiction
•As the RTC has jurisdiction over the action to declare the interest
rates and foreclosure void, the RTC is allowed to decide the action
for violation of the Truth Lending Act which was jointly instituted
even if such cause of action falls within the jurisdiction of the MTC
(UCPB v. Spouses Beluso, GR No. 159912, August 17, 2007)
Where all the causes of action are principally for recovery of
money, what is the test of jurisdiction?
•The aggregate amount claimed.
This embodies the "totality rule" as exemplified by Section 33 (1) of
B.P. Blg. 129 which states, among others, 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."
Misjoinder of causes of action NOT a ground for dismissal
•Misjoinder of the action for quieting of tile which is a special civil
action under Rule 63 and an action for declaration of nullity in one
suit is not a ground for the dismissal of the case (Roman Catholic
Archbishop of San Fernando v. Soriano, GR Nos. 153829 and 160909,
August 17, 2011)
What is the effect of a misjoinder of causes of action and parties?
•The Court can order:
1.The severance of the misjoined cause of action, to be proceeded
with separately (in case of misjoinder of causes of action); and/or
2.The dropping of a party and the severance of any claim against said
misjoined party, also to be proceeded with separately (in case of
misjoinder of parties). (Republic v. Herbieto)
RULE 3 PARTIES
Who are parties to a civil action?
•Plaintiff
•Defendant
Who may be plaintiffs/defendants?
•Natural or
•Juridical Persons or
•entities authorized by law (Section 1, Rule 3)
EXAMPLES:
•When a group of individuals claiming to represent an association
filed a case and all signed the verification, and the association was
not duly registered or incorporated, the Supreme Court held that the
plaintiff had no personality to sue (Dueñas v. Santos Subdivision
Homeowners Association, G.R. No. 149417, 4 June 2004).
•When a dissolved corporation filed a case beyond the 3-year
winding up period, it was considered to be without personality to
sue. The Supreme Court explained the rule that if the corporation
commenced the suit within the 3-year period, even if litigation ends
after the said period, the corporation is deemed to have
personality. (Alabang Development Corporation v. Alabang Hills, G.R.
No. 187456, 2 June 2014).
•Note: under Section 122 of the Corporation Code, the suit of the
dissolved corporation must be in connection with the closure and
settlement of its affairs.
NOTE: under Section 15 of Rule 3, as a party defendant, “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.”
Examples of entities authorized by law to be parties:
1. Estate of a deceased person
2. Legitimate Labor organization
3. Corporation under dissolution under Section 122 of the
Corporation Code.
REAL PARTY IN INTEREST
•Who is a real party in interest?
One who has a material interest in the case and stands to be
benefited or injured by the judgment in the case.
The rule is that every civil action must be prosecuted in the name of
the real party in interest.
What is the ground for dismissal if it is not?
Failure of the complaint to state a cause of action
EXAMPLE:
•A Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage may only be
brought by the husband or wife. Hence, even if an heir of one of the
spouses will benefit (by inheritance) if the marriage is declared null,
he/she cannot file the Petition himself/herself. (Carlos v. Sandoval,
G.R. No. 179922, 16 December 2008)
Who is the real party in interest in an action for recovery of
possession or ownership?
•The rule is that any one of the co-owners may bring any kind of
action for the recovery of co-owned properties since the suit is
presumed to have been filed for the benefit of all co-owners. This
clear under Article 487 of the Civil Code which covers all kinds of
action for the recovery of possession and ownership (Estreller v.
Ysmael, GR No. 170264, March 13, 2009).
INDISPENSABLE PARTIES:
Q: When can an agent sue in his own name?
A: When:
(1)the agent acted in his own name during the transaction;
(2)the agent acted for the benefit of an undisclosed principal; and
(3)the transaction did not involve the property of the principal.
(Section 3, Rule 3)
REAL PARTY IN INTEREST
In V-Gent v. Morning Star, 22 July 2015, the Supreme Court ruled
that V-Gent, which purchased various airline tickets for individual
passengers, cannot sue the travel agency without impleading the
individual ticketholders.
The Supreme Court held:
“In the present case, only the first element is present; the purchase
order and the receipt were in the name of V-Gent. However, the
remaining elements are absent because: (1) V-Gent disclosed the
names of the passengers to Morning Star — in fact the tickets were in
their names; and (2) the transaction was paid using the passengers'
money. Therefore, Rule 3, Section 3 of the Rules of Court cannot
apply.
INDISPENSABLE PARTIES (SECTION 7, RULE 3)
Who is an indispensable party?
An indispensable party is one whose interest in a case is such that a
final judgment cannot be rendered therein without affecting his
interest. His interest is inextricably linked and not separable from the
interest of the other parties to the case.
EXAMPLES:
•In a case for nullification of title, the registered owner of the
property is an indispensable party (Cagatao v. Almonte, G.R. No.
174004, 9 October 2013)
•All co-owners in a partition suit are indispensable parties. (Salvador
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 109910, 5 April 1995)
•However, not ALL co-owners are indispensable parties to bring an
action against a third party who poses a challenge to their land
(Article 487, Civil Code).
•In a Petition for Certiorari, the main respondent is the public
respondent. Not all of the private parties in the case a quo are
indispensable parties. (Siok Ping Tang v. Subic Bay Distribution, Inc.,
G.R. No. 162575, 15 December 2010)
What is the effect of the failure to implead an indispensable party?
•Failure to implead an indispensable party is not a ground for
dismissal of case. Neither misjoinder nor non joinder of parties is a
ground for dismissal of an action (Leonis Navigation v. Catalina
Villamater, GR No. 179169, March 3, 2010).
What is the proper remedy when an indispensable party has not
been impleaded as a party to the case?
•The proper remedy is to implead the indispensable party at any
stage of the action even after a judgment has been rendered. (Leonis
Navigation v. Catalina Villamater, GR No. 179169, March 3, 2010).
Who is a necessary party?
•A necessary party is one who is not an indispensable party but one
who should be joined as a party in order to accord a complete relief
to the original parties or to have a complete determination of the
claim subject of the case.
What is the test for determining if a party is a necessary party?
•The test is by ascertaining the relief prayed for in the complaint. If a
complete relief cannot be afforded to the original parties or a
complete determination of the claim subject of the case cannot be
made without impleading the party, then such party is a necessary
party.
NECESSARY PARTIES
•EXAMPLES:
•Joint Obligors
•Junior Mortgagees
•If one co-owner files a case, on behalf of property, other co-owners
are necessary parties
Q: A private law office was engaged by a GOCC. The payment of fees
to the Law office was disallowed by the COA. The private law office
filed a Petition to the Supreme Court challenging the disallowance. Is
a private law office the real party in interest to challenge the
disallowance by the COA?
A: Yes. The law office does not have “a mere incidental interest and
the interest is not merely consequential. xxx The net effect of
upholding or setting aside the assailed COA rulings would be to
either disallow or allow the payment of legal fees to (the law office).”
(Law Firm of Laguesma v. COA, 13 January 2015).
Q: Should the GOCC be a party to the case?
A: Yes, it is a necessary party as it will ultimately be ordered to pay.
Its inclusion will accord a complete relief to the original parties or to
have complete determination of the claim subject of the case.
Foreign corporations and their capacities to sue
•An unlicensed foreign corporation not doing business in the
Philippines has the capacity to sue
•An unlicensed foreign corporation doing business in the Philippines
cannot sue before Philippine courts but such corporation can sue if it
is not doing business (Sec. 133, Corporation Code).
•A private company owned by a foreign government is not immune
from suit
A misjoinder of party plaintiff is not a ground for dismissal of the
complaint
What is the remedy in case of misjoinder of parties?
•The remedy is to move for the dropping of misjoined parties from
the complaint. This may be done through amendment of the
complaint or through motu propio order of the RTC.
Substitution in case of death of parties
•When a party dies in an action that survives, the deceased party
shall be substituted by his heirs, administrator or legal representative
•The rule does not apply to all kinds of actions. Substitution is
required only in actions that survive the death of the party
•Purpose of the rule: to protect the right to due process of parties
who may be affected by the death of a party. It is not a jurisdictional
requirement but non compliance of the rule results in violation of the
right to due process of those affected by the judgment.
What is the test for determining whether an action survives the
death of the plaintiff?
•Ascertain the nature of the action and the damage sued for.
 If the complained acts affect or relate to property and
property rights, the action survives.
 If they affect or relate to the person, the action does not
survive.
What is the effect of the failure to effect substitution of parties on
the proceedings or judgment?
•If no valid substitution of parties is made, the proceedings and
judgment are void because the court acquired no jurisdiction over the
person of the heirs upon whom the judgment would be binding.
•Moreover, the attorneys for the offended party ceased to be the
attorneys for the deceased upon the death of the latter, the
principal.
The deceased cannot be substituted by a person who is not an heir,
legal representative, or administrator
•The reason for the rule is to protect all those who may be affected
by the death. A substitute should not have a claim against the
interest of the deceased through the transfer of the latter’s interest
in the litigation to another party (Judge Sumaljag v. Literato).
What are the requirements for automatic qualification as indigent
parties?
1.The income requirement: the applicant’s gross income and that of
his family must not exceed an amount double the monthly minimum
wage of an employee
2.The property requirement: the applicant must not own real
property with a fair market value of more than P300,000.
•If these requirements are met, the motion shall be granted
automatically and as a matter of right (Spouses Algura v. LGU)
When is a hearing required to determine if a party is entitled to
litigate as a pauper litigant?
•If one or both of these requirements have not been met, the motion
should not be denied outright but the trial court shall set the case
for hearing to enable the applicant to prove that he has no money
sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for
himself and his family in accordance with Section 21, Rule 3 and use
its sound discretion in determining the merits of the prayer for
exemption (Id.)
CLASS SUIT:
•Requisites:
(1) that the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or
general interest to many persons; and
(2) that the parties are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring
them all before the court
(Sulo ng Bayan v. Araneta, G.R. No. L-31061, 17 August 1976).
CLASS SUIT
•Action to dissolve a voluntary association, for accounting and
liquidation was considered a class suit. (Borlasa v. Polistico, G.R. No.
L-22909, 28 January 1925).
•Families of airplane crash victims CANNOT bring a class suit because
the basis for their damages would be different (Bar 1991)
•An association of sugar planters cannot bring a class suit on behalf
of individual planters against a magazine for alleged libel because the
circumstances of the planters are all different. (Newsweek. V. IAC,
G.R. No. L-63559, 30 May 1986).
RULE 4 VENUE
Venue
•Not jurisdictional – it is procedural
•Waivable - When improper venue is not objected to in a motion to
dismiss, it is deemed waived (except in criminal cases.)
Improper venue should be raised seasonably, else it is deemed
waived. It should be raised either in a motion to dismiss or in the
affirmative defense in the Answer.
What is the purpose of the rule on venue?
•To provide convenience to the parties, rather than restrict their
access to the courts.
•To make it more convenient for the parties to file actions pursuant
to the policy that everyone should be allowed free access to courts of
justice.
Venue in personal actions
•Venue is in the court of the place where the plaintiff or the
defendant resides at the election of the plaintiff.
•EXCEPTION: The rule on venue does not apply when there is an
exclusive venue stipulation of the parties in a contract (Spouses
Lantin v. Jane Lantion). Here, the loan and mortgage documents –
which plaintiffs seek to annul - contain an exclusive venue stipulation
restricting the venue of any suit in Metro Manila. Thus, the action
filed in Lipa Batangas was improperly laid.
EXCLUSIVE VENUE STIPULATIONS
•The mere stipulation on the venue of an action is not enough to
preclude parties from bringing a case in other venues. The parties
must be able to show that such stipulation is exclusive. In the
absence of qualifying or restrictive words, the stipulation should be
deemed as merely an agreement on an additional forum, not as
limiting venue to the specified place. (Spouses Lantin v. Lantion, G.R.
No. 160052, 28 August 2006.)
•WHAT IS THE EFFECT IF THE VENUE STIPULATION IS NOT
RESTRICITVE?
•The said stipulation merely provides for another permissible venue.
But the venue stipulation is NOT per se invalidated. (Philbanking
Corporation v. Tensuan, G.R. No. 104649, 28 February 1994)
•Examples of “restrictive words”: "only," "solely," "exclusively in this
court," "in no other court save —," "particularly," "nowhere else
but/except —," or words of equal import. (Pacific Consultants v.
Schonfeld, G.R. No. 166920, 19 February 2007).
EXCLUSIVE VENUE STIPULATIONS
•Can there be a valid venue stipulation for real actions?
•Yes. (See Briones v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 204444, 14 January
2015).
•If the case merely assails the provisions of the agreement, the
venue stipulation stated therein is valid and must be followed
(Spouses Lantin v. Lantion, G.R. No. 160052, 28 August 2006.)
But if what is assailed is the very validity of the agreement containing
the stipulation, the venue stipulation is no longer controlling (Briones
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 204444, 14 January 2015).
Q: Will an exclusive venue stipulation in a Real Estate Mortgage
apply to extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings?
A: No. In Ochoa v. Chinabank, 23 March 2011, the SC ruled that an
exclusive venue stipulation cannot apply to extrajudicial
foreclosure. “(W)ith respect to the venue of extrajudicial foreclosure
sales, Act No. 3135, as amended, applies, it being a special law
dealing particularly with extrajudicial foreclosure sales of real estate
mortgages, and not the general provisions of the Rules of Court on
Venue of Actions.
RULE 4 EXAMPLE OF COMPLEMENTARY-CONTRACTS-CONSTRUED
TOGETHER DOCTRINE:
Q: In a case, there was a Promissory Note with an exclusive venue
stipulation and a Surety Agreement which did not contain the venue
stipulation. If a case is filed enforcing the Surety Agreement, will the
venue stipulation govern?
A: Yes. In PBCom V. Lim, 12 April 2005, the SC ruled that “(i)n
enforcing a surety contract, the complementary-contracts-construed-
together doctrine finds application. According to this principle, an
accessory contract must be read in its entirety and together with
the principal agreement. This principle is used in construing
contractual stipulations in order to arrive at their true meaning;
certain stipulations cannot be segregated and then made to
control.”
Where is the venue in derivative suits?
•The place of principal office of the corporation
Venue is in the court of the place where the corporation holds its
principal office (Hi-Yield v. CA).
Illustrative Cases:
•A case which prays for the declaration of nullity of a loan
agreement and its accompanying surety agreement and real and
chattel mortgage was deemed to be a PERSONAL ACTION. The
Supreme Court noted that because there was no transfer of the real
property yet, it could not be categorized as a real action (BPI v.
Hontanosas, G.R. No. 157163, 25 June 2014)
•An action to recover the deficiency after extrajudicial foreclosure
is a PERSONAL ACTION. (BPI v. Yujuico, G.R. No. 175796, 22 July
2015)
•What is the venue for a revival of action?
It depends on the nature of the prayer for revival.
 In a case where the original action was for specific
performance and damages, the action to revive which now
focused on the delivery of a certain real property arising
from the judgment – was considered a REAL ACTION.
(Infante v. Aran Builders, G.R. No. 156596, 24 August 2007).
•The inclusion of a party plaintiff who was NOT the principal plaintiff
in the action cannot justify filing the case in said party’s place of
residence. (Marcos-Araneta v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 154096, 22
August 2008).
Where is the venue of the action if there is more than one plaintiff?
•Residence of the principal party
The residence of the principal parties is the basis for determining
venue if there is more than one plaintiff in a personal action. (Irene
Marcos Araneta v. CA) Here, the complaint for reconveyance of
shares was dismissed for improper venue. While her MR was
pending, Irene filed an amended complaint in which 3 individuals
appeared as additional plaintiffs – all of whom are from Ilocos Norte
and allegedly Irene’s new trustees
•Purpose of the rule: to prevent the plaintiff from choosing the
residence of a minor plaintiff or defendant as the venue which would
thereby defeat the purpose of the rule as the minor party would not
have the degree of interest in the subject of the action.
Rule 5 – Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts
An appeal of a judgment for unlawful detainer before the RTC is not
covered by Summary Procedure
•Proceedings in the RTC are not covered by the Summary Rules even
for appeal of cases that are covered by the Summary Rules (Estate of
Macadangdang v. Gaviola).
•The failure of a defendant to file an answer or to appear at a
preliminary conference shall entitle the plaintiff to a judgment on
the basis of the facts alleged in the complaint (Soriente v. Estate of
Concepcion)
•A Motion for Reconsideration is a prohibited pleading. The filing
thereof will render the order of dismissal final and executory
 MR is prohibited under the summary rules. Sec 19 (c)
considers a motion for reconsideration of a judgment a
prohibited pleading. The filing thereof did not interrupt or
stop the running of the period for appeal. Thus, the period
for appeal had long lapsed when Spouses filed their appeal.
The lapse of the period for appeal rendered the RTC without
 any jurisdiction to entertain much less grant the appeal
from the final and immutable judgment of the MTC.
(Spouses Edillo v. Spouses Dulpina)
RULE 6 –KINDS OF PLEADINGS
WHAT IS A PLEADING?
•statement of a party’s claims or defenses in an action that is
submitted to the court for appropriate judgment
WHEN IS IT COMPULSORY?
(Reillo v. San Jose, G.R. No. 166393, June 18, 2009)
(a) it arises out of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or
occurrence subject of the opposing party's claim;
(b) it is existing at the time of the filing of the answer; and
(c) it does not require for its adjudication the presence of third
parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction

IS A MOTION A PLEADING? WHEN IS IT PERMISSIVE?

•strictly speaking, NO. •if it does not arise out of or is not necessarily connected with the
•Sec 1, Rule 15: a motion is an application for relief other than by a subject matter of the opposing party's claim
pleading •permissive counterclaim- essentially an independent claim that may
be filed separately in another case.
WHAT ARE THE PLEADINGS ALLOWED UNDER THE ROC?
•complaint COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
•counterclaim •FOR CASES FILED BEFORE THE MTC
•crossclaim •must be within its jurisdiction both as to the amount and nature of
•third party complaint the case
•complaint in intervention •FOR CASES FILED BEFORE THE RTC
•answer to a pleading asserting a claim •counterclaim is compulsory even if the amount is within the
•reply to answer jurisdiction of the MTC

WHAT ARE THE TWO KINDS OF DEFENSES? COMPULSORY v. PERMISSIVE

•NEGATIVE DEFENSE  COMPULSORY
•AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE •necessarily connected with the claim asserted in the complaint,
•should be set up in the answer in the same action; otherwise, they
WHAT IS A NEGATIVE DEFENSE? would be barred forever
•a defense that specifically denies the material facts alleged in the •Payment of docket fee is not required
complaint  PERMISSIVE
•independent of the claim asserted in the complaint.
WHAT IS AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE? •may be filed separately in another case.
•an allegation of a new matter which would bar recovery by •payment of docket fees is necessary before the court could acquire
plaintiffs even if the allegations in the complaint are hypothetically jurisdiction over the counterclaim.
admitted
•Fraud TEST FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A COUNTERCLAIM IS
•Prescription COMPULSORY
•Payment (Financial Building Corp. v. Forbes Park Association, GR 133119,
•Release August 17, 2000)
•Illegality •Are the same issues of fact or law raised by the claim and
•Statute of Frauds counterclaim?
•Estoppel •Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant’s claim
•Discharge in bankruptcy absent the compulsory counterclaim rule?
•Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff’s
WHAT IS AN ANSWER EX ABUNDANTE AD CAUTELA? claim as well as the defendant’s counterclaim?
•the answer is being filed “out of abundant caution” •Is there any logical relation between the claim and the
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF ITS FILING? counterclaim?
•same effect as filing of an answer as long as it sets forth the party’s
defenses to the claim asserted against it in the complaint. COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM MUST BE RAISED IN THE ANSWER.
•Its filing does not make it less of an answer. OTHERWISE, SUCH CLAIM WILL BE BARRED
•If a compulsory counterclaim is not raised in the answer, a party is
•The contention of defendants that plaintiff cannot take deposition barred from interposing such claim in a future litigation.
on them as they had not yet served their answers was incorrect since EXCEPTION: The claim is not barred even if it was necessarily
defendants had already filed an ex abundanti ad cautela answer connected with the claim in the complaint where the claim did not
after their motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of subject matter exist or mature at the time of the filing of the answer. (BDO v. CA
jurisdiction was denied (Rosete v. Lim, G.R. No. 136051, June 8, G.R. No. 160354, August 25, 2005)
2006). The SC held that BDO’s claim for deficiency of debtor’s obligations
after foreclosure of debtor’s property could not have been raised
WHAT IS A COUNTERCLAIM? when the bank filed its answer with compulsory counterclaim to the
•a claim by a defending party against an opposing party. debtor’s complaint. At that time, the cause of action for the
•may either be a compulsory or permissive counterclaim. deficiency amount had not yet arisen. It only arose after the
foreclosure of the properties and after the debtor has refused and
failed to settle the deficiency amount.
•If a party files a motion to dismiss the complaint instead of setting
up a compulsory counterclaim in an answer and the complaint is
dismissed, he is already barred from prosecuting such claim
(Financial Building Corp. v. Forbes Park Association, GR 133119,
August 17, 2000).
•GENERAL RULE: DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT RESULTS IN DISMISSAL
OF COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
(Financial Building Corp. v. Forbes Park Association, GR 133119,
August 17, 2000)
EXCEPTION: Dismissal of the complaint due to the fault of the
plaintiff does not carry with it the dismissal of the counterclaim,
compulsory or otherwise. In fact, the dismissal of the complaint is
without prejudice to the right of defendants to prosecute the
counterclaim. (Pinga v. Heirs of German Santiago, GR 170354, June
30, 2006). (Spouses Corpuz v. Citibank, GR 175677, July 31, 2009)
Sec 6 Rule 16 also provides that “the dismissal of the complaint shall
be without prejudice to the prosecution in the same action or
separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in the answer” – the
provision does not distinguish whether counterclaim is compulsory
or permissive.
•FILING OF A MOTION TO DISMISS IS AN IMPLIED WAIVER OF
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
•the grant of the motion results in the dismissal of the counterclaim.
(Financial Building Corp. v. Forbes Park Association, GR 133119,
August 17, 2000). Financial Building filed an injunction case after
Forbes Park Association enjoined prevented it from doing further
construction work. The case was dismissed upon motion of Forbes
Park Association. Thereafter, Forbes Park filed a complaint for
damages against Financial Building. The SC held that Forbes Park’s
claim is already barred due to its failure to set it up as a compulsory
counterclaim in the prior injunction suit.
WHAT IS A THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT?
•a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against
a person not a party to the action, for contribution, indemnity,
subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim.
THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT
•In a case where the plaintiff sued defendant for the payment and
rentals for various equipment, and the defendant sought to implead
a third party in whose project the equipment were allegedly used,
the Supreme Court ruled that this is not a proper third-party
complaint on the ground that they were separate transactions.
(Asian Construction v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 160242, 17 May
2005).
TEST IN DETERMINING PROPRIETY OF A THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
(Asian Construction v. CA, GR 160242, May 17, 2005)
(1) whether the 3rd party claim arises from the same transaction
subject of the complaint; or whether the 3rd party claim, although
arising out of different transaction, is connected with the plaintiff's
claim;
(2) whether the third-party defendant would be liable to the plaintiff
or to the defendant 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 or to both the plaintiff and the
defendant; and
(3) whether the third-party defendant may assert any defenses which
the third-party plaintiff has or may have to the plaintiff's claim
THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT
It is settled that a defendant in a contract action may join as third-
party defendants those who may be liable to him in tort for the
plaintiffs claim against him, or even DIRECTLY to the plaintiff.
(Philtranco Services v. Paras, 25 April 2012)
•THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT MAY RAISE DEFENSES WHICH THIRD
PARTY PLAINTIFF MAY HAVE AGAINST THE ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF
•Sec. 13, Rule 6: a third party defendant may allege in his answer his
defenses, counterclaims, cross-claims, including such defenses that
the third party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiff’s claim.
•THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT MAY ASSERT A COUNTERCLAIM
AGAINST ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF
•Sec. 13, Rule 6: in proper cases such as when the third party plaintiff
imputes direct liability to the third party defendant, the latter may
assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of the
latter’s claim against the third party plaintiff.
NOTE: Where the complaint was dismissed not because of lack of
cause of action but because of a compromise agreement between
the plaintiff and the defendant (third party plaintiff), the third party
complaint shall survive the termination of the main action as it
involved a finding of liability on the part of the defendant. (Banez v.
CA, GR No. 119321, March 18, 1997)
WHAT IS A CROSS-CLAIM?
• a claim by one party against a co-party.
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF A CROSS-CLAIM?
•the claim must arise out of the transaction or occurrence subject of
the complaint or counterclaim. Otherwise, it is not proper to assert
such claim in a cross-claim.
•There is no such thing as permissive cross-claim.
•The cross-claim must be existing as of the time of the filing of the
answer
•CROSS-CLAIM CANNOT HOLD CROSS-DEFENDANT DIRECTLY LIABLE
TO PLAINTIFF
•Unlike a third party complaint, a cross-claim cannot pray that cross-
defendant be held directly liable to the plaintiff.
WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF A REPLY?
•to deny or address new matters alleged by way of defense in the
answer
•If no reply is filed, all new matters alleged in the answer are
deemed controverted
RULE 7 PARTS OF A PLEADING
When is a pleading sufficient in form?
•A pleading is sufficient in form when it contains the following:
•Caption, setting forth the name of the court, the title of the action
indicating the names of the parties, and the docket number
•Body, reflecting the designation, the allegations of the party's
claims or defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading
•Signature and Address of the party or counsel
•Verification for some pleadings - designed to secure an assurance
that the allegations have been made in good faith, or are true and
correct and not merely speculative
•Certificate of Non-forum Shopping for initiatory pleadings, which
although not jurisdictional, the same is obligatory
•Explanation where the pleading is not filed personally to the Court
and served personally to the parties for pleadings subsequent to the
complaint
Additional requirements include:
•Proof of service
•Roll of attorney’s number
•Professional tax receipt number
•IBP Official Receipt number
•MCLE Compliance certificate number and date of issue
WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF COUNSEL’S SIGNATURE IN A
PLEADING?
•signature of counsel constitutes an assurance by him:
•that he has read the pleading;
•that, to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, there is a
good ground to support it; and
•that it is not interposed for delay.
•PARTY CAN SIGN A PLEADING.
•COUNSEL CAN DELEGATE SIGNING TO ANOTHER LAWYER BUT NOT
TO A NON-LAWYER
Under Section 3, Rule 7, a party may sign a pleading. Counsel's
authority and duty to sign a pleading are personal to him. He may
not delegate it to just any person. He may delegate it to another
lawyer but cannot do so in favor of one who is not. (Republic v.
Kenrick Development Corp, GR 149576, August 8, 2006)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF A PLEADING SIGNED BY A NON-LAWYER?
•A pleading signed by a non-lawyer is an unsigned pleading which
produces no legal effect. It is as if the pleading was not filed in court.
•Such pleading can be stricken out pursuant to Sec. 12, Rule 8.
PLEADINGS IN WHICH CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED
•It is required in a complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a
claim for relief
•Certification not required in appeal.
FACTS REQUIRED TO BE STATED IN THE CERTIFICATION AGAINST
FORUM SHOPPING:
•Party has not 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
•If there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement
of the present status thereof
•If should thereafter learn that the same or similar action has been
filed or pending, he shall report that fact within 5 days therefrom to
the court.
PARTY WHO SHOULD SIGN THE CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM
SHOPPING
•Sec. 5, Rule 7: the plaintiff or principal party shall sign the
certification. Thus, all plaintiffs or principal parties must sign the
certification; otherwise, those who did not sign will be dropped as
parties to the case.
EXCEPTION: When all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common
interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the
signature of only one of them substantially complies with the Rule
(Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Heirs of Minoza, GR
186045, Feb. 2, 2011).
•If the party is a corporation, the certification should be signed by its
duly authorized officer pursuant to Section 23, in relation to Sec. 25
of the Corporation Code.
•The certification should be accompanied be a Secretary’s Certificate
or Board Resolution showing the authority of the officer to sign the
certification.
•Failure to attach the proof of authority shall merit the dismissal of
the complaint or petition.
•EXCEPTION:
•When the merits of the petition justify the relaxation of the rule
(Kaunlaran Lending v. Uy, GR 154974, February 4, 2008).
•When it is signed by an officer who is in a position to verify the
truthfulness and correctness of the allegations in the petition such
as the Chairman of the Board, President, General Manager,
Personnel Officer (Mid-Pasig Land v. Mario Tablante, GR No. 162924,
February 4, 2010).
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULE ON CERTIFICATION
•If no certification is attached to an initiatory pleading, the case shall
be dismissed without prejudice unless otherwise provided upon
motion and after hearing.
•Submission of a false certification and non-compliance with the
undertakings therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court.
•This should be distinguished from the effect of a willful and
deliberate forum shopping which shall be a ground for dismissal with
prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt.
Distinction between violation of the rule on certification and willful
forum shopping is:
(Madara v. Hon. Perello , GR No. 172449, August 20, 2008)
Both are grounds for dismissal
 Violation of the rule on certification
•Dismissal shall be upon motion and only after hearing,
•dismissal is without prejudice unless otherwise provided
•constitutes indirect contempt
 Willful forum shopping
•Dismissal can be done motu proprio and summarily
•dismissal is with prejudice
•constitutes direct contempt of court
CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM-SHOPPING
The Supreme Court enumerated the ways by which forum shopping
may be committed, thus:
(1) filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with
the same prayer, the previous case not having been resolved yet
(where the ground for dismissal is litis pendentia);
(2) filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and the
same prayer, the previous case having been finally resolved (where
the ground for dismissal is res judicata); and
(3) filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action, but with
different prayers (splitting of causes of action, where the ground for
dismissal is also either litis pendentia or res judicata)
(Chua v. MetroBank, G.R. No. 182311, 19 August 2009, 596 SCRA
524, 535-536).
How is a pleading verified?
•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
personal knowledge or based on authentic records.
•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.
•If a corporate officer verifies, he must be clothed with authority
from the corporation.
•However, in Mid Pasig Land v. Tablante, G.R. No. 162924, 4
February 2010, the Supreme Court explained that “the following
officials or employees of the company can sign the verification and
certification without need of a board resolution:
(1) the Chairperson of the Board of Directors,
(2) the President of a corporation,
(3) the General Manager or Acting General Manager,
(4) Personnel Officer, and
(5) an Employment Specialist in a labor case.”
RULE 8 MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS
PLEADING REQUIREMENT UNDER THE RULES OF COURT
•ONLY ULTIMATE FACTS SHALL BE ALLEGED
•Section 1 of Rule 8 declares that every pleading, including, of
course, a complaint, "shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a
plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts . . . omitting
the statement of mere evidentiary facts."
WHAT ARE ULTIMATE FACTS?
•Ultimate facts are the essential and substantial facts which form the
basis of the primary right and duty or which directly make up the
wrongful acts or omissions of the defendant.
•Evidentiary facts are those which tend to prove or establish said
ultimate facts.
What facts may be averred generally in a pleading?
(a) performance of conditions precedent (Sec. 3)
(b) Malice, Intent, Knowledge, or Other Condition of the Mind of a
Person (Sec. 5)
What must be averred with PARTICULARITY?
(a) Fraud, mistake, or circumstances surrounding fraud or mistake
(Sec. 5)
(b) Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued; authority
of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity; legal
existence of an organized association of persons (Sec. 4)
•A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any
party or capacity to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, shall
do so by SPECIFIC DENIAL and SHALL INCLUDE SUCH SUPPORTING
PARTICULARS AS ARE PECULIARLY WITHIN THE PLEADER’S
KNOWLEDGE
WHAT IS AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT?
•A document that serves as basis of the plaintiff’s cause of action or
defendant’s defense must be attached to the complaint or answer,
as the case may be.
Failure to attach the document to the complaint will be dismissed for
failure to state a cause of action or the answer will have no leg to
stand on (Malayan Insurance v. Regis, GR 172156, November 23,
2007).In that case, the plaintiff filed a complaint for collection in its
capacity as subrogee but it failed to attach to its complaint the
document that serves as basis of its right to subrogation, i.e., the
marine insurance policy. The SC held that its failure to do so casts an
irremissible cloud on the substance of its very cause of action.
•An actionable document must be set forth in pleading in two
ways:
1. ATTACHMENT: The substance of the actionable document shall be
set forth in the pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be
attached to the pleading as an exhibit (Annex).
2. COPYING IN. A copy of the actionable document (in its entirety) is
set forth in the pleading.
What are considered admitted?
•By the admission of the genuineness and due execution of an
instrument, as provided in this section, is meant that the party
whose signature it bears admits:
(a) that he signed it or that it was signed by another for him with his
authority;
(b) 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;
(c) 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.
(See Hibberd v. Rohde, G.R. No. 8418, 9 December 1915)
The following defenses are therefore barred:
(a) that the signature is a forgery (Puritan Mfg. Co. v. Toti & Gradi, 14
N. M., 425; Cox v. Northwestern Stage Co., 1 Idaho, 376; Woollen v.
Whitacre, 73 Ind., 198; Smith v. Ehnert, 47 Wis., 479; Faelnar v.
Escaho, 11 Phil. Rep., 92);
(b) or that it was unauthorized, as in the case of an agent signing for
his principal, or one signing in behalf of a partnership (County Bank v.
Greenberg, 127 Cal., 26; Henshaw v. Root, 60 Ind., 220; Naftzker v.
Lantz, 137 Mich., 441), or of a corporation (Merchant v. International
Banking Corporation, 6 Phil. Rep., 314; Wanita v. Rollins, 75 Miss.,
253; Barnes v. Spencer & Barnes Co., 162 Mich., 509);
(c) or that, in the case of the latter, that the corporation was not
authorized under its charter to sign the instrument
(d) or that the party charged signed the instrument in some other
capacity than that alleged in the pleading setting it out
(e)or that it was never delivered (Hunt v. Weir, 29 Ill., 83; Elbring v.
Mullen 4 Idaho, 199; Thorp v. Keokuk Co., 48 N. Y., 253; Fire
Association of Philadelphia vs: Ruby, 60 Neb., 216)
The following defenses are NOT bared:
•Fraud
•mistake
•compromise
•payment
•prescription
•estoppel
•want of consideration.
When oath is NOT required:
•The requirement of a specific denial under oath (general rule) will
not apply in either of the following cases:
(a)When the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the
instrument, or
(b) When compliance with an order for an inspection of the original
instrument is refused (Sec. 8, Rule 8, Rules of Court).
An actionable document may be attached in an Answer. In such a
case, the Plaintiff has to file a Reply under oath, otherwise, the
document will be deemed admitted (Casent Realty v. Philbanking,
G.R. No. 150731, 14 September 2007)
HOW TO DENY ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT?
•Each allegation of fact has to be denied specifically
Modes of specific denial
•By specifying the allegation that is denied and whenever practicable
stating the allegations supporting the denial
•By specifying a part of the allegation that is true and denying the
remainder thereof
•By stating that defendant is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation
HOW TO MAKE A SPECIFIC DENIAL?
•What is a “negative pregnant” denial? How do you avoid making a
negative pregnant denial?
Each allegation of fact must be specifically denied.
Where the allegation of fact is qualified, both the allegation and the
qualification must be specifically denied.
If an allegation contains more than one thought or conveys more
than one idea or fact, the allegation must be dissected and divided
into separate allegations of facts and each allegation of fact must be
specifically denied. Otherwise, the denial is a negative pregnant, i.e.,
a denial pregnant with the admission of substantial facts (Republic v.
SB, GR No. 152154, July 15, 2003).
Examples of Negative Pregnant:
“(a) The defense alleges: “I had never borrowed money from the
plaintiff from 2011 to 2013,” may imply that the pleader had
borrowed money at some other time and was only denying that he
did so during the years mentioned.
(b) A complaint alleges: “Plaintiff extended a loan to Defendant in
the amount of P500,000 on July 27, 2016 in Baguio City.” The
defendant, In his answer, alleges: “Defendant specifically denies that
Plaintiff extended a loan to Defendant in the amount of P500,000 in
Baguio City.”
(c) The plaintiff alleged that the defendant evicted the lawful
occupants of the property by intimidating them with an assault rifle.
The defendant alleged in his answer: “Defendant denies vigorously
that he used or brandished an assault rifle against the plaintiffs.” The
answer could be an admission of having intimidated the plaintiffs but
not through the use of an assault rifle.” (RIANO, Civil Procedure, Vol.
1, 2016 ed.)
WHEN IS “LACK OF KNOWLEDGE” FORM OF DENIAL CONSIDERED
AN EFFECTIVE DENIAL?
•When the facts to which defendant claims to have no knowledge
are not within the knowledge or control of the defendant nor are
they readily accessible to him. (Republic v. SB, GR No. 152154, July
15, 2003). (Warner Barnes v. Reyes, GR L-9531, May 14, 1958).
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SPECIFICALLY DENY UNDER
OATH AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT?
•Genuineness and due execution of the document will be deemed
admitted.
•Genuineness merely refers to the fact that the signatures were not
falsified and/or whether there was no substantial alteration to the
document. While due execution refers to whether the document
was signed by one with authority.
But the defendant is not precluded from presenting evidence to
refute the facts stated in the documents. (Casent Realty v.
Philbanking Corp, GR No. 150731, September 14, 2007).
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FAILURE TO RAISE DEFENSES AND
OBJECTIONS IN A MOTION TO DISMISS OR ANSWER?
•Under Section 1, Rule 9, defenses and objections that are not
timely raised in a motion to dismiss or answer are deemed
waived.(OMNIBUS MOTION RULE)
EXCEPTIONS: The following defenses are not deemed waived even if
they are not raised in a motion to dismiss or answer:
•Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
•Litis pendencia – there is another action pending between the same
parties for the same cause
•Res Judicata – the action is barred by a prior judgment
•Prescription – the action is barred by statute of limitations
•Instances where the court can motu proprio dismiss an action:
•In addition to the four grounds above, the court can also dismiss
motu proprio when there is willful and deliberate violation of the
rule on forum shopping
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SET UP COMPULSORY
COUNTERCLAIM OR CROSS-CLAIM IN THE ANSWER?
•Section 2, Rule 9 states that they shall be barred if not set up in the
Answer.
•What are barred are claims existing at the time of the filing of
Answer (BDO V. CA, GR No. 160354, August 25, 2005).
When is a defendant declared in default?
1. Fails to file an answer within the time allowed
2. Failure to file pre-trial brief (defendant)
3. Failure to appear at pre-trial (defendant)
4. Failure to comply with discovery (Rule 29)
NOTE: Non-appearance of defendant and counsel at an ordinary
hearing is NOT a ground for default (Monzon v. Relova, G.R. No.
171827, 17 September 2008)
ORDER DECLARATION OF DEFAULT CAN BE MADE ONLY UPON
MOTION
•The court cannot motu proprio declare defendant in default. If no
motion to declare a defendant in default, no default order should be
issued by the court. (Santos v. PNOC, GR 170943, September 23,
2008).
EFFECT OF ORDER OR DECLARATION OF DEFAULT
•The court may render judgment on the basis of the allegations and
relief prayed for in the complaint or it may require the plaintiff to
present evidence.
•If the court requires plaintiff to submit evidence, the defaulting
party may not take part in the trial.
•The defaulting party is entitled to notice of subsequent
proceedings. (Santos v. PNOC, GR 170943, September 23, 2008).
•Being declared in default does not constitute a waiver of rights
(except that of being heard and of presenting evidence in the trial
court)
REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO A PARTY DECLARED IN DEFAULT:
•Before judgment, file a verified motion to set aside order of default
on the ground that the failure to file answer was due to fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable negligence and that he has a
meritorious defense (Sec. 3 (b), Rule 9)
•After judgment but before finality, file a motion for new trial under
Sec. 1 (a) of Rule 37 or appeal under Sec. 2 Rule 41 on the ground
that the judgment is contrary to evidence or the law
•After finality of judgment, file a petition for relief under Section of
Rule 38
EXTENT OF RELIEF THAT CAN BE AWARDED IN A JUDGMENT BY
DEFAULT
•It shall not exceed the amount prayed for
•It shall not be different in kind from that prayed for
•It shall not award unliquidated damages (Sec. 3, Rule 9)
WHEN IS THERE PARTIAL DEFAULT?
•Where there are several defendants, some of whom answer and the
others fail to do so, the court can proceed to render judgment
against the defaulting parties.
•Example – A,B and C are joint debtors. Only A answers. B and C can
be declared in default.
•However, when the complaint asserts a common cause of action
against all the defendants, the court shall try the case against all
upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence
presented. •Example: A,B and C are solidary debtors. Only A
answers. Case will be decided based on A’s answer and evidence.
NO DEFAULT IN CERTAIN CASES:
•Action for annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage
•Legal separation
•Summary Procedure
Rule 10 – Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
When are amendments a matter of right?
•Amendments are matter of right when they are filed before a
responsive pleading is served, or in the case of a Reply, within 10
days after it is served. What is material is date of service of
responsive pleading, not date of filing.
•Amendment as a matter of right can only be done ONCE.
Subsequent amendments even if filed before a responsive pleading
is served require leave of court
An amendment can introduce a new cause of action or alter the
theory of the case
•An amendment may change or alter a cause of action. (no
prohibition against this under the 1997 Rules of Court) Thus, when an
original complaint simply prayed for Injunction, and it was amended
to include “Reformation of Instrument”, the amendment was still
allowed (PPA v. Go thong and Aboitiz, G.R. No. 158401, 28 January
2008)
Can an amendment be done to cure a jurisdictional error?
•Yes, if it was done before responsive pleading because court has not
exercised any jurisdiction yet.
However, if there has already been a responsive pleading filed, the
court cannot grant a substantial amendment which intends to grant
jurisdiction (Rosario v. Carandang, G.R. No. L-7076, 28 April 1955).
•If the original complaint stated a premature cause of action, the
accrual of the cause of action subsequently cannot be the basis for
an amendment (Swagman v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161135, 8
April 2005).
•A motion to Dismiss is NOT a responsive pleading. Hence, if a
Complaint was amended after a Motion to Dismiss was filed, it can
still be amended as a matter of right (Bautista v. Mayamaya, G.R.
No. 148361, 29 November 2005; Marcos-Araneta v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 154096, 22 August 2008)
Amendment of pleading can be made after dismissal provided it is
filed before the finality of the dismissal
•Plaintiff may file an amended complaint even after the original
complaint was ordered dismissed provided that the order of
dismissal is not yet final (Bautista v. Maya Maya, GR No. 148361,
November 29. 2005).
Effect of amended pleadings
•The amended pleading supersedes the original pleading.
•The settled rule is that the filing of an amended pleading does not
retroact to the date of the filing of the original; hence, the statute of
limitation runs until the submission of the amendment (Wallem
Philippines v. SR Farms, G.R. No. 161849. July 7, 2010).
•Admission made in the original pleading may be received in
evidence against the pleader
•Claims and defenses alleged in the original pleading which are not
incorporated in the amended pleading are deemed waived.
(OMNIBUS MOTION RULE)
Supplemental pleadings
•Should be filed with leave of court
•Must allege facts – transactions, occurrences, or events – which
have happened since the date of the filing of the original pleading.
•Filing fees on additional claims alleged in a Supplemental
Complaint must be paid (Do-All Metal v. Security Bank, G.R. No.
176339, January 10, 2011). In that case, the SC deleted the award of
actual damages as prayed for in the Supplemental Complaint for
failure of the plaintiffs to pay the required filing fees.
Rule 11 – When to File Responsive Pleadings
Period for filing answer
•15 days (unless a different period is fixed by the court.)
•If a motion to dismiss is denied, period is the balance of the 15-day
period which shall not be less than 5 days from receipt of the denial
(Sec. 4, Rule 16).
•Period to file answer under Summary Rules is 10 days
•If motion for bill of particulars is filed, period is the balance of the
15-day period which shall not be less than 5 days from service of
the bill of particulars or amended complaint or notice of denial of
motion.
•Where the defendant is a foreign corporation and summons was
served on it through a government official designated by law,
period is 30 days after receipt of summons by such entity (Sec. 2,
Rule 11).
•Where the defendant is a foreign corporation and extra-territorial
service of summons is made, period is “reasonable time” as may be
determined by the court which shall not be less than 60 days from
receipt of summons (Sec. 15, Rule 14).
•Answer to Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Cross-claim/Third-
party Complaint
 15 days from service for amended pleading filed as a
matter of right
 10 days from receipt of order for amended pleading filed
with leave of court
•Answer to Counterclaim/Cross-claim – 10 days from service
•Answer to Supplemental Complaint – 10 days from notice of Order
admitting the same, (unless a different period is fixed by the court)
•Answer to Complaint-in-Intervention – 15 days from notice of the
order admitting the same.
•Period for compliance with order for bill of particulars – 10 days
from notice of Order
Answer to original complaint deemed answer to
amended/supplemental complaint
•Where plaintiff filed an amended complaint or supplemental
complaint and defendant failed to file answer thereto, the
defendant cannot be declared in default if it filed an answer to the
original complaint.
The answer shall serve as the answer to the amended/supplemental
complaint.
Counterclaim and cross-claim arising after filing of answer
•Before judgment, the counterclaim or cross-claim may be
presented by supplemental pleading.
•After judgment, it may be asserted in a separate action.
Omitted counterclaim/cross-claim
•Effect of failure to assert a compulsory counterclaim and cross-
claim in Answer: defendant shall be barred from asserting such
claims.
•(Sec. 10, Rule 11)
Where deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday
•Sec. 1, Rule 22 provides that where the last day of the period for
doing an act as provided by law falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or a
legal holiday in the place where the court sits, the time should not
run until the next working day. (Alarilla v. Ocampo, GR No. 144697,
December 10, 2003).
•When the deadline falls on a holiday or weekend, an extension can
be filed the next working day but should count the extended period
from original deadline (Montajes v. People, G.R. 183449, 12 March
2012)
Rule 12 – Bill of Particulars
•When the causes of action alleged in the complaint are vaguely or
obscurely pleaded such that there is a need to clarify the basis of the
action so that defendant can intelligently prepare a responsive
pleading. (Bantillo v. IAC, G.R. No. 75311 October 18, 1988).
CASE:
•Plaintiff filed a complaint for reconveyance for herself as a surviving
heir and in representation of other heirs of the owner of the
property in question.
•Defendant filed a motion for bill of particulars seeking the identity
of the other heirs which she seeks to represent and her authority for
representing them.
•HELD: The filing of a motion for Bills of Particulars is proper as the
complaint failed to allege a factual matter which, under the Rules,
must be alleged or pleaded, i.e., identity of alleged co-heirs and co-
plaintiffs is necessary for a proper defense.
When to file a motion for a bill of particulars?
 Before responding to a pleading
 If the pleading is a Reply, the motion for bill of particulars
must be filed within 10 days from the service thereof.
 Such motion shall point out the defects complained of, the
paragraphs wherein they are contained and the details
desired
•COMPLAINT alleged that defendants acted in “unlawful concert”.
•Defendant filed a motion for a bill of particulars, for clarification on
the specific nature, manner and extent of his participation in the
acquisition of the assets cited. (Republic v. SB, G.R. No. 148154,
December 17, 2007).
•SC ruled that this is proper for Bill of Particulars.
Order for bill of particulars
•The order may direct the adverse party (a) to file a bill of
particulars, or (b) to make the pleading referred to in the motion
more definite and certain, either by amending or supplementing
the same. (Bantillo v. IAC, G.R. No. 75311 October 18, 1988).
What is the effect of the failure to comply with an order for bill of
particulars?
•Sec. 4, Rule 12 provides that the court may:
1.Order the striking out of the pleading or the portions thereof or
2.Make such other order as it deems just.
Rule 13 – Filing and Service of Pleadings, Judgments, and other
papers
What are the modes of filing of pleadings, orders, or judgments?
1.Personal Filing – by presenting the originals personally to the clerk
of court
2.Registered Mail – date of mailing shall be considered as the date of
their filing
What is the rule on filing of pleadings, orders, or judgments?
•The rule is that filing of pleadings shall be done personally.
If filing is done by registered mail, a written explanation must be
included in the pleading why filing was not done personally (Sec. 11,
Rule 13).
What are the modes of service of pleadings, orders, or judgments?
1.Personal Service - by delivering personally a copy to the party or
counsel or by leaving a copy at his office with a person having charge
thereof or if not available, at his residence with a person of sufficient
age and discretion residing therein.
2.Registered Mail
3.Ordinary Mail - if no registry service is available in the locality of
either the sender or the addressee
4.Substituted Service - by delivering a copy to the clerk of court, with
proof of failure of both personal service and service by mail.
What is the rule on service of pleadings, orders, or judgments?
•The rule is service shall be done personally.
Service by mail must be accompanied by a written explanation why
service was not done personally.
•Sec. 11, Rule 13 provides that a violation of the rule may cause to
consider the paper as not filed.
Proof of filing
•Best evidence is the existence of a pleading in the record of the
case.
If a pleading is not in the record:
•Proof of personal filing
 the written or stamped acknowledgement of its filing by the
clerk of court.
•Proof of filing by registered mail
 the registry receipt and the affidavit of the person who
mailed.
Proof of service
•Proof of personal service – written acknowledgement of the party
served or affidavit of service of the person who served, or official
return of the server
•Proof of service by ordinary mail – Affidavit of service of the person
who mailed
•Proof of service by registered mail – Affidavit of service and
registry receipt issued by the Post Office. In one case, the SC held
that "it is the registry receipt issued by the mailing office and the
affidavit of the person mailing, which proves service made through
registered mail." Absent one or the other, or worse both, there is no
proof of service. (Republic v. Resins, G.R. No. 175891, January 12,
2010).
•Filing or Service by Courier is NOT one of the accepted modes of
filing service (Heirs of Miranda v. Miranda, G.R. No. 179638, 8 July
2013; Palileo v. Planters Development Bank, G.R. No. 193650, 8
October 2014)
•For Requests for Admission under Rule 26, service to PARTY and
not just to counsel, is required.
•When party is represented by counsel, it is service to counsel that
is considered as proper service. (Delos Santos v. Elizalde, G.R. No.
141810 and 141812, 2 February 2007)
•IMPORTANCE OF PROPER FILING AND SERVICE: This is considered
as the reckoning period for compliance with/counting of,
reglementary periods
•A pleading not served is also deemed as not filed.
What is notice of lis pendens?
•A Notice of Lis Pendens is a notice of the pendency of an action
affecting title to or possession of property that is recorded by
plaintiff in the Registry of Deeds. It serves as constructive notice of
the pendency of the action to purchasers of the property affected by
the notice.
Party affected by lis pendens
•A notice of lis pendens affects a purchaser or a transferee of the
property while the action is pending. He is bound by any judgment
which may be rendered for or against the transferor (defendant) and
his title is subject to the results of the pending litigation.
•It does not affect the title of one who is not a party to the case. A
notice of lis pendens concerns litigation between a transferor
(defendant) and a third party (plaintiff), where the transferee who
acquires property while the action is pending stands in the shoes of
the transferor and his title is subject to the results of the action.
(Spouses Vicente v. Avera, G.R. no. 169970, January 20, 2009)
Rule 14 – Summons
What are the modes of service of summons?
1.Personal Service - by handing a copy of summons to the defendant
in person or by tendering it to the defendant if he refuses to accept
and sign for it.
2.Substituted Service - by leaving a copy at the defendant’s
residence with a person of suitable age and discretion residing
therein or at the defendant’s office or place of business with a
person in charge thereof.
3.Constructive Service – e.g., by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation
4.Extra-territorial Service – service of summons abroad
What are the requirements of substituted service?
1.Impossibility of prompt personal service
 i.e., it must be shown that defendant cannot be served
promptly or there is impossibility of prompt service within a
reasonable time, i.e., the sheriff must show several attempts
for personal service of at least three times on at least two
different dates
2. Specific details in the return
 i.e., the sheriff must describe in the Return of Summons the
facts and circumstances surrounding the attempted personal
service
3. Substituted service effected on a person of suitable age and
discretion residing at defendant's house or residence; or on a
competent person in charge of defendant's office or regular place
of business (Garcia v. SB, GR 170122, October 12, 2009).
Substituted service
•In substituted service, it is not necessary that the person in charge
of the defendant's regular place of business be specifically
authorized to receive the summons. It is enough that he appears to
be in charge. (Guanzon v. Arradaza, GR 155392, December 6, 2006).
•Substituted service to a representative of a law firm who claims to
be the defendant’s counsel is ineffective. (Potenciano v. Barnes, GR
159421, August 20, 2008).
What are the 2 modes for effecting substituted service of
summons?
1.By leaving copies of the summons at the defendant’s residence
with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing
therein, or
2.by leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular place of
business with some competent person in charge thereof.
When does extraterritorial service apply?
•Extraterritorial service of summons applies only where action is in
rem or quasi in rem, but not if an action is in personam (Perken
Elmer v. Dakila Trading, G.R. No. 172242. August 14, 2007).
EXCEPTIONS:
1.Extraterritorial service applies even in action in personam in case
of foreign corporations under the amendment to Sec. 12, Rule 14.
2.It also applies even in actions in personam against residents who
are temporarily out of the Philippines.
When does extraterritorial service apply?
•In short, extraterritorial service applies in the following:
1.Actions in rem and quasi in rem against any defendant, whether
individuals, domestic juridical entity or foreign juridical entity;
2.In personam actions against foreign corporations;
3.In personam actions against residents who are temporarily out of
the Philippines.
When can constructive notice by publication be resorted to?
1.Actions in rem and quasi in rem against any defendant, whether
individuals or foreign corporation;
2.In personam actions against foreign corporations;
3.In personam actions against residents who are temporarily out of
the Philippines; and
4.In personam actions against a defendant whose identity or
whereabouts is unknown.
Rule on service of summons
•The rule on service of summons depends on the nature of the
action (in rem, quasi in rem and in personam) and whether the
defendant is an individual, domestic juridical entity or foreign
juridical entity.
 Where the defendant is an individual and the action is in
personam, the general rule is PERSONAL SERVICE or
SUBSTITUTED SERVICE, when appropriate.
Exceptions are:
1.When defendant or his whereabouts is unknown (Sec. 14, Rule 14)
and
2.When defendant is a Philippine resident temporarily out of the
Philippines (Sec. 16), where CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE and EXTRA-
TERRITORIAL SERVICE may be resorted.
 Where the defendant is an individual and the action is in
rem or quasi in rem, PERSONAL SERVICE, SUBSTITUTED
SERVICE, CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OR EXTRA-TERRITORIAL
SERVICE may be resorted to.
 Where the defendant is a domestic juridical entity, the rule
is PERSONAL SERVICE OR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE on the
officers enumerated under Section 11, Rule 14. (Exception
is where the identity of the defendant corporation is
unknown such unknown owner of a property that caused
damage.)
 Where the defendant is a foreign juridical entity that has
transacted business in the Philippines, EXTRATERRITORIAL
SERVICE may be resorted to regardless of the nature of the
action. PERSONAL SERVICE can also be made.
Service on individuals as defendants
•When the action is in personam, service must be made on the
individual within the Philippines, either by personal service or
substituted service, when appropriate.
If the defendant is a non-resident, summons cannot be served on
him and the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over him. (Gomez v. CA,
GR 127692, March 10, 2004).
Exception is where the defendant or his whereabouts is unknown or a
resident who is temporarily outside of the Philippines.
•Where the action is in rem or quasi in rem, service of summons by
publication or personal service abroad may be availed of (Sec. 17,
Rule 14)
•Defect in the service of summons on defendant individual will not
invalidate the proceedings and judgment. HOWEVER, the defect will
preclude the court from rendering a judgment on the personal
liability of the defendants. (San Pedro v. Ong, GR 177598, October 17,
2008).
•A defendant whose identity or whereabouts is unknown may be
served by publication regardless of the nature of the action. I submit
that the law presumes that he is a resident.
•A resident temporarily out of the Philippines may be served by
personal service abroad or by publication (Sec. 19, Rule 14). But if the
defendant is no longer residing and is already abroad at the time of
the service of summons even if he was still residing in the Philippines
5 months before the date of service of summons, this rule will not
apply (Arcenas v. CA, GR No. 130401, 4 December 1998). The SC
ruled in that case that “residence” is determined at the time of
service of summons.
•In addition to that provided under Sec. 19, substituted service may
also be resorted to (Montefalcon v. Vasquez, G.R. No. 165016. June
17, 2008; (PCIB v. Alejandro, G.R. No. 175587. September 21, 2007).
To whom should service on a domestic juridical entity be made?
1.President
2.Managing Partner
3.General Manager
4.Corporate Secretary
5.Treasurer
6.In-house counsel
•Service of summons to someone other than the corporation's
president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary,
treasurer, and in-house counsel (exclusive), is not valid (Paramount
Insurance v. Ordonez, G.R. No. 175109, August 6, 2008).
•The enumeration under the new rule is restricted, limited and
exclusive, following the rule in statutory construction that expressio
unios est exclusio alterius. The doctrine of substantial compliance has
already been overturned by Villarosa (Spouses Mason v. CA, G.R. No.
144662, October 13, 2003).
What are the requisites for the application of the doctrine of
substantial compliance?
1.There must be actual receipt of the summons by the person
served, i.e., transferring possession of the copy of the summons from
the Sheriff to the person served;
2.The person served must sign a receipt or the sheriff's return; and
3.There must be actual receipt of the summons by the corporation
through the person on whom the summons was actually served.
•The third requisite is the most important for it is through such
receipt that the purpose of the rule on service of summons is attained
(Millennium v. Tan, G.R. No. 131724, February 28, 2000).
Service on foreign corporation
•Personal service or extraterritorial service may be made on a
foreign corporation that has transacted business in the Philippines
regardless of the nature of the action (Sec. 12, Rule 14, as amended).
•For registered foreign corporations, personal service or
constructive service may be resorted to.
Personal service - for service on its resident agent or any of its
officers or agents in the Philippines.
Constructive notice - for service on a government official designated
by law like the SEC.
•For unregistered foreign corporations or foreign corporations
without resident agents, extraterritorial service of summons may be
made by: (a) personal service abroad, which must be coursed through
the appropriate court in the foreign country; (b) publication abroad
and registered mail at the last known address of defendant; (c )
facsimile or other recognized electronic means that could generate
proof of service; (d) other means as the court may direct.
•Through AM 11-3-6-SC, the SC expanded the ways by which service
of summons may be done on a foreign corporation that has
transacted business in the Philippines.
Voluntary appearance
•Voluntary appearance is equivalent to service of summons.
 In a motion to dismiss challenging the jurisdiction of the
court, the inclusion of other grounds does not constitute
voluntary appearance.
 The filing of a motion or pleading seeking an affirmative
relief constitutes or is tantamount to voluntary appearance.
In a case wherein defendants filed a "Motion for Inhibition
without submitting themselves to the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court" subsequent to their filing of a "Motion to
Dismiss (for Lack of Jurisdiction), the SC held that
defendants sought affirmative relief other than the dismissal
of the case and thus have manifested their voluntary
submission to the court's jurisdiction (Philippine Commercial
International Bank v. Dy Hong Pi, G.R. No. 171137, June 5,
2009).
What does NOT constitute voluntary appearance?
•The filing of pleadings by defendant solely for special appearance
with the purpose of challenging the jurisdiction of the court over his
cannot be deemed as voluntary appearance and submission to the
jurisdiction of the court (Garcia v. SB, GR 170122, October 12, 2009).
•Filing of an Answer ad cautelam with compulsory counterclaim
cannot be considered as voluntary appearance of petitioner before
the RTC. (Perken Elmer v. Dakila Trading, G.R. No. 172242. August 14,
2007).
Rule 15 – Motions
Notice of hearing
•The requirement of a notice of hearing, which should indicate the
date and time of hearing and the 3-day notice rule, which requires
the movant to ensure that the motion is filed and served at least
three (3) days before the hearing, is mandatory. Failure to strictly
comply with the requirements renders the motion fatally defective
(KKK Foundation v. Bargas, G.R. No. 163785. December 27, 2007).
Notice of hearing; defect substantially cured
•Where a motion contains a defective notice of hearing but the
adverse party was given the opportunity to file its comment thereon,
the defect is substantially cured.
3-day notice rule
•Every written motion required to be heard and the notice of hearing
thereof shall be served in such a manner as to ensure its receipt by
the other party at least three (3) days before the date of hearing,
(unless the court for good cause sets the hearing on shorter notice.
)(Camarines Sur v. Aquino G.R. No. 167691 September 23, 2008)
Notice/hearing of motion is for the benefit of the opposing party
•The requirement of setting a motion for hearing is intended for the
benefit of the opposing party. The trial court can resolve the motion
without waiting for the hearing date provided it is not adverse to the
opposing party (China Banking Corp v. Abel, G.R. No. 182547, January
10, 2011).
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS
WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL ? (Sec. 1, Rule 16)
•Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
•Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
•Improper venue
•Lack of legal capacity to sue
•Litis pendentia
•Res judicata
•Prescription
•Failure to state a cause of action
•Payment, waiver, abandonment, extinguishment of claim
•Claim is unenforceable under the statute of frauds
•Failure to comply with a condition precedent
WHAT ARE THE OTHER GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL ?
•Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff (Sec. 1, Rule 17)
•Dismissal upon motion by plaintiff (Sec. 2, Rule 17)
•Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff (Sec. 3, Rule 17)
•Failure of plaintiff to appear at pre-trial (Sec. 5, Rule 18)
•Failure of plaintiff to file a pre-trial brief (Sec. 6, Rule 18)
•Failure to comply with the rule on certification against forum
shopping (Sec. 5, Rule 7)
•Commission of acts constituting willful and deliberate forum
shopping (Sec. 5, Rule 7)
•Failure to comply with an Order to implead an indispensable party
(Sec. 11, Rule 3)
•Failure to comply with an Order for bill of particulars, in relation to
failure of plaintiff to comply with an order of the court (Sec. 4, Rule
12).
GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL WHICH IF GRANTED WOULD BAR THE
REFILING OF THE SAME ACTION (with prejudice):
•Res judicata (Sec. 5, Rule 16)
•Prescription (Id.)
•Payment, waiver, abandonment or extinguishment of claim (Id.)
•Claim is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds (Id.)
•Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff which operates as an
adjudication upon the merits (Sec. 1, Rule 17)
•Dismissal upon motion by plaintiff when the order of dismissal
states that dismissal is with prejudice (Sec. 2, Rule 17)
•Dismissal due to fault of the plaintiff (unless the order states
otherwise) (Sec. 3, Rule 17)
•Dismissal due to willful and deliberate forum shopping
•Dismissal due to failure of plaintiff to appear at pre-trial or file a
pre-trial brief when the order of dismissal states that dismissal is
with prejudice.
GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL WHICH IF GRANTED DO NOT BAR
REFILING (without prejudice)
•Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
•Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
•Improper venue
•Lack of legal capacity to sue
•Litis pendencia
•Failure to state a cause of action
•Failure to comply with a condition precedent
EFFECT OF, AND REMEDY FROM, DENIAL OF MOTION TO DISMISS
•Defendant shall file his Answer within the balance of the period for
filing the same but in no case less than 5 days.
•Remedy is to file answer and go to trial or file petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 if there is grave abuse of discretion. But as
a general rule, the denial of a motion to dismiss cannot be
questioned in a certiorari proceeding under Rule 65 (Malicdem v.
Flores, G.R. No. 151001, September 8, 2006).
EFFECT OF AND REMEDY FROM DISMISSAL OR GRANT OF MOTION
TO DISMISS
•Action may be re-filed (except where dismissal is based on res
judicata, prescription, payment, waiver, abandonment or
extinguishment of claim and claim is unenforceable under Statute of
Frauds) (Sec. 5, Rule 16).
•Remedy is appeal under Rule 41 if the order of dismissal is with
prejudice or petition for certiorari under Rule 65 if the order of
dismissal is without prejudice (Sec. 5, Rule 16 in relation to Sec. 1,
Rule 41).
GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL AS AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
•The grounds for dismissal under Rule 16 may be pleaded as
affirmative defenses in the Answer.
•Defendant is entitled to move for the hearing and resolution of its
affirmative defenses asserted in the Answer. The Rules provide a
preliminary hearing may be held as if a motion to dismiss had been
filed in the discretion of the court. (PDI v. Hon. Alameda, G.R. No.
160604, March 28, 2008).
•The grounds raised in a Motion to Dismiss can be repleaded in the
Answer as affirmative defenses but defendant can no longer
demand for a preliminary hearing thereon. (exception: Rasdas v.
Estenor, 13 December 2005)
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF RES JUDICATA
•The former judgment or order must be final
•It must be a judgment or order on the merits
•The court which rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter
and the parties
•There must be between the first and second actions identity of
parties, subject matter and cause of action (Heirs of Abalos v. Bucal,
GR No. 156224, February 19, 2008)
JUDICIAL COMPROMISE HAS THE EFFECT OF RES JUDICATA
•A judicial compromise has the effect of res judicata and is
immediately executory and not appealable (Republic v. CA, GR No.
110020, September 25, 1998).
ASPECTS OF RES JUDICATA
•ACTION COULD BE BARRED EITHER BY:
 PRIOR JUDGMENT OR
 CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT
•"Bar by prior judgment," is the effect of a judgment as a bar to the
prosecution of a second action upon the same claim, demand or
cause of action.
•"Conclusiveness of judgment," issues actually and directly resolved
in a former suit cannot again be raised in any future case between
the same parties involving a different cause of action (Francisco v.
Co, G.R. No. 151339, January 31, 2006).
CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT OPERATES AS A BAR EVEN IF
THERE IS NO IDENTITY OF CAUSE OF ACTION
ONLY SUBSTANTIAL IDENTITY OF PARTIES IS REQUIRED
•Exact identity of parties is not necessary. Only substantial identity
is necessary to warrant the application of res judicata. The principle
of res judicata may not be evaded by the mere expedient of including
an additional party to the first and second action. There is
substantial identity of parties when there is a community of interest
between a party in the first case and a party in the second case albeit
the latter was not impleaded in the first case. (Cruz v. CA, GR 164797,
February 13, 2006)
PRESCRIPTION AS GROUND FOR DISMISSAL MUST BE APPARENT
FROM THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT
•Prescription can effectively be used in a motion to dismiss only
when the Complaint on its face shows that indeed the action has
already prescribed. If it involves evidentiary matters requiring a full-
blown trial on the merits, it cannot be determined in a motion to
dismiss. (Heirs of Dolleton v. Fil-Estate, G.R. No. 170750, April 7,
2009).
DEFENSE OF PAYMENT, WAIVER OR ABANDONMENT OF CLAIM
HYPOTHETICALLY ADMITS THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT
BUT THE COURT IS NOT CONFINED TO THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE
COMPLAINT
•This ground essentially admits the obligation set out in the
complaint but points out that such obligation has been extinguished,
by payment, waiver or abandonment. (Dona Rosana Realty v.
Molave, GR 180523, March 26, 2010)
RULE 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS
INSTANCES WHERE THE COMPLAINT MAY BE DISMISSED DUE TO
PLAINTIFF'S FAULT:
(1) if he fails to appear on the date for the presentation of his
evidence in chief;
(2) if he fails to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of
time; or
(3) if he fails to comply with the rules or any order of the court.
 DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE IS AN
ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS
 DISMISSAL UPON NOTICE BY PLAINTIFF IS EFFECTIVE UPON
ITS FILING IN COURT
•Dismissal is ipso facto upon notice. It is not filed through motion
but through mere notice. (Dael v. Spouses Benedicto, GR 156470,
April 30, 2008).
DISMISSAL UPON NOTICE IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
•The rule is that dismissal upon notice by plaintiff is without
prejudice.
•Dismissal upon notice of a case is without prejudice to the re-filing
thereof. Moreover, even if the same were tested under the rules on
litis pendentia and res judicata, the danger of conflicting decisions
cannot be present, since the case was dismissed even before a
responsive pleading was filed. (Benedicto v. Lacson, GR 141508, May
5, 2010).
EXCEPTIONS:
(1) Where the notice of dismissal so provides (dismissal is with
prejudice)
(2) Where the plaintiff has previously dismissed a similar case in a
court of competent jurisdiction
(3) Even where the notice of dismissal does not provide that it is with
prejudice but it is premised on the fact of payment by the defendant
of the claims involved (Serrano v. Cabrera, 93 Phil 774 1953).
2-DISMISSAL RULE
•Second Dismissal must be by Notice
•Both dismissals must be upon the instance of the plaintiff (Ching v.
Cheng, G.R. No. 175507, 8 October 2014)
EFFECT OF DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT ON MOTION OR DUE TO
FAULT OF PLAINTIFF ON COUNTERCLAIM OR CROSS-CLAIM
•Counterclaim and crossclaim will survive the dismissal of the
complaint whether compulsory or permissive.
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL
WHO HAS THE DUTY TO HAVE THE CASE SET FOR PRE-TRIAL?
•Section 1 of Rule 18 of the Rules of Court imposes upon the plaintiff
the duty to set the case for pre-trial after the last pleading is served
and filed.
•This duty of plaintiff is not affected by the fact that the Pre-trial
Guidelines mandates the Clerk of Court to promptly issue a notice of
pre-trial.
SIGNIFICANCE OF DOCUMENTS PRESENTED AND MARKED DURING
PRE-TRIAL: CAN BE CONSIDERED AS EVIDENCE EVEN IF NOT
FORMALLY OFFERED
•As a rule, documents which are not formally offered in evidence
shall not be considered.
EXCEPTION:
•When the following requisites are present:
(1) The same must have been duly identified by testimony duly
recorded and,
(2) The same must have been incorporated in the records of the case.
(Ramos v. Spouses Dizon, GR 137247, Aug 7, 2006).
WHO IS ENTITLED TO NOTICE OF PRE-TRIAL, COUNSEL OR PARTY?
•As a rule, notice of pre-trial shall be served on counsel. A separate
notice is not required to be sent to a party as the counsel is charged
with the duty of notifying his client.
•EXCEPTION: A party who has no counsel is entitled to receive a
notice of pre-trial.
WHO ARE REQUIRED TO APPEAR AT PRE-TRIAL
•The parties and their counsel shall appear at the pre-trial.
•A representative may appear in behalf of a party provided that he is
fully authorized in writing to enter into an amicable settlement,
submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and to enter into
stipulations or admission of facts and documents.
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO APPEAR AT PRE-TRIAL
•Failure of plaintiff to appear at pre-trial shall be a cause for
dismissal with prejudice (unless otherwise ordered by the court).
•Failure of defendant to appear is not a ground for default but the
effects of a default are applied, i.e., the court may allow the plaintiff
to present his evidence ex parte and render judgment on the basis
thereof.
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
•Failure of the defendant to file a pre-trial brief shall have the same
effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial, i.e., the plaintiff may
present his evidence ex parte and the court shall render judgment on
the basis thereof. (Saguid v. CA, GR 150611, June 10, 2003).
RULE 19 INTERVENTION
REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERVENTION
(1) Legal interest
(a) in the matter in controversy; or
(b) in the success of either of the parties; or
(c) against both parties; or
(d) person is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution
or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an
officer thereof;
(2) Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication
of rights of original parties;
(3) Intervenor's rights may not be fully protected in a separate
proceeding.
WHEN INTERVENTION SHOULD BE MADE
•As a rule, intervention is allowed at any time before rendition of
judgment by the trial court. After the lapse of this period, it will not
be warranted anymore because intervention is not an independent
action but is ancillary and supplemental to an existing litigation.
(Salandanan v. Spouses Mendez, G.R. No. 160280, March 13, 2009)
EXCEPTION:
•Where intervenor was not impleaded despite being an
indispensable party, and had not known of the existence of the case
before the trial court and the effect of the final order is to deprive
intervenor of his property. (Asia’s Emerging Dragon v. DOTC, G.R. No.
169914, April 18, 2008).
Rule 19:
Q: In a case where the litigant terminated the services of her counsel,
and eventually settled the case amicably on her own, can the
previous counsel intervene in the pending case to protect his
contingency fee?
A: Yes. This is considered as a legal interest in the matter in
litigation. (Malvar v. Kraft Foods, Inc., 9 September 2013)
Rule 21 – Subpoena
What are the modes of service of a subpoena?
•Service of a subpoena shall be made in the same manner as
personal or substituted service of summons (Macaspac v. Flores,
A.M. No. P-05-2072, August 13, 2008)
What are the grounds for the quashal of a subpoena duces tecum?
1.Subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive - has a tendency to
infringe on the right against invasion of privacy. (In re: Petition for
cancellation and correction of entries in the record of birth, Lee v. CA
G.R. No. 177861, July 13, 2010)
o In that case, the SC held that the grounds of
unreasonableness and oppresiveness are proper for
subpoena duces tecum.
2.Relevancy of books, documents or things does not appear
3.Movant fails to advance reasonable cost of the production
thereof. (Sec. 4, Rule 21)
4. Documents not specifically described or designated
5. Documents covered by privilege like attorney-client privilige
6. Documents covered by RA 1405 or the Banks Secrecy Law, but
note the exceptions
7. Documents covered by Foreign Currency Law
8. Executive Privilege
What are the grounds for the quashal of a subpoena ad
testificandum?
1.Where witness is being called to testify against his parents, other
direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants. (Sec. 25,
Rule 130 on parental and filial privilege)
2.Where the witness is disqualified by reason of privileged
communication – husband and wife as to communication received in
confidence during their marriage, attorney or his secretary as to legal
advice given to a client, a doctor in a civil case as to the advice or
treatment given to his patient, a priest regarding a confession made
to him or a public officer as to communication made to him in
confidence (Sec. 22 – 24, Rule 130) privileged communication rule
3.Executive privilege
What are the other grounds for the quashal of a subpoena ad
testificandum?
•Section 4, Rule 21 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, thus provides: The
court may quash a subpoena ad testificandum on the ground that
1.The witness is not bound thereby.
2.In either case, the subpoena may be quashed on the ground that
the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by these Rules were not
tendered when the subpoena was served.
Rule 30 – Trial
Trial can be dispensed with by agreement of the parties
•The trial court can render a decision without a full-blown trial,
based solely on the pleadings of the parties and the documents
appended to their memorandum where the parties themselves
agreed to forego a full-blown trial and to instead file their
respective "Memorandum of Authority" and to submit evidence in
support of their respective contentions. (Republic v. Vda De Neri,
G.R. No. 139588, March 4, 2004).
Absence of a party during trial constitutes a waiver of his right to
present evidence or cross-examine the opposing party’s witnesses
•The absence of a party during trial constitutes waiver of his right to
present evidence and cross-examine the opponent's witnesses.
•Although a defendant who answered the complaint but fails to
appear at the scheduled trial cannot be declared in default, the trial,
however, may proceed without his presence.
And if the absence of a party during the hearing was due to his own
fault, he cannot later on complain that he was deprived of his day in
court. (Spouses Calo v. Spouses Tan, G.R. No. 151266, November 29,
2005).
Rule 31 – Consolidation
What are the requisites of consolidation?
1.Two or more actions are pending before the court involving the
same parties;
2.Both or all actions arise from the same act, event transaction,
involve the same or like issues, and depend largely or substantially
on the same evidence
3.The court has jurisdiction over the cases to be consolidated
(Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 116463, June 10, 2003).
4.Consolidation would not result in prejudice to any of the parties or
would not cause complications, delay, or restrict the rights of a party.
(Teston v. DBP, G.R. No. 144374, November 11, 2005).
5.The nature of both actions is the same (Espinoza v. UOB, G.R. No.
175380, March 22, 2010)
What is the purpose of consolidation?
•The obvious purpose of the rule allowing consolidation is to avoid
multiplicity of suits, to guard against oppression or abuse, to prevent
delays, to clear congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial
court; in short the attainment of justice with the least expense and
vexation to the parties litigants.
Consolidation addressed to the sound discretion of the court
•Consolidation of actions is addressed to the sound discretion of the
court and its action in consolidating will not be disturbed in the
absence of manifest abuse of discretion.
Court must have jurisdiction over the cases sought to be
consolidated
•In Republic v. CA, the SC held that an essential requisite of
consolidation is that the court must have jurisdiction over all the
cases consolidated before it. Since the Sandiganbayan does not have
jurisdiction over the collection case, the same cannot be
consolidated with the criminal cases even if these cases involve
similar questions of fact and law.
A civil case can be consolidated with a criminal case
•As a rule, consolidation of civil and criminal cases is allowed when
all the requisites of consolidation are present. In one case, the SC
allowed a civil action not arising from the offense charged (arising ex
contractu) to be consolidated with the criminal action (Naguiat v.
Intermediate Appellate Court)
•In another case, the Court consolidated a civil action for the
recovery of wage differential with a criminal action for violation of
the Minimum Wage Law (Canos v. Peralta)
A civil case can be consolidated with a criminal case; Exception
•EXCEPTION (which means that a civil case cannnot be consolidated
with the criminal case) -- If the civil case amounts to a counterclaim
or a third party complaint in a criminal case. In one case, the SC held
that a consolidation of the collection case with the criminal cases will
have the same effect of a counterclaim or a third-party complaint
against the complainant. In such case, the rule against counterclaims
and third-party complaints in criminal cases may be applied by
analogy. (Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 116463, June 10, 2003).
Rule 32 – Trial by Commissioner
Court can decide a case on the basis of a commissioner’s report and
adopt in whole the findings of commissioners
•In one case, the trial court acted properly when it adopted the
Majority Report of the commissioners as part and parcel of its
Decision. That is allowed in Section 11, Rule 32 which provides that
the court may adopt, modify, or reject the report in whole or in part
or it may receive further evidence or may recommit it with
instructions. (Manotok Realty v. CLT Realty, G.R. No. 123346,
November 29, 2005)
•In this case, the overlapping of titles necessitates the assistance of
experts in the field of geodetic engineering. The very reason why
commissioners were appointed by the trial court, upon agreement of
the parties, was precisely to make an evaluation and analysis of the
titles in conflict with each other. Given their background, expertise
and experience, these commissioners are in a better position to
determine which of the titles is valid. Thus, the trial court may rely
on their findings and conclusions. It bears stressing that the parties
opted to submit the case for decision on the bases, among others, of
their respective objections/comments on the commissioners'
reports.
Rule 33 – Demurrer to Evidence
What is a demurrer to evidence?
•Demurrer to evidence as "an objection by one of the parties in an
action, to the effect that the evidence which his adversary produced
is insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to make out a case
or sustain the issue." (Casent Realty v. Philbanking, G.R. No. 150731,
September 14, 2007).
What is the purpose of a demurrer to evidence?
•To discourage prolonged litigations.
oThe demurrer, therefore, is an aid or instrument for the expeditious
termination of an action, similar to a motion to dismiss, which a
court or tribunal may either grant or deny. Heirs of Santioque v. Heirs
of Calma, G.R. No. 160832, October 27, 2006
Evidence to be considered in demurrer to evidence
•What should be resolved in a motion to dismiss based on a
demurrer to evidence is whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief
based on the facts and the law. The evidence contemplated by the
rule on demurrer is that which pertains to the merits of the case,
excluding technical aspects such as capacity to sue.
•However, the plaintiff's evidence should not be the only basis in
resolving a demurrer to evidence. The "facts" referred to in Section
8 should include all the means sanctioned by the Rules of Court in
ascertaining matters in judicial proceedings. These include judicial
admissions, matters of judicial notice, stipulations made during the
pre-trial and trial, admissions, and presumptions, the only exclusion
being the defendant's evidence. (Casent Realty v. Philbanking, G.R.
No. 150731, September 14, 2007).
What is the effect of the filing of a demurrer to evidence?
•If demurrer is denied, defendant’s right to offer evidence is not
waived as the case still remains before the trial court.
•If the demurrer is granted but on appeal, the dismissal is reversed,
defendant lose the right to present evidence. (Radiowealth v.
Spouses Del Rosario, G.R. No. 138739, July 6, 2000).
The appellate court should not remand the case to the trial court
•CA should not remand case to trial court. It shall proceed to render
decision on the merits based on the evidence on record. (Radiowealth
v. Spouses Del Rosario, G.R. No. 138739, July 6, 2000).
Rule 34 and 35
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS/SUMMARY JUDGMENT
•The existence or appearance of ostensible issues in the pleadings,
on the one hand, and their sham or fictitious character, on the other,
are what distinguish a proper case for summary judgment from one
for a judgment on the pleadings.
•In a proper case for judgment on the pleadings, there is no
ostensible issue at all because of the failure of the defending party’s
answer to raise an issue.
•On the other hand, in the case of a summary judgment, issues
apparently exist i.e. facts are asserted in the complaint regarding
which there is as yet no admission, disavowal or qualification; or
specific denials or affirmative defenses are in truth set out in the
answer but the issues thus arising from the pleadings are sham,
fictitious or not genuine, as shown by affidavits, depositions, or
admissions.
•In other words, a judgment on the pleadings is a judgment on the
facts as pleaded, while a summary judgment is a judgment on the
facts as summarily proven by affidavits, depositions, or admissions
(Narra Integrated Company v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 137915, 15
November 2000)
Illustrative examples:
1. A was the lessor of B. B subleased the premises without
permission from A. A padlocked the premises to prevent B and
sublessees from entering. B filed a case for damages. A filed an
Answer alleging that the proper interpretation of the contract
disallows a sublease. Is this proper for Judgment on the Pleadings?
A: Yes. The only issue was as to the interpretation of contract
(Sunbanun v. Go, 2 February 2010)
2. A was the lessor of B. During the term of the lease, B pre-
terminated the contract and vacated the premises. A claimed that
the lease agreement does not provide for pre-termination and filed a
case for damages. B filed an Answer admitting that he had vacated
and argued that based on the Civil Code, he could pre-terminate the
lease because of a change in the circumstances. Is JUDGMENT on the
PLEADINGS still proper?
A: YES. A judgment can be based exclusively upon the allegations
appearing in the pleadings of the parties and the accompanying
annexes. The defense which is based on an interpretation of law
can be resolved through a review of the pleadings. (Comglasco v.
Santos Car Check, 25 March 2015).
3. A failed to pay B insurance premium for one quarter. B sued A for
collection of unpaid premiums. A raised in its Answer the defense
that collection is not proper because legally, the effect of non-
payment is that the insurance/reinsurance contracts becomes
ineffective. Hence, there is no cause of action for collection. A
claimed asked for Judgment on the Pleadings. Proper?
A: Yes. The answer depended solely on the legal interpretation of the
effect of non-payment of an insurance premium. This can be
resolved based on the pleadings and an interpretation of the
applicable law. (GSIS v. Prudential, 20 November 2013)
4. A executed a Real Estate Mortgage in favor of B, in connection
with a loan it incurred. After B foreclosed on the REM, A filed a case
to annul the foreclosure sale claiming that he merely took on the
loan for his company, and proceeds did not go to him. B filed an
Answer admitting the material allegations, but countered that the
evidence shows that A incurred the obligation solidarily with his
company. B then moved for Summary Judgment. Proper?
A: Yes, proper, because there was no genuine issue raised by A. A
does not deny the loan nor that his property was mortgaged. Even
assuming A just lent his name as guarantor for the loan, B can still
claim from A and his property. (Evangelista v. Mercator Finance, 21
August 2003)
Q: Why is this not proper for Judgment of the Pleadings instead?
A: Because there appears to be a defense, but it is “sham” as a
perusal of the evidence will clearly belie the claim.
5. Napocor and a private individual, A, entered into an agreement in
connection with Napocor’s use of a portion of the property for
transmission lines and towers. After Napocor had entered into the
property, A discovered that Napocor paid his neighbors a higher
amount per square meter. Thus, A filed a case for rescission of
contract and damages. B filed an Answer claiming that the proper
amount had already been paid. Proper for Summary Judgment?
A: Yes. “What remained for the determination of the RTC was the
proper amount of damages due the respondents for the portions of
their lots taken by the petitioner.” (NAPOCOR v. Vda. De Capin, 17
October 2008)
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS AND ENTRY THEREOF
REQUISITES OF A VALID JUDGMENT
•Even a dismissal of a case for failure to prosecute must comply with
the requirements that the same clearly state the facts and law upon
which it is based. (Shimizu Philippines Contractors v. Magsalin, G.R.
No. 170026, 20 June 2012)
Nunc pro tunc judgments have been defined and characterized by
this Court in the following manner:
•The office of a judgment nunc pro tunc is to record some act of the
court done at a former time which was not then carried into the
record, and the power of a court to make such entries is restricted to
placing upon the record evidence of judicial action which has been
actually taken.
•It may be used to make the record speak the truth, but not to make
it speak what it did not speak but ought to have spoken.
•If the court has not rendered a judgment that it might or should
have rendered, or if it has rendered an imperfect or improper
judgment, it has no power to remedy these errors or omissions by
ordering the entry nunc pro tunc of a proper judgment.
•Hence a court in entering a judgment nunc pro tunc has no power
to construe what the judgment means, but only to enter of record
such judgment as had been formerly rendered, but which had not
been entered of record as rendered.
•In all cases the exercise of the power to enter judgments nunc pro
tunc presupposes the actual rendition of a judgment, and a mere
right to a judgment will not furnish the basis for such an entry
(Briones-Vasquez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 144882, 4 February
2005)
Q: A filed a case against B for easement of right of way. A claimed
that it is through B’s property that A has best access to a highway.
Since B closed the said pathway, A sought court relief to declare the
same a legal easement. The Court ruled that there was another
pathway through the southern portion of B’s property, and
DISMISSED the case. When A sought to use the southern pathway, B
again closed it. Can A move to open the southern portion based on
the court’s previous decision?
A: NO. The dispositive portion of the decision merely denied the
complaint. Though the Court stated, as its reason, the existence of
the southern pathway, that was an issue in the case and hence not
part of the dispositive portion. (Obra v. Badua, 9 August 2007)
Q: What is a several judgment?
A: “A several judgment is proper only when the liability of each
party is clearly separable and distinct from that of his co-parties,
such that the claims against each of them could have been the
subject of separate suits, and judgment for or against one of them
will not necessarily affect the other.
Where a common cause of action exists against the defendants, as in
actions against solidary debtors, a several judgment is not proper.”
(De Leon v. Court of Appeals, 6 June 2002)
RULE 39 Rule on Execution
- only final and executory judgments may be executed
Exceptions:
1. Judgments pending appeal
2. Immediately executory judgments (N.B. Both judgments are not
final but may already be executed)
3. Supervening event which renders execution unjust or impossible
such as where the decision of the CA was superceded by
Compromise Agreement (Republic v. Antonio)
4. Equitable grounds such as where there is a change in the
situation of the parties
5. Judgment has been novated by parties
6. Judgment has become dormant
7. Judgment turns out to be incomplete.
(Items 3 to 7 can be used as grounds for quashal of writ of execution)
Execution of final and executory judgment - matter of right
REQUISITES – The requisites for the grant of an execution of a final
and executory judgment are:
(a) Motion by judgment obligee;
(b) Notice to adverse party ;
(c) Before court of origin;
(d) Submit certified copy of judgment and entry of judgment.
•Only trial court may issue the writ but appellate court may direct
trial court to issue in the interest of justice
Execution pending appeal – discretionary
REQUISITES - The requisites for the grant of an execution of a
judgment pending appeal are the following:
(a) there must be a motion by the prevailing party with notice to
the adverse party;
(b) there must be good reasons for execution pending appeal;
(c) the good reasons must be stated in the special order; and
(d) trial court while it has jurisdiction and is in possession of the
original record/appellate court after the trial court has lost
jurisdiction.
EXAMPLES:
a. Appeal is unmeritorious
•The well-established rule is that it is not for the trial court to
determine the merits of the decision it rendered and use the same
as basis for its order allowing execution pending appeal.
The authority to determine the merits of the appeal and the
correctness of the findings and conclusions of the trial court is
lodged in the appellate court. (Heirs of Sangkay v. Napocor, G.R. No.
141447. May 4, 2006)
b. Appeal is dilatory
•That the appeal is merely dilatory is not a good reason for granting
execution pending appeal.
Only an appellate court can appreciate the dilatory intent of an
appeal as an additional good reason in upholding an order for
execution pending appeal. (Heirs of Sangkay v. Napocor, G.R. No.
141447. May 4, 2006)
c. Financial distress of prevailing company
•The Court held that even the financial distress of the prevailing
company is not sufficient reason to call for execution pending
appeal.
•The financial distress of a juridical entity is not comparable to a case
involving a natural person — such as a very old and sickly one
without any means of livelihood, an heir seeking an order for support
and monthly allowance for subsistence, or one who dies or who is ill,
of advanced age or dying as to justify execution pending appeal.
•Financial distress arising from a lone collection suit and not due to
the advanced age of the party is not an urgent or compelling reason
that would justify the immediate levy on the properties of Urban
Bank pending appeal.
(Urban Bank v. Pena, G.R. No. 145817, October 19, 2011)
d. If only one of the defendants held solidarily liable is insolvent
•In cases where the two or more defendants are made subsidiarily or
solidarily liable by the final judgment of the trial court, discretionary
execution can be allowed if all the defendants have been found to
be insolvent. (Urban Bank v. Pena, G.R. No. 145817, October 19,
2011)
e. The prevailing party’s husband was ill and said party was willing
to post a bond.
•(Stronghold Insurance v. Felix)
(f) Advanced age and illness of one of the prevailing parties, losing
party’s dilatory and frivolous appeal and strong likelihood of
becoming insolvent during the pendency of the appeal.
•SC ruling – Only Rosario is in her old age and suffers from life
threatening ailments. But the trial court has allowed execution
pending appeal for all of the Florendos, not just for Rosario whose
share in the subject lands had not been established. Paramount’s
delaying tactics and the possibility that it could become insolvent
during the appeal are purely speculative. As for the Florendos’ fear of
Paramount’s insolvency, such is wholly irrelevant since the judgment
did not require it to pay them any form of damages. Indeed, the
Florendos are the ones required by the RTC to reimburse Paramount
the value of its bid and the amounts of real estate taxes that it had
paid on the properties. Lastly, the Florendos’ posting of a P4 million
bond to answer for the damages that respondent Paramount might
suffer in case the RTC decision is reversed on appeal is quite
insufficient. The lands had a market value of P42 million in 2001.
(Florendo v. Paramount, G.R. No. 167976 January 20, 2010)
•If an execution pending appeal is issued, what is the remedy of the
defeated party to stay the execution pending appeal?
 Filing of supersedeas bond
•Immediately executory judgments - executable upon rendition but
may be stayed by trial court or on appeal.
•Injunction, receivership, accounting, support, support pendente lite
•Effect of reversal of executed judgment
•orders of restitution or reparation of damages
Mode of obtaining a writ of execution
a. By Motion - within 5 years from date of entry of judgment; period
is tolled when delay is caused by judgment obligor (Yao v. Silverio)
•Writ issued and levy within 5 years, execution sale after 5 years
•still okay provided sale is made within 10 years.
b. By action - after 5 years from date of entry of judgment but before
it is barred by prescription; in such case, judgment becomes a mere
right of action
Execution in case of death of obligor (obligor dies before actual levy
of his property)
•If judgment is for recovery of property, execution shall be against
executor or administrator.
•What about if judgment is for payment of money?
•If obligor dies after actual levy of property, the property in the
name of deceased obligor may be sold.
Writ of execution is directed to the Sheriff
•Contents: must state amount of interest as of the date of issuance
of the writ
•Where decision does not include payment of interest, writ shall not
include legal interest but may include 12% legal interest from the
time the judgment became final and executory
•Where decision includes interest, writ shall include 6 % legal
interest from date of filing of complaint or demand and may include
12% legal interest from the date the judgment became final and
executory
Execution of Money Judgment – Manner of enforcement
A. Demand for Immediate Payment – cash, MC or other acceptable
form of payment, payment shall be made directly to obligee or in his
absence to executing Sheriff.
B. Levy upon properties of obligor - obligor has option to choose
property to be levied on. If option not exercised, Sheriff shall levy on
personal properties first and then real properties.
•Judgment for sum of money cannot be executed by issuing a writ
of possession over a real property (Cardinal v. Asset). There is
nothing in the rules that authorize the issuance of a writ of
possession over a property of the judgment obligor in the execution
of a money judgment.
C. Garnishment - made by service of notice upon third persons.
Garnishee to make a report whether obligor has sufficient funds to
satisfy judgment or if not sufficient state the amount of funds in its
possession.
•Garnished amount shall be paid in the name of obligee, not Sheriff.
Payment shall be delivered within 10 working days from notice of
delivery by Sheriff.
•Instead of levy upon property and sale on execution, Court may
order any property or money of Judgment Obligor in his possession or
of another person to be applied to the satisfaction of the judgment
(Sec 40)
Execution of Specific Act Judgment:
A. Judgments directing the (a) execution of Deeds of Conveyance of
land or personal property or (b) delivery of documents
•Should a party fail to comply within the time specified - court may
direct the act to be done by another person. But if land or personal
property is in the Phil, court in lieu of directing a conveyance
thereof, may issue an order divesting title of obligor and vesting it in
the obligee. This shall have the effect of a conveyance executed in
due form of the law.
B. Delivery of Real Property
•Sheriff to serve a Notice to Vacate within 3 working days. If obligor
fails to vacate, Sheriff shall oust obligor and ALL PERSONS claiming
rights under him.
•Improvements introduced by obligor on real property shall not be
destroyed or removed without a special order of demolition by the
court.
Demolition order shall be issued after hearing and after obligor fails
to remove the same within a reasonable time.
Removal of improvements is relevant only if obligor is a builder in
good faith.
Execution of Special Judgment
•Judgment declaring stockholders’ meeting and election of board of
directors void, permanent injunction, validity and legality of certain
acts or things – examples of a special judgment
•How enforced? - Sheriff to serve the writ and certified copy of
judgment upon the party against whom judgment is rendered.
Remedy of a third person whose property is levied on execution
•Serve Affidavit of 3rd Party Claim stating his right to possession or
title on Sheriff and obligee.
•Effect of serving such Affidavit - it won't stop delivery or sale of
property but Sheriff for his protection may require obligee to post
bond. Sheriff may or may not require obligee to post bond.
•Claim for damages against the bond - action shall be made within
120 days from filing of bond; otherwise it is barred.
BUT 3rd party may still file a separate action for damages or action
for recovery of property.
Obligee may claim damages in the same or separate action against
3rd party for filing a frivolous or spurious claim.
•Fermin v. Estevez – The claim of terceria is available to a third
person other than the judgment obligor who claims a property levied
on and put on auction by Sheriff. This is not the appropriate remedy
where the third person’s property is subject of a writ of execution or
writ of demolition arising from a civil case to which said third person
was not a party and whose rights do not arise from the defendant in
the said case.
Property Exempt From Execution
•Claim for exemption of family home from execution must be set up
and proved before the sale of the property at public auction
(Honrado v. CA)
•Exemption shall not apply to judgments for foreclosure of
mortgage thereon or recovery for its price.
Validity of Writ of Execution
•valid and effective during the period within which the judgment
may be enforced, i.e. 5 years from date of entry of judgment.
•Shall be returned when judgment has been satisfied in full or part
or 30 days from receipt of Writ and every 30 days thereafter until
judgment is satisfied in full.
Judgment obligee who purchases the property need not pay the
amount of the bid.
Conveyance of Real Property
•Sheriff shall execute a Certificate of Sale in favor of the purchaser
which shall be registered in the RD.
Redemption of real property sold (only real property may be
redeemed)
a. Who may redeem: judgment obligor or his successor in
interest and redeeming creditor or redemptioner
b. Period of redemption: 1 year from date of registration of
certificate of sale
WITHIN THE 1-YEAR PERIOD OF REDEMPTION
a. Rents, earnings and income of property during redemption
belong to Judgment Obligor
b. Possession remains with Judgment Obligor
c. No limit as to the number of times a property may be redeemed
d. Notice requirement for redemption – must be given to Sheriff,
RD; notice must indicate payment of taxes and liens; (otherwise,
these won’t be paid by subsequent redemptioner)
e. Effect of redemption by judgment obligor – no further
redemption shall be allowed and he is restored to his estate.
Effect of No Redemption
a. Upon expiration of redemption period, judgment obligor shall be
divested of all his rights, title, interest and claim to the property and
the same shall be vested in the purchaser (Sec 33)
b. Purchaser entitled to Deed of Final Conveyance and delivery of
possession of the property.
Sheriff to execute the Final Deed of Conveyance, but there is a need
to file a Petition for Issuance of a New Title and with respect to
possesion to file an ex parte Motion for Writ of Possession
Remedy when judgment is unsatisfied
A. Motion to require judgment obligor or debtor of judgment obligor
to appear and be examined concerning his property and income
•Provided the court or commissioner is within the city where such
obligor resides.
•Any other person may also be compelled to attend and testify on
such matters
B. Motion to require Judgment Obligor to pay in fixed monthly
installments where his salary or earnings are more than necessary for
the support of his family.
the burden of overcoming the presumption of its validity. (Mijares
v. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, April 12, 2005)
FRAUD AS GROUND TO SET ASIDE FOREIGN JUDGMENT IS
EXTRINSIC FRAUD
•Fraud to hinder the enforcement within the jurisdiction of a foreign
judgment must be extrinsic, i.e., fraud based on facts not
controverted or resolved in the case where judgment is rendered or
that which would go to the jurisdiction of the court or would deprive
the party against whom judgment is rendered a chance to defend the
action to which he has a meritorious defense. Intrinsic fraud is one
which goes to the very existence of the cause of action is deemed
already adjudged, and it, therefore, cannot militate against the
recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment. (Asiavest v. CA
G.R. No. 110263, July 20, 2001)

Remedy where debtor of Judgment Obligor denies the debt or

another person claims the property:
•File an action, with leave of the executing court, for the recovery of
debt or interest and forbid a transfer or disposition of such debt or
interest within 120 days from notice of order.

Entry of Satisfaction of Judgment

•Clerk of Court shall enter satisfaction of a judgment in the court
docket and in the execution book upon the filing of the Sheriff's
Return or admission to the satisfaction of judgment by Judgment
Obligee.
•If judgment is satisfied other than by execution, Judgment Obligor
may demand of the Judgment Obligee to execute an admission to
the satisfaction of judgment or file a Motion for an Order to enter
satisfaction of judgment.

RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT

EFFECT OF IN REM FOREIGN JUDGMENT AND IN PERSONAM
FOREIGN JUDGMENT
•For an action in rem, the foreign judgment is deemed conclusive
upon the title to the thing.
•In an action in personam, the foreign judgment is presumptive, and
not conclusive, of a right as between the parties and their successors
in interest by a subsequent title.
•In both cases, the foreign judgment is susceptible to impeachment
in our local courts on the grounds of want of jurisdiction or notice to
the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. (Mijares
v. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, April 12, 2005)

FILING FEE OF ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN MONEY JUDGMENT

•Foreign judgment may be deemed as subsumed under Section
7(b)(3) of Rule 141, i.e., within the class of "all other actions not
involving property." Thus, only the blanket filing fee of minimal
amount is required. (Mijares v. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, April 12,
2005)

HOW TO ENFORCE IN REM FOREIGN JUDGMENT

•It is clear then that it is usually necessary for an action to be filed in
order to enforce a foreign judgment, even if such judgment has
conclusive effect as in the case of in rem actions, if only for the
purpose of allowing the losing party an opportunity to challenge the
foreign judgment, and in order for the court to properly determine
its efficacy. Consequently, the party attacking a foreign judgment has