Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

CHAP. II CAUSE OF ACTION AND ACTIONS I. CAUSE OF date (Art.

1196, Civil Code of the Philippines) unless


ACTION (Rule 2) A. Meaning > cause of action - the act he loses the right to make use of the period (Art.
or omission by which a party violates the rights of 1198, Civil Code of the Philippines). Illustration (Bar
another (Sec. 2, Rule 2, Rules of Court) B. Elements of 1999) A sued B to recover P500,000.00 bayed on a
a cause of action - The elements of a cause of action promissory note due and payable on December 5,
are as follows: (a) A right in favor of the plaintiff by 1998. The Complaint was filed on November 30, 1998,
whatever means and under whatever law it arises or and summons was served on B on December 7, 1.998.
is created; (b) An obligation on the part of the named B interposes a motion to dismiss on the ground that
defendant to respect or not to violate such right; and the Complaint states no cause of action. If you were
(c) Act or omission on the part of such defendant in the judge, how would you rule on the motion?
violation of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a Suggested answer: The motion must be granted. The
breach of the obligation of the defendant to the complaint states no cause of action for having been
plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action filed prematurely. The defect could not be cured by
for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief. - the service of summons on the defendant after the
Briefly stated, it is the reason why the litigation has due date of the promissory note. 4. In an unlawful
come about, it is the act or omission of defendant detainer case, the cause of action does not accrue
resulting in the violation of someone's rights. - While unless there is a demand to vacate and is not
the concept of a cause of action is one that is essential complied with. If however, the suit is based on
to the existence of a civil action, in administrative expiration of the lease, notice and demand are not
cases however, the issue is not whether the required. - If the unlawful detainer case is predicated
complainant has a cause of action against the upon the defendant's failure to pay the rentals, the
respondent, but whether the Page22 respondent has demand should not be "to pay or vacate" but should
breached the norms and standards of the office. C. be to pay and vacate (Sec. 2, Rule 70, Rules of Court).
Cause of action in specific cases 1. The cause of action The first type of demand does not give rise to an
for breach of contract does not require an allegation unlawful detainer case since it is in essence an action
and proof of the negligence of the defendant. The for a sum of money. Thus, if the amount of rentals to
elements of this cause of action are (a) the existence be collected is P900,000.00, the action should be filed
of a contract, and (b) the breach of the contract.  with the Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction
Thus, if a carrier is sued based on a breach of contract over the amount demanded. If the demand is "to pay
of carriage, negligence need not be proved by the and vacate, the cause of action is one for unlawful
plaintiff, negligence not being an element of the detainer and should be filed in the Municipal Trial
cause of action of a suit predicated upon a breach of Court." - If the unlawful detainer case is anchored
contract. This is true whether or not the defendant is upon the failure of the defendant to comply with the
a public or a private carrier. However, where the conditions of the lease, the demand must not be "to
defendant is a common carrier there is an additional comply.. or vacate" but should be "to comply. . . and
reason: negligence of the common carrier is vacate" (Sec. 2, Rule 70, Rules of Court). The first type
presumed (Art. 1735 & Art. 1756, Civil Code of the of demand is not one for unlawful detainer but one
Philippines). 2. Negligence is an element of a quasi- for specific performance. Illustration (Bar 2004) AX, a
delict and must be alleged and proved (Art. 2176, Civil Makati.-bound paying passenger utility bus, died
Code of the Philippines) but the negligence of those instantly on board the bus on account of the fatal
persons under Art. 2 180 is presumed. 3. Where the head wounds he sustained as a result of the strong
cause of action rests on a promissory note, filing the impact of the collision between the bus and a dump
action before the due date of the obligation would be truck. The accident happened while the bus was still
premature because the obligation is one with a traveling on EDSA towards Makati. The foregoing
period. Whenever a period is designated in an facts among others, were duly established on
obligation, the obligation becomes demandable only evidence-in-chief by the plaintiff TY, sole heir of AX in
when the period arrives. Such period is presumed to TY's action against the subject common carrier for
be for the benefit of both parties and of course, also breach of contract of carriage. After TY had rested his
of the debtor. He cannot be charged before the due case, the common carrier filed a demurrer to
evidence contending that plaintiff's evidence is of the complaint, the simple dictum to be followed is:
insufficient because it did not show (1) that defendant "If you have a cause of action, then by all means, state
was negligent, and (2) that such negligence was the it!" Where there is a defect or an insufficiency in the
proximate cause of the collision. Should the court statement of the cause of action, a complaint may be
grant or deny defendant's demurrer to evidence? dismissed not because of an absence or a lack of a
Discuss briefly. Suggested answer. The demurrer to cause of action but because the complaint "states no
evidence should be denied. A demurrer is to be cause of action." The dismissal will therefore, be
granted only when under the facts and the law, the anchored on a "failure to state a cause of action." 2.
plaintiff is not entitled to relief as when the evidence The failure to state a cause of cause of action does not
is insufficient to support the claim of the plaintiff. mean that the plaintiff has "no cause of action." It
Under the circumstances, the failure to prove the only means that the plaintiff's allegations are
negligence of the defendant does not in any way insufficient for the court to know that the rights of the
indicate an insufficiency of evidence. In a suit based plaintiff were violated by the defendant. Thus, even if
on breach of contract, especially a breach of a indeed the plaintiff suffered injury, if the same is not
contract of carriage against a common carrier, the set forth in the complaint, the pleading will state no
negligence of the defendant is presumed (Art. 1756, cause of action even if in reality the plaintiff has a
Civil Code of the Philippines). Besides, negligence is cause of action against the defendant. F. Failure to
not an element of a cause of action based on breach state a cause of action and lack of a cause of action 1.
of contract. 5. For a malicious prosecution suit to A fair reading of jurisprudence likewise shows that a
prosper, the plaintiff must prove the following: (1) the failure to state a cause of action is not the same as an
prosecution did occur, and the defendant was himself absence or a lack of a cause of action. The former
the prosecutor or that he instigated its refers to an insufficiency in the allegations of the
commencement; (2) the criminal action finally ended complaint while the latter means the failure to prove
with an acquittal; (3) in bringing the action, the or to establish by evidence one's cause of action. 2. In
prosecutor acted without probable cause; and (4) the one case the Court was more succinct: "While the
prosecution was impelled by legal malice - an former is determined by referring to the allegations
improper or a sinister motive. The gravamen of of the pleading asserting the claim, the latter is
malicious prosecution is not the filing of a complaint determined by referring to the evidence adduced.
based on the wrong provision of law, but the Usually, the declaration that a plaintiff failed to
deliberate initiation of an action with the knowledge establish a cause of action is postponed until after the
that the charges were false and groundless. D. Action parties are given the opportunity to present all
distinguished from cause of action (Bar 1999) - An relevant evidence on questions of fact." 3. Under Rule
action is the suit filed in court for the enforcement or 16, the ground for dismissal in relation to a cause of
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of action is not "lack of a cause of action" or "no cause
a wrong (Sec. 3[a], Rule 2, Rules of Court). A cause of of action." The ground is that "the pleading asserting
action is the basis of the action filed because every the claim states no cause of action (Sec. 1(g], Rule 16;
"...action must be based on a cause of action" (Sec. 1, San Lorenzo Village Association, Inc. vs. Court
Rule 2, Rules of Court). E. Failure to state a cause of ofAppeals, 288 SCRA 115 [1998]). The ground for
action Page23 1. The mere existence of a cause of dismissal based on the fact that the pleading asserting
action is not sufficient for a complaint to prosper. the claim states no cause of action is different from
Even if in reality the plaintiff has a cause of action the ground that the case of the claimant should be
against the defendant, the complaint may be dismissed for lack of a cause of action. The first is
dismissed if the complaint or the pleading asserting raised in a motion to dismiss under Rule 16 before a
the claim "states no cause of action" (Sec. 1[g], Rule responsive pleading is filed and can be determined
16). This means that the cause of action must only from the allegations of the pleading and not from
unmistakably be stated or alleged in the complaint or evidentiary matters. The second is raised in a
that all the elements of the cause of action required demurrer to evidence under Rule 33 after the plaintiff
by substantive law must clearly appear from the mere has rested his case and can be resolved only on the
reading of the complaint. To avoid an early dismissal basis of the evidence he has presented in support of
his claim. - A motion to dismiss based on lack of cause beside the point because the allegations in the
of action is filed by the defendant after the plaintiff complaint are hypothetically admitted. Thus, a
has presented his evidence on the ground that the motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint
latter has shown no right to the relief sought. While a fails to state a cause of action, hypothetically admits
motion to dismiss under Rule 16 is based on the matters alleged in the complaint. The
preliminary objections which can be ventilated before hypothetical admissions however, extend only to the
the beginning of the trial, a motion to dismiss under relevant and material facts well pleaded in the
Rule 33 is in the nature of a demurrer to evidence on complaint as well as to inferences fairly deductible
the ground of insufficiency of evidence and is therefrom. The admission does not include
presented only after the plaintiff has rested his case. conclusions or interpretations of law. H. Allegations of
4. There is a failure to state a cause of action if the complaint determine whether or not complaint
allegations in the complaint taken together, do not states a cause of action l. In determining whether an
completely spell out the elements of a particular initiatory pleading states a cause of action, "the test
cause of action. - Thus, in actions for forcible entry, is as follows: admitting the truth of Page24 the facts
three (3) requisites have to be alleged for the alleged, can the court render a valid judgment in
municipal trial court to acquire jurisdiction over the accordance with the prayer?" To be taken into
case. First, the plaintiff must allege his prior physical account are only the material allegations in the
possession of the land or building. Second, he must complaint; extraneous facts and circumstances or
also assert that he was deprived of possession of the other matters aliunde are not considered but the
property either by (force, intimidation, threat, court, mny consider- in addition to the complaint the
strategy, or stealth. Third, the action must be filed trppended annexes or documents, other pleadings of
within one (1) year from the time he learned of his the plaintiff, or admissions in the records. 2. Current
deprivation of physical possession of the property. - jurisprudence establishes the rule that the court
Even if in truth he has a cause of action for forcible ought not to consider matters outside of the
entry, if the complaint fails to allege an essential complaint in determining whether or not a complaint
element of a forcible entry case, as for instance, the states a cause of action. The court should only
fact that he was, prior to the deprivation, in actual consider the allegations of the complaint and there is
physical possession of the property, there is a failure no need to require the presentation of evidence to
to state a cause of action. In a similar vein, if in an determine whether or not the complaint states a
action for a sum of money arising from a loan, the cause of action because the allegations of the
plaintiff fails to allege that the debt is due and complaint will disclose the compliance or non-
demandable, the complaint asserting the claim states compliance of the required statement of the cause of
no cause of action even if in truth the plaintiff has a action. - In determining whether or not a cause of
cause of action for collection of the debt. 5. It has action is sufficiently stated in the complaint, the
been held that in a motion to dismiss based on the statements in the complaint may be properly
ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of considered. It is error for the court to take cognizance
action, the question submitted to the court for of external facts or to hold preliminary hearings to
determination is the sufficiency of the allegations in determine its existence (Diaz vs. Diaz, 331 SCRA 302,
the complaint, and to determine the sufficiency of the 316). The sufficiency of the statement of the cause of
cause of action, only the facts alleged in the action must appear on the face of the complaint and
complaint, and no others should be. G. Test of the its existence may be determined only by the
sufficiency of the statement of a cause of action 1. allegations of the complaint, consideration of other
The test of the sufficiency of the facts alleged in the facts being proscribed and any attempt to prove
complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether extraneous circumstances not being allowed.
or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could However, the annexes to the complaint may be
render a valid verdict in accordance with the prayer considered in determining whether or not a
of the complaint. 2. Jurisprudence likewise tells us complaint states a cause of action because such
that in determining the sufficiency of the cause of annexes are considered parts of the complaint. - The
action, the truth or the falsity of the allegations are cause of action in a complaint is not what the
designation of the complaint states, but what the determines the nature of an action as well as which
allegations in the body of the complaint define and court or body has jurisdiction over it are the
describe. The designation or caption is not allegations of the complaint and the character of the
controlling, more than the allegations in the relief sought, whether or not plaintiff is entitled to
complaint themselves are, for it is not even an any and all of the reliefs prayed for. The jurisdiction
indispensable part of the complaint. I. Allegations of of the court or tribunal over the nature of the action
the complaint also determine the nature of the cause cannot be made to depend upon the defenses set up
of action 1. The nature of the cause of action is in the court or upon a motion to dismiss, for
determined by the facts alleged in the complaint and otherwise, the question of jurisdiction would depend
not by the prayer therein 2. A complaint captioned as almost entirely on defendant. Hence, if the
an unlawful detainer case would actually be an action allegations of the complaint make out a case for
for forcible entry where the complaint alleges that the unlawful detainer, the Municipal Trial Court is not
plaintiff was deprived of the possession of the divested of its jurisdiction to take cognizance of the
premises by force, intimidation, stealth, threat or case merely because the defendant claims ownership
strategy. 3. In one case, the complaint filed in the over the property subject of the action. J. How to
Regional Trial Court was captioned "Collection of a state the cause of action 1. The pleading asserting the
Sum of Money with Damages." The complaint alleged claim or the cause of action must contain only the
that he demanded payment of the rentals in arrears ultimate facts. These facts must be stated in a plain,
and for the defendant to vacate the premises. The concise, methodical and logical form. Evidentiary
Supreme Court held that the nature of the allegations facts must be omitted (Sec. 1, Rule 8, Rules of Court).
make out a cause of action for unlawful detainer, not Since the rule requires that pleadings should contain
an action for collection of a sum of money. An action only the ultimate facts, the same should not contain
for unlawful detainer is one within the jurisdiction of mere conclusions of law because conclusions are not
the Municipal Trial Court. The Regional Trial Court facts. 2. The ultimate facts refer to the essential facts
therefore, had no jurisdiction over the action even if of the claim. A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken
the action was denominated as an action to collect a out without leaving the statement of the cause of
sum of money. 4. Similarly, a petition denominated as action insufficient (Ceroferr Realty Corporation vs.
a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 may Court of Appeals, 376 SCRA 144). The ultimate facts
considered by the Court as a petition for certiorari are the important and substantial facts which form
under Rule 65 because the petition alleged grave the basis of the primary right of the plaintiff and
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction which make up the wrongful act or omission of the
5. Where from a reading of the allegations of the defendant. The ultimate facts do not refer to the
complaint and the reliefs prayed for, the ultimate details of probative matter or to the particulars of
objective of the plaintiffs is to obtain title to real evidence by which the material elements are to be
property, it should be filed in the proper court having established. They are the principal, determinate,
jurisdiction over the assessed value of the property constitutive facts, upon the existence of which, the
subject thereof even if the complaint is denominated entire cause of action rests. 3. The complaint, in
as an action for reconveyance or an action to annul a stating the cause of action, should not contain sham,
deed of sale to real property. The nature of an action false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or
is not determined by the caption of the complaint but scandalous matters. These matters may be stricken
by the allegations therein together with the reliefs out upon Page25 motion by a party within twenty (20)
prayed for. 6. Thus, where the allegations of the days after service of the pleading upon him or upon
complaint state that the actual transaction between the court's own initiative at any time (Sec. 12, Rule 8,
the parties was not a sale but an equitable mortgage, Rules of Court). K. Conditions precedent 1. Common
and that the issues and evidences in the proceedings usage refers to conditions precedent as matters
revolved on the true nature of the transaction, the which must be complied with before a cause of action
trial court correctly resolved the issue even if the arises. When a claim is subject to a condition
action was erroneously labeled as an action for precedent, the compliance of the same must be
reformation. 7. It is settled jurisprudence that what alleged in the pleading. 2. The following are examples
of conditions precedents: (a) A tender of payment is The rule is borne out of human experience. It is
required before making a consignation (Art. 1256, difficult to state the particulars constituting these
Civil Code of the Philippines). (b) Exhaustion of matters. Hence, a general averment is sufficient. P.
administrative remedies is required in certain cases Pleading alternative causes of actions or defenses 1.
before resorting to judicial action. (c) Prior resort to Under Sec. 2 of Rule 8, a party may set forth two or
barangay conciliation proceedings is necessary in more statements of a claim or defense alternatively
certain cases (Book III, Title I, Chapter 7, Local or hypothetically, either in one cause of action or
Government Code of 1991). (d) Earnest efforts defense or in separate causes of action or defenses.
toward a compromise must be undertaken when the 2. This provision recognizes that the liability of the
suit is between members of the same family and if no defendant may possibly be based on either one of
efforts were in fact made, the case must be dismissed two causes of action. The plaintiff, may for example,
(Art. 151, Family Code of the Philippines). 3. The believe that the liability of the carrier may be based
failure to comply with a condition precedent is an either on a breach of contract of carriage or on a quasi
independent ground for a motion to dismiss: that a delict but he may not be certain which of the causes
condition precedent for filing the claim has not been of action would squarely fit the set of facts alleged in
complied with (Sec. 1fj], Rule 16, Rules of Court). L. the complaint, although he is certain that he is
Pleading a judgment - In pleading a judgment or entitled to relief. He may therefore, state his causes
decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or of action in the alternative. This provision in effect,
quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is also relieves a party from being compelled to choose
sufficient to aver the judgment or decision. There is only one cause of action. - The landmark case of La
no need to allege matters showing the jurisdiction to Mallorca us. Court ofAppeals illustrates this rule
render the judgment or decision (Sec. 6, Rule 8, Rules particularly well. Here, the plaintiffs were allowed to
of Court) because under this rule, jurisdiction is sue based upon a quasi- delict theory and in the
presumed. M. Pleading an official document or act - alternative, upon a breach of contract, where the
In pleading a document or an act, it is sufficient to death of their child occurred when they were no
aver that the document was issued in compliance longer on board the bus of the common carrier but at
with law. With respect to an act, it is likewise the time the father was in the process of retrieving
sufficient to allege that the act was done also in the family's personal belongings from the bus.
compliance with law (Sec. 9, Rule 8, Rules of Court). Although ultimately the case was ruled to be a breach
N. Pleading capacity to sue or be sued - Facts showing of contract of carriage, the procedural device of
the capacity of a party to sue or be sued must be pleading alternative causes of action was strongly
averred. If a party is suing or sued in a representative reaffirmed in this case. 3. The same provision is
capacity, the same must be averred. If a party is an similar to the rule (Sec. 13, Rule 3, Rules of Court)
organized association of persons, its legal existence which authorizes suing two or more defendants in the
must likewise be averred (Sec. 4, Rule 8, Rules of alternative. For instance, the plaintiff insurance
Court). O. Pleading, fraud, mistake or condition of the company, which paid for the loss of the goods
mind 1. When making averments of fraud or mistake, insured, may sue in the alternative the shipping
the circumstances constituting such fraud or mistake company that transported the goods and the
must be stated with particularity (Sec. 5, Rule 8, Rules warehouse company that stored the goods if the
of Court). It is not enough therefore, for the complaint plaintiff is uncertain which between the defendants is
to allege that he was defrauded by the defendant. responsible for the loss. 4. Pleading alternative causes
Under this provision, the complaint must state with of action normally leads to inconsistent claims. For
particularity the fraudulent acts of the adverse party. instance, the elements of a cause of action based on
These particulars would necessarily include the time, a contractual theory are inconsistent with those of a
place and specific acts of fraud committed against cause of action based on a quasi-delict. As previously
him. 2. Malice, intent, knowledge or other conditions discussed, a suit based on a breach of contract of
of the mind of a person may be averred generally carriage for example, does not require an allegation
(Sec. 5, Rule 8, Rules of Court). Unlike in fraud or and proof of negligence because it is not an element
mistake, they need not be stated with particularity. of a breach of contract suit. On the other hand,
negligence, as a rule, is an essential element of a suit of pleading a document applies only to one which is
based on a quasi-delict (Art. 2176, Civil Code of the the basis of action or a defense. Hence, if the
Philippines). - Under Sec. 2 of Rule 8, this situation is document does not have the character of an
permissible as long as the allegations pleaded within actionable document, as when it is merely
a particular cause of action are consistent with the evidentiary, it need not be pleaded strictly in the
cause of action relied upon as an alternative. Thus, if manner prescribed by Sec. 7 of Rule 8. R. How to
the alternative cause of action is a breach of contract, contest an actionable document 1. When the action
the allegations therein must support the facts is founded upon a document pleaded in the manner
constituting the breach of the contract. Page26 5. Sec. required by Sec. 7 of Rule 8, the party who has no
2 of Rule 8 likewise allows a party to interpose intent of admitting the genuineness and due
alternative defenses even if such defenses are execution of the document, must contest the same by
inconsistent with each other. The defendant may (a) specifically denying the genuineness and due
therefore, in his answer to the complaint, defend by execution of the document under oath; and (b)
alleging that the debt has been paid or that it has setting forth what he claims to be the facts (Sec. 8,
prescribed. 6. Sec. 2 of Rule 8 does not require that all Rule 8, Rules of Court). 2.A mere specific denial of the
of the alternative causes of action be sufficient for the actionable document is insufficient. The denial must
plaintiff to be entitled to relief. It is enough that one be coupled with an oath. In current usage, this means
of them if made independently would be sufficient to that the denial must be verified. The absence of an
support a cause of action. The same principle applies oath will result in the implied admission of the due
to alternative defenses. "When two or more execution and genuineness of the document (Sec. 8,
statements are made in the alternative and one of Rule 8, Rules of Court). 3. The requirement of a
them if made independently would be sufficient, the specific denial under oath will not apply in either of
pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency the following: (a) when the adverse party does not
of one or more of the alternative statements" (Sec. 2, appear to be a party to the document, or (b) when
Rule 8, Rules of Court). Q. Pleading actionable compliance with an order for an inspection of the
documents 1. A substantial number of complaints original instrument is refused (Sec. 8, Rule 8, Rules of
reaching the courts shows that the plaintiff's cause of Court). - Thus, if a son is sued as a substitute party
action or the defendant's defense is based upon a under a document signed by his deceased father, a
written instrument or a document. - The document specific denial may be made without the same being
used in such cases is what is commonly termed an under oath because the son is not a party to the
"actionable document" and in current usage is document. Also, if the court grants a motion filed by
referred to as the document relied upon by either the a party for the inspection of the original document in
plaintiff and the defendant.  For example, in an the possession of the adverse party, and the latter
action for collection of a sum of money, the refuses to comply with the order, the former may
actionable document would be a promissory note. In deny the document without an oath. Illustration (Bar
an action for foreclosure of a mortgage, the 1987) "A"filed suit against "B" and "C" for the
actionable document would be the deed of mortgage. recovery of personal property which, according to the
On the other hand, if the defendant defends by complaint, had been sold to him by the defendant's
alleging that the debt has been paid, the receipt of father during the latter's lifetime under a document
payment issued by the plaintiff would constitute the entitled Bill of Sale. The substance of the bill was
actionable document. - Whenever an actionable pleaded in the complaint and a copy thereof was
document' is the' basis of a pleading, the rule attached to the complaint as an exhibit. "B" and "C"
specifically directs the pleader to set forth in the filed an answer which disclaimed knowledge or
pleading the substance of the instrument or the information about the Bill of Sale and averred that the
document, (a) and to attach the original or the copy signature thereon allegedly belonging to their father
of the document to the pleading as an exhibit and to \appears to be a forgery. At the trial of the case, "B"
be part of the pleading; or (b) with like effect, to set and "C" Icommenced through counsel and by means
forth in the pleading said copy of the instrument or of an expert witness, to adduce evidence to prove
document (Sec. , Rule S, Rules of Court). This manner that the seller's signature was a forgery. "A" objected,
saying that the genuineness and due execution of the on the pleadings. This judgment is rendered by the
Bill of Sale was deemed admitted because the answer court, where the answer fails to tender an issue or
was unverified, as a matter of law, inasmuch as the otherwise admits the material allegations of the
verification was made only on the express basis of adverse party's pleading (Sec. 1, Rule 34, Rules of
best information and belief. Resolve the objection Court). The deed of sale appended to the complaint is
with basis. Suggested answer: The objection should in the nature of an actionable document because it is
be overruled. "B" and "C" do not have to deny the bill the basis of the plaintiff's claim. Under the Rules, the
of sale under oath since they are not parties to the Bill genuineness and due execution of the document shall
of Sale alleged to have been executed by their be deemed admitted unless the adverse party denies
deceased father. A specific denial of the genuineness them under oath (Sec. 8, Rule 8, Rules of Court). The
and due execution of the document is sufficient. S. unverified answer therefore, failed to tender an issue.
Defenses cut-off by the admission of genuineness and Also, the averment of lack of knowledge is obviously
due execution - When a party is deemed to have one done in bad faith. A denial that the defendant is
admitted the genuineness and due execution of an without any knowledge of his having signed a deed of
actionable document, defenses that are implied from mortgage when the facts and the actionable
said admission are necessarily waived like the document forming the basis of the claim
defenses of forgery of the document, lack of authority incontrovertibly show that he so executed the
to execute the document, that the party charged document denied, is a denial in bad faith. This denial
signed the document in some other capacity than that Amounts to an admission. While a pleader is allowed
alleged in the pleading, or that the document was to allege that he is without knowledge or information
never delivered. Also cut off by the admission is the sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material
defense that the document was not in words and averment made in the complaint, this rule shall not
figures as set out in the pleadings. T. Defenses not cut- apply where the fact as to which a lack of knowledge
off by the admission of genuineness and due is asserted is, to the knowledge of the court, so plainly
execution - The following defenses, among others, on within the defendant's knowledge that his averment
the other hand, may be interposed despite the of ignorance must be palpably untrue. Illustration
implied admission of the genuineness and due (Bar 2004) In his complaint for foreclosure of
execution of the document: (a) payment; (b) want of mortgage to which was duly attached a copy of the
consideration; (c) illegality of consideration; Page27 mortgage deed, plaintiff PP alleged inter alia as
(d) usury; and (e) fraud.  These defenses are not follows: (1) that defendant DD duly executed the
inconsistent with the admission of the genuineness mortgage deed, copy of which is attached as Annex
and due execution of the instrument and are not "A" of the complaint and made an integral part
therefore, barred.  It is submitted that prescription, thereof; and (2) that to prosecute his complaint,
release, waiver, statute of frauds, estoppel, former plaintiff contracted a lawyer, CC for a fee of
recovery or discharge in bankruptcy are not likewise P50,000.00 In his answer, defendant alleged, inter
barred. Illustration (Bar 2005) In a complaint for alia, that he had no knowledge of the mortgage deed,
recovery of real property, the plaintiff averred, and he also denied liability for plaintiff's contracting
among others, that he is the owner of the said with a lawyer for a fee. Does defendant's answer as
property by virtue of a deed of sale executed by the to plaintiff's allegation No. 1 x x x sufficiently raise an
defendant in his favor. Copy of the deed of sale was issue of fact? Suggested answer: The answer of
appended to their complaint as "Annex A" thereof. In defendant does not sufficiently raise an issue of fact
his unverified answer, the defendant denied the because the answer admitted the material allegations
allegation concerning the sale of the property in of the complaint. First, the complaint was based on
question, as well as the appended deed of sale, for the mortgage deed, an actionable document. The
lack of knowledge of information sufficient to form a genuineness and due execution of the deed were all
belief as to the truth thereof. Is it proper for the court admitted when the defendant failed to make a
to render judgment without trial? Suggested answer. specific denial under oath (Sec. 8, Rule 8, Rules of
Where no other issue exists in the case, the court may Court). Second, the averment of lack of knowledge is
render a judgment without a trial through a judgment obviously one done in bad faith. A denial that the
defendant is without any knowledge of his having Page28 disappearance of the amount from the
signed a deed of mortgage when the facts and the conjugal funds as Norma Alajar lost the same in the
actionable document forming the basis of the claim casino. The answer is not verified. At the trial, the
incontrovertibly that he so executed the document lawyer of Norma Alajar objected to the testimony of
denied, is a denial in bad faith. This denial amounts to Mario Reyes as to his accommodation story because,
an admission. While a pleader is allowed to allege that as the answer is not verified, he is deemed to have
he is without knowledge or information sufficient to admitted the genuineness and due execution of the
form a belief as the truth of a material averment promissory note. Decide on the objection with
made in the complaint, this rule shall not apply where reasons. Suggested answer: The objection should be
the fact as to which a lack of knowledge is asserted is, overruled. When an actionable document is not
to the knowledge of the court, so plainly within the denied under oath, the genuineness and the due
defendant's knowledge that his averment of execution of the document are deemed admitted.
ignorance must be palpably untrue. Illustration (Bar When a party is deemed to have admitted the
1991) In an action for collection of P2,000,000.00, genuineness and due execution of an actionable
plaintiff bank alleged that defendant, Oriental Textile document, defenses that are implied from said
Mills, Inc. for valuable consideration, executed in admission are necessarily waived like the defenses of
favor of the bank a promissory note for said amount. forgery of the document, lack or authority to execute
Defendant filed an answer to the complaint denying the document, that the party charged signed the
liability and alleging that Jesus Lim had no authority document in some other capacity than that alleged in
to negotiate and obtain a loan in its behalf nor to sign the pleading, or that the document was never
the promissory note. The answer was not verified. delivered. The defense of absence of consideration is
During the trial, defendant sought to introduce not however, deemed admitted. This defense is not
evidence to show that Jesus Lim was not authorized inconsistent with the admission of the genuineness
to enter into the transaction and to sign the and due execution of the instrument.
promissory note for and in behalf of the defendant
corporation. Plaintiff objected to such evidence,
claiming that Lim's authority had been admitted by
defendant's failure to verify the answer. (a) The judge
sustained the objection. Was the ruling correct? (b)
xxx Suggested answer. The ruling of the court is
correct. Where the claim is based on an actionable
document like a promissory note, the genuineness
and due execution of the note are deemed admitted
where such matters are not specifically denied under
oath. In the instant case, the defendant in not
verifying his answer did not make a denial under oath.
When a party is deemed to have admitted the
genuineness and due execution of an actionable
document, defenses that are implied from said
admission are necessarily waived like the defenses of
forgery of the document, lack or authority to execute
the document, that the party charged signed the
document in some other capacity than that alleged in
the pleading, or that the document was never
delivered. Illustration (Bar 1990) In his answer to the
complaint, Mario Reyes alleged that he does not owe
Norma Alajar any sum of money, and that he
executed the promissory note only to enable Norma
Alajar to show the same to her husband to explain the