Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
2
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
3
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
4
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
5
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
6. M e n t i o n m u s t also be m a d e of t h e territorial
jurisdiction of a court, which refers to t h e geographical
area within which its powers can be exercised. As
already stated, this a s s u m e s importance in criminal cases
wherein considerations of t h e territory vis-a-vis t h e locus
of t h e crime d e t e r m i n e not only t h e venue of t h e case
b u t t h e jurisdiction of t h e court; and, in civil cases, t h e
venue of real or mixed actions. In all cases, t h e S u p r e m e
Court and the Court of Appeals have national jurisdiction;
t h e Regional Trial C o u r t s have regional jurisdiction; a n d
t h e inferior courts have such t e r r i t o r i a l jurisdiction as
may be defined by t h e S u p r e m e Court p u r s u a n t to Secs,
25, 28 and 3 1 , B.P. Blg. 129.
Other classifications of original jurisdiction are based
on t h e s u b j e c t - m a t t e r or t h e n a t u r e of t h e action being
t r i e d b y t h e c o u r t , s u c h a s civil, c r i m i n a l , p r o b a t e ,
a d m i r a l t y a n d maritime, juvenile and domestic relations,
a g r a r i a n , a n d land r e g i s t r a t i o n . Most of t h e s e different
a r e a s of jurisdiction a r e exercised by t h e r e g u l a r t r i a l
6
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
7
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
8
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1 1 . As a g e n e r a l proposition, t h e jurisdiction of t h e
court is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e s t a t u t e in force at t h e t i m e of
t h e c o m m e n c e m e n t of t h e action (People vs. Paderna,
9
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
10
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
11
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
this case, the Judiciary Act and B.P. Blg. 129, both as
a m e n d e d , a n d of w h i c h j u r i s d i c t i o n is only a p a r t .
J u r i s d i c t i o n c a n n o t be fixed by t h e a g r e e m e n t of t h e
parties; it cannot be acquired t h r o u g h , or waived, en-
l a r g e d or d i m i n i s h e d by, any act or omission of t h e
p a r t i e s ; neither can it be conferred by the acquiescence
of t h e court (De Jesus, et al. vs. Garcia, et al., L-26816,
Feb. 28, 1967; Calimlim, et al. vs. Ramirez, et al.,
L-34363, Nov. 19, 1982). Jurisdiction m u s t exist as a
m a t t e r of law (People vs. Casiano, L-15309, Feb. 16,
1961). Consequently, questions of jurisdiction may be
raised for t h e first time on a p p e a l even if such issue
w a s not r a i s e d in t h e l o w e r c o u r t (Government vs.
American Surety Co., 11 Phil. 203; Vda. de Roxas vs.
Rafferty, 37 Phil. 957; People vs. Que Po Lay, 94 Phil.
640). A court can motu proprio dismiss a case which is
outside its jurisdiction (Sec. 1, Rule 9).
17. N e v e r t h e l e s s , in some c a s e s , t h e p r i n c i p l e of
estoppel by laches h a s been availed of by our a p p e l l a t e
courts to bar a t t a c k s on jurisdiction a n d t h i s principle
h a s been applied to both civil a n d criminal cases, t h u s :
a. In t h e early case of Santiago, et al. vs. Valenzuela
(78 Phil. 397), it was held t h a t if a motion to dismiss t h e
appeal, on t h e ground t h a t said a p p e a l was perfected out
of time, is filed for t h e first time w i t h t h e appellate court
after t h e a p p e l l a n t had paid t h e docket fee and t h e cost
of p r i n t i n g t h e record on appeal, and after the filing of
a p p e l l a n t ' s brief, t h e a p p e l l a t e court should deny t h e
motion as t h e appellee may be considered in estoppel by
his failure to object on time.
This doctrine was subsequently abandoned in
Miranda vs. Guanzon (92 Phil. 168) since t h e "require-
m e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e perfection of an a p p e a l w i t h i n t h e
r e g l e m e n t a r y period is not only m a n d a t o r y b u t j u r i s -
dictional," a ruling subsequently r e i t e r a t e d in Garganta
vs. CA (105 Phil. 412), Valdez vs. Ocumen (106 Phil.
12
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
13
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
14
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
16
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
19. S i n c e a C o u r t o f F i r s t I n s t a n c e ( n o w , t h e
R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t ) is a c o u r t of g e n e r a l o r i g i n a l
jurisdiction, w h e t h e r a p a r t i c u l a r m a t t e r should be
resolved by it in t h e exercise of its g e n e r a l jurisdiction,
or in its limited j u r i s d i c t i o n as a p r o b a t e or land
r e g i s t r a t i o n court, is not a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l q u e s t i o n b u t
a p r o c e d u r a l q u e s t i o n i n v o l v i n g a m o d e of p r a c t i c e
16
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
17
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
Coron vs. Carino, et al., G.R. No. 65896, Sept. 24, 1987;
Sarmiento vs. Gatmaitan, et al., L-38173, Nov. 12, 1987).
However, new court rules apply to p e n d i n g cases
only with reference to proceedings t h e r e i n which t a k e
place after t h e d a t e of t h e i r effectivity. They do not
apply to the extent t h a t in t h e opinion of t h e court t h e i r
application would not be feasible or would work injustice,
in which event the former procedure shall apply. T h u s ,
where t h e application of the Rule on S u m m a r y Procedure
will m e a n t h e dismissal of the appeal of t h e p a r t y , t h e
s a m e should not apply since, after all, t h e p r o c e d u r e
t h e y a v a i l e d of w a s also allowed u n d e r t h e R u l e s of
Court (Laguio, et al. vs. Garnet, et al., G.R. No. 74903,
Mar. 21, 1980).
22. S u b s t a n t i v e law is t h a t p a r t of t h e law which
c r e a t e s r i g h t s concerning life, liberty or property, or t h e
p o w e r s of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t i e s for t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of
p u b l i c affairs (Primicias vs. Ocampo, 81 Phil. 650).
Procedural law refers to the adjective laws which prescribe
rules a n d forms of procedure in order t h a t courts may be
able to a d m i n i s t e r justice (Lopez vs. Gloria, 40 Phil. 33).
S u b s t a n t i v e law c r e a t e s , defines a n d r e g u l a t e s r i g h t s ,
as opposed to "adjective or remedial law" which prescribes
t h e method of enforcing t h e r i g h t s or obtaining r e d r e s s
for t h e i r i n v a s i o n (Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.,
p. 1429; citations omitted).
Procedure is t h e mode of proceeding by which a legal
r i g h t is enforced, as d i s t i n g u i s h e d from t h e law which
gives or defines t h e right, a n d which, by m e a n s of t h e
proceeding, t h e court is to a d m i n i s t e r . This t e r m is com-
monly opposed to t h e s u m of legal principles c o n s t i t u t i n g
t h e s u b s t a n c e of t h e law, and denotes t h e body of rules,
w h e t h e r of practice or pleading, whereby rights are
effectuated t h r o u g h t h e successful a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e
proper remedies (op. cit., pp. 1367-1368; id.).
®
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
In d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a r u l e p r e s c r i b e d by t h e
S u p r e m e C o u r t abridges, e n l a r g e s or modifies any
substantive right, the test is whether the rule really
r e g u l a t e s p r o c e d u r e , t h a t is, t h e judicial process for
enforcing rights and duties recognized by the substantive
law a n d for j u s t l y a d m i n i s t e r i n g r e m e d y a n d r e d r e s s for
a d i s r e g a r d or infraction of t h e m . If t h e r u l e t a k e s a w a y
a vested r i g h t , it is not p r o c e d u r a l . If t h e r u l e c r e a t e s a
right, s u c h as t h e r i g h t to a p p e a l , it may be classified as
a s u b s t a n t i v e m a t t e r ; b u t if it operates as a means of
implementing an existing right, then the rule deals
merely with procedure (Fabian vs. Desierto, etc., et al.,
G.R. No. 129742, Sept. 16, 1998).
It is, t h e r e f o r e , t h e n a t u r e a n d t h e p u r p o s e of t h e
law w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s w h e t h e r i t i s s u b s t a n t i v e o r
procedural, a n d not its place in t h e s t a t u t e or its inclusion
in a code. T h u s , for i n s t a n c e , A r t s . 539 and 1674 of t h e
Civil Code a n d Sec. 85, R.A. 296 provided injunctive r u l e s
i n e j e c t m e n t cases i n t h e t r i a l a n d a p p e l l a t e s t a g e s , b u t
these have b e e n properly incorporated with modifications
as Secs. 8 a n d 9, r e s p e c t i v e l y , of Rule 70 of t h e 1964
Rules of C o u r t (now, Sec. 15 of revised Rule 70). T h e s e
s u b s e q u e n t a m e n d a t o r y provisions on injunctions were
proper since t h e m e r e fact t h a t those provisions on in-
junctions w e r e formerly included in a s u b s t a n t i v e s t a t u t e
or code does not c o n v e r t t h e m into or d e t r a c t from t h e
fact t h a t t h e y a r e p r o c e d u r a l laws, c o n t r a r y t o common
m i s i m p r e s s i o n . I n fact, t h e r e a r e m a n y such p r o c e d u r a l
rules found in t h e Civil Code or, for t h a t m a t t e r , in o t h e r
codes o r b a s i c a l l y s u b s t a n t i v e l a w s b u t t h e y d o n o t
t h e r e b y lose t h e i r c h a r a c t e r a s p r o c e d u r a l laws.
T h i s m a t t e r is being clarified a n d e m p h a s i z e d h e r e
in view of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n a l provision t h a t t h e r u l e s
which t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t is a u t h o r i z e d to p r o m u l g a t e
shall not d i m i n i s h , i n c r e a s e or modify s u b s t a n t i v e r i g h t s
(Sec. 5 [5], Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution). The improbable
position t h a t a clearly p r o c e d u r a l provision becomes a
19
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
20
I. CIVIL P R O C E D U R E
A. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
2. Definition of t e r m s :
a. Cause of action: The delict or wrongful act or
omission c o m m i t t e d by t h e d e f e n d a n t in v i o l a t i o n of
the p r i m a r y r i g h t s of t h e plaintiff (Racoma vs. Fortich,
et al, L-29380, June 10, 1971).
b. Right of action: T h e r e m e d i a l r i g h t or r i g h t to
relief g r a n t e d by law to a p a r t y to i n s t i t u t e an action
a g a i n s t a p e r s o n who h a s c o m m i t t e d a delict or w r o n g
against him.
T h e c a u s e of a c t i o n is t h e delict or w r o n g , while
the r i g h t of action is t h e r i g h t to sue as a consequence
of t h a t delict. T h e q u e s t i o n as to w h e t h e r t h e plaintiff
has a c a u s e of action is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e a v e r m e n t s
in the pleading regarding the acts committed by the
defendant; w h e t h e r s u c h acts give him a r i g h t of action
is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e s u b s t a n t i v e law. T h e r e can be no
r i g h t of a c t i o n w i t h o u t a c a u s e of a c t i o n b e i n g first
e s t a b l i s h e d (see Espanol vs. The Chairman, etc. of the
PVA, L-44616, June 29, 1985).
A r i g h t of action is t h e r i g h t to p r e s e n t l y enforce a
c a u s e of a c t i o n — a r e m e d i a l r i g h t affording r e d r e s s
for t h e i n f r i n g e m e n t of a legal r i g h t belonging to some
definite person; a c a u s e of action consists of t h e operative
facts which give rise to s u c h r i g h t of action. The r i g h t
of a c t i o n does n o t a r i s e u n t i l t h e p e r f o r m a n c e of all
conditions p r e c e d e n t to t h e action, a n d may be t a k e n
away by the r u n n i n g of the s t a t u t e of limitations,
21
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
22
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
23
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
24
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
25
B. J U R I S D I C T I O N OF THE S U P R E M E COURT
U N D E R THE 1987 C O N S T I T U T I O N
Article VI (Legislative D e p a r t m e n t )
"Sec. 30. No law s h a l l be p a s s e d i n c r e a s i n g t h e
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as
provided i n t h i s C o n s t i t u t i o n w i t h o u t i t s advice a n d
concurrence."
"Sec. 18. ( t h i r d p a r . ) T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t m a y
review, in an a p p r o p r i a t e proceeding filed by any citizen,
t h e sufficiency of t h e factual basis of t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n of
m a r t i a l law or t h e suspension of t h e privilege of t h e w r i t
or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision
t h e r e o n w i t h i n t h i r t y days from its filing."
26
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
U N D E R T H E 1987 CONSTITUTION
27
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
NOTES
28
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
U N D E R T H E 1987 CONSTITUTION
29
C. THE J U D I C I A R Y REORGANIZATION ACT
OF 1 9 8 0
ORGANIZATION
30
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
31
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
32
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
JURISDICTION
I. I n t e r m e d i a t e Appellate C o u r t (now, t h e Court of
Appeals):
33
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
34
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
NOTES
35
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
36
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
37
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
38
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
39
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
1 1 . On a different r a t i o n a l e , t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t
ruled in Fabian vs. Desierto, etc., et al. (G.R. No. 129742,
S e p t . 16, 1998) t h a t a p p e a l s from t h e Office of t h e
O m b u d s m a n in administrative disciplinary cases should
be t a k e n to the Court of Appeals via a verified petition for
review u n d e r Rule 43. Striking down as unconstitutional
Sec. 27, R.A. 6770 ( O m b u d s m a n Act of 1989) w h i c h
a u t h o r i z e d s u c h a p p e a l t o t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t "in
accordance with Rule 45," it was pointed out t h a t
appeals u n d e r Rule 45 apply only to j u d g m e n t s or final
orders of the courts e n u m e r a t e d u n d e r Sec. 1 thereof, a n d
not to those of quasi-judicial agencies. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h a t
provision of R.A. 6770 violates the proscription in Sec. 30,
A r t . VI of t h e 1987 C o n s t i t u t i o n a g a i n s t a law which
increases the appellate jurisdiction of t h e S u p r e m e Court
without its advice and consent.
40
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
41
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
42
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
NOTES
43
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
2. The j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t s
differs from t h a t of the former Courts of F i r s t Instance
in t h e following respects:
a. While u n d e r t h e J u d i c i a r y Act, all a c t i o n s in
a d m i r a l t y a n d m a r i t i m e j u r i s d i c t i o n w e r e exclusively
cognizable by t h e Court of F i r s t I n s t a n c e r e g a r d l e s s of
t h e v a l u e of t h e p r o p e r t y involved or t h e a m o u n t of
p l a i n t i f f s claim (Sec. 44[d]), they a r e now w i t h i n t h e
exclusive jurisdiction of t h e Regional Trial Courts only if
t h e value or claim exceeds P 100,000 or, in M e t r o Manila,
P200,000, otherwise jurisdiction is vested in t h e inferior
courts (Sec. 33).
b . T h e J u d i c i a r y Act v e s t e d t h e C o u r t s o f F i r s t
I n s t a n c e w i t h exclusive j u r i s d i c t i o n in all m a t t e r s of
probate, w h e t h e r t e s t a t e or i n t e s t a t e (Sec. 44[e]). The
Regional Trial Courts now have such exclusive jurisdiction
if t h e gross value of t h e e s t a t e exceeds P 100,000 or, in
Metro Manila, P200.000, otherwise t h e proceedings a r e
cognizable by t h e inferior courts (Sec. 33).
c. Actions for a n n u l m e n t of m a r r i a g e a n d all o t h e r
special cases and proceedings not otherwise provided for
were exclusively cognizable by the Courts of First Instance
u n d e r t h e J u d i c i a r y Act (Sec. 44[e]) or, u n d e r special
44
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
45
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
46
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
47
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
I I I . Family Courts:
1. On October 28, 1997, Congress enacted R.A.
8369 ( F a m i l y C o u r t s Act of 1997; s e e Appendix P)
establishing a Family Court in every province and city
and, in case the city is t h e provincial capital, t h e Family
Court shall be established in t h e municipality w i t h the
highest population. Pending t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of such
Family Courts, t h e S u p r e m e Court shall d e s i g n a t e t h e
s a m e from a m o n g t h e b r a n c h e s of t h e R e g i o n a l T r i a l
Courts e n u m e r a t e d in the Act; and in a r e a s w h e r e t h e r e
a r e n o F a m i l y C o u r t s , t h e c a s e s w h i c h a r e w i t h i n its
exclusive original jurisdiction shall be adjudicated by t h e
Regional Trial Court.
48
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
49
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
50
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
NOTES
51
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
5 . T h e r e g l e m e n t a r y p e r i o d s for a p p e a l s from
j u d g m e n t s or final o r d e r s of t h e different t r i a l c o u r t s
have been made uniform at 15 days from receipt thereof,
except in special p r o c e e d i n g s , cases w h e r e i n m u l t i p l e
appeals are permitted, and habeas corpus cases. For a
detailed discussion on t h e bases, modes and periods for
a p p e a l from a n d to different c o u r t s , see Lacsamana,
et al. vs. The Hon. Second Special Cases Division of the
52
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980
53
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
J U R I S D I C T I O N I N CIVIL C A S E S
I. S U P R E M E COURT
A. Original
1. Exclusive
a. P e t i t i o n s for c e r t i o r a r i , p r o h i b i t i o n or
m a n d a m u s against:
(1) Court of Appeals;
(2) Court of Tax Appeals;
(3) S a n d i g a n b a y a n ;
(4) Commission on Elections; and
(5) Commission on Audit.
2. Concurrent
a. With t h e Court of Appeals
(1) Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or
m a n d a m u s against:
(a) Regional Trial Courts;
(b) Civil Service Commission;
(c) C e n t r a l B o a r d o f A s s e s s m e n t
Appeals;
(d) N a t i o n a l Labor R e l a t i o n s Com-
mission; a n d
(e) O t h e r quasi-judicial agencies.
b. With t h e Court of Appeals a n d Regional
Trial Courts
(1) Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or
m a n d a m u s a g a i n s t courts of t h e first
level a n d o t h e r bodies; a n d
(2) Petitions for habeas corpus a n d quo
warranto.
c. With Regional Trial Courts
(1) Actions a g a i n s t a m b a s s a d o r s , o t h e r
public ministers a n d consuls.
54
J U R I S D I C T I O N IN CIVIL C A S E S
B. Appellate
1. Petitions for review on certiorari against:
a. Court of Appeals;
b. Court of Tax Appeals;
c. S a n d i g a n b a y a n ; a n d
d. Regional Trial Courts in cases involving —
(1) C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y or v a l i d i t y of a
treaty, international or executive
a g r e e m e n t , law, p r e s i d e n t i a l decree,
proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation;
(2) Legality of a tax, impost, a s s e s s m e n t ,
toll or a p e n a l t y in relation t h e r e t o ;
(3) J u r i s d i c t i o n of a lower court; a n d
(4) Only e r r o r s or questions of law.
55
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
b. Family Courts.
2. Appeal by petition for review from:
a. Civil Service Commission;
b. Central Board of Assessment Appeals;
c. Securities and Exchange Commission;
d. Land Registration Authority;
e. Social Security Commission;
f. Office of the President;
g. Civil Aeronautics Board;
h. B u r e a u s u n d e r the Intellectual Property
Office;
i. National Electrification Administration;
j . Energy Regulatory Board;
k. National Telecommunications Commission;
1. D e p a r t m e n t of A g r a r i a n Reform u n d e r
R.A. 6657;
m. Government Service I n s u r a n c e System;
n. Employees Compensation Commission;
o. Agricultural Inventions Board;
p. I n s u r a n c e Commission;
q. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission;
r. Board of I n v e s t m e n t s ;
s. Construction Industry Arbitration Commis-
sion;
t. Office of t h e O m b u d s m a n , in a d m i n i s t r a -
tive disciplinary cases; and
u. Any o t h e r quasi-judicial agency, i n s t r u -
mentality, board or commission in the
e x e r c i s e of i t s q u a s i - j u d i c i a l f u n c t i o n s ,
such as voluntary a r b i t r a t o r s .
3. Petitions for review from t h e Regional Trial
C o u r t s i n cases a p p e a l e d t h e r e t o from t h e
lower courts.
56
JURISDICTION IN CIVIL C A S E S
I I I . R E G I O N A L TRIAL C O U R T S
A. Original
1. Exclusive
a. Actions t h e subject m a t t e r s whereof are not
capable of pecuniary estimation;
b. Actions involving title to or possession of
r e a l p r o p e r t y or an i n t e r e s t t h e r e i n , w h e r e
the assessed value of such property exceeds
P 2 0 . 0 0 0 or, i n M e t r o M a n i l a , P 5 0 . 0 0 0 ,
except forcible e n t r y and u n l a w f u l
detainer;
c. Actions in a d m i r a l t y and m a r i t i m e juris-
diction w h e r e t h e d e m a n d or claim exceeds
PIOO.OOO or, in M e t r o Manila, P200.000;
d. M a t t e r s of p r o b a t e , t e s t a t e or i n t e s t a t e ,
w h e r e t h e gross value of t h e e s t a t e exceeds
P100,000 or, in M e t r o Manila, P200.000;
e. Cases not within t h e exclusive jurisdiction
of any court, t r i b u n a l , person or body exer-
cising judicial or quasi-judicial functions;
f. Actions a n d special proceedings within t h e
exclusive original jurisdiction of t h e Court
of A g r a r i a n Relations as now provided by
law; a n d
g. O t h e r cases w h e r e t h e demand, exclusive
o f i n t e r e s t , d a m a g e s , a t t o r n e y ' s fees,
litigation expenses and costs, or t h e value
of t h e p r o p e r t y exceeds P 100,000 or, in
Metro Manila, P200,000.
2. Concurrent
a. With t h e S u p r e m e Court:
(1) Actions affecting a m b a s s a d o r s , other
public ministers and consuls.
b. With t h e S u p r e m e Court and the Court of
Appeals:
57
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
IV. FAMILY C O U R T S
A. Original
1. Exclusive
a. P e t i t i o n s for g u a r d i a n s h i p , c u s t o d y of
children, habeas corpus in relation to t h e
latter;
b. Petitions for adoption of children a n d t h e
revocation thereof;
c. C o m p l a i n t s for a n n u l m e n t of m a r r i a g e ,
declaration of nullity of m a r r i a g e a n d those
relating to marital status and property
r e l a t i o n s of h u s b a n d a n d wife or t h o s e
living t o g e t h e r u n d e r different s t a t u s a n d
a g r e e m e n t s , a n d petitions for dissolution
of conjugal p a r t n e r s h i p of gains;
d . P e t i t i o n s for s u p p o r t a n d / o r a c k n o w l -
edgment;
e. Summary judicial proceedings brought
u n d e r t h e provisions of Executive O r d e r
No. 209 (Family Code of t h e Philippines);
f. P e t i t i o n s for d e c l a r a t i o n of s t a t u s of
children as abandoned, dependent or
neglected children, for t h e v o l u n t a r y or
involuntary c o m m i t m e n t of children, a n d
for t h e s u s p e n s i o n , t e r m i n a t i o n , o r
58
J U R I S D I C T I O N IN CIVIL C A S E S
59
RULE 1 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
60
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 1
D. T H E R E V I S E D R U L E S OF COURT*
P u r s u a n t t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s e c t i o n 5(5) o f
Article VIII o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t
h e r e b y a d o p t s a n d p r o m u l g a t e s t h e following r u l e s
concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional r i g h t s , pleading, practice and procedure in
all c o u r t s , t h e a d m i s s i o n t o t h e p r a c t i c e o f law, t h e
Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the under-
privileged:
RULE 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
NOTES
2. " W h e n by l a w j u r i s d i c t i o n is c o n f e r r e d on a
court or judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and
61
RULE 1 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
62
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 3
63
RULE 1 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
NOTES
64
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 6
S e c . 3. Cases governed. — T h e s e R u l e s s h a l l
govern the procedure to be observed in actions,
civil o r c r i m i n a l , a n d s p e c i a l p r o c e e d i n g s .
(a) A c i v i l a c t i o n is o n e by w h i c h a p a r t y s u e s
a n o t h e r for t h e e n f o r c e m e n t o r p r o t e c t i o n o f a
right, or the p r e v e n t i o n or redress of a wrong,
( l a , R2)
A civil action may either be ordinary or special.
B o t h a r e g o v e r n e d b y t h e r u l e s for o r d i n a r y c i v i l
a c t i o n s , s u b j e c t t o t h e s p e c i f i c r u l e s p r e s c r i b e d for
a s p e c i a l c i v i l a c t i o n , (n)
65
RULE 1 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. S
(b) A c r i m i n a l a c t i o n is o n e by w h i c h t h e S t a t e
p r o s e c u t e s a p e r s o n for an a c t or o m i s s i o n
p u n i s h a b l e by l a w . (n)
(c) A s p e c i a l p r o c e e d i n g is a r e m e d y by w h i c h a
p a r t y s e e k s to e s t a b l i s h a s t a t u s , a r i g h t , or a
p a r t i c u l a r fact. (2a, R2)
NOTES
3. In an ordinary action, t h e r e m u s t be r e a l p a r t i e s
in i n t e r e s t a s s e r t i n g adverse claims and p r e s e n t i n g a ripe
issue (Tolentino vs. Board of Accountancy, 90 Phil. 88).
66
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 5
NOTE
S e c . 5. Commencement of action. — A c i v i l a c t i o n
is commenced by the filing of the original complaint
in court. If an additional defendant is impleaded in
a later pleading, the action is c o m m e n c e d with
regard to h i m on the date of the filing of such later
p l e a d i n g , i r r e s p e c t i v e o f w h e t h e r t h e m o t i o n for i t s
a d m i s s i o n ^ i f n e c e s s a r y , i s d e n i e d b y t h e c o u r t . (6a)
NOTES
68
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 5
69
RULE 1 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
70
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 6
71
RULE 1 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
S e c . 6. Construction. — T h e s e R u l e s s h a l l be
liberally construed in order to promote their
objective of securing a just, speedy and i n e x p e n s i v e
d i s p o s i t i o n o f e v e r y a c t i o n a n d p r o c e e d i n g . (2a)
NOTES
72
RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 6
73
RULE 1 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
74
CIVIL A C T I O N S
RULE 2
C A U S E OF ACTION
NOTES
76
RULE 2 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
NOTES
76
RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION SEC. 4
5. W i t h a l , e v e n if t h e c o n t r a c t is divisible in its
performance a n d t h e future periodic deliveries a r e not
yet due, b u t t h e obligor h a s already manifested his refusal
to comply w i t h his future periodic obligations, "the con-
tract is entire and the breach total," hence t h e r e can only
be one action for damages (Blossom & Co. vs. Manila Gas
Corporation, 55 Phil. 226).
77
RULE 2 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTES
78
RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION SEC. 5
79
RULE 2 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
5 . I n a c o m p l a i n t filed i n t h e S e c u r i t i e s a n d
Exchange Commission by a stockholder of a corporation,
one of t h e causes of action t h e r e i n sought t h e a n n u l m e n t
of a dacion en pago a g r e e m e n t , whereby said corporation
ceded all its a s s e t s to the mortgagee b a n k in s e t t l e m e n t
of its account, and to recover said property from t h e third-
party purchaser to whom the mortgagee bank had
subsequently sold t h e property and who was impleaded
as a co-defendant. It was held t h a t such cause of action
could not be joined in said complaint since jurisdiction
thereover lies in t h e r e g u l a r courts. While, ordinarily,
the p u r c h a s e r corporation should be included as a p a r t y
defendant since it h a s an i n t e r e s t in t h e subject m a t t e r ,
in this case said p u r c h a s e r has no intra-corporate
relationship with t h e complainant, hence, t h e Commission
has no jurisdiction over it u n d e r P.D. 902-A. The rule on
permissive joinder of causes of action is subject to t h e
rules r e g a r d i n g jurisdiction, venue and joinder of p a r t i e s
(Union Glass & Container Corp., et al. vs. SEC, et al.,
G.R. No. 64013, Nov. 28, 1983), as clarified in this revised
Rule.
80
RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION SEC. 5
81
RULE 2 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
82
RULE 2 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 6
83
RULE 3
P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S
NOTES
NOTES
S e c . 3. Representatives as parties. — W h e r e t h e
a c t i o n is a l l o w e d to be p r o s e c u t e d or d e f e n d e d by a
representative or s o m e o n e a c t i n g in a fiduciary
capacity, the beneficiary shall be included in the
title of the case and shall be d e e m e d to be the real
p a r t y in i n t e r e s t . A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e m a y be a t r u s t e e
of an express trust, a guardian, an e x e c u t o r or
a d m i n i s t r a t o r , or a p a r t y a u t h o r i z e d by l a w or t h e s e
R u l e s . A n a g e n t a c t i n g i n h i s o w n n a m e a n d for
the benefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or
be sued without joining the principal except w h e n
the contract involves things belonging to the
p r i n c i p a l . (3a)
NOTES
86
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS SEC. 3
3. A*corporation c a n n o t m a i n t a i n an a c t i o n to
recover property belonging to its stockholders as it has
no interest therein, it having a separate personality and
the properties not having been transferred to it (Sulo
ng Bayan, Inc. vs. Gregorio Araneta, Inc., et al., L-31061,
Aug. 17, 1976).
4. U n d e r t h e p r e s e n t Rules, p a r t i e s in i n t e r e s t may
be classified a n d defined as follows:
a. Indispensable parties: Those without whom no
final d e t e r m i n a t i o n can be had of an action (Sec. 7).
b. Necessary parties: Those who a r e not indispen-
sable but ought to be parties if complete relief is to be
87
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
88
RULE 3 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 4
6. In t h e p r e s e n t definition of a necessary p a r t y , t h e
a d d i t i o n of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e c l a u s e "or for a c o m p l e t e
d e t e r m i n a t i o n or s e t t l e m e n t of t h e claim subject of the
action" is i n t e n d e d to m a k e t h e definition of necessary
p a r t i e s more comprehensive a n d complete. T h u s , if the
plaintiff creditor s u e s only one of t h e two joint debtors,
the j u d g m e n t t h e r e i n would accord complete relief as
between him a n d said defendant. However, t h e co-debtor
who was not impleaded is definitely a necessary p a r t y
since a j u d g m e n t in t h a t action with respect to his own
joint liability is necessary for a complete s e t t l e m e n t of
the debt in favor of t h e plaintiff. Without such alterna-
tive clause, the u n i m p l e a d e d debtor would not be
considered as a necessary p a r t y and t h e procedure and
sanctions in Sec. 9 of t h i s Rule could not be applied to
him.
S e c . 4. Spouses as parties. — H u s b a n d a n d w i f e
shall s u e o* be s u e d jointly, e x c e p t as provided by
law. (4a)
89
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTE
NOTES
T
- -• . r -
1. U n d e r t h e 1964 Rules, a distinction w a s made
between unemancipated and emancipated minors. An
u n e m a n c i p a t e d minor could sue or to be sued "through"
h i s p a r e n t o r g u a r d i a n , t h a t is, t h e a c t i o n h a d t o b e
brought in the name of or against such p a r e n t or
guardian with the designation that he was bringing
the action or being sued in t h a t capacity. In t h e case of
e m a n c i p a t e d minors, they could sue or be sued "with t h e
assistance" of t h e p a r e n t or g u a r d i a n . The action was in
the n a m e of or a g a i n s t t h e minor, w i t h an indication t h a t
he was being assisted t h e r e i n by his p a r e n t or g u a r d i a n .
Note t h a t 18 y e a r s is now t h e age of majority (R.A. 6809)
and for contracting m a r r i a g e (Art. 5, Family Code).
90
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 6
his i n c o m p e t e n c y be alleged in t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g
pleadings a n d t h e t r i a l court may p a s s upon t h e t r u t h a n d
effects thereof.
NOTES
91
RULE 3 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
y
S e c . 7. Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties.
— Parties in interest w i t h o u t w h o m no final
92
RULE 3 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SECS. 7-8
S e c . 8. Necessary party. — A n e c e s s a r y p a r t y is
one w h o is not indispensable but who ought to be
joined as a party if c o m p l e t e relief is to be accorded
as to t h o s e a l r e a d y p a r t i e s , or for a c o m p l e t e
determination or settlement of the claim subject of
t h e a c t i o n . (8a)
NOTES
93
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
NOTES
94
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 9
95
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 10-11
NOTES
96
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL A C T I O N S S E C . 12
NOTES
97
RULE 3 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12
98
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL A C T I O N S S E C . 12
99
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
100
RULE 3 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SECS. 14-15
NOTE
NOTES
101
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 15
NOTES
102
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS S E C . 16
NOTES
103
RULE 3 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 16
104
RULE 3 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S S E C . 16
3. Upon l e a r n i n g of the d e a t h of a p a r t y , t h e t r i a l
court should not order the a m e n d m e n t of t h e complaint
but t h e appearance of the decedent's legal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .
An o r d e r for the- a m e n d m e n t of t h e c o m p l a i n t before
s u b s t i t u t i o n of the deceased p a r t y is void (Casenas vs.
Rosales, L-18707, Feb. 28, 1967). Upon t h e d e a t h of t h e
party, t h e a t t o r n e y h a s no further a u t h o r i t y to appear,
save to inform t h e court of his client's d e a t h and to t a k e
steps t o s a f e g u a r d t h e d e c e d e n t ' s i n t e r e s t , u n l e s s his
services a r e f u r t h e r r e t a i n e d by t h e s u b s t i t u t e p a r t i e s
(Vda. de Haberer vs. CA, et al., L-42709, May 26, 1981;
Lavina, et al. vs. CA, et al., G.R. Nos. 78295 and 79917,
April 10, 1989; Heirs of Maxima Regoso vs. CA, et al.,
G.R. No. 91879, July 6, 1992). The d e f e n d a n t ' s legal
heirs are his legal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s if t h e r e is no pending
proceeding for t h e s e t t l e m e n t of his e s t a t e (Magdalera vs.
Benedicto, 103 Phil. 1102 [Unrep.J). The rule is t h a t in
the s u b s t i t u t i o n of t h e deceased, priority is given to his
legal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , i.e., t h e executor or a d m i n i s t r a t o r of
his e s t a t e . The court may allow t h e substitution by the
heirs instead if t h e r e is unreasonable delay in the
a p p o i n t m e n t of an executor or a d m i n i s t r a t o r or when the
estate was extrajudicially settled (Lawas vs. CA, et al.,
supra).
105
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 16
6. W h e r e d u r i n g t h e p e n d e n c y of actions filed by
t h e g u a r d i a n in behalf of his ward, t h e l a t t e r died and
t h e former w a s t h e r e a f t e r a p p o i n t e d a d m i n i s t r a t o r of
t h e e s t a t e of t h e decedent, he may be s u b s t i t u t e d as a
representative p a r t y in t h e pending actions (Ypil vs. Solas,
et al., L-49311, May 27, 1979).
106
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS S E C . 16
107
RULE 3 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 17-18
108
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS SECS. 17-19
NOTES
109
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 20
110
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 20
i n s t e a d be allowed to c o n t i n u e u n t i l e n t r y of final
judgment. A favorable j u d g m e n t obtained by the
plaintiff t h e r e i n shall be enforced in the m a n n e r
e s p e c i a l l y p r o v i d e d i n t h e s e R u l e s for p r o s e c u t i n g
claims a g a i n s t t h e e s t a t e of a d e c e a s e d p e r s o n . (21a)
NOTES
2. U n d e r t h e former procedure, t h e d a t e of t h e d e a t h
of t h e defendant, in relation to t h e stage of t h e action at
t h a t time, was d e t e r m i n a t i v e of t h e procedure t h a t should
be followed thereafter. If he died "before final j u d g m e n t
in t h e C o u r t of F i r s t I n s t a n c e , " t h e action should be
dismissed w i t h o u t prejudice to t h e plaintiff p r e s e n t i n g
his claim t h e r e i n as a money claim in t h e s e t t l e m e n t of
the e s t a t e of t h e deceased defendant in accordance with
and as required by Sec. 5, Rule 86. The reason given for
the adoption of such procedure was t h a t if t h e defendant
dies a n d despite such fact t h e case against him proceeds
t o j u d g m e n t , h i s e s t a t e will n o n e t h e l e s s h a v e t o b e
settled in a Regional Trial Court (then, t h e Court of First
I n s t a n c e ) w h e r e i n s u c h j u d g m e n t for money s h a l l b e
presented as a claim. Consequently, unless t h e action is
111
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 20
112
RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS SEC. 20
6. T h i s s e c t i o n s p e a k s of c o n t r a c t s , " e x p r e s s or
implied," which is t h e s a m e terminology used in Sec. 5,
Rule 86 w i t h r e g a r d to one of t h e bases for t h e money
claims to be filed t h e r e u n d e r , and, formerly, in Sec. 1(a),
Rule 57 on p r e l i m i n a r y a t t a c h m e n t with respect to the
bases of causes of action contemplated therein. In Leung
Ben vs. O'Brien, et al. (38 Phil. 182), it was held t h a t
the contracts, express or implied, referred to in Rule 57,
include all p u r e l y p e r s o n a l obligations which a r e not
based on a delict or a tort, t h a t is, a quasi-delict. According-
ly, o n t h e s a m e c o n c e p t u a l r a t i o n a l e , t h e " i m p l i e d "
contracts mentioned in this section and in Sec. 5, Rule 86
may properly include w h a t are referred to in civil law as
quasi-contracts, a n d t h i s is t h e t e r m now used in Sec. 1(a)
of Rule 57, as a m e n d e d .
113
RULE 3 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 21
S e c . 2 1 . Indigent party. — A p a r t y m a y be
authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense
a s a n i n d i g e n t i f t h e c o u r t , u p o n a n e x parte
application and hearing, is satisfied that the party
is one w h o has no money or property sufficient and
a v a i l a b l e for f o o d , s h e l t e r a n d b a s i c n e c e s s i t i e s for
himself and his family.
Such authority shall include an exemption
from p a y m e n t of docket and other lawful fees, and
of transcripts of stenographic notes which the
court may order to be furnished him. The amount
of the docket and other lawful fees which the
indigent w a s e x e m p t e d from p a y i n g shall be a lien
on any judgment rendered in the case favorable to
the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides.
Any adverse party may contest the grant of
such authority at any time before judgment is
rendered by the trial court. If the court should
d e t e r m i n e after h e a r i n g that the party d e c l a r e d as
an i n d i g e n t is in fact a p e r s o n w i t h sufficient
income or property, the proper docket and other
lawful fees shall be assessed and collected by
the clerk of court. If payment is not made within
the time fixed by the court, e x e c u t i o n shall issue
for t h e p a y m e n t t h e r e o f , w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e t o s u c h
o t h e r s a n c t i o n s a s t h e c o u r t m a y i m p o s e . (22a)
114
RULE 3 P A R T I E S TO CIVIL A C T I O N S SEC. 22
NOTES
2. T h e p r e s e n t c o n c e p t of an i n d i g e n t l i t i g a n t is
believed to be more realistic in light of t h e contemporary
s i t u a t i o n . T h e proof of p a u p e r i s m r e q u i r e d u n d e r t h e
former Rule consisted merely of affidavits or certificates
of t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g t r e a s u r e r s t h a t t h e p a r t y had no
r e g i s t e r e d p r o p e r t y . I t w a s considered i n a c c u r a t e and
misleading since a p a r t y may be financially sound although
h e h a s n o t a c q u i r e d o r r e g i s t e r e d a n y p r o p e r t y for
reasons of his own, hence t h e p r e s e n t revision opted for
judicial i n t e r v e n t i o n w i t h s a n c t i o n s a s set out i n t h i s
section.
115
RULE 3 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 22
116
RULE 4
VENUE OF ACTIONS
NOTES
117
RULE 4 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS 1-2
2. The v e n u e of t h e r e a l actions c o n t e m p l a t e d in
t h e first p a r a g r a p h of Sec. 1 of t h i s Rule shall be "in t h e
proper court which h a s jurisdiction over t h e a r e a w h e r e i n
the r e a l p r o p e r t y involved, or a portion thereof, is
situated." This is so because under the a m e n d m e n t s
i n t r o d u c e d by R.A. 7 6 9 1 to Secs. 19 a n d 33 of B.P. Blg. 129, both t h e Regional Trial C o u r t s a n d t h e lower
courts now have jurisdiction over real actions, d e p e n d i n g
on the value of the property in controversy. This
p r e s u p p o s e s , h o w e v e r , t h a t s u c h r e a l a c t i o n involves
the title to or t h e possession of t h e r e a l p r o p e r t y or any
interest therein.
4. A c t i o n s for t h e a n n u l m e n t or r e s c i s s i o n of a
sale a n d t h e r e t u r n of realty (Muhoz vs. Llamas, et al.,
87 Phil. 737; Gavieres vs. Sanchez, et al., 94 Phil. 760;
Punsalan vs. Vda. de Lacsamana, et al., G.R. No. 55729,
Mar. 28, 1983), to compel t h e vendor to accept p a y m e n t
118
RULE 4 V E N U E OF ACTIONS SECS. 1-2
6. An a c t i o n for t h e r e v i e w of an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
decision involving r e a l p r o p e r t y should he brought in t h e
Regional T r i a l Court of t h e place w h e r e t h e officer who
r e n d e r e d t h e decision holds office, a n d not w h e r e t h e
land is s i t u a t e d (Salud vs. Executive Secretary, L-25446,
May 22, 1969), such as w h e r e t h e m a t t e r in dispute is a
fishpond p e r m i t (Digon vs. Bayona, 98 Phil. 442; Sarabia
vs. Secretary, 104 Phil. 115) or t h e r i g h t to a t i m b e r
concession (Suarez vs. Reyes, L-19828, Feb. 28, 1963),
the location of t h e p r o p e r t y being i m m a t e r i a l .
119
RULE 4 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 1-2
120
RULE 4 VENUE OF ACTIONS SEC. 3
NOTES
1. W h e r e a p e r s o n a l action is a g a i n s t a r e s i d e n t
defendant a n d a n o n r e s i d e n t defendant b u t who is in t h e
Philippines, both of whom a r e principal defendants, t h e
venue may be laid e i t h e r w h e r e t h e r e s i d e n t defendant
resides or where the nonresident defendant may be
found, as a u t h o r i z e d by Sec. 2 of this Rule, but with an
additional a l t e r n a t i v e v e n u e , i.e., t h e residence of any of
the principal plaintiffs, p u r s u a n t to Secs. 2 and 3.
It will be observed t h a t w h e n t h e r e is more t h a n one
defendant or plaintiff in t h e case, t h e residences of t h e
p r i n c i p a l p a r t i e s s h o u l d b e t h e b a s i s for d e t e r m i n i n g
the p r o p e r v e n u e . O t h e r w i s e , t h e purpose of t h e Rule
would be defeated w h e r e a n o m i n a l or formal p a r t y is
impleaded in t h e action since t h e l a t t e r would not have
the degree of i n t e r e s t in t h e subject of the action which
would w a r r a n t and entail the desirably active participation
expected of litigants in a case.
121
RULE 4 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
3. W h e r e t h e plaintiff is a n o n r e s i d e n t of t h e
Philippines b u t is p e r m i t t e d to sue h e r e (as in t h e case
of a foreign corporation with t h e requisite license u n d e r
Sec. 123 of t h e Corporation Code), t h e n t h e v e n u e is t h e
place w h e r e t h e d e f e n d a n t r e s i d e s , or, in r e a l actions,
w h e r e t h e real p r o p e r t y or p a r t thereof is s i t u a t e d . This
is proper since t h e a l t e r n a t i v e venue g r a n t e d to plaintiffs
122
RULE 4 V E N U E OF ACTIONS SEC. 4
5. An e x c e p t i o n to t h e g e n e r a l r u l e s on v e n u e is
found in civil actions for d a m a g e s in case of libel, w h e t h e r
a criminal action therefor h a s been filed or not, as special
rules of v e n u e a r e provided in A r t . 360 of t h e Revised
Penal Code, as l a s t a m e n d e d by R.A. 4363. Said venue
provisions apply to both residents and nonresidents,
assuming t h a t jurisdiction over the l a t t e r has been
acquired (Time, Inc. vs. Reyes, et al., supra).
NOTES
123
RULE 4 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
124
RULE 4 V E N U E OF ACTIONS SEC. 4
4 . Inr c o n t r a c t s o f a d h e s i o n , t h e r u l e i s t h a t
ambiguities t h e r e i n a r e t o b e c o n s t r u e d a g a i n s t t h e p a r t y
who c a u s e d it. If t h e s t i p u l a t i o n s a r e not obscure a n d
leave no d o u b t on t h e i n t e n t i o n of t h e p a r t i e s , t h e literal
meaning of t h e stipulations m u s t be held controlling
(Lufthansa German Airlines, et al. vs. CA, et al.,
G.R. No. 91544, May 8, 1992; RCBC vs. CA, et al.,
G.R. 133107, Mar. 25, 1999). C o n t r a c t s of a d h e s i o n
are n o t p r o h i b i t e d , b u t t h e f a c t u a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f
each c a s e m u s t b e carefully s c r u t i n i z e d t o d e t e r m i n e
the respective claims of t h e p a r t i e s as to their efficacy
(see National Dev. Co. vs. Madrigal Wan Hai Lines Corp.,
G.R. No. 148332, Sept. 30, 2003).
T h u s , in c o n t r a c t s involving passage tickets, a
condition p r i n t e d a t t h e b a c k t h e r e o f t h a t all a c t i o n s
arising out of t h a t c o n t r a c t of c a r r i a g e can be filed only in
a p a r t i c u l a r province or city, to t h e exclusion of all others,
was declared void a n d unenforceable due to t h e s t a t e of
the shipping i n d u s t r y . The Court noted t h a t t h e acute
shortage of i n t e r - i s l a n d vessels could not provide enough
a c c o m m o d a t i o n s for p l a i n t i f f s to t r a v e l to t h e v e n u e
indicated, a s i d e from t h e fact t h a t t h e p a s s e n g e r s did
not h a v e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x a m i n e t h e fine p r i n t
providing for s u c h v e n u e (Sweet Lines, Inc. vs. Teves,
etc., et al., L-37750, May 19, 1978).
In a s u b s e q u e n t c a s e i n v o l v i n g 6 s u b s c r i p t i o n
c o n t r a c t s for c e l l u l a r t e l e p h o n e s e a c h c o v e r e d by a
mobiline service a g r e e m e n t , t h e subscriber challenged
the provisions in said agreements providing t h a t the
v e n u e for all s u i t s a r i s i n g t h e r e f r o m s h a l l be in t h e
proper court of M a k a t i , with t h e subscriber waiving any
125
RULE 4 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
126
RULE 4 V E N U E OF ACTIONS SEC. 4
127
RULE 4 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
128
RULE 5
U N I F O R M P R O C E D U R E I N TRIAL C O U R T S
S e c t i o n 1. Uniform procedure. — T h e p r o c e d u r e
in the Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same as
i n t h e R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t , e x c e p t (a) w h e r e a
particular-provision expressly or impliedly applies
o n l y t o e i t h e r o f s a i d c o u r t s , o r (b) i n c i v i l c a s e s
g o v e r n e d b y t h e R u l e o n S u m m a r y P r o c e d u r e , (n)
NOTES
129
RULE 5 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
5. Formerly, t h e decisions of t h e t h e n C o u r t s of F i r s t
I n s t a n c e , in cases appealed to t h e m from t h e decisions of
t h e inferior courts in t h e exercise of t h e l a t t e r ' s original
jurisdiction, were a p p e a l a b l e to t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t by
c e r t i o r a r i u n d e r Rule 45 if t h e only issue w a s w h e t h e r
t h e conclusion of t h e t h e n C o u r t of F i r s t I n s t a n c e w a s
i n c o n s o n a n c e w i t h law a n d j u r i s p r u d e n c e , h e n c e t h e
issue is consequently a p u r e l y legal q u e s t i o n . W h e r e ,
130
RULE 5 UNIFORM PROCEDURE IN TRIAL COURTS SEC. 2
131
RULE 5 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
II.
Civil Cases
SEC. 3. Pleadings. —
A. Pleadings allowed. — T h e only p l e a d i n g s
allowed to be filed a r e t h e complaints, compulsory
132
RULE 5 U N I F O R M P R O C E D U R E IN TRIAL COURTS SEC. 2
133
RULE 5 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
134
RULE 5 U N I F O R M P R O C E D U R E IN TRIAL COURTS
(e) S u c h o t h e r m a t t e r s i n t e n d e d to expedite t h e
disposition of t h e case.
SEC. 9. Submission of affidavits and position
papers. — W i t h i n t e n (10) days from receipt of t h e
o r d e r m e n t i o n e d in t h e next preceding section, t h e
p a r t i e s shall s u b m i t t h e affidavits of t h e i r witnesses
a n d o t h e r evidence on t h e factual issues defined in
t h e order, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r position p a p e r s s e t t i n g
forth t h e law a n d t h e facts relied upon by t h e m .
S E C . 10. Rendition of judgment. — W i t h i n
t h i r t y (30) days after receipt of t h e last affidavits and
position p a p e r s , or t h e expiration of t h e period for
filing t h e s a m e , t h e court shall r e n d e r j u d g m e n t .
However, should t h e court find it necessary to
clarify c e r t a i n m a t e r i a l facts, it may, d u r i n g t h e said
period, issue an order specifying t h e m a t t e r s to be
clarified, a n d r e q u i r e t h e p a r t i e s to s u b m i t affidavits
or o t h e r evidence on t h e said m a t t e r s within t e n (10)
days from receipt of said order. J u d g m e n t shall be
r e n d e r e d w i t h i n fifteen (15) days after t h e receipt of
t h e l a s t clarificatory affidavits, or t h e expiration of
t h e period for filing t h e s a m e .
T h e c o u r t s h a l l not r e s o r t to clarificatory pro-
cedure to gain time for t h e rendition of t h e j u d g m e n t .
X X X
IV.
Common Provisions
SEC. 18. Referral to Lupon. — Cases requiring
referral to t h e Lupon for conciliation u n d e r t h e pro-
visions of P r e s i d e n t i a l Decree No. 1508 w h e r e t h e r e
is no showing of compliance with such requirement,
s h a l l be d i s m i s s e d w i t h o u t prejudice, a n d may be
r e v i v e d only a f t e r s u c h r e q u i r e m e n t s h a l l h a v e
been complied with, x x x.
135
RULE 6 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
136
RULE 5 U N I F O R M P R O C E D U R E IN TRIAL C O U R T S SEC. 2
d e t a i n e r , s h a l l b e i m m e d i a t e l y executory, w i t h o u t
prejudice to a further appeal t h a t may be t a k e n
therefrom. Section 10 of Rule 70 shall be deemed
repealed.
SEC. 22. Applicability of the regular rules. —
T h e r e g u l a r p r o c e d u r e p r e s c r i b e d in t h e Rules of
C o u r t s h a l l apply to t h e special cases herein provided
for in a suppletory capacity insofar as they a r e not
inconsistent h e r e w i t h .
S E C . 2 3 . Effectivity. — T h i s r e v i s e d Rule on
S u m m a r y P r o c e d u r e s h a l l be effective on Novem-
ber 15, 1991."
137
RULE S REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
10. E x c e p t i n c a s e s c o v e r e d b y t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l
t e n a n c y laws or w h e n the law o t h e r w i s e expressly
p r o v i d e s , all a c t i o n s for forcible e n t r y a n d u n l a w f u l
d e t a i n e r , irrespective of t h e a m o u n t of d a m a g e s or u n p a i d
r e n t a l s sought to be recovered, a r e now governed by t h e
s u m m a r y procedure provided in revised Rule 70.
138
P R O C E D U R E I N R E G I O N A L TRIAL C O U R T S
RULE 6
KINDS OF PLEADINGS
S e c t i o n 1. Pleadings defined. — P l e a d i n g s a r e t h e
written statements of the respective claims and
d e f e n s e s o f t h e p a r t i e s s u b m i t t e d t o t h e c o u r t for
appropriate judgment, (la)
S e c . 2. Pleadings allowed. — T h e c l a i m s of a p a r t y
a r e asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-
claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint or
complaint-in-intervention.
The d e f e n s e s of a party are alleged in the a n s w e r
to the pleading asserting a claim against him.
A n a n s w e r m a y b e r e s p o n d e d t o b y a r e p l y , (n)
NOTE
S e c . 3 . Complaint. — T h e c o m p l a i n t i s t h e
pleading alleging the plaintiffs cause or causes of
action. The n a m e s and residences of the plaintiff
and d e f e n d a n t m u s t b e s t a t e d i n t h e c o m p l a i n t . (3a)
139
RULE 6 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-5
NOTES
S e c . 4. Answer. — An a n s w e r is a p l e a d i n g in
w h i c h a defending party sets forth his defenses.
(4a)
S e c . 5 . Defenses. — D e f e n s e s m a y e i t h e r b e
negative or affirmative.
(a) A n e g a t i v e d e f e n s e i s t h e s p e c i f i c d e n i a l o f
t h e material fact or facts alleged in t h e p l e a d i n g of
the claimant essential to his cause or causes of
action.
(b) An a f f i r m a t i v e d e f e n s e is an a l l e g a t i o n of a
new matter which, while hypothetically admitting
the material allegations in the pleading of the
c l a i m a n t , w o u l d n e v e r t h e l e s s p r e v e n t or bar
recovery by him. The affirmative defenses include
fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment,
illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other
m a t t e r b y w a y o f c o n f e s s i o n a n d a v o i d a n c e . (5a)
140
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADING S E C S . 4-5
NOTES
141
RULE 6 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 6-7
S e c . 6. Counterclaim. — A c o u n t e r c l a i m is a n y
claim w h i c h a defending party may have against
a n o p p o s i n g p a r t y . (6a)
S e c . 7. Compulsory counterclaim.—A c o m p u l s o r y
counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the
regular courts of justice, arises^out ofjor is
connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing
party's c l a i m and d o e s not r e q u i r e for its
adjudication the presence of third parties of w h o m
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such a
counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the
court both as to the a m o u n t and the nature thereof,
except that in an original action before the
Regional Trial Court, the c o u n t e r c l a i m may be
c o n s i d e r e d c o m p u l s o r y r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e a m o u n t , (n)
NOTES
2. A c l a r i f i c a t i o n h a s b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d in t h e
d e f i n i t i o n of a c o m p u l s o r y c o u n t e r c l a i m by r e a s o n of
d i v e r g e n t views i n t h e p a s t a s t o w h e t h e r o r not t h e
a m o u n t involved in t h e counterclaim should be t a k e n into
142
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS S E C S . 6-7
143
RULE 6 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 6-7
144
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS S E C S . 6-7
7. W h e r e t h e c o u n t e r c l a i m , a n d t h e s a m e is t r u e
with a cross-claim, w a s already in existence at t h e time
the d e f e n d a n t filed his a n s w e r b u t was not set up t h e r e i n
t h r o u g h o v e r s i g h t , i n a d v e r t e n c e , or excusable neglect,
or w h e n justice so r e q u i r e s , t h e s a m e may be set up by
filing an a m e n d e d a n s w e r (Sec. 10, Rule 11). Where said
counterclaim or cross-claim m a t u r e d after t h e filing of t h e
a n s w e r , t h e d e f e n d i n g p a r t y c a n s e t it up by filing a
s u p p l e m e n t a l a n s w e r or p l e a d i n g (Sec. 9, Rule 11). In
either case, leave of court is required and such pleadings
must be filed before t h e rendition of the j u d g m e n t .
8. A c o u n t e r c l a i m or c r o s s - c l a i m n e e d n o t be
answered if it is based on a n d inseparable from t h e very
defense r a i s e d by t h e opposing p a r t y as it will merely
r e s u l t in said opposing p a r t y p l e a d i n g t h e s a m e facts
already raised in his former pleading (Navarro vs. Bello,
102 Phil. 1019) or w h e r e t h e counterclaim merely alleges
the opposite of t h e facts in t h e complaint (Ballecer vs.
Bernardo, L-21766, Sept. 30, 1966). Thus, where the
counterclaims a r e only for d a m a g e s and attorney's fees
arising from t h e filing of t h e complaint, the same shall be
considered as special defenses and need not be answered
(see Worcester vs. Lorenzana, 104 Phil. 234).
145
RULE 6 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 9-10
1 1 . Although t h e G o v e r n m e n t is generally i m m u n e
from suit, if it files an action a g a i n s t a p r i v a t e p a r t y , it
s u r r e n d e r s its privileged position and t h e d e f e n d a n t may
validly file a c o u n t e r c l a i m a g a i n s t it (Froilan vs. Pan
Oriental Shipping Co., 95 Phil. 905).
12. It is not proper to allow a counterclaim to be filed
a g a i n s t a lawyer who h a s filed a complaint for his client
and is merely his r e p r e s e n t a t i v e in court, not a plaintiff
or c o m p l a i n a n t in t h e case, since such a procedure would
r e s u l t in mischievous consequences. A lawyer owes his
client e n t i r e devotion to his genuine i n t e r e s t , w a r m zeal
in t h e m a i n t e n a n c e a n d defense of his r i g h t s , a n d t h e
exertion of his u t m o s t l e a r n i n g a n d ability. He cannot
properly a t t e n d to his d u t i e s if, in t h e s a m e case, he is
k e p t busy defending himself. Where t h e lawyer acts in
t h e n a m e of a client, t h e c o u r t s h o u l d not p e r m i t his
being impleaded as an additional p a r t y d e f e n d a n t in t h e
c o u n t e r c l a i m in t h e very s a m e case w h e r e he is acting
only as a counsel. Any claim for alleged d a m a g e s or o t h e r
causes of action a g a i n s t h i m should be filed in an entirely
s e p a r a t e a n d d i s t i n c t civil a c t i o n (Chavez, etc. vs.
Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R. No. 91391, Jan. 24, 1991).
S e c . 8. Cross-claim. — A c r o s s - c l a i m is a n y c l a i m
by one party against a co-party arising out of the
146
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS SECS. 9-10
NOTES
147
RULE 6 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 9-10
file s u c h r e p l y , all t h e n e w m a t t e r s a l l e g e d i n t h e
a n s w e r a r e d e e m e d c o n t r o v e r t e d , '-h ^pP
If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims
arising out of the new matters so alleged, such
claims shall be set forth in an a m e n d e d or
s u p p l e m e n t a l c o m p l a i n t . (11)
NOTES
148
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS SECS. 9-10
149
RULE 6 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
150
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS S E C . 11
4. The t e s t s to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r the t h i r d - p a r t y
complaint is in respect of plaintiff s claim a r e :
"a. W h e r e it a r i s e s out of t h e s a m e t r a n s a c t i o n on
which t h e p l a i n t i f f s claim is based; or w h e t h e r t h e third-
party claim, a l t h o u g h arising out of a n o t h e r or different
contract or t r a n s a c t i o n , is connected with the p l a i n t i f f s
claim;
b. W h e t h e r t h e t h i r d - p a r t y defendant would be liable
to the plaintiff or to t h e defendant for all or p a r t of t h e
plaintiff's claim a g a i n s t t h e original defendant, although
the t h i r d - p a r t y defendant's liability arises out of a n o t h e r
transaction; a n d
c. W h e t h e r t h e t h i r d - p a r t y defendant may assert any
defenses which t h e t h i r d - p a r t y plaintiff h a s or may have
to t h e p l a i n t i f f s claim" (see Capayas vs. CFI of Albay,
et al. 77 Phil 181).
C o n s e q u e n t l y , a d e f e n d a n t may file a t h i r d - p a r t y
complaint in t h e s a m e capacity in which he is being sued
in t h e original complaint. A plaintiff may also file a third-
party complaint b u t also in t h e same capacity in which he
is sued u n d e r a counterclaim.
5. Where t h e t r i a l court has jurisdiction over the
main case, it also h a s jurisdiction over t h e t h i r d - p a r t y
complaint regardless of t h e a m o u n t involved as a third-
party complaint is merely auxiliary to and is a continua-
151
RULE 6 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
152
RULE 6 KINDS OF PLEADINGS S E C S . 12, 1 3
NOTES
2. E v e n w h e r e t h e i m p l e a d i n g of t h e t h i r d - p a r t y
defendants does not fall squarely within t h e requisites of
Sec. 12, Rule 6 on t h i r d - p a r t y complaints, their inclusion
in t h e action may be p e r m i t t e d where t h e r e is a question
of law or fact common to t h e r i g h t in which they a r e
i n t e r e s t e d a n d a n o t h e r right sought to be enforced in the
action, hence t h e i r inclusion as proper (now, necessary)
p a r t i e s is j u s t i f i e d u n d e r Sec. 6, Rule 3 of t h e Rules
(Balbastro, et al. vs. CA, et al., supra).
153
RULE 7
PARTS OF A P L E A D I N G
S e c t i o n 1. Caption. — T h e c a p t i o n s e t s f o r t h t h e
name of the court, the title of the action, and the
docket number if assigned.
The title of the action indicates the names of
t h e p a r t i e s . T h e y s h a l l all b e n a m e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l
c o m p l a i n t or petition; but in all s u b s e q u e n t
pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the
first party on each side be stated with an
appropriate indication when there are other
parties.
Their respective participation in the case shall
b e i n d i c a t e d , ( l a , 2a)
NOTES
154
RULE 7 PARTS OF A P L E A D I N G S SEC. 2
S e c . 2. The body.—The b o d y of t h e p l e a d i n g s e t s
forth i t s d e s i g n a t i o n , t h e a l l e g a t i o n s o f t h e p a r t y ' s
c l a i m s o r d e f e n s e s , t h e r e l i e f p r a y e d for, a n d t h e d a t e
o f t h e p l e a d i n g , (n)
(a) Paragraphs. — T h e a l l e g a t i o n s in t h e b o d y
of a p l e a d i n g shall be divided into paragraphs so
numbered as to be readily identified, each of which
shall c o n t a i n a s t a t e m e n t of a s i n g l e set of
c i r c u m s t a n c e s s o far a s t h a t c a n b e d o n e w i t h
c o n v e n i e n c e . A p a r a g r a p h m a y be r e f e r r e d to by a
n u m b e r i n a l l s u c c e e d i n g p l e a d i n g s . (3a)
(b) Headings. — W h e n t w o or m o r e c a u s e s of
a c t i o n a r e j o i n e d , t h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e first s h a l l b e
p r e f a c e d b y t h e w o r d s "first c a u s e o f a c t i o n , " o f t h e
s e c o n d b y " s e c o n d c a u s e o f a c t i o n , " a n d s o o n for
the others.
When one or more paragraphs in the answer
are a d d r e s s e d t o o n e o f s e v e r a l c a u s e s o f a c t i o n i n
the complaint, they shall be prefaced by the words
" a n s w e r t o t h e first c a u s e o f a c t i o n " o r " a n s w e r t o
the s e c o n d c a u s e of action" and so on; and w h e n
one or more paragraphs of the answer are addressed
to several causes of action, they shali be prefaced
by w o r d s to t h a t effect. (4)
(c) Relief. — T h e p l e a d i n g s h a l l s p e c i f y t h e r e l i e f
s o u g h t , b u t i t m a y a d d a g e n e r a l p r a y e r for s u c h
further or other relief as may be d e e m e d just or
e q u i t a b l e . (3a, R6).
(d) Date. — E v e r y p l e a d i n g s h a l l be d a t e d , (n)
155
RULE 7 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
NOTES
156
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 3
NOTES
157
RULE 7 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n o r e v e n a c i t a t i o n for i n d i r e c t
c o n t e m p t , t h a t counsel should p r o m p t l y r e p o r t t o t h e
court w h e r e he is a p p e a r i n g in a case any change of his
a d d r e s s . It is e l e m e n t a r y t h a t the r e q u i r e m e n t to make
of record in the court his a d d r e s s or any change thereof is
to e n s u r e his prompt receipt of judicial orders or processes;
yet, a n u m b e r of lawyers fail to report such changes in
both the trial and appellate courts resulting in unnecessary
delay in judicial a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . This situation is further
a g g r a v a t e d w h e r e even t h e a d d r e s s of t h e p a r t y is not
stated in the pleadings or it is merely averred t h a t
processes to said p a r t y may be served on his counsel.
3. No s u b s t i t u t i o n of a t t o r n e y s will be a l l o w e d
unless (a) t h e r e is a w r i t t e n r e q u e s t for such s u b s t i t u t i o n ,
(b) filed w i t h t h e w r i t t e n c o n s e n t o f t h e c l i e n t , a n d
(c) with the written consent of the attorney to be substituted,
or with proof of service of notice of said motion to t h e
a t t o r n e y to be s u b s t i t u t e d . U n l e s s t h e s e a r e complied
with, no s u b s t i t u t i o n will be p e r m i t t e d a n d t h e a t t o r n e y
who last a p p e a r e d in t h e case before such application will
be responsible for t h e conduct of t h e case (Bacarro vs. CA,
et al, L-28203, Jan. 22, 1971, citing U.S. vs. Borromeo,
20 Phil. 189; see Magpayo, et al. vs. CA, et al, L-35966,
Nov. 19, 1974; Sumadchat vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 52197,
Jan. 30, 1982; Aban vs. Enage, L-30666, Feb. 26, 1983;
Yu, et al. vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 56766, Feb. 28, 1985).
S e c . 4. Verification. — E x c e p t w h e n o t h e r w i s e
specifically provided by law or rule, pleadings need
not be under oath, verified or accompanied by
affidavit.
A p l e a d i n g 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.
158
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 4
A p l e a d i n g required to be verified w h i c h
contains a verification based on "information and
belief," or u p o n " k n o w l e d g e , i n f o r m a t i o n a n d belief,"
or Jacks a proper verification, shall be t r e a t e d as
an unsigned-pleading. ( 4 a ) (As amended in A.M.
No. 00-2-10SC, effective May 1, 2000)
NOTES
159
RULE 7 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
160
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 4
161
RULE 7 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 4
6. E v e n w h e r e verification is r e q u i r e d by t h e Rules,
t h e court m a y give due course to t h e p l e a d i n g even if
162
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 5
163
RULE 5 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
164
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 5
16B
RULE 7 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 5
166
RULE 7 P A R T S OF A P L E A D I N G SEC. 5
168
RULE 7 PARTS OF A PLEADING SEC. 5
169
RULE 7 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
170
r e q u i r e m e n t s for a certification a g a i n s t forum shopping
in petitions filed in the Court of Appeals, which have also
been adopted for petitions filed in the S u p r e m e Court,
p u r s u a n t to Sec. 2, Rule 56.
171
RULE 7 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
172
RULE 8
M A N N E R OF MAKING A L L E G A T I O N S
IN PLEADINGS
S e c t i o n 1. In general. — E v e r y p l e a d i n g s h a l l
c o n t a i n in a m e t h o d i c a l a n d l o g i c a l form, a p l a i n ,
concise and direot-etetetnent of the ultimate facts
o n w h i c h t h e p a r t y p l e a d i n g r e l i e s for h i s c l a i m o r
defense, as the case may be, omitting t h e statement
o f m e r e e v i d e n t i a r y f a c t s . (1)
hi a d e f e n s e r e l i e d on is based on law, the
pertinent provisions thereof and their applicability
t o h i m s h a l l be< c l e a r l y a n d c o n c i s e l y s t a t e d , (n)
NOTES
1. As a l r e a d y s t a t e d , a n n e x e s to..pleadings, -are
considered p a r t of t h e pleadings, but t h e said pleadings
must contain-a summary statement of the matters
contained in t h e annex and c a n n o t j u s t refer to the same
(Rubios, et al. vs. Reolo, 96 Phil. 984fUnrep.J; La Mallorca
vs. CA, et al, 100 Phil. 1048; see Sec. 7 of this Rule).
2. "Ultimate facte" are the i m p o r t a n t and substan-
tial facts which e i t h e r directly form t h e b a s i s of t h e
plaintiff's p r i m a r y right and duty or directly make up
the wrongful acts or omissions of the defendant (Alsua
us. Johnson, 21 Phil. 308). A fact is essential if it cannot
be s t r i c k e n out w i t h o u t leaving t h e s t a t e m e n t of t h e
cause of action or defense insufficient (Toribio, et al. vs.
Bid in, etc., et al, G.R. No. 57821, Jan. 17, 1985). Hence,
conclusions, i n f e r e n c e s , p r e s u m p t i o n s , and d e t a i l s of
probative m a t t e r s should not be alleged.
•. <t\-
3. "Evidentiary facts" are those which are necessary
to prove the ultimate fact or which furnish evidence of
the existence of some other facts. They are not proper as
173
RULE 8 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 2-3
S e c . 3. Conditions precedent. — In a n y p l e a d i n g
a general a v e r m e n t of the p e r f o r m a n c e or occur-
r e n c e of all c o n d i t i o n s p r e c e d e n t shall be sufficient.
(3)
174
RULE 8 MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS SECS 4 5
IN PLEADINGS
S e c . 4. Capacity. — F a c t s s h o w i n g t h e c a p a c i t y
of a p a r t y to s u e or be s u e d or t h e a u t h o r i t y of a
party to s u e or be s u e d in a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a p a c i t y
or the legal existence of an organized association
of p e r s o n s t h a t is m a d e a party, m u s t be a v e r r e d .
A party d e s i r i n g to raise an issue as to the legal
existence of any party or the capacity of any party
to s u e or be s u e d in a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a p a c i t y , s h a l l
do so by specific denial, which shall include such
s u p p o r t i n g p a r t i c u l a r s a s are p e c u l i a r l y w i t h i n t h e
p l e a d e r ' s k n o w l e d g e . (4)
NOTE
NOTE
1. F a c t s c o n s t i t u t i n g condition of t h e mind a r e
permitted to be averred generally as it would be difficult
to do so with particularity. However, fraud and mistake
are required to be averred with particularity in order to
enable the opposing party to controvert the p a r t i c u l a r
facta allegedly constituting the same. This requirement
175
RULE 8 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 6. 7-8
a s s u m e s s i g n i f i c a n c e i n m o t i o n s for n e w t r i a l o r
p e t i t i o n s for relief from j u d g m e n t or o r d e r b a s e d on
fraud or mistake.
S e c . 6. Judgment. — In p l e a d i n g a j u d g m e n t or
decision of a d o m e s t i c or foreign court, judicial or
q u a s i - j u d i c i a l t r i b u n a l , or of a b o a r d or officer, it is
sufficient to aver the j u d g m e n t or decision w i t h o u t
setting forth m a t t e r showing jurisdiction to r e n d e r
it. (6)
NOTE
176
RULE 8 MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS SECS. 7-8
IN PLEADINGS
a d m i t t e d » n U M , t a » ad^CTuu p a i t y + - w d e r - ^ t h ,
s p e c i f i c a l l y de-mee-tfcero, a n d uviv • furUi w4mt he
c l a i m s to Ofi-the ~faets;^but t h e r e q u i r e m e n t of an
oath does not apply w h e n the adverse party does
not a p p e a r to be a p a r t y to t h e i n s t r u m e n t or w h e n
c o m p l i a n c e w i t h a n o r d e r for a n i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e
o r i g i n a l i n s t r u m e n t i s r e f u s e d . (8a)
NOTES
177
RULE 8 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 7-8
6. By t h e a d m i s s i o n of t h e g e n u i n e n e s s a n d due
execution of a document, such defenses as t h a t the sig-
n a t u r e was a forgery; or t h a t it was u n a u t h o r i z e d in t h e
case of an a g e n t signing in behalf of a p a r t n e r s h i p or of
a c o r p o r a t i o n ; or t h a t , in t h e c a s e of t h e l a t t e r , t h e
corporation was not authorized u n d e r its c h a r t e r to sign
t h e i n s t r u m e n t ; o r t h a t t h e p a r t y c h a r g e d signed t h e
i n s t r u m e n t in some o t h e r capacity t h a n t h a t alleged in
the pleading s e t t i n g it out; or t h a t it was never delivered,
are deemed cut off. But t h e failure to deny the genuine-
ness a n d due execution of t h e d o c u m e n t does not estop
a p a r t y from controverting it by evidence of fraud, mistake,
compromise, p a y m e n t , s t a t u t e of limitations, estoppel, and
w a n t of consideration (1 Martin 301, citing Hibberd vs.
Rhode, supra, and Bough vs. Cantiveros, supra).
178
RULE 8 M A N N E R OF MAKING A L L E G A T I O N S SEC 9
IN PLEADINGS
179
RULE 8 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 10
NOTES
180
RULE 8 M A N N E R OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS SEC 11
IN PLEADINGS
181
RULE 8 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
182
RULE 8 MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS SEC 11
IN PLEADINGS
o t h e r the** t h o s e a s t o t h e - a m o u n t o f u n l i q u i d a t e d
d a m a g e s , shall be d e e m e d a d m i t t e d when- not
specifically d e n i e d . Allegations of usury in a
c o m p l a i n t t o r e c o v e r u s u r i o u s i n t e r e s t are d e e m e d
a d m i t t e d i f n o t d e n i e d u n d e r o a t h , ( l a , R9)
NOTES
183
RULE 8 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12
184
RULE 9
E F F E C T OF FAILURE TO PLEAD
NOTES
1. U n d e r t h i s a m e n d e d p r o v i s i o n , t h e following
defenses a r e not waived even if not raised in a motion to
dismiss or in the answer: (a") lack of jurisdiction over the
subject m a t t e r ; (b~) litis pendentia; (c) res judicata; and
(d) prescription of the action.
2. The omnibus motion rule in the former Sec. 2 of
this Rule also provided, as an exception t h e r e t o , "the
failure to s t a t e a cause of action which may be alleged in
a l a t e r pleading, if one is p e r m i t t e d , or by motion for
j u d g m e n t on t h e pleadings, or at the trial on the merits;
but in the last instance, the motion shall be disposed of
as provided in Section 5, Rule 10 in t h e light of any
evidence which may have been received."
T h a t ground and the alternative bases for consider-
ing it, in the event it was not alleged in either a motion
to d i s m i s s or in t h e a n s w e r , h a s been deleted as an
exception to the omnibus motion rule. The alternative
ways for posing t h i s g r o u n d for c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the
court in other pleadings, t h a t is, in a later pleading if
185
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
186
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 1
187
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
6 . T h e p r e s e n c e o f a n y o f t h e s e four g r o u n d s
authorizes the court to motu proprio dismiss the claim,
t h a t is, the claims a s s e r t e d in a complaint, counter claim,
cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint or
complaint-in-intervention (see Sec. 2, Rule 6). In order
t h a t it may do so, it is necessary t h a t t h e constitutive
facts of such grounds, if not in the a n s w e r with evidence
duly adduced therefor, should a p p e a r in the other
pleadings filed or in the evidence of record in t h e case.
188
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 2
p r e s c r i p t i o n of t h e c r i m e is not w a i v e d e v e n if not
raised before t h e plea, since prescription is a substantive
r i g h t w h i c h c a n n o t be d e f e a t e d by p r o v i s i o n s of a
procedural law (People vs. Moran, 44 Phil. 387; People
vs. Castro, 95 Phil. 462). For t h a t m a t t e r , such objection
may even be raised for the first time on appeal (People
vs. Balagtas, 105 Phil. 1362 fUnrep.J; Escano, et al. vs.
Geronimo, [CA], 60 O.G. 8497).
NOTES
189
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
190
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
191
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
192
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
6. T h e fact t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t w a s d e c l a r e d in
default is of no m o m e n t w h e n t h e plaintiff would not
have been entitled to relief since his complaint did not
state a cause of action, hence the same should be dismissed
(Reyes vs. Tolentino, et al., L-29142, Nov. 29, 1971).
193
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 3
194
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
1 1 . T h e former r u l e w a s t h a t w h e r e a p a r t y had
moved to set aside the order of default, he was entitled to
copies o f all p l e a d i n g s a n d o r d e r s filed a n d i s s u e d
thereafter. If he had not done so, he was still entitled to
be served with copies of substantially amended or sup-
p l e m e n t a l pleadings, as well as final orders or j u d g m e n t s .
The qualifications were rationalized as follows:
He must be served with amended pleadings and
s u p p l e m e n t a l pleadings as he may be entitled to plead
thereto. T h u s , if the defendant was declared in default
upon an original complaint, t h e filing of t h e a m e n d e d
c o m p l a i n t r e s u l t e d in t h e w i t h d r a w a l of t h e o r i g i n a l
complaint, hence t h e defendant was entitled to file an
answer to the amended complaint as to which he was not
in default. If t h e s u p p l e m e n t a l pleading introduced new
claims, he was entitled to plead thereto as jurisdiction had
not been acquired over him in respect thereof.
He had to be served with a copy of the j u d g m e n t by
default as he had t h e right to appeal therefrom and in
said appeal he may, aside from attacking the propriety
of the relief t h e r e i n awarded, assign as error the order of
t h e c o u r t d e c l a r i n g him in default, or refusing to set
aside such order, or denying a motion for new trial as
the case may be.
T h i s w a s b e c a u s e t h e n Sec. 2 of Rule 18 r e a d :
"Except as provided in Section 9 of Rule 13, a p a r t y
d e c l a r e d in d e f a u l t s h a l l not be e n t i t l e d to notice of
s u b s e q u e n t proceedings, nor to take p a r t in t h e trial."
T h i s r u l e w a s c o n s i d e r e d too h a r s h , h e n c e , a s now
amended, p a r . (a) of t h i s section simply provides t h a t
while a p a r t y in default cannot take p a r t in the trial, he is
nonetheless entitled to notice of subsequent proceedings
without the qualifications under the former practice.
12. If the court sets aside the order of default, the
defendant is restored to his standing and rights in the
action. However, proceedings already taken are not to
195
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
196
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
197
RULE 9 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
17. It h a s also b e e n h e l d , h o w e v e r , t h a t w h i l e a
default order, being interlocutory, is not a p p e a l a b l e , an
order d e n y i n g a p e t i t i o n for relief, s e e k i n g to set aside
an order of default, is not merely interlocutory but
final a n d , t h e r e f o r e , a p p e a l a b l e (Rodriguez, et al. vs.
IAC, et al, G.R. No. 74816, Mar. 17, 1987).
2 0 . W h e r e a c o - d e f e n d a n t w h o filed h i s a n s w e r
died a n d t h e case w a s dismissed a s t o him, t h e a n s w e r h e
filed does not i n u r e to t h e benefit of t h e d e f e n d a n t who
did not file his own a n s w e r . N e i t h e r will t h e rule apply
where the defenses alleged by the defendant who
198
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
199
RULE 9 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
200
RULE 9 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD SEC. 3
201
R U L E 10
S e c t i o n 1. Amendments in general. — P l e a d i n g s
may be amended by adding or striking out an
allegation or the name of any party, or by
c o r r e c t i n g a m i s t a k e in t h e n a m e of a p a r t y or a
mistaken or inadequate allegation or description
in any other respect, so that the actual merits of
the controversy may speedily be determined,
without regard to technicalities, and in the most
e x p e d i t i o u s a n d i n e x p e n s i v e m a n n e r . (1)
NOTES
2. The a m e n d e d p l e a d i n g s u p e r s e d e s t h e original
pleading which is deemed w i t h d r a w n and no longer
c o n s t i t u t e s p a r t of t h e record. However, t h e filing of t h e
a m e n d e d p l e a d i n g does not r e t r o a c t to t h e d a t e of t h e
filing of t h e original, h e n c e , t h e s t a t u t e of l i m i t a t i o n s
r u n s u n t i l t h e filing of t h e a m e n d m e n t (Ruymann, et al.
vs. Director of Lands, 34 Phil. 429). But an a m e n d m e n t
which merely s u p p l e m e n t s and amplifies facts originally
alleged in t h e complaint r e l a t e s back to t h e d a t e of the
c o m m e n c e m e n t of t h e action a n d is not b a r r e d by t h e
202
RULE 10 AMENDED AND S E C S . 1, 7
SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
203
RULE 10 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
204
RULE 10 AMENDED AND SEC. 2
SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
205
R U L E 10 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 3-4
S e c . 4. Formal amendments. — A d e f e c t in t h e
designation of the parties and other clearly clerical
or typographical errors may be summarily corrected
by the c o u r t at any stage of t h e action, at its
initiative or on motion, provided no prejudice is
c a u s e d t h e r e b y t o t h e a d v e r s e p a r t y . (4a)
NOTES
206
R U L E 10 AMENDED AND SECS. 3-4
SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
207
RULE 10 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
m e n t is to i n t r o d u c e a s u b s e q u e n t l y - a c c r u e d c a u s e of
action (Surigao Mine Exploration Co. vs. Harris, 68 Phil.
118).
3. To d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a different cause of action
is introduced by a m e n d m e n t s to the complaint, w h a t is
ascertained is w h e t h e r the defendant is being required to
a n s w e r for a liability or legal o b l i g a t i o n c o m p l e t e l y
different from t h a t s t a t e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l c o m p l a i n t
(Rubio vs. Mariano, et al, L-30404, Jan. 31, 1973). The
same t e s t may be applied with respect to s u p p l e m e n t a l
pleadings.
4. As earlier stated, a plaintiff may move to amend
his complaint even if the same was dismissed on motion of
the defendant provided the dismissal order is not yet final.
An order denying such motion to amend the complaint is
appealable a n d the r e g l e m e n t a r y period to perfect t h e
appeal r u n s from plaintiffs receipt of t h e order denying
his motion to amend the complaint (Constantino vs. Reyes,
supra).
208
RULE 10 AMENDED AND SEC. 5
SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
NOTES
209
R U L E 10 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
S e c . 6. Supplemental pleadings. — U p o n m o t i o n
of a party the court may, upon reasonable notice
and upon such terms as are just, permit him to serve
a s u p p l e m e n t a l p l e a d i n g s e t t i n g forth t r a n s a c t i o n s ,
occurrences or events which have happened since
the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented.
T h e a d v e r s e p a r t y m a y p l e a d t h e r e t o w i t h i n t e n (10)
days from notice of the order a d m i t t i n g the
s u p p l e m e n t a l p l e a d i n g . (6a)
NOTES
210
RULE 10 AMENDED AND SEC. 8
SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
3. F o r c o r r e l a t i o n , Sec. 7 of t h i s Rule h a s b e e n
transposed to follow Sec. 1 thereof.
NOTES
211
R U L E 10 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
212
RULE 11
W H E N TO FILE R E S P O N S I V E P L E A D I N G S
NOTES
213
R U L E 11 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
may e x t e n d t h e t i m e t o p l e a d p r o v i d e d i n t h e s e
Rules.
The court may also, upon like t e r m s , allow an
a n s w e r or other pleading to be filed after the time
fixed by these Rules. (8a)"
It is believed, however, t h a t the discretion of the court
to admit pleadings filed after the reglementary period has
expired does not extend to the steps necessary to perfect
an appeal which must all be done within the reglementary
period, unless prior to its expiration an extension has been
sought and granted on justifiable grounds.
3. A motion for extension of time to file an a n s w e r
may be heard and granted ex parte (Amante us. Sunga,
L-40491, May 28, 1975).
4. An order allowing the filing of a late a n s w e r is
i n t e r l o c u t o r y a n d n o t a p p e a l a b l e (De Ocampo us.
Republic, L-19533, Oct. 31, 1963).
214
R U L E 11 WHEN TO FILE SEC. 3
RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS
NOTE
215
R U L E 11 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-6, 6
NOTES
S e c . 6. Reply. — A r e p l y m a y be filed w i t h i n t e n
(10) d a y s f r o m s e r v i c e o f t h e p l e a d i n g r e s p o n d e d
to. (6)
NOTES
216
RULE 11 WHEN TO FILE SEC. 6
RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS
217
R U L E 11 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
NOTE
218
R U L E 11 W H E N TO FILE SECS. 8-11
RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS
219
R U L E 11 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 8-11
NOTES
1. Sec. 11 is c o m m e n t e d on in t h e n o t e s u n d e r
Sec. 2 of this Rule.
2. See t h e discussion in t h e notes u n d e r Secs. 6
and 7 of Rule 6 which point out t h a t an after-acquired
c o u n t e r c l a i m or cross-claim may be set up by filing a
s u p p l e m e n t a l pleading, while an omitted counterclaim or
cross-claim may be raised in an amended pleading
p u r s u a n t to and u n d e r the conditions in Secs. 9 and 10 of
this Rule.
It is also noted t h e r e i n t h a t a counterclaim or cross-
c l a i m n e e d n o t be a n s w e r e d if it is b a s e d on or is
inseparable from the defenses raised by the opposing party,
or merely allege t h e opposite of the facts in t h e complaint.
Also, w h e r e the counterclaim or cross-claim is only for
d a m a g e s or a t t o r n e y ' s fees arising from the filing of the
complaint, it need not be answered. These doctrines also
apply to after-acquired or omitted counterclaims and cross-
claims subsequently allowed by the court to be filed in the
action.
220
R U L E 12
BILL OF PARTICULARS
NOTES
2. W h a t m a y be c o n s i d e r e d as a r a t i o n a l e for
r e q u i r i n g a bill of p a r t i c u l a r s in proper cases is t h a t ,
while p l e a d i n g s s h o u l d be liberally c o n s t r u e d with a
view to s u b s t a n t i a l justice, courts should not be left to
conjecture in the determination of the issues submitted
by the l i t i g a n t s . Where the pleading is vague and
uncertain, courts should not be led to the commission of
error or injustice by exploring in the midst of uncertainty
a n d d i v i n i n g t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e p a r t i e s from t h e
221
R U L E 12 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 2-4
S e c . 4. Effect of non-compliance. — If t h e o r d e r is
not obeyed, or in case of insufficient compliance
therewith, the court may order the striking out of
the pleading or the portions thereof to which the
order was directed or make such other order as it
deems just. (l[c]a)
222
RULE 12 BILL OF PARTICULARS SECS. 5-6
NOTES
223
R U L E 12 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 5-6
NOTES
224
RULE 12 BILL OF PARTICULARS SECS. 5-6
225
RULE 13
FILING A N D SERVICE OF P L E A D I N G S ,
J U D G M E N T S A N D OTHER P A P E R S
S e c t i o n 1. Coverage. — T h i s R u l e s h a l l g o v e r n
t h e f i l i n g o f all pleadings and other papers, as well
as the service t h e r e o f , e x c e p t t h o s e for w h i c h a
different mode o f s e r v i c e i s p r e s c r i b e d , (n)
NOTES
1. It is t h e d u t y of counsel to a d o p t a n d strictly
m a i n t a i n a system t h a t efficiently t a k e s into account all
court notices s e n t to him. His failure to do so c a n n o t
excuse him from the consequences of his non-receipt of
court notices (Babala vs. CA, et al., L-23065, Feb. 16,
1970; Republic vs. Arro, et al., L-48241, June 11, 1987;
Antonio, et al. vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 77656, Aug. 31,
1987). An a t t o r n e y of record m u s t notify t h e court of his
change of a d d r e s s . The fact t h a t counsel used a different
a d d r e s s in later pleadings does not constitute the notice
r e q u i r e d for i n d i c a t i n g his c h a n g e of a d d r e s s (Phil.
Suburban Dev. Corp. vs. CA, et al., L-33448, Sept. 17,
1980). See also Sec. 3, Rule 7 and t h e notes t h e r e u n d e r .
226
RULE 13 FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SECS 1-2
JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
227
RULE 13 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
S e c . 3. Manner of filing. — T h e f i l i n g of p l e a d -
ings, appearances, motions, notices, orders,
j u d g m e n t s a n d all o t h e r p a p e r s s h a l l b e m a d e b y
p r e s e n t i n g the original copies thereof, plainly
indicated as such, personally to the clerk of court
or by s e n d i n g t h e m by r e g i s t e r e d m a i l . In t h e first
c a s e , t h e c l e r k o f c o u r t shall e n d o r s e o n t h e p l e a d i n g
t h e d a t e a n d h o u r o f filing. I n t h e s e c o n d c a s e , t h e
date of the mailing of motions, pleadings, or any
other papers or payments or deposits, as s h o w n by
t h e p o s t office s t a m p o n t h e e n v e l o p e o r t h e r e g i s t r y
receipt, shall be considered as the date of their
filing, p a y m e n t , o r d e p o s i t i n c o u r t . T h e e n v e l o p e
shall be attached to the record of the case, (la)
NOTES
2. U n d e r t h i s s e c t i o n , filing by m a i l s h o u l d be
t h r o u g h the registry service which is made by deposit of
t h e p l e a d i n g in t h e post office, a n d not t h r o u g h o t h e r
m e a n s of t r a n s m i s s i o n . T h u s , the date of delivery of the
p l e a d i n g s to a p r i v a t e l e t t e r - f o r w a r d i n g agency or
p r i v a t e c a r r i e r , e v e n if l i c e n s e d to act as s u c h w i t h
r e s p e c t to o t h e r a r t i c l e s , is not a recognized mode of
filing p l e a d i n g s which can only be done t h r o u g h t h e
Philippine G o v e r n m e n t Post Office or its postal agencies.
If a p r i v a t e carrier is availed of by the party, the d a t e of
228
RULE 13 FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SECS 4-5 6
JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
S e c . 5. Modes of service. — S e r v i c e of p l e a d i n g s ,
motions, notices, orders, judgments and other
p a p e r s s h a l l b e m a d e e i t h e r p e r s o n a l l y o r b y mail.
(3a)
NOTE
S e c . 6. Personal service. — S e r v i c e of t h e p a p e r s
m a y be m a d e by d e l i v e r i n g p e r s o n a l l y a c o p y to t h e
p a r t y or h i s c o u n s e l , or by l e a v i n g it in h i s office
with his clerk or with a person having charge
thereof. If no p e r s o n is f o u n d in h i s office, or h i s
office i s n o t k n o w n , o r h e h a s n o office, t h e n b y
leaving the copy, between the hours of eight in
t h e m o r n i n g a n d six i n t h e e v e n i n g , a t t h e party's
or c o u n s e l ' s r e s i d e n c e , if k n o w n , w i t h a p e r s o n of
229
R U L E 13 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 7
NOTE
S e c . 7. Service by mail. — S e r v i c e by r e g i s t e r e d
mail shall be made by depositing the copy in the
p o s t office, i n a s e a l e d e n v e l o p e , p l a i n l y a d d r e s s e d
t o t h e p a r t y o r h i s c o u n s e l a t h i s office, i f k n o w n ,
otherwise at his residence, if known, with postage
fully pre-paid, and with i n s t r u c t i o n s to the
p o s t m a s t e r t o r e t u r n t h e m a i l t o t h e s e n d e r after
t e n (10) d a y s i f u n d e l i v e r e d . I f n o r e g i s t r y s e r v i c e i s
available in the locality of either the sender or the
a d d r e s s e e , s e r v i c e m a y b e d o n e b y o r d i n a r y mail.
(5a) (As amended by Resolution of the Supreme Court,
dated Feb. 17, 1998)
230
RULE 13 FILING A N D SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SECS 8-9
JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
NOTE
S e c . 8. Substituted service. — If s e r v i c e of
pleadings, motions, notices, resolutions, orders and
other papers cannot be made under the two
p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n s , t h e office a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e
of the party or his counsel being unknown, service
may be made by delivering the copy to the clerk of
court, with proof of failure of both personal service
and service by mail. The service is complete at the
t i m e o f s u c h d e l i v e r y . (6a)
NOTES
231
RULE 13 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
NOTES
232
RULE IS FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS
J U D G M E N T S AND OTHER PAPERS
233
RULE 13 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 10
NOTES
234
RULE 13 FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS SECS 11-12
J U D G M E N T S AND OTHER PAPERS
89 Phil. 279).
236
RULE 13 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 11-12
NOTES
236
RULE 13 FILING A N D SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SEC. 13
JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
NOTE
237
RULE 13 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 14
NOTES
238
RULE 13 FILING A N D SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SEC. 14
JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
239
RULE 13 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 14
240
RULE 13 FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, SEC 14
J U D G M E N T S AND OTHER PAPERS
241
R U L E 14
SUMMONS
S e c . 2 . Contents. — T h e s u m m o n s s h a l l b e
directed to the defendant, signed by the clerk of
c o u r t u n d e r s e a l , a n d c o n t a i n : (a) t h e n a m e o f t h e
c o u r t a n d t h e n a m e s o f t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e a c t i o n ; (b)
a direction that the defendant answer within the
t i m e fixed by t h e s e R u l e s ; a n d (c) a n o t i c e t h a t u n l e s s
the defendant so answers, plaintiff will take
judgment by default and may be granted the relief
a p p l i e d for.
A c o p y of t h e c o m p l a i n t a n d o r d e r for
a p p o i n t m e n t of g u a r d i a n ad litem, if a n y , s h a l l be
attached to the original and each copy of the
s u m m o n s . (3a)
NOTES
242
RULE 14 SUMMONS SECS. 1-2
3 . W h e r e t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s a l r e a d y been served
with summons on the original complaint, no further
s u m m o n s is r e q u i r e d on t h e a m e n d e d c o m p l a i n t if it
does not introduce new causes of action (Ong Peng vs.
Custodio, L-14911, Mar. 25, 1961); b u t w h e r e t h e
defendant was declared in default on the original
complaint and t h e plaintiff subsequently filed an amended
complaint, new summons m u s t be served on the defendant
on t h e amended complaint as t h e original complaint was
deemed w i t h d r a w n upon such a m e n d m e n t (Atkins, Kroll
& Co. vs. Domingo, 44 Phil. 680).
4. F u r t h e r m o r e , if the defendant had not yet
appeared by filing adversary pleadings and an amended
complaint i n t r o d u c i n g new c a u s e s of action is filed, a
243
RULE 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 3-5
S e c . 3. By whom served. — T h e s u m m o n s m a y be
s e r v e d b y t h e sheriff, h i s d e p u t y , o r o t h e r p r o p e r
c o u r t o f f i c e r s , o r for j u s t i f i a b l e r e a s o n s b y a n y
suitable person authorized by the court issuing the
s u m m o n s . (5a)
S e c . 4 . Return. — W h e n t h e s e r v i c e h a s b e e n
c o m p l e t e d , t h e s e r v e r s h a l l , w i t h i n f i v e (5) d a y s
therefrom, serve a copy of the return personally or
by registered mail, to the p l a i n t i f f s counsel, and
shall return the s u m m o n s to the clerk w h o issued
it, a c c o m p a n i e d b y p r o o f o f s e r v i c e . (6a)
244
RULE 14 SUMMONS SECS. 6-7
NOTES
1. T h e e n u m e r a t i o n in Sec. 3 of t h e p e r s o n s who
may validly serve s u m m o n s is exclusive. T h u s , w h e r e
s u m m o n s w a s served, without authority granted by t h e
court, by a police s e r g e a n t (Sequito vs. Letrondo, 105 Phil.
1139), by a p o s t m a s t e r (Olar vs. Cuna, L-47935, May 5,
1978), or by a p a t r o l m a n (Bello vs. Ubo, et al., L-30353,
Sept. 30, 1982), such service was invalid and t h e court
did not acquire jurisdiction over t h e defendant.
245
RULE 14 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 6-7
NOTES
1. T h e s e t w o s e c t i o n s p r o v i d e for t w o m o d e s of
service of summons. The third mode is service of summons
by publication (Secs. 14, 15 a n d 16). The court may also
provide for any other m a n n e r as it may deem sufficient
(Sec. 15).
2. S u m m o n s cannot be served by mail. Where
service of s u m m o n s is m a d e by publication, "a copy of
t h e s u m m o n s a n d o r d e r of t h e c o u r t s h a l l be s e n t by
registered mail to t h e last known a d d r e s s of t h e defen-
d a n t " (Sec. 15). T h a t r e s o r t to r e g i s t e r e d mail is only
complementary to service of s u m m o n s by publication, b u t
it does not m e a n t h a t service by r e g i s t e r e d mail alone
would suffice. T h u s , Sec. 22 of t h e former Rule entitled
"Proof of service by registered mail," which c r e a t e d t h a t
m i s i m p r e s s i o n , a l t h o u g h i t a c t u a l l y r e f e r r e d only t o
t h e r e g i s t e r e d m a i l as a c o m p l e m e n t in s u m m o n s by
publication, h a s been eliminated and h a s not been
r e p r o d u c e d i n t h i s revised Rule. For t h a t m a t t e r , t h e
p u r p o s e it i n t e n d e d to serve is a t t e n d e d to by Sec. 13,
Rule 13.
246
RULE 14 SUMMONS SEC. 8
247
R U L E 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
NOTES
248
RULE 14 SUMMONS S E C S . 9-10
NOTES
249
RULE 14 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
NOTES
1. U n d e r t h e f o r m u l a t i o n in Sec. 13 of t h i s Rule
from which t h i s a m e n d e d section w a s t a k e n , it w a s held
t h a t service upon a person o t h e r t h a n those mentioned
t h e r e i n i s i n v a l i d a n d does not b i n d t h e c o r p o r a t i o n
(Delta Motors Corp. vs. Pamintuan, et al., L-41667,
April 30, 1976, citing Reader vs. District Court, 94 Pac.
2nd 8581, holding t h a t service of s u m m o n s on t h e wife of
the corporate secretary was not binding on t h e corporation;
cf. AM Trucking, Inc. vs. Buencamino, et al., G.R.
No. 62445, Aug. 31, 1983). B u t in Summit Trading &
Dev. Corp. vs. Avendano, et al. (G.R. No. 60038, M a r . 18,
1985), s u m m o n s for t h e corporation served on the secretary
of t h e p r e s i d e n t thereof was held to be binding on said
250
RULE 14 SUMMONS S E C . 11
251
RULE 14 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
252
RULE 14 SUMMONS S E C . 11
253
R U L E 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12
NOTES
254
RULE 14 SUMMONS S E C . 13
3. W h e r e t h e service of s u m m o n s is m a d e on t h e
g o v e r n m e n t official d e s i g n a t e d by law, t h e d e f e n d a n t
corporation h a s 30 days from its receipt of the s u m m o n s
w i t h i n w h i c h to file i t s a n s w e r (Sec. 2, Rule 11). If
served on its r e s i d e n t agent, officers or other a g e n t s in
the Philippines, t h e 15-day reglementary period applies
(see Facilities Management Corp. vs. DelaOsa, L-38649,
Mar. 28, 1979).
265
RULE 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 14-16
e x e c u t i v e h e a d , o r o n s u c h o t h e r officer o r o f f i c e r s
a s t h e l a w o r t h e c o u r t m a y d i r e c t . (15)
256
RULE 14 SUMMONS SECS. 14-15
NOTES
3. U n d e r Sec. 15 of t h i s Rule, e x t r a t e r r i t o r i a l
service of s u m m o n s is proper only in four instances, viz.:
(a) w h e n t h e action affects t h e p e r s o n a l s t a t u s of t h e
plaintiff; (b) w h e n the action relates to, or the subject of
which is p r o p e r t y w i t h i n t h e Philippines in which t h e
d e f e n d a n t h a s or c l a i m s a lien or i n t e r e s t , a c t u a l or
contingent; (c) w h e n t h e relief demanded in such action
consists, wholly or in p a r t , in excluding the defendant
from any i n t e r e s t in property located in the Philippines;
a n d (d) w h e n t h e d e f e n d a n t n o n r e s i d e n t ' s p r o p e r t y
has been a t t a c h e d in t h e P h i l i p p i n e s (De Midgely vs.
Ferandos, supra).
267
RULE 14 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 14-15
5. Since t h e d e f e n d a n t is a n o n r e s i d e n t a n d t h e
suit also involves real p r o p e r t y in t h e Philippines w h e r e i n
said d e f e n d a n t h a s an i n t e r e s t , service of s u m m o n s on
him by publication in a local n e w s p a p e r is a u t h o r i z e d by
Sec. 17 (now, Sec. 15) of t h i s Rule. While it m a y be t r u e
t h a t service of s u m m o n s by publication does not involve
any absolute a s s u r a n c e t h a t said n o n r e s i d e n t d e f e n d a n t
shall thereby receive actual notice, such service of
s u m m o n s i s r e q u i r e d n o t for p u r p o s e s o f p h y s i c a l l y
acquiring jurisdiction over his person but simply
in p u r s u a n c e of t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of fair p l a y . It is
necessary, however, t h a t copies of t h e s u m m o n s a n d t h e
complaint be duly served at defendant's last known
a d d r e s s by r e g i s t e r e d mail as a complement to the
publication. The failure to strictly a n d correctly comply
with the requirements of the rules regarding the
mailing of said copies will constitute a fatal defect in t h e
aforesaid mode of service of s u m m o n s (Sahagun vs. CA,
et al, G.R. No. 78328, June 3, 1991).
258
RULE 14 SUMMONS SECS. 14-15
259
RULE 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 16-17
NOTES
1. U n d e r t h e s e provisions, service of s u m m o n s by
publication is a u t h o r i z e d , w i t h prior leave of court:
a. W h e r e t h e identity of t h e defendant is u n k n o w n ;
b. Where t h e w h e r e a b o u t s of t h e defendant is un-
known;
c. W h e r e t h e d e f e n d a n t does not reside a n d is not
found i n t h e P h i l i p p i n e s b u t t h e s u i t c a n p r o p e r l y b e
m a i n t a i n e d a g a i n s t him here, being in rem or quasi in
rem; a n d
260
RULE 14 SUMMONS SECS. 16-17
d. W h e r e t h e d e f e n d a n t is a r e s i d e n t of t h e
Philippines b u t is temporarily out of the country.
2. S u m m o n s in a s u i t in personam a g a i n s t a
resident of t h e Philippines temporarily absent therefrom
m a y be validly effected by s u b s t i t u t e d service u n d e r
Sec. 7 of t h i s Rule. It is i m m a t e r i a l t h a t the defendant
does not in fact receive actual notice, and the validity of
such service is not affected. While t h e p r e s e n t Sec. 15
provides for modes of service which may also be availed
of in t h e case of a resident defendant temporarily absent,
the n o r m a l mode of service on such temporarily absent
d e f e n d a n t is by such s u b s t i t u t e d service u n d e r Sec. 7
because personal service outside t h e country and service
by publication are not ordinary means of summons
(Montalban, et al. vs. Maxima, L-22997, Mar. 15, 1968).
However, it h a s also been held t h a t in such cases, non-
c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e m o d e s of service u n d e r Sec. 18
(now, Sec. 16) is a d e n i a l of due process a n d r e n d e r s
the proceedings null and void (Castillo vs. CFI of Bulacan,
G.R. No. 55869, Feb. 29, 1984).
261
RULE 14 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 18-20
Comm. Co., Inc. vs. IAC, et al., G.R. No. 70661, April 9,
1987).
NOTE
1. Any form of a p p e a r a n c e in c o u r t , by t h e
defendant, by his a g e n t authorized to do so, or by attorney,
is e q u i v a l e n t to service except w h e r e such a p p e a r a n c e is
precisely to object to t h e jurisdiction of t h e court over t h e
person of t h e d e f e n d a n t (Carballo vs. Encarnacion, 92
Phil. 974). See Notes 4 a n d 5 u n d e r Sec. 1, Rule 16.
262
R U L E 15
MOTIONS
S e c t i o n 1. Motion defined. — A m o t i o n is an
a p p l i c a t i o n for r e l i e f o t h e r t h a n b y a p l e a d i n g , ( l a )
NOTE
1. T h i s a m e n d e d d e f i n i t i o n of a m o t i o n is a
consequence of t h e provisions of Sec. 1, Rule 6 which limit
the m e a n i n g of a pleading to t h e w r i t t e n s t a t e m e n t of the
respective claims a n d defenses submitted by the p a r t i e s
for a p p r o p r i a t e j u d g m e n t , and Sec. 2 of t h e same Rule
which e n u m e r a t e s t h e pleadings allowed. However, as
explained in t h e notes t h e r e u n d e r , a motion may also be
considered in a broad sense as in t h e n a t u r e of a pleading
since it is among t h e p a p e r s filed in court. Hence, Sec. 10
of t h i s Rule r e q u i r e s a qualified application to motions of
the rules applicable to pleadings.
S e c . 3. Contents. — A m o t i o n s h a l l s t a t e t h e
relief sought to be obtained and the grounds upon
which it is based, and if required by these Rules or
necessary to prove facts alleged therein, shall be
accompanied by supporting affidavits and other
p a p e r s . (3a)
263
REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M
NOTES
1. T h e exceptions to t h e t h r e e - d a y notice r u l e in
Sec. 4 a r e : (a) ex parte m o t i o n s , (b) u r g e n t m o t i o n s
(Bautista vs. Mun. Council of Mandaluyong, Rizal, 98
Phil. 409; Supreme Investment Corp. vs. Engineering
Equipment, Inc., L-25755, April 11, 1972), (c) motions
agreed upon by t h e p a r t i e s to be h e a r d on s h o r t e r notice
(Tuazon & Co. vs. Magdangal, L-15047, Jan. 30, 1962)
or jointly s u b m i t t e d by t h e p a r t i e s , a n d (d) motions for
s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t which m u s t be served at least 10 days
before its h e a r i n g (Sec. 3, Rule 35).
264
RULE 15 MOTIONS S E C S . 5-6
S e c . 6. Notice of hearing. — T h e n o t i c e of h e a r i n g
s h a l l b e a d d r e s s e d t o all p a r t i e s c o n c e r n e d , a n d s h a l l
specify the time and date of the hearing w h i c h must
n o t b e l a t e r t h a n t e n (10) d a y s after t h e f i l i n g o f t h e
m o t i o n . (5a)
NOTES
1. In t h e C o u r t s of F i r s t I n s t a n c e (now, Regional
Trial Courts) and t h e lower courts, a motion which does
not contain a notice of time and place of hearing is a useless
piece of p a p e r and of no legal effect, e.g., in the case of a
motion for reconsideration of a j u d g m e n t or final order, it
does not interrupt the reglementary period (Manila Surety
& Fidelity Co., Inc. vs. Bath Construction & Co., LI6636,
June 24, 1965; cf. Sebastian vs. Cabal, L-25699,
April 30, 1970). The same is t r u e where the date for the
h e a r i n g of t h e motion is u n i n t e l l i g i b l e , hence fatally
defective (Republic Planters Bank, et al. vs. IAC, et al.,
G.R. No. 63805, Aug. 31, 1984).
265
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 5-6
266
RULE 15 MOTIONS S E C S . 8, 9
S e c . 7. Motion day. — E x c e p t f o r m o t i o n s
r e q u i r i n g i m m e d i a t e a c t i o n , all m o t i o n s s h a l l b e
s c h e d u l e d for h e a r i n g o n F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n s , o r i f
Friday is a n o n - w o r k i n g day, in the afternoon of
t h e n e x t w o r k i n g d a y . (7a)
NOTE
267
RULE 15 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
S e c . 8. Omnibus motion. — S u b j e c t to t h e
p r o v i s i o n s of s e c t i o n 1 of R u l e 9, a m o t i o n a t t a c k i n g
a pleading, order, judgment, or p r o c e e d i n g shall
i n c l u d e all o b j e c t i o n s t h e n a v a i l a b l e , a n d all
objections not so included shall be deemed waived.
(8a)
NOTES
NOTES
268
RULE 15 MOTIONS S E C . 10
S e c . 10. Form. — T h e R u l e s a p p l i c a b l e t o
p l e a d i n g s s h a l l a p p l y t o w r i t t e n m o t i o n s s o far a s
concerns caption, designation, signature, and other
m a t t e r s o f form. (9a)
269
R U L E 16
M O T I O N TO D I S M I S S
S e c t i o n 1. Grounds. — W i t h i n t h e t i m e for b u t
before filing the answer to the complaint or
p l e a d i n g a s s e r t i n g a claim, a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s may
be made on any of the following grounds:
(a) T h a t t h e c o u r t h a s n o j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e
p e r s o n of the d e f e n d i n g party;
(b) T h a t t h e c o u r t h a s n o j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e
subject matter of the claim;
(c) T h a t v e n u e i s i m p r o p e r l y laid;
(d) T h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f h a s n o l e g a l c a p a c i t y t o
sue;
(e) T h a t t h e r e i s a n o t h e r a c t i o n p e n d i n g
b e t w e e n t h e s a m e p a r t i e s for t h e s a m e c a u s e ;
(f) T h a t t h e c a u s e of a c t i o n is b a r r e d by a p r i o r
judgment or by the statute of limitations;
(g) T h a t t h e p l e a d i n g a s s e r t i n g t h e c l a i m s t a t e s
no cause of action;
(h) T h a t t h e c l a i m o r d e m a n d s e t f o r t h i n t h e
plaintiffs pleading has been paid, waived,
abandoned, or otherwise extinguished;
(i) T h a t t h e c l a i m o n w h i c h t h e a c t i o n i s
founded is unenforceable under the provisions of
the statute of frauds; and
(j) T h a t a c o n d i t i o n p r e c e d e n t for f i l i n g t h e
c l a i m h a s n o t b e e n c o m p l i e d w i t h , (la)
NOTES
270
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
271
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
272
R U L E 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
273
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
6. W h e r e s u m m o n s w a s not s e r v e d on t w o of t h e
d e f e n d a n t s a n d a lawyer filed, in t h e i r behalf b u t w i t h o u t
t h e i r a u t h o r i t y , a motion for extension of t i m e to a n s w e r ,
the court does not acquire jurisdiction over said defendants.
N e i t h e r w a s s u c h j u r i s d i c t i o n a l defect c u r e d b y t h e i r
s u b s e q u e n t filing of a motion for new t r i a l as t h e s a m e
w a s based precisely on such defect a n d to secure to said
d e f e n d a n t s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to be h e a r d (Cavili, et al. vs.
Vamenta, Jr., etc., et al., G.R. No. 57771, May 31, 1982).
For obvious reasons, the considerations discussed in
De Midgely a n d La Naval h a v e no a p p l i c a t i o n to t h i s
case u n d e r t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s obtaining t h e r e i n .
274
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
275
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
276
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
277
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
278
R U L E 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
279
R U L E 16 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
280
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS
17. W h e n t h e g r o u n d for d i s m i s s a l i s t h a t t h e
c o m p l a i n t s t a t e s no c a u s e of action, such fact can be
determined only from t h e facts alleged in the complaint
(Mindanao Realty Corp. vs. Kintanar, et al., L-17152,
Nov. 30, 1962) and from no other (Marabilles vs. Quito,
100 Phil. 64; Boncato vs. Siason, et al., L-29094, Sept. 5,
1985), and the court cannot consider other m a t t e r s aliunde
(Salvador vs. Frio, L-25352, May 29, 1970). This implies
t h a t t h e issue m u s t be passed upon on t h e basis of the
allegations a s s u m i n g t h e m to be t r u e and t h e court cannot
inquire into t h e t r u t h of t h e allegations and declare t h e m
to be false; otherwise, it would be a procedural e r r o r and
a d e n i a l of d u e p r o c e s s to t h e plaintiff (Ventura vs.
Bernabe, L-26769, April 30, 1971; Galeon vs. Galeon, et
al., L-30380, Feb. 28, 1973). The exception was provided
by t h e former Sec. 2, Rule 9, i.e., w h e r e t h e motion to
dismiss on t h i s ground could be filed during the trial, in
which case t h e evidence presented was to be considered.
Also, it h a s been held t h a t u n d e r this ground the trial
c o u r t c a n c o n s i d e r all t h e p l e a d i n g s filed, i n c l u d i n g
annexes, motions and t h e evidence on record (Marcopper
Mining Corp. vs. Garcia, G.R. No. 55935, July 30, 1986),
i n c l u d i n g d o c u m e n t a r y evidence s t i p u l a t e d upon a n d
which is before the court (Santiago vs. Pioneer Savings
& Loan Bank, et al., G.R. No. 77502, Jan. 15, 1983).
However, it h a s likewise been held t h a t even if the
complaint stated a valid cause of action, a motion to dismiss
for insufficiency of c a u s e of action will be g r a n t e d if
documentary evidence admitted by stipulations discloses
facts sufficient to defeat t h e claim and enables the court
to go beyond t h e disclosures in the complaint. In such
instances, the court can dismiss a complaint on this ground
e v e n w i t h o u t a h e a r i n g , by t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t t h e
discussions in said motion a n d t h e opposition t h e r e t o
(Tan vs. Director of Forestry, et al., L-24548, Oct. 27, 1983).
This controversy which a p p e a r e d to have been due to
confusion over t h e s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e i n t h e c o m p l a i n t
281
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
282
RULE 16 MOTIONS TO DISMISS SEC. 1
283
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
284
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
285
R U L E 16 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
t h e r e f o r e , n o t a v a i l a b l e w h e r e a c o m p r o m i s e of t h e
controversy is not p e r m i t t e d by law, as w h e r e it involves
civil s t a t u s , validity of m a r r i a g e or legal separation,
grounds for legal separation, future support, jurisdiction
and future legitime (Art. 2035, Civil Code). The same
r u l e a p p l i e s even if t h e complaint a s k s for s u p p o r t in
a r r e a r s , which is p e r m i t t e d to be compromised, b u t it also
seeks future s u p p o r t (Mendoza vs. CA, et al., L-23102,
April 24, 1967). As to who a r e considered m e m b e r s of a
"family," A r t . 2 1 7 , Civil Code, p r o v i d e d t h a t family
relations shall include those (1) between h u s b a n d and wife;
(2) b e t w e e n p a r e n t a n d child; (3) among o t h e r a s c e n d a n t s
a n d t h e i r d e s c e n d a n t s ; and (4) among b r o t h e r s a n d sisters
(Gayon vs. Gayon, L-28394, Nov. 26, 1970). Art. 150 of
t h e F a m i l y Code a m e n d e d t h e foregoing e n u m e r a t i o n
r e g a r d i n g siblings, to specify " w h e t h e r of t h e full or half-
blood."
F a i l u r e to allege in t h e complaint t h a t e a r n e s t efforts
at compromise h a d been made by t h e plaintiff before filing
t h e action is not a ground for a motion to dismiss if one of
t h e p a r t i e s is a s t r a n g e r (Magbaleta vs. Gonong, L-44903,
April 25, 1977) or w h e r e t h e s u i t is b e t w e e n collateral
relatives who a r e not b r o t h e r s or s i s t e r s and, therefore,
not m e m b e r s of t h e s a m e family (Mendez vs. Bionson,
L-32159 Oct. 28, 1977).
286
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
287
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
288
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 1
f. T h e a m e n d m e n t of S e c t i o n 1 of t h i s R u l e
providing t h a t t h e exceptions to the omnibus motion rule
m a y be g l e a n e d from t h e e v i d e n c e on record (which
includes t h e case where t r i a l h a s begun) forestalls any
challenge on t h a t score. Also, the liberalization of other
former holdings on belated motions to dismiss t h u s affirm
t h a t procedural rules, as essential tools for the obtention
of justice, should not be literally constricted by petrified
logic in t h e i r application. In any event, where the motion
to dismiss falls outside t h e g e n e r a l rule on allowable
grounds and/or time limits, b u t invokes judicial discretion
due to special reasons, as earlier noted, the better practice
is to move for leave of court therefor so t h a t the situation
may be presented and t h e t r i b u n a l p u t on guard.
22. An action cannot be dismissed on the ground t h a t
the complaint is vague or indefinite. The remedy of the
defendant is to move for a bill of particulars or avail of the
p r o p e r mode of discovery (Galeon vs. Caleon, et al.,
L-30380, Feb. 28, 1973).
2 3 . Courts do not e n t e r t a i n moot questions or issues,
t h a t is, t h o s e w h i c h c e a s e t o p r e s e n t a j u s t i c i a b l e
controversy such t h a t a resolution thereof would be of no
practical use or value and no legal relief is needed or called
for.
However, courts will still decide cases, otherwise moot
and academic, If (1) t h e r e is a grave violation of t h e
Constitution; (2) an exceptional character of the situation
and t h e p a r a m o u n t public i n t e r e s t is involved; (3) t h e
constitutional issue raised requires formulation of
controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar and the
public, and (4) the case is capable of repetition yet evading
review (Lu vs. Lu Ym Sr., et al. G.R. No. 153690, Aug. 26,
2008, which other cases jointly decided).
289
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
S e c . 2. Hearing of motion. — At t h e h e a r i n g of
the motion, the parties shall submit their arguments
on the questions of law and their evidence on the
q u e s t i o n s o f fact i n v o l v e d e x c e p t t h o s e n o t a v a i l a b l e
at that time. Should the case go to trial, the
evidence presented during the hearing shall
automatically be part of the evidence of the party
p r e s e n t i n g t h e s a m e , (n)
NOTES
290
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 3
S e c . 3. Resolution of motion. — A f t e r t h e h e a r i n g ,
the c o u r t m a y dismiss t h e action or claim, deny the
motion or order the amendment of the pleading.
The court shall not defer the resolution of the
m o t i o n for t h e r e a s o n t h a t t h e g r o u n d r e l i e d u p o n
is not indubitable.
In every case, the resolution shall state clearly
a n d d i s t i n c t l y t h e r e a s o n s t h e r e f o r . (3a)
NOTES
291
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
4. An o r d e r d e n y i n g a motion to d i s m i s s is
i n t e r l o c u t o r y a n d n o t a p p e a l a b l e (Harrison Foundry
& Machinery, et al. vs. Harrison Foundry Workers
Association, et al., L-18432, June 19, 1963), b u t an order
g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s is final a n d a p p e a l a b l e
(Monares vs. CNS Enterprises, 105 Phil. 1333 fUnrep.J).
However, if t h e o r d e r of dismissal is not an adjudication
292
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 3
6. W h e r e t h e defect is curable by a m e n d m e n t as
where t h e complaint s t a t e s no cause of action, and the
c o u r t u n c o n d i t i o n a l l y r e f u s e s t o allow a m e n d m e n t ,
the same is reversible e r r o r (Macapinlac vs. Repide, 43
Phil. 770). However, t h e plaintiff must move for leave to
amend t h e complaint before the dismissal order becomes
final (Constantino vs. Reyes, L-16853, June 29, 1963).
Also, where t h e dismissal was merely for failure to allege
e a r n e s t efforts to compromise a suit between members of
the same family (Verzosa vs. Verzosa, L-25609, Nov. 27,
1968), now subsumed under the ground of non-compliance
with a condition precedent, such refusal is improper as
the defect is curable by a m e n d m e n t . This presupposes,
of course, t h a t t h e r e were really such e a r n e s t efforts as
alleged.
293
R U L E 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
S e c . 4. Time to plead. — If t h e m o t i o n is d e n i e d ,
t h e m o v a n t s h a l l file h i s a n s w e r w i t h i n t h e b a l a n c e
of the period prescribed by Rule 11 to which he
was entitled at the time of serving his motion, but
n o t l e s s t h a n five (5) d a y s i n a n y e v e n t , c o m p u t e d
from his receipt of the notice of the denial. If
t h e p l e a d i n g i s o r d e r e d t o b e a m e n d e d , h e s h a l l file
his answer within the period prescribed by Rule 11
counted from service of the a m e n d e d pleading,
u n l e s s t h e c o u r t p r o v i d e s a l o n g e r p e r i o d . (4a)
NOTES
294
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 6
S e c . 5. Effect of dismissal. — S u b j e c t to t h e r i g h t
of appeal, an order granting a motion to dismiss
b a s e d on p a r a g r a p h s (f)» (h) a n d (i) of s e c t i o n 1
h e r e o f s h a l l bar t h e r e f i l i n g o f t h e s a m e a c t i o n o r
c l a i m , (n)
NOTES
295
RULE 16 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
1 . U n d e r t h e p r a c t i c e before 1964, w h e r e t h e
d e f e n d a n t filed a motion to dismiss a n d t h e s a m e w a s
unconditionally denied, t h e g r o u n d s raised by him in said
motion could no longer be pleaded as affirmative defenses
as t h e resolution thereof h a d already been concluded by
t h e d e n i a l of his motion. If he did not file a motion to
dismiss, t h e n he could raise any of t h e g r o u n d s therefor
as affirmative defenses in his a n s w e r and have a
p r e l i m i n a r y h e a r i n g t h e r e o n as if a motion to dismiss h a d
been filed.
D e s p i t e t h e c h a n g e of phraseology u n d e r t h e 1964
Rules, i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e s a m e procedure applied, a n d
w h e r e t h e d e f e n d a n t did not move to d i s m i s s he could
allege any of t h e g r o u n d s therefor, except improper v e n u e ,
as affirmative defenses in his a n s w e r . On t h e o t h e r h a n d ,
w h e r e a motion to dismiss on t h e g r o u n d s of res judicata
a n d litis pendentia w e r e u n c o n d i t i o n a l l y d e n i e d , s a i d
g r o u n d s could no longer be raised as affirmative defenses
in t h e a n s w e r , as well as t h e o t h e r g r o u n d s to dismiss
available at t h e t i m e t h e motion was filed, except those of
failure to s t a t e a cause of action a n d lack of jurisdiction
which were not deemed waived (Heirs of Juliana Clavano
vs. Genato, et al. L-45837, Oct. 28, 1977).
296
RULE 16 MOTION TO DISMISS SEC. 6
297
RULE 16 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
298
RULE 17
D I S M I S S A L OF A C T I O N S
NOTES
299
R U L E 17 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
300
RULE 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS SEC. 2
NOTES
301
R U L E 17 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
302
R U L E 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS SEC. 3
303
R U L E 17 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
NOTES
304
RULE 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS SEC. 3
305
R U L E 17 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
t h e r e o n in t h a t s a m e judicial proceeding.
"Section 3, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , c o n t e m p l a t e s a
dismissal not procured by plaintiff, albeit justified by
causes imputable to him a n d which, in t h e p r e s e n t
case, was petitioner's failure to a p p e a r at t h e pre-trial.
This situation is also covered by Section 3, as extended
by judicial interpretation, and is ordered upon
motion of d e f e n d a n t or motu proprio by t h e court.
H e r e , t h e issue of w h e t h e r d e f e n d a n t h a s a p e n d i n g
c o u n t e r c l a i m , p e r m i s s i v e or c o m p u l s o r y , is not of
determinative significance. The dismissal of plaintiffs
complaint is evidently a confirmation of t h e failure of
evidence to prove his cause of action outlined t h e r e i n ,
h e n c e t h e d i s m i s s a l is c o n s i d e r e d , as a matter of
evidence, an adjudication on t h e m e r i t s . This does
not, however, m e a n t h a t t h e r e is likewise such ab-
sence of evidence to prove defendant's c o u n t e r c l a i m
a l t h o u g h t h e s a m e a r i s e s out of t h e s u b j e c t - m a t t e r of
t h e complaint which w a s merely t e r m i n a t e d for lack
of proof. To hold o t h e r w i s e w o u l d n o t only w o r k
injustice to d e f e n d a n t but would be r e a d i n g a
further provision into Section 3 and wresting a
m e a n i n g therefrom a l t h o u g h n e i t h e r exists even by
m e r e implication. T h u s u n d e r s t o o d , t h e complaint
can accordingly be dismissed, b u t relief can never-
t h e l e s s be g r a n t e d as a m a t t e r of course to d e f e n d a n t
on his counterclaim as alleged a n d proved, w i t h or
w i t h o u t any r e s e r v a t i o n therefor on his p a r t , u n l e s s
from his conduct, e x p r e s s or implied, he h a s virtually
c o n s e n t e d to t h e concomitant d i s m i s s a l of his coun-
terclaim."
306
RULE 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS SEC. 3
307
R U L E 17 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
10. D i s m i s s a l u n d e r Secs. 1, 2 a n d 3 of t h i s
Rule, u n l e s s otherwise ordered, is an adjudication on t h e
m e r i t s except, of course, dismissal for lack of jurisdiction
which is always w i t h o u t prejudice (Rivera vs. Luciano,
L-20944, Aug. 14, 1965, a n d cases t h e r e i n cited).
308
R U L E 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS SEC. 4
309
RULE 18
PRE-TRIAL
S e c t i o n 1. When conducted. — A f t e r t h e l a s t
p l e a d i n g h a s been served and filed, it shall be the
d u t y of t h e p l a i n t i f f to p r o m p t l y m o v e ex parte t h a t
t h e c a s e b e s e t for p r e - t r i a l . (5a, R20)
NOTES
1. To o b v i a t e t h e conflicting v i e w s a n d d e c i s i o n s
u n d e r t h e former Rule, Sec. 1 now imposes upon t h e plain-
tiff t h e d u t y to p r o m p t l y move ex parte t h a t t h e case be set
for pre-trial, a n d t h i s he m u s t do upon t h e service and
filing of t h e last p l e a d i n g required in t h e case by t h e Rules
or, in a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , by t h e court itself. This
clarifies a n d c h a n g e s t h e p r o c e d u r e p r e s c r i b e d i n t h e
former Sec. 5 of Rule 20 which imposed t h a t d u t y on t h e
clerk of court "upon t h e submission" of t h e last pleading.
The t r a n s f e r of responsibility to t h e plaintiff himself, as
h a s b e e n followed in o t h e r provisions of t h e revised Rules,
is b a s e d on t h e policy t h a t whosoever is t h e p r o p o n e n t of
t h e p a r t i c u l a r s t a g e of t h e proceeding should himself ini-
t i a t e t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g s t e p s t o have judicial action t a k e n
t h e r e o n since he is p r e s u m e d to be t h e one i n t e r e s t e d in
t h e speedy disposition thereof.
310
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL SEC. 2
311
RULE 18 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
(i) S u c h o t h e r m a t t e r s a s m a y a i d i n t h e p r o m p t
d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e a c t i o n , ( l a , R20)
NOTES
2 . W i t h r e g a r d t o s u b m i s s i o n t o a r b i t r a t i o n , see
R.A. 876 a n d A r t s . 2028 to 2041 of t h e Civil Code on
compromises and arbitrations. For recent legislation
p r o v i d i n g for a b r o a d e r scope of a l t e r n a t i v e m o d e s of
dispute resolution, see R.A. 9285 which institutionalized
t h e use of an a l t e r n a t i v e d i s p u t e resolution s y s t e m a n d
e s t a b l i s h e d t h e Office for A l t e r n a t i v e D i s p u t e Resolution
(Appendix DD).
S e c . 3. Notice of pre-trial. — T h e n o t i c e of
pre-trial shall be served on counsel, or on the party
who has no counsel. The counsel served with such
notice is charged with the duty of notifying the
p a r t y r e p r e s e n t e d b y h i m . (n)
NOTE
312
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL SEC. 4
et al. vs. Macandog, etc., et al. supra), and the same may
be served directly to him or t h r o u g h his counsel (Lim,
et al. vs. Animas, etc., et al., L-39094, April 18, 1975),
otherwise t h e proceedings will be null and void (Sagarino
vs. Pelayo, L-27927, June 20, 1977; Patalinjug vs. Peralta,
et al., L-43324, May 5, 1979). It was the duty of counsel
upon whom such notice is served to see to it t h a t his client
receives such notice and a t t e n d s the pre-trial, otherwise
he will be liable for grave a d m i n i s t r a t i v e disciplinary
action (Taroma, et al. vs. Sayo, et al., L-37296, Oct. 30,
1975).
The p r o c e d u r e h a s been simplified in t h i s revised
section in t h e sense t h a t t h e notice of pre-trial shall be
served on counsel, and service shall be made on the party
only if he h a s no counsel. However, the duty of counsel
served with such notice to duly notify his client thereof
r e m a i n s substantially the same.
S e c . 4. Appearance of parties. — It s h a l l be t h e
duty of the parties and their counsel to appear at
t h e p r e - t r i a l . T h e n o n - a p p e a r a n c e of a p a r t y m a y
be e x c u s e d o n l y if a v a l i d c a u s e is s h o w n t h e r e f o r
or if a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s h a l l a p p e a r in h i s b e h a l f fully
authorized in writing to enter into an amicable
settlement, to submit to alternative modes of
dispute resolution, and to enter into stipulations
or a d m i s s i o n s of f a c t s a n d of d o c u m e n t s , (n)
NOTES
313
RULE 18 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
2. It m u s t f u r t h e r be noted t h a t t h e special a u t h o r i t y
should confer on t h e p a r t y ' s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e not only t h e
power to e n t e r into a compromise, as it w a s u n d e r t h e
former provision, b u t also to s u b m i t to a l t e r n a t i v e modes
of d i s p u t e s e t t l e m e n t , a n d to e n t e r into s t i p u l a t i o n s or
a d m i s s i o n s o f f a c t s a n d d o c u m e n t s . Also, t h e m e r e
p r e s e n t a t i o n of s u c h w r i t t e n a u t h o r i t y is not sufficient,
b u t m u s t be c o m p l e m e n t e d by a showing of valid c a u s e
for t h e n o n - a p p e a r a n c e of t h e p a r t y himself.
3 . W h e r e nobody a p p e a r e d a t t h e p r e - t r i a l except t h e
counsel for t h e plaintiff b u t said counsel h a d no special
a u t h o r i t y t o r e p r e s e n t t h e plaintiff t h e r e i n , t h e plaintiff
may properly be declared non-suited. T h e plaintiff may
be so declared non-suited a n d t h e case dismissed w i t h o u t
motion by t h e d e f e n d a n t (Sec. 3, Rule 17).
314
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL SEC. 5
t o t h e n e x t p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n s h a l l b e c a u s e for d i s -
missal of the action. The dismissal shall be with
prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
A similar failure on the part of the defendant shall
be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his
e v i d e n c e ex parte a n d t h e c o u r t to r e n d e r j u d g m e n t
o n t h e b a s i s thereof. (2a, R20)
NOTES
315
R U L E 18 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
5. T h e d i s m i s s a l of t h e case by t h e c o u r t d u e to
n o n - a p p e a r a n c e of t h e plaintiff a n d his c o u n s e l at t h e
pre-trial, b u t w i t h o u t p r o p e r notice of said p r e - t r i a l served
on them, is violative of due process and the dismissal should
be s e t a s i d e (Loquias vs. Rodriguez, et al., L-38388,
July 31, 1975). W h e r e p e t i t i o n e r ' s counsel w a s not served
w i t h a s e p a r a t e notice of p r e - t r i a l , a l t h o u g h his client
acknowledged receipt of a copy thereof in its behalf a n d of
said counsel, said service is insufficient a n d t h e o r d e r of
default a n d t h e ex parte proceedings before t h e commis-
sioner a r e null a n d void (People's Realty Brokerage Corp.
vs. Lustre, et al., L-41495, Oct. 20, 1978). This doctrine
would s t i l l hold t r u e a s i t does not conflict w i t h t h e
a m e n d e d Sec. 3 of t h i s Rule.
316
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL SECS. 6, 7
NOTE
S e c . 7. Record of pre-trial. — T h e p r o c e e d i n g s in
the pre-trial s h a l l b e r e c o r d e d . U p o n t h e t e r m i n a -
317
RULE 18 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
NOTES
1. T h i s provision on the p r o c e d u r e in p r e - t r i a l
proceedings in civil cases is different from t h a t obtaining
in c r i m i n a l cases w h e r e i n , as provided in Sec. 2 of Rule
118, an a g r e e m e n t or admission of a p a r t y in t h e p r e - t r i a l
conference s h a l l be admissible a g a i n s t h i m only if reduced
to w r i t i n g a n d signed by h i m a n d his counsel. However,
t h e b i n d i n g effect of t h e p r e - t r i a l order issued u n d e r t h i s
section is s u b s t a n t i a l l y t h e s a m e as a p r e - t r i a l order in
c r i m i n a l cases, as provided in Sec. 4 of said Rule.
2. T h e a m e n d m e n t of a p r e - t r i a l order is a d d r e s s e d
to t h e s o u n d d i s c r e t i o n of t h e c o u r t (Gotico vs. Leyte
Chinese Chamber of Commerce, L-39379, April 30, 1985).
3. W h e r e t h e a m o u n t of back r e n t a l s to be paid by
t h e d e f e n d a n t is s t a t e d in t h e p r e - t r i a l o r d e r in t h e n a t u r e
of a compromise a g r e e m e n t t h e r e o n , said p r e - t r i a l order
in t h a t s e n s e h a s t h e force of res judicata on t h a t issue
(M & M Management Aids, Inc. vs. CA, et al., G.R.
No. 53942, June 29, 1984).
4. A p r e - t r i a l o r d e r is not m e a n t to be a detailed
catalogue of e a c h a n d every issue t h a t is to be or may be
318
RULE 18 PRE-TRIAL SEC. 7
t a k e n u p d u r i n g t h e t r i a l . I s s u e s t h a t a r e impliedly
included t h e r e i n by necessary implication are as much
i n t e g r a l p a r t s of t h e p r e - t r i a l order as those t h a t a r e
expressly s t i p u l a t e d (Velasco, et al. vs. Apostol, et al.,
L-44588, May 9, 1989).
319
RULE 19
INTERVENTION
NOTES
320
RULE 19 INTERVENTION SEC. 1
4 . A n i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n i s t h e effect u p o n
a c o m p l a i n t - i n - i n t e r v e n t i o n by t h e d i s m i s s a l of t h e
principal action wherein such intervention was sought.
The confusion h e r e i n s e e m s to have a r i s e n from t h e
decisions of t h e S u p r e m e Court in Barangay Matictic,
etc. vs. Elbinias, etc., et al. (L-48769, Feb. 27, 1987) and
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. vs. Presiding Judge,
etc., et al. (G.R. No. 89909, Sept. 2 1 , 1990). While in
Matictic it was held t h a t the dismissal of the main case
barred further action on the intervention, in Metropoli-
tan t h e c o m p l a i n t - i n - i n t e r v e n t i o n s u r v i v e d a n d w a s
allowed to proceed d e s p i t e t h e dismissal of t h e m a i n
action. The two cases actually rest on different facts and
t h e s e e m i n g l y o p p o s i n g decisions t h e r e i n a r e easily
reconcilable.
In Matictic, the main action, an expropriation case,
was filed by t h e M u n i c i p a l i t y of N o r z a g a r a y a g a i n s t
private respondents who were charging and collecting toll
fees on feeder roads in Barangay Matictic. Later, the
m u n i c i p a l m a y o r evinced his desire to w i t h d r a w t h e
expropriation case, whereupon petitioner barangay filed
a motion for intervention, contending t h a t the result of
321
R U L E 19 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
322
RULE 19 INTERVENTION SEC. 1
323
RULE 19 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
8. To w a r r a n t intervention, it m u s t be shown t h a t
t h e m o v a n t h a s legal i n t e r e s t in t h e m a t t e r in litigation
and consideration m u s t be given as to w h e t h e r or not t h e
adjudication of t h e rights of t h e original p a r t i e s may be
delayed or prejudiced, while those of t h e i n t e r v e n o r may
be protected in a s e p a r a t e proceeding. Both r e q u i r e m e n t s
m u s t concur.
The i n t e r e s t which entitles a person to intervene in a
suit m u s t be on t h e m a t t e r in litigation a n d of such direct
and immediate c h a r a c t e r t h a t t h e i n t e r v e n o r will e i t h e r
324
RULE 19 INTERVENTION SEC. 2
S e c . 2. Time to intervene. — T h e m o t i o n to
i n t e r v e n e m a y b e filed a t a n y t i m e before r e n d i t i o n
of j u d g m e n t by the trial court. A copy of the
pleading-in-intervention shall be attached to the
motion and served on the original p a r t i e s , (n)
NOTES
325
RULE 19 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 3 4
injustice a n d in consideration of t h e n u m b e r of p a r t i e s
who may be affected by t h e dispute involving overlap-
ping of n u m e r o u s land titles.
2. The uncertainty in these rulings has been
eliminated by t h e p r e s e n t Sec. 2 of t h i s a m e n d e d Rule
which p e r m i t s t h e filing of t h e motion to intervene at any
time before the rendition of t h e j u d g m e n t in t h e case, in
line w i t h t h e d o c t r i n e in Lichauco above cited. T h e
justification advanced for t h i s is t h a t before j u d g m e n t is
rendered, t h e court, for good cause shown, may still allow
t h e introduction of additional evidence and t h a t is still
w i t h i n a liberal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e period for t r i a l .
Also, s i n c e n o j u d g m e n t h a s y e t b e e n r e n d e r e d , t h e
m a t t e r subject of t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n may still be readily
resolved and i n t e g r a t e d in t h e j u d g m e n t disposing of all
c l a i m s i n t h e case, a n d would not r e q u i r e a n o v e r a l l
r e a s s e s s m e n t of said claims as would be t h e case if the
j u d g m e n t had already been r e n d e r e d (see also Looyuko,
et al. vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 102696, July 12, 2001).
S e c . 3. Pleadings-in-intervention. — T h e i n t e r v e -
n o r s h a l l file a c o m p l a i n t - i n - i n t e r v e n t i o n if he
a s s e r t s a c l a i m a g a i n s t e i t h e r o r all o f t h e o r i g i n a l
parties, or an answer-in-intervention if he unites
with the defending party in resisting a claim against
t h e l a t t e r . (2[c]a, R12)
S e c . 4. Answer to complaint-in-intervention. —
The answer to the complaint-in-intervention
s h a l l b e filed w i t h i n f i f t e e n (15) d a y s f r o m n o t i c e
of the order admitting the same, unless a different
p e r i o d i s f i x e d b y t h e c o u r t . (2[d]a, R 1 2 )
NOTES
326
RULE 19 INTERVENTION S E C S . 3-4
327
RULE 20
CALENDAR OF C A S E S
S e c t i o n 1. Calendar of cases. — T h e c l e r k of
court, under the direct supervision of the judge,
s h a l l k e e p a c a l e n d a r of c a s e s for p r e - t r i a l , t h o s e
whose trials were adjourned or postponed, and
t h o s e w i t h m o t i o n s t o s e t for h e a r i n g . P r e f e r e n c e
s h a l l be g i v e n to habeas corpus c a s e s , e l e c t i o n c a s e s ,
special civil actions, and t h o s e so required by law.
( l a , R22)
NOTE
S e c . 2. Assignment of cases. — T h e a s s i g n m e n t
of cases to the different branches of a court shall
be d o n e e x c l u s i v e l y by raffle. The a s s i g n m e n t
shall be done in open session of which adequate
notice shall be g i v e n so as to afford i n t e r e s t e d
p a r t i e s o p p o r t u n i t y t o b e p r e s e n t . ( 7 a , R22)
NOTE
328
RULE 20 CALENDAR OF CASES SEC. 2
329
RULE 21
SUBPOENA
NOTE
330
RULE 21 SUBPOENA SEC. 3
W h e n a p p l i c a t i o n for a s u b p o e n a to a p r i s o n e r
i s m a d e , t h e j u d g e o r officer s h a l l e x a m i n e a n d s t u d y
carefully such application to determine whether the
s a m e is m a d e for a v a l i d p u r p o s e .
N o p r i s o n e r s e n t e n c e d t o d e a t h , reclusion
perpetua or life i m p r i s o n m e n t a n d w h o is c o n f i n e d
in any penal institution shall be brought outside
t h e s a i d p e n a l i n s t i t u t i o n for a p p e a r a n c e o r
attendance in any court unless authorized by the
S u p r e m e Court. (2a, R23)
NOTES
331
R U L E 21 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 4, 5
S e c . 4. Quashing a subpoena. — T h e c o u r t m a y
q u a s h a s u b p o e n a duces tecum u p o n m o t i o n
promptly made and, in any event, at or before the
time specified therein if it is unreasonable and
oppressive, or the relevancy of the books,
documents or things does not appear, or if the
person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued
fails to advance the reasonable cost of the
production thereof.
T h e c o u r t m a y q u a s h a s u b p o e n a ad testifican-
dum o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t t h e w i t n e s s i s n o t b o u n d
thereby. In either case, the subpoena may be
quashed on the ground that the w i t n e s s fees and
kilometrage allowed by these Rules were not
t e n d e r e d w h e n t h e s u b p o e n a w a s s e r v e d . (4a, R23)
NOTE
332
RULE 21 SUBPOENA S E C S . 6-8
s u f f i c i e n t a u t h o r i z a t i o n for t h e i s s u a n c e o f
s u b p o e n a s for t h e p e r s o n s n a m e d i n s a i d n o t i c e
by the clerk of the court of the place in which the
d e p o s i t i o n is to be taken. The clerk shall not,
h o w e v e r , i s s u e a s u b p o e n a duces tecum to a n y s u c h
p e r s o n w i t h o u t a n o r d e r o f t h e c o u r t . (5a, R23)
S e c . 6. Service. — S e r v i c e of a s u b p o e n a
shall be m a d e in the same manner as personal or
substituted service of summons. The original
shall be exhibited and a copy thereof delivered
to the person on w h o m it is served, tendering to
h i m t h e f e e s for o n e day's a t t e n d a n c e a n d t h e
kilometrage allowed by these Rules, except that,
w h e n a s u b p o e n a is i s s u e d by or on behalf of
the R e p u b l i c of t h e P h i l i p p i n e s or an officer or
agency thereof, the t e n d e r need not be made. The
service must be made so as to allow the witness
a r e a s o n a b l e t i m e for p r e p a r a t i o n a n d t r a v e l t o
t h e p l a c e of a t t e n d a n c e . If t h e s u b p o e n a is duces
tecum, t h e r e a s o n a b l e c o s t o f p r o d u c i n g t h e b o o k s ,
documents or things demanded shall also be
t e n d e r e d . (6a, R23)
S e c . 8. Compelling attendance. — In c a s e of
f a i l u r e of a w i t n e s s to a t t e n d , t h e c o u r t or j u d g e
issuing the subpoena, upon proof of the service
thereof and of the failure of the witness, may
issue a warrant to the sheriff of the province,
or his deputy, to arrest the witness and bring
h i m before t h e c o u r t o r officer w h e r e h i s a t t e n d a n c e
333
RULE 21 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 9, 10
S e c . 9. Contempt. — F a i l u r e by a n y p e r s o n
without adequate cause to obey a subpoena served
upon h i m shall be deemed a contempt of the court
from w h i c h the subpoena is issued. If the subpoena
was not issued by a court, the disobedience thereto
shall be punished in accordance with the applicable
l a w or R u l e . (12a, R23)
NOTE
1. S e e S e c . 3, et seq., R u l e 71 on i n d i r e c t or
constructive contempt. While, under t h a t section,
indirect c o n t e m p t is to be p u n i s h e d only after w r i t t e n
c h a r g e a n d h e a r i n g , i t i s also provided t h a t " n o t h i n g
in t h i s section s h a l l be so c o n s t r u e d as to p r e v e n t t h e
court from i s s u i n g process to b r i n g t h e accused p a r t y
i n t o c o u r t , o r from h o l d i n g h i m i n c u s t o d y p e n d i n g
such proceedings."
S e c . 10. Exceptions. — T h e p r o v i s i o n s of s e c t i o n s
8 a n d 9 of t h i s R u l e s h a l l n o t a p p l y to a w i t n e s s w h o
r e s i d e s m o r e t h a n o n e h u n d r e d (100) k i l o m e t e r s
from his residence to the place where he is to
testify by the ordinary course of travel, or to a
detention prisoner if no permission of the court in
w h i c h h i s c a s e i s p e n d i n g w a s o b t a i n e d . (9a, R23)
NOTES
334
RULE 21 SUBPOENA S E C . 10
335
RULE 22
COMPUTATION OF TIME
NOTES
336
RULE 22 COMPUTATION OF TIME
6. In c o n s i d e r i n g t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e r u l e on
p r e t e r m i s s i o n of holidays, t h e second sentence of t h i s
section refers to t h e place where the court sits. This is
because c e r t a i n non-working holidays, or special days
as they were sometimes termed, are applicable to and
observed only in some p a r t i c u l a r places or regions of
the country.
7. In Labad vs. The University of Southwestern
Philippines, et al. (G.R. No. 139665, A u g . 9, 2001),
this section a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n t ramifications a r i s i n g
therefrom were explained by the Supreme Court as
337
RULE 22 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
338
RULE 22 COMPUTATION OF TIME SEC. 2
T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t r e c a l l e d t h a t i n National
Marketing Corporation vs. Tecson (97 Phil. 70), it had
ruled t h a t a y e a r is equivalent to 365 days regardless of
w h e t h e r it is a calendar year or a leap year, which was
not always consistently so. At any rate, it called attention
to t h e fact t h a t in 1987, E.O. 297, or the Administrative
Code of 1987, was enacted, and Sec. 3 1 , C h a p t e r VIII,
Book I thereof provides:
339
RULE 22 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
It e x p l a i n e d t h a t a c a l e n d a r m o n t h is "a m o n t h
designated in t h e calendar without regard to t h e n u m b e r
of days it may contain. It is the period of time r u n n i n g
from t h e beginning of a certain n u m b e r e d day up to, but
not including, the corresponding numbered day of the next
month, and if t h e r e is not a sufficient n u m b e r of days in
t h e next month, t h e n up to and including t h e last day of
t h a t m o n t h . T o i l l u s t r a t e , one c a l e n d a r m o n t h from
D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 2007 will be from J a n u a r y 1, 2 0 0 8 to
J a n u a r y 3 1 , 2008; one calendar month from J a n u a r y 31,
2008 will be from F e b r u a r y 1, 2008 u n t i l F e b r u a r y 29,
2008."
10. T h i s t a x c a s e u n d e r c o m m e n t a f f o r d s t h e
opportunity to invite a t t e n t i o n to some of t h e holdings of
t h e S u p r e m e Court in National Marketing Corporation,
vs. Tecson, et al. (139 Phil. 584) on t h e a n t e c e d e n t s of
Art. 13 of t h e Civil Code which limits t h e connotation of
each "year" t h e r e i n to 365 days. Prior to t h e Civil Code of
Spain, t h e S p a n i s h S u p r e m e Court h a d held t h a t when
t h e law spoke of m o n t h s , it m e a n t a m o n t h of 30 days, not
t h e "natural," "solar," "calendar," (or "civil") m o n t h s in t h e
absense of express provisions to the contrary. This concept
was modified in t h e Philippines by Sec. 13 of our Revised
Administrative Code, p u r s u a n t to which a "month" shall
be understood to refer to a "calendar" m o n t h . With t h e
e n a c t m e n t of our Civil Code, we r e v e r t e d to t h e rule in
340
RULE 22 COMPUTATION OF TIME SEC. 1
In civil s u i t s , t h e s t a t u t e is i n t e r p o s e d by t h e
legislature as an i m p a r t i a l a r b i t e r . In t h e construction of
the p e n a l s t a t u t e , t h e r e is no i n t e n d m e n t to be made in
favor of e i t h e r p a r t y . In criminal cases, t h e S t a t e is t h e
g r a n t o r s u r r e n d e r i n g by an a c t of grace t h e r i g h t to
prosecute a n d declaring an offense to be no longer t h e
subject of prosecution, hence such s t a t u t e s of limitations
are liberally construed in favor of t h e accused.
Also, t h e rule on pretermission of holidays in civil suits
provides t h a t in c o n s t r u i n g its s t a t u t e of limitations, the
first day is excluded a n d t h e last day included, unless t h a t
last day is dies non in which case t h e act may be done on
the succeeding business day. In criminal cases, such a
s i t u a t i o n c a n n o t l e n g t h e n t h e period fixed by law to
prosecute such offender. The waiver or loss of the right to
prosecute is a u t o m a t i c and by operation of law. Where
t h e last day to file an information falls on a Sunday or
legal holiday, t h e period cannot be extended up to t h e
next working day since prescription has already set in.
T h e q u e s t i o n of t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h i s Rule in
computing periods provided by an "applicable s t a t u t e , " as
341
RULE 22 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTE
342
RULE 23
NOTES
343
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
344
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SEC. 1
345
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
S e c . 2. Scope of examination. — U n l e s s o t h e r w i s e
ordered by the court as provided by section 16 or
18 of this Rule, the deponent may be examined
regarding any matter, not privileged, which is
relevant to the subject of the pending action,
whether relating to the claim or defense of any
other party, including the existence, description,
nature, custody, condition, and location of any
books, documents, or other tangible things and
the identity and location of persons having
k n o w l e d g e o f r e l e v a n t f a c t s . (2, R24)
346
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION S E C S . 3, 4
NOTE
S e c . 4. Use of depositions. — At t h e t r i a l or u p o n
the h e a r i n g of a m o t i o n or an interlocutory
p r o c e e d i n g , a n y p a r t or all of a d e p o s i t i o n , so far
as admissible under the rules of evidence, may be
used against any party who was present or
represented at the taking of the deposition or who
had d u e notice thereof, in accordance with any one
of the following provisions:
(a) A n y d e p o s i t i o n m a y b e u s e d b y a n y p a r t y
for t h e p u r p o s e o f c o n t r a d i c t i n g o r i m p e a c h i n g t h e
testimony of d e p o n e n t as a witness;
(b) T h e d e p o s i t i o n of a p a r t y or of a n y o n e w h o
a t t h e t i m e o f t a k i n g t h e d e p o s i t i o n w a s a n officer,
director, or m a n a g i n g agent of a public or private
corporation, partnership, or association which is
a p a r t y m a y be u s e d by an a d v e r s e p a r t y for a n y
purpose;
(c) T h e d e p o s i t i o n of a w i t n e s s , w h e t h e r or n o t
a p a r t y , m a y be u s e d by a n y p a r t y for a n y p u r p o s e
i f t h e c o u r t finds: (1) t h a t t h e w i t n e s s i s d e a d ; o r
(2) t h a t t h e w i t n e s s r e s i d e s a t a d i s t a n c e m o r e t h a n
o n e h u n d r e d (100) k i l o m e t e r s from t h e p l a c e o f trial
or hearing, or is out of the Philippines, unless it
appears that his absence w a s procured by the party
o f f e r i n g t h e d e p o s i t i o n ; o r (3) t h a t t h e w i t n e s s ,
347
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
NOTES
1. W h e r e t h e w i t n e s s is a v a i l a b l e to testify a n d
t h e s i t u a t i o n is not one of those excepted u n d e r Sec. 4 of
t h i s Rule, his deposition theretofore t a k e n is inadmissible
in evidence a n d he s h o u l d in lieu t h e r e o f be m a d e to
testify (Vda. de Sy-Quia vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 62283,
Nov. 25, 1983).
2. A d e p o s i t i o n m a y be u s e d for i m p e a c h i n g or
contradicting any witness, b u t it can be used as evidence
b y a p a r t y ("for a n y p u r p o s e " ) u n d e r t h e s p e c i f i c
conditions set out in Sec. 4. If t h e deposition is t h a t of a
p a r t y or of an employee of a corporation which is a party,
it can be used by t h e adverse p a r t y for i m p e a c h m e n t of
t h e d e p o n e n t or as direct evidence of his case, w h e t h e r
t h e d e p o n e n t i s a v a i l a b l e o r not; b u t s a i d d e p o s i t i o n
cannot be used by t h e d e p o n e n t - p a r t y as evidence of his
case, unless he or t h e corporate employee cannot testify
for any reason s t a t e d in P a r . (c). If t h e d e p o n e n t is only
a witness and is available at the trial, his deposition cannot
be used as evidence b u t may be used only to impeach him.
348
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SEC. 5
3 . U n d e r t h e f o r m e r S e c . 4(c)(2), t h e d i s t a n c e
provided was more t h a n 50 kilometers from the residence
of t h e d e p o n e n t to t h e place of t r i a l or hearing. It h a s
now been increased to more t h a n 100 kilometers, as in
the a m e n d m e n t to t h e rule on subpoenas and for t h e same
reason (see Sec. 10, Rule 21).
4. D e p o s i t i o n s a r e chiefly a mode of d i s c o v e r y .
They a r e i n t e n d e d as a m e a n s to compel disclosure of facts
r e s t i n g in t h e knowledge of a p a r t y or other persons which
are r e l e v a n t in a suit or proceeding in court. Depositions
and t h e o t h e r modes of discovery are m e a n t to enable a
p a r t y to l e a r n all t h e m a t e r i a l and relevant facts, not only
known to him a n d his witnesses but also those known to
the a d v e r s e p a r t y a n d t h e l a t t e r ' s own witnesses.
Depositions a r e not generally m e a n t to be a substitute
for t h e actual testimony in open court of a party or witness.
The d e p o n e n t m u s t , as a r u l e , be p r e s e n t e d for o r a l
examination in open court at the trial. Indeed, any
deposition offered to prove t h e facts t h e r e i n at the t r i a l of
the case, in lieu of t h e a c t u a l testimony of the deponent in
court, may be opposed a n d excluded for being hearsay,
except in those specific instances authorized by the Rules
u n d e r p a r t i c u l a r c o n d i t i o n s a n d for c e r t a i n l i m i t e d
purposes (Dasmarinas Garments, Inc. vs. Reyes, etc., et
al., G.R. No. 108229, Aug. 24, 1993).
349
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 6-9
filed i n t h e f o r m e r a c t i o n m a y b e u s e d i n t h e l a t t e r
a s i f o r i g i n a l l y t a k e n t h e r e f o r . (6, R24)
S e c . 6. Objections to admissibility. — S u b j e c t to
the provisions of section 29 of this Rule, objection
may be made at the trial or h e a r i n g to receiving in
e v i d e n c e a n y d e p o s i t i o n o r p a r t t h e r e o f for a n y
reason which would require the exclusion of
the e v i d e n c e if the witness were then present and
t e s t i f y i n g . (6, R24)
S e c . 9. Rebutting deposition. — At t h e t r i a l or
hearing, any party may rebut any relevant evidence
c o n t a i n e d in a deposition w h e t h e r introduced by
h i m o r b y a n y o t h e r p a r t y . (9, R24)
NOTE
350
RULE 23 D E P O S I T I O N S P E N D I N G ACTION SECS. 10-11, 12
NOTE
NOTES
351
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 13-14
352
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SECS. 15-16
NOTE
353
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 17
354
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SECS. 18-19
355
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 20-23
d e p o s i t i o n i s n o t s i g n e d b y t h e w i t n e s s , t h e officer
s h a l l s i g n i t a n d s t a t e o n t h e r e c o r d t h e fact o f t h e
waiver or of the illness or absence of the witness or
the fact of t h e refusal to sign t o g e t h e r w i t h the
reason given therefor, if any, and the deposition
m a y t h e n b e u s e d a s fully a s t h o u g h s i g n e d , u n l e s s
o n a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s u n d e r s e c t i o n 2 9 (f) o f t h i s
R u l e , t h e c o u r t h o l d s t h a t t h e r e a s o n s g i v e n for
the refusal to sign require rejection of the deposi-
t i o n i n w h o l e o r i n part. (19a, R24)
356
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SECS. 24-26
357
RULE 23 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 27-29
358
RULE 23 DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION SEC. 29
359
RULE 24 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 29
17, 19, 20 to 26 of t h i s R u l e a r e w a i v e d u n l e s s a m o -
tion to suppress the deposition or some part thereof
is made with reasonable p r o m p t n e s s after such
defect is, or w i t h due diligence might have been, as-
c e r t a i n e d . (29a, R24)
360
RULE 24
S e c . 2. Contents of petition. — T h e p e t i t i o n s h a l l
be entitled in the name of the petitioner and
s h a l l s h o w : (a) t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n e r e x p e c t s t o b e a
party to an action in a court of the Philippines but
is presently unable to bring it or cause it to be
b r o u g h t ; (b) t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e e x p e c t e d
a c t i o n a n d h i s i n t e r e s t t h e r e i n ; (c) t h e f a c t s w h i c h
he desires to establish by the proposed testimony
a n d h i s r e a s o n s for d e s i r i n g t o p e r p e t u a t e it;
(d) t h e n a m e s o r a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p e r s o n s h e
e x p e c t s will b e a d v e r s e p a r t i e s a n d t h e i r a d d r e s s e s
s o f a r a s k n o w n ; a n d (e) t h e n a m e s a n d a d d r e s s e s o f
the persons to be examined and the substance of
the testimony which he expects to elicit from
e a c h , a n d s h a l l a s k for a n o r d e r a u t h o r i z i n g t h e p e -
titioner to take the depositions of the persons to be
e x a m i n e d n a m e d i n t h e p e t i t i o n for t h e p u r p o s e o f
p e r p e t u a t i n g t h e i r t e s t i m o n y . (2, R134)
361
RULE 24 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-7
t h e r e i n , for t h e o r d e r d e s c r i b e d i n t h e p e t i t i o n .
A t l e a s t t w e n t y (20) d a y s b e f o r e t h e d a t e o f t h e
hearing, the court shall cause notice thereof to
be served on the parties and prospective deponents
i n t h e m a n n e r p r o v i d e d for s e r v i c e o f s u m m o n s .
(3a, R134)
S e c . 5. Reference to court. — F o r t h e p u r p o s e of
a p p l y i n g R u l e 2 3 t o d e p o s i t i o n s for p e r p e t u a t i n g
testimony, each reference therein to the court in
which the action is pending shall be deemed to
r e f e r t o t h e c o u r t i n w h i c h t h e p e t i t i o n for s u c h
d e p o s i t i o n w a s filed. (5a, R134)
362
RULE 24 DEPOSITIONS BEFORE ACTION SECS. 1-7
OR PENDING APPEAL
p e r p e t u a t e t h e i r t e s t i m o n y for u s e i n t h e e v e n t o f
further p r o c e e d i n g s i n t h e said c o u r t . I n s u c h c a s e
the party who desires to perpetuate the testimony
m a y m a k e a m o t i o n in t h e s a i d c o u r t for l e a v e to
take the depositions, upon the same notice and
service thereof as if the action was pending therein.
The m o t i o n s h a l l s t a t e (a) t h e n a m e s a n d a d d r e s s e s
of the persons to be examined and the substance
of the t e s t i m o n y w h i c h he expects to elicit from
e a c h ; a n d (b) t h e r e a s o n for p e r p e t u a t i n g t h e i r
testimony. If the court finds that the perpetuation
of the t e s t i m o n y is proper to avoid a failure or
delay of justice, it may make an order allowing
the depositions to be taken, and thereupon the
depositions may be taken and used in the same
manner and under the same conditions as are
p r e s c r i b e d i n t h e s e R u l e s for d e p o s i t i o n s t a k e n i n
p e n d i n g a c t i o n s . (7a, R134)
NOTES
363
RULE 24 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 1-7
364
RULE 25
INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES
S e c . 2. Answer to interrogatories. — T h e i n t e r -
r o g a t o r i e s s h a l l b e a n s w e r e d fully i n w r i t i n g a n d
shall be signed and sworn to by the person making
them. The party upon w h o m the interrogatories
h a v e b e e n s e r v e d s h a l l file a n d s e r v e a c o p y o f t h e
answers on the party submitting the interrogato-
r i e s w i t h i n f i f t e e n (15) d a y s after s e r v i c e thereof,
u n l e s s t h e c o u r t , o n m o t i o n a n d for g o o d c a u s e
s h o w n , e x t e n d s o r s h o r t e n s t h e t i m e . (2a)
S e c . 3. Objections to interrogatories. — O b j e c t i o n s
to any interrogatories may be presented to the
c o u r t w i t h i n t e n (10) d a y s after s e r v i c e thereof, w i t h
n o t i c e as in c a s e of a m o t i o n ; a n d a n s w e r s s h a l l be
d e f e r r e d u n t i l t h e o b j e c t i o n s are r e s o l v e d , w h i c h
s h a l l be at as e a r l y a t i m e as is p r a c t i c a b l e . (3a)
S e c . 4. Number of interrogatories. — No p a r t y
may, w i t h o u t l e a v e o f c o u r t , s e r v e m o r e t h a n o n e
set of interrogatories to be answered by the same
party. (4)
365
RULE 25 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 5
NOTES
2. A j u d g m e n t by default may be r e n d e r e d a g a i n s t
a p a r t y who fails to serve his a n s w e r to w r i t t e n
i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s (Cason vs. San Pedro, L-18928, Dec. 28,
1962; see Sec. 3fcJ, Rule 29).
3. After s e r v i c e of t h e a n s w e r , l e a v e of c o u r t is
not required for t h e service of w r i t t e n interrogatories upon
a party {Arellano vs. CFI of Sorsogon, et al., L-34897,
July 15, 1975).
366
RULE 25 INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES SEC. 6
NOTE
1. To u n d e r s c o r e t h e i m p o r t a n c e a n d significant
benefits of discovery procedures in t h e adjudication of
cases, this new provision encourages the use of w r i t t e n
interrogatories by imposing prejudicial consequences on
the p a r t y who fails or refuses to avail himself of w r i t t e n
interrogatories without good cause. A similar provision
h a s b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d in t h e succeeding Rule 26 for
non-availment of requests for admission by the opposing
p a r t y . These two provisions are directed to t h e p a r t y
who fails or refuses to resort to the discovery procedures
therein, and should not be confused with the provisions
o f R u l e 2 9 w h i c h p r o v i d e s for s a n c t i o n s o r o t h e r
consequences upon a party who refuses or fails to comply
with d i s c o v e r y p r o c e d u r e s d u l y a v a i l e d of by h i s
opponent.
367
RULE 25 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
368
RULE 26
S e c . 2. Implied admission. — E a c h of t h e m a t t e r s
of which an admission is requested shall be deemed
admitted unless, within a period designated in the
r e q u e s t , w h i c h s h a l l n o t b e l e s s t h a n f i f t e e n (15)
days after service thereof, or within such further
time as t h e c o u r t m a y allow on motion, the p a r t y to
w h o m t h e r e q u e s t i s d i r e c t e d files a n d s e r v e s u p o n
the party requesting the admission a sworn state-
m e n t either d e n y i n g specifically the m a t t e r s of
which an admission is requested or setting forth in
detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully either
admit or deny those matters.
O b j e c t i o n t o a n y r e q u e s t for a d m i s s i o n s h a l l b e
submitted to the court by the party requested
w i t h i n t h e p e r i o d for a n d p r i o r t o t h e f i l i n g o f h i s
sworn statement as contemplated in the preceding
p a r a g r a p h and his compliance therewith shall be
deferred until such objections are resolved, which
resolution shall be made as early as practicable.
(2a)
369
RULE 26 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 1-3
S e c . 3. Effect of admission. — A n y a d m i s s i o n
m a d e b y a p a r t y p u r s u a n t t o s u c h r e q u e s t i s for t h e
purpose of the p e n d i n g action only and shall not
c o n s t i t u t e a n a d m i s s i o n b y h i m for a n y o t h e r
purpose nor may the same be used against him in
a n y o t h e r p r o c e e d i n g . (3)
NOTES
2. S e c . 1 of t h i s R u l e , as a m e n d e d , specifically
r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e facts s o u g h t t o b e a d m i t t e d b y t h e
a d v e r s e p a r t y m u s t be both m a t e r i a l a n d r e l e v a n t to the
issues in the case. The same r e q u i r e m e n t s of both
m a t e r i a l i t y a n d relevancy have likewise been specified in
t h e preceding Rule 25 on r e q u e s t s for admission. This
m u s t be so since t h e fact in question may be r e l e v a n t if it
h a s a logical t e n d e n c y to prove a factual m a t t e r in t h e
case b u t it may be i m m a t e r i a l if t h a t factual m a t t e r is no
longer in issue, a n d vice-versa.
370
RULE 26 ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY SEC. 4
S e c . 4. Withdrawal. — T h e c o u r t m a y a l l o w t h e
party making an admission under this Rule,
whether express or implied, to withdraw or amend
i t u p o n s u c h t e r m s a s m a y b e j u s t . (4)
371
RULE 26 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTE
372
R U L E 27
P R O D U C T I O N OR I N S P E C T I O N
OF D O C U M E N T S OR T H I N G S
NOTES
1. T h e p r o d u c t i o n of d o c u m e n t s a f f o r d s m o r e
opportunity for discovery t h a n a subpoena duces tecum
as, in the latter, the documents are brought to t h e court
for t h e first t i m e on t h e d a t e of t h e s c h e d u l e d t r i a l
w h e r e i n such d o c u m e n t s are required to be produced.
The inspection of land and other real property for t h e
purposes authorized by this Rule also avoids the need for
ocular inspection thereof by the court.
373
RULE 27 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
2 . I n c r i m i n a l c a s e s , m o t i o n s for p r o d u c t i o n o r
inspection of d o c u m e n t s a r e governed by Sec. 10, Rule
116, a n d may be availed of only by t h e accused generally
d u r i n g t h e pendency of t h e case for trial.
374
RULE 27 P R O D U C T I O N OR INSPECTION SEC. 1
OF DOCUMENTS OR THINGS
375
RULE 28
NOTES
3. Since t h e r e s u l t s of t h e e x a m i n a t i o n a r e i n t e n d e d
to be made public, the same are not covered by the
p h y s i c i a n - p a t i e n t privilege. F u r t h e r m o r e , such exami-
nation is not necessary to t r e a t or cure t h e p a t i e n t b u t to
assess t h e e x t e n t of injury or to e v a l u a t e his physical or
m e n t a l condition.
376
RULE 28 PHYSICAL AND MENTAL SECS. 3-4
EXAMINATION OF PERSONS
S e c . 3. Report of findings. — If r e q u e s t e d by t h e
party examined, the party c a u s i n g the examination
to be m a d e s h a l l d e l i v e r to h i m a c o p y of a d e t a i l e d
written report of the examining physician setting
out his findings and conclusions. After such
request and delivery, the party causing the
examination to be made shall be entitled upon
r e q u e s t t o r e c e i v e from t h e p a r t y e x a m i n e d a l i k e
report of any examination, previously or thereafter
made of the same mental or physical condition. If
the party examined refuses to deliver such report,
the court on motion and notice may make an order
r e q u i r i n g d e l i v e r y o n s u c h t e r m s a s are j u s t , a n d i f
a p h y s i c i a n fails or r e f u s e s to m a k e s u c h a r e p o r t
t h e c o u r t m a y e x c l u d e h i s t e s t i m o n y i f offered a t
t h e trial. (3a)
S e c . 4. Waiver of privilege. — By r e q u e s t i n g a n d
obtaining a report of the examination so ordered
or by taking the deposition of the examiner, the
party examined waives any privilege he may have
in that action or any other involving the same
controversy, regarding the testimony of every
other person who has examined or may thereafter
examine him in respect of the same mental or
p h y s i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n . (4)
NOTE
377
RULE 28 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 3-4
378
R U L E 29
REFUSAL TO COMPLY
WITH MODES OF DISCOVERY
S e c t i o n 1. Refusal to answer. — If a p a r t y or o t h e r
deponent refuses to answer any question upon oral
examination, the examination may be completed on
other matters or adjourned as the proponent of the
question may prefer. The proponent may there-
after apply to the p r o p e r court of the place w h e r e
t h e d e p o s i t i o n i s b e i n g t a k e n for a n o r d e r t o c o m p e l
an answer. The same procedure may be availed of
w h e n a p a r t y or a witness refuses to a n s w e r any
i n t e r r o g a t o r y s u b m i t t e d u n d e r R u l e s 2 3 o r 25.
If the application is granted, the court shall
require the refusing party or deponent to answer
the question or interrogatory and if it also finds
that the refusal to answer was without substantial
justification, it may require the refusing party or
deponent or the counsel advising the refusal, or
both of them, to pay the proponent the amount of
the reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining the
o r d e r , i n c l u d i n g a t t o r n e y ' s fees.
If t h e application is denied a n d the c o u r t finds
t h a t i t w a s filed w i t h o u t s u b s t a n t i a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n ,
the court may require the proponent or the counsel
a d v i s i n g t h e filing of t h e application, or both of
them, to pay to the refusing party or deponent the
amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in
opposing the application including attorney's
fees, ( l a )
S e c . 2. Contempt of court. — If a p a r t y or o t h e r
witness refuses to be sworn or refuses to answer
any question after being directed to do so by the
379
RULE 29 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
S e c . 3. Other consequences. — If a n y p a r t y or an
officer o r m a n a g i n g a g e n t o f a p a r t y r e f u s e s t o o b e y
an order made under section 1 of this Rule
requiring him to answer designated questions, or
an order under Rule 27 to produce any document
o r o t h e r t h i n g for i n s p e c t i o n , c o p y i n g , o r
p h o t o g r a p h i n g or to permit it to be done, or to
permit entry upon land or other property, or an
order made under Rule 26 requiring h i m to submit
to a physical or mental examination, the court may
m a k e s u c h orders in regard to t h e refusal as are
just, and a m o n g others the following:
(a) A n o r d e r t h a t t h e m a t t e r s r e g a r d i n g w h i c h
the questions were asked, or the character or
description of the thing or land, or the contents of
the paper, or the physical or mental condition of
the party, or any other designated facts shall be
t a k e n t o b e e s t a b l i s h e d for t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e a c t i o n
in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining
the order;
(b) A n o r d e r r e f u s i n g t o a l l o w t h e d i s o b e d i e n t
party to support or oppose designated claims or
defenses or prohibiting him from introducing in
evidence designated documents or things or items
of testimony, or from introducing evidence of
physical or mental condition;
(c) A n o r d e r s t r i k i n g o u t p l e a d i n g s o r p a r t s
thereof, or staying further proceedings until the
order is obeyed, or dismissing the action or
p r o c e e d i n g or any part thereof, or r e n d e r i n g a
j u d g m e n t b y d e f a u l t a g a i n s t t h e d i s o b e d i e n t party;
and
380
RULE 29 REFUSAL TO COMPLY SECS. 4-6
WITH MODES OF DISCOVERY
(d) In l i e u of a n y of t h e f o r e g o i n g o r d e r s or in
addition thereto, an order directing the arrest of
a n y p a r t y or a g e n t of a p a r t y for d i s o b e y i n g a n y of
such orders except an order to submit to a physical
or m e n t a l e x a m i n a t i o n . (3a)
381
RULE 29 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-6
NOTES
382
RULE 30
TRIAL
S e c t i o n 1. Notice of trial. — U p o n e n t r y of a c a s e
in the trial calendar, the clerk shall notify the
parties of the date of its trial in such m a n n e r as
s h a l l e n s u r e h i s r e c e i p t o f t h a t n o t i c e a t l e a s t five
(5) d a y s before s u c h d a t e . (2a, R22)
NOTES
383
RULE 30 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 3-4
o n e m o n t h for e a c h a d j o u r n m e n t , nor m o r e
t h a n t h r e e m o n t h s i n all, e x c e p t w h e n a u t h o r i z e d
in writing by the Court Administrator, Supreme
Court. (3a, R22)
NOTES
2. T h e p r o v i s i o n s of Sec. 3 of t h i s R u l e a r e not
applicable to c r i m i n a l cases as t h e rule on p o s t p o n e m e n t s
in c r i m i n a l cases is governed by Sec. 2, Rule 119 (People
vs. Catolico, L-31261-65, April 20, 1971).
384
RULE 30 TRIAL SEC. 5
S e c . 5. Order of trial. — S u b j e c t to t h e p r o -
v i s i o n s o f s e c t i o n 2 o f R u l e 31, a n d u n l e s s t h e c o u r t
for s p e c i a l r e a s o n s o t h e r w i s e d i r e c t s , t h e trial s h a l l
b e l i m i t e d t o t h e i s s u e s s t a t e d i n t h e pre-trial o r d e r
and shall proceed as follows:
(a) T h e p l a i n t i f f s h a l l a d d u c e e v i d e n c e i n
support of his complaint;
(b) T h e d e f e n d a n t s h a l l t h e n a d d u c e e v i d e n c e
in support of his defense, counterclaim, cross-claim
and third-party complaint;
(c) T h e t h i r d - p a r t y d e f e n d a n t , i f a n y , s h a l l
adduce evidence of his defense, counterclaim,
cross-claim and fourth-party complaint;
(d) T h e f o u r t h - p a r t y , a n d so forth, if a n y , s h a l l
a d d u c e e v i d e n c e o f t h e m a t e r i a l facts p l e a d e d b y
them;
(e) T h e p a r t i e s a g a i n s t w h o m a n y c o u n t e r -
claim or cross-claim has been pleaded, shall adduce
evidence in support of their defense, in the order to
be p r e s c r i b e d by t h e court;
(f) T h e p a r t i e s m a y t h e n r e s p e c t i v e l y a d d u c e
r e b u t t i n g e v i d e n c e o n l y , u n l e s s t h e c o u r t , for
good reasons and in the furtherance of justice,
permits them to adduce evidence upon their
original case; and
385
RULE 30 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
(g) U p o n a d m i s s i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e , t h e c a s e
s h a l l b e d e e m e d s u b m i t t e d for d e c i s i o n , u n l e s s t h e
court directs the parties to argue or to submit their
respective memoranda or any further pleadings.
If several defendants or third-party defendants,
and so forth, h a v i n g separate d e f e n s e s a p p e a r by
different counsel, the court shall determine the
relative order of presentation of their evidence, (la,
R30)
NOTES
1. U n d e r s c o r i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e of a p r e - t r i a l
conference a n d t h e proceeding conducted t h e r e i n , this
a m e n d e d section additionally provides t h a t , u n l e s s t h e
court specifically directs, t h e t r i a l shall be limited to t h e
issues s t a t e d in t h e p r e - t r i a l order.
386
RULE 30 TRIAL SEC. 6
5. A r e l a t e d r u l e in A m e r i c a n j u r i s p r u d e n c e on
evidence at the rebuttal stage was adopted by the Supreme
C o u r t in a c r i m i n a l case (People vs. Mazo, G.R. No.
136869, Oct. 17, 2001) which could very well apply in all
o t h e r c a s e s . T h e holding is t h a t evidence offered in
rebuttal is not automatically excluded just because it would
have been more properly admitted in the case in chief.
W h e t h e r evidence could have been more properly
admitted in the case in chief is not a test of admissibility
of evidence in r e b u t t a l . T h u s , the fact t h a t testimony
might have been useful and usable in t h e case in chief
does not necessarily preclude its use in rebuttal.
387
RULE 30 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM S E C S . 7, 8
S e c . 7. Statement of judge. — D u r i n g t h e h e a r i n g
or trial of a case any statement made by the judge
with reference to the case, or to any of the parties,
witnesses or counsel, shall be made of record in the
s t e n o g r a p h i c n o t e s . (3a, R30)
NOTE
1. T h i s p r o v i s i o n differs s o m e w h a t from t h a t of
Sec. 17, Rule 136, t h e last p a r a g r a p h whereof r e a d s as
follows:
"Whenever requested by a party, any statement made
by a judge of first instance, or by a commissioner, w i t h
reference to a case being tried by him, or to any of t h e
p a r t i e s t h e r e t o , or to any w i t n e s s or a t t o r n e y , d u r i n g t h e
h e a r i n g of s u c h c a s e , s h a l l be m a d e of r e c o r d in t h e
s t e n o g r a p h i c notes."
S e c . 8. Suspension of actions. — T h e s u s p e n s i o n
of actions shall be governed by the provisions of
t h e C i v i l C o d e , (n)
388
RULE 30 TRIAL SEC. 9
NOTES
389
RULE 30 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 0
NOTES
2. T h e p r e s e n t p r o v i s i o n is i n t e n d e d to effect a
r a p p r o c h e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e conflicting practices, having
in mind t h e need to relieve t h e judge of some of his judicial
functions w h e n e v e r t h e s a m e can be safely e n t r u s t e d to a
responsible officer a n d w i t h t h e necessary s a f e g u a r d s for
t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h e p a r t i e s . The basic r u l e , of course,
r e m a i n s t h a t t h e judge m u s t himself personally receive
a n d resolve t h e evidence of t h e p a r t i e s .
390
R U L E SO TRIAL SEC. 9
391
RULE 31
C O N S O L I D A T I O N OR S E V E R A N C E
S e c t i o n 1 . Consolidation. — W h e n a c t i o n s
i n v o l v i n g a c o m m o n q u e s t i o n of law or fact are
p e n d i n g before the court, it may order a joint
h e a r i n g o r t r i a l o f a n y o r all t h e m a t t e r s i n i s s u e i n
the a c t i o n s ; it may order all the a c t i o n s con-
solidated; and it may make such orders concerning
proceedings therein as may tend to avoid
u n n e c e s s a r y c o s t s o r d e l a y . (1)
NOTES
2. T h e r u l e on c o n s o l i d a t i o n of c a s e s g e n e r a l l y
applies only to cases p e n d i n g before t h e s a m e judge, not
to cases p e n d i n g in different b r a n c h e s of t h e s a m e court
or in different c o u r t s (PAL, et al. vs. Teodoro, et al.,
97 Phil. 461), a n d also a p p l i e s to s p e c i a l p r o c e e d i n g s
(Salazar vs. CFI of Laguna, infra); b u t w h e n e v e r
a p p r o p r i a t e , a n d in t h e i n t e r e s t of justice, consolidation of
cases in different b r a n c h e s of t h e same court or in different
courts can be effected. Consolidation of cases on a p p e a l
a n d assigned to different divisions of t h e S u p r e m e Court
or t h e Court of Appeals is also authorized, a n d generally
392
RULE 31 CONSOLIDATION OR SEVERANCE SEC. 1
the case which was appealed later and bearing the higher
docket n u m b e r is consolidated with the case having t h e
lower docket number.
3. As a r u l e , t h e consolidation of s e v e r a l cases
involving the same parties and subject-matter is
discretionary with the trial court. However, consolidation
of these cases becomes a m a t t e r of duty if two or more
cases a r e tried before t h e same judge, or, if filed with
different branches of t h e same Court of First Instance,
one of such cases has not been partially tried (Raymundo,
et al. vs. Felipe, supra). Subject to the qualification in
the latter case, it would seem t h a t the former doctrine t h a t
there is no time beyond which no consolidation of cases
can be effected is still valid (see Sideco vs. Paredes,
74 Phil. 6).
393
RULE 31 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
1. W h e n s e p a r a t e t r i a l of claims is conducted by t h e
court u n d e r this section, it may r e n d e r s e p a r a t e j u d g m e n t s
on each claim (see Sec. 5, Rule 36).
2. This provision permitting separate trials
p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t t h e c l a i m s involved a r e w i t h i n t h e
jurisdiction of t h e court. W h e n one of t h e claims is not
w i t h i n its jurisdiction, t h e s a m e should be dismissed, so
t h a t it m a y be filed in t h e proper court.
394
R U L E 32
TRIAL BY C O M M I S S I O N E R
S e c t i o n 1. Reference by consent. — By w r i t t e n
consent of both parties, the court may order any or
all of t h e i s s u e s in a c a s e to be r e f e r r e d to a
commissioner to be agreed upon by the parties or
to be appointed by the court. As used in these
Rules, the word "commissioner" includes a referee,
a n a u d i t o r a n d a n e x a m i n e r , ( l a , R33)
395
RULE 32 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
e v i d e n c e o n l y , a n d m a y fix t h e d a t e for b e g i n n i n g
a n d c l o s i n g t h e h e a r i n g s a n d for t h e f i l i n g o f h i s
report. S u b j e c t t o t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n s a n d l i m i t a t i o n s
stated in the order, the commissioner has and shall
exercise the power to regulate the proceedings in
e v e r y h e a r i n g b e f o r e h i m a n d t o d o all a c t s a n d t a k e
all m e a s u r e s n e c e s s a r y o r p r o p e r for t h e e f f i c i e n t
performance of his duties under the order. He may
i s s u e s u b p o e n a s a n d s u b p o e n a s duces tecum, s w e a r
witnesses, and unless otherwise provided in the
order of reference, he may rule upon the
admissibility of evidence. The trial or hearing
b e f o r e h i m s h a l l p r o c e e d i n all r e s p e c t s a s i t w o u l d
i f h e l d b e f o r e t h e c o u r t . (3a, R33)
NOTES
S e c . 4. Oath of commissioner. — B e f o r e e n t e r i n g
upon his duties the commissioner shall be sworn
396
RULE 32 TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER SECS. 5-9
S e c . 7. Refusal of witness. — T h e r e f u s a l of a
w i t n e s s to obey a s u b p o e n a issued by the
c o m m i s s i o n e r o r t o g i v e e v i d e n c e before h i m , s h a l l
be d e e m e d a contempt of the court which appointed
t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r . (7a, R33)
S e c . 9. Report of commissioner. — U p o n t h e
completion of the trial or hearing or proceeding
before t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r , h e shall file w i t h t h e c o u r t
his report in writing upon the matters submitted to
397
RULE 32 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 10-13
398
RULE 32 TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER S E C . 13
NOTES
2. It s h o u l d also be noted, in p a s s i n g , t h a t t h e
former Rule 32 which provided for trial with assessors has
not been reproduced in the p r e s e n t revision of the Rules.
399
RULE 33
D E M U R R E R TO E V I D E N C E
NOTES
2. In t h e l a n g u a g e of t h e S u p r e m e Court, a
d e m u r r e r to evidence may be issued where, upon the
facts a n d t h e law, t h e plaintiff h a s shown no r i g h t to relief.
Where the plaintiffs evidence together with such
inferences a n d conclusions as may reasonably be d r a w n
therefrom does not w a r r a n t recovery against the
d e f e n d a n t , a d e m u r r e r to evidence should be s u s t a i n e d .
A d e m u r r e r to evidence is likewise s u s t a i n a b l e w h e n ,
a d m i t t i n g every proven fact favorable to t h e plaintiff a n d
i n d u l g i n g in his favor all conclusions fairly and
r e a s o n a b l y inferable t h e r e f r o m , t h e plaintiff h a s failed
to m a k e o u t one or more of t h e m a t e r i a l e l e m e n t s of his
case, or w h e n t h e r e is no evidence to s u p p o r t an allegation
400
RULE 33 DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE SEC. 1
401
RULE 33 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
6. F o r t h e c o u n t e r p a r t b u t c o n t r a r y f e a t u r e s in
c r i m i n a l c a s e s , s e e Sec. 2 3 , R u l e 119 a n d t h e n o t e s
thereunder.
402
RULE 34
J U D G M E N T O N THE P L E A D I N G S
NOTES
403
RULE 34 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM 8EC. 1
3. U n d e r t h i s Rule, a j u d g m e n t on t h e pleadings
m u s t be on motion of t h e claimant. However, if at the
pre-trial, t h e court finds t h a t a j u d g m e n t on t h e pleadings
is p r o p e r , it m a y r e n d e r s u c h j u d g m e n t motu proprio
(Sec. 2[g], Rule 18).
4. The t r i a l court may r e n d e r a j u d g m e n t on t h e
pleadings if, after t h e pre-trial, t h e facts w a r r a n t such
a j u d g m e n t (Taleon vs. Sec. of Public Works &
Communications, L-24281, May 19, 1967).
5. Distinctions b e t w e e n j u d g m e n t on t h e pleadings
a n d s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t (Rule 35):
a. J u d g m e n t on the pleadings is proper when it
a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e is no genuine issue between t h e parties;
a s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t is p r o p e r even if t h e r e is an issue as
to d a m a g e s recoverable.
b. J u d g m e n t on t h e p l e a d i n g s is based exclusively
upon t h e p l e a d i n g s w i t h o u t i n t r o d u c t i o n of evidence; a
s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t is based not only on t h e pleadings but
also upon t h e affidavits, depositions a n d admissions of the
p a r t i e s showing t h a t , except as to t h e a m o u n t of d a m a g e s ,
t h e r e is no g e n u i n e issue.
c. J u d g m e n t on t h e p l e a d i n g s is available in any
action, except for d e c l a r a t i o n of nullity or a n n u l m e n t of
m a r r i a g e a n d legal s e p a r a t i o n ; a s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t is
p r o p e r only in actions to recover a debt, or for a liquidated
s u m of money, or for declaratory relief.
d. A motion for j u d g m e n t on t h e pleadings is subject
only to t h e 3-day notice rule (Sec. 4, Rule 15) a n d w h e r e
all t h e m a t e r i a l a v e r m e n t s of t h e complaint a r e a d m i t t e d ,
such motion m a y even be m a d e ex parte (Cruz vs. Oppen,
L-23861, Feb. 17, 1968); a motion for s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t
r e q u i r e s prior 10-day notice (Sec. 3, Rule 35). See also
Narra Integrated Corp. vs. CA, et al. (G.R. No. 137915,
Nov. 15, 2000).
404
RULE 34 JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS SEC. 1
405
RULE 35
SUMMARY J U D G M E N T S
NOTES
1. F o r d i s t i n c t i o n s b e t w e e n a j u d g m e n t on t h e
p l e a d i n g s a n d a s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t , see t h e notes u n d e r
Sec. 1, Rule 34.
406
RULE 35 SUMMARY JUDGMENTS SEC. 3
NOTES
407
RULE 36 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 4
6. An accounting o r d e r in a s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t is
of an interlocutory n a t u r e a n d is not appealable (Talastas
vs. Abella, L-26398, Oct. 25, 1968).
7. U n d e r Sec. 3 of t h i s Rule, s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t
may not be r e n d e r e d on t h e amount of d a m a g e s , a l t h o u g h
such j u d g m e n t may be e n t e r e d on t h e issue of t h e right to
damages. Thereafter, t h e court may proceed to assess
t h e a m o u n t recoverable (Jugador vs. he Vera, 94 Phil.
704). Also, t h e court c a n n o t impose a t t o r n e y ' s fees in a
408
RULE 35 SUMMARY JUDGMENTS SEC. 4
s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t in t h e absence of proof as to t h e
a m o u n t thereof (Warner, Barnes & Co. vs. Luzon Surety
Co., 95 Phil. 924).
409
RULE 35 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 5-6
NOTE
410
RULE 35 S E C S . 5-6
NOTE
411
RULE 36
NOTES
2. W h e r e t h e r e is a conflict b e t w e e n t h e dispositive
portion of t h e decision a n d t h e body thereof, t h e dispositive
portion controls irrespective of w h a t a p p e a r s in t h e body
of t h e decision. H o w e v e r , an e x c e p t i o n is recognized
w h e r e t h e inevitable conclusion from t h e findings of fact
in t h e opinion is so indubitable a n d clear as to show t h a t
t h e r e w a s a m i s t a k e in t h e dispositive portion (Aguirre, et
al. vs. Aguirre, et al., L-33080, Aug. 15, 1974), or w h e r e
explicit discussion a n d s e t t l e m e n t of t h e issue is found in
t h e body of t h e decision (Millare vs. Millare, 106 Phil.
412
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC. 1
AND ENTRY THEREOF
413
RULE 36 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
5. As a r u l e , a j u d g m e n t u p o n c o m p r o m i s e is
i m m e d i a t e l y e x e c u t o r y (Pamintuan vs. Muhos, et al.,
L-26331, Mar. 15, 1968; Central Bank vs. CA, et al.,
L-38224, Dec. 10, 1974; Pasay City Gov't, et al. vs. CFI of
Manila, et al, L 32162, Sept. 28, 1984) in t h e absence of
a motion to set t h e s a m e aside on t h e ground of fraud,
m i s t a k e , etc. (Cadano vs. Cadano, L-34998, Jan. 11, 1973;
Zagala, et al. vs. Jimenez, et al, L 33050, July 23, 1987),
and if such motion is m a d e and denied, a p p e a l may be
t a k e n from t h a t o r d e r of denial (De los Reyes vs. Ugarte,
75 Phil. 505; Enriquez vs. Padilla, 77 Phil. 373). In
414
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC. 1
AND ENTRY THEREOF
415
RULE 36 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 1
416
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC 1
AND ENTRY THEREOF
417
RULE 36 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
17. T h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n a n a m e n d e d
j u d g m e n t a n d a s u p p l e m e n t a l j u d g m e n t . In an amended
and clarified j u d g m e n t , t h e court m a k e s a t h o r o u g h study
of t h e original j u d g m e n t a n d r e n d e r s t h e a m e n d e d and
clarified j u d g m e n t only after considering all the factual
a n d legal issues. Such a m e n d e d a n d clarified decision is
an e n t i r e l y new decision which s u p e r s e d e s t h e original
decision. A s u p p l e m e n t a l decision does not t a k e t h e place
of or e x t i n g u i s h t h e original; it only serves to bolster or
add s o m e t h i n g to t h e p r i m a r y decision (Esquivel, et al.
vs. Alegre, etc., et al., G.R. No. 79425, April 17, 1989).
418
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC 1
AND ENTRY THEREOF
court should state clearly the reasons for its issuance, with
specific r e f e r e n c e s to t h e facts a n d law relied upon,
necessary for the full u n d e r s t a n d i n g thereof; otherwise,
t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t w o u l d b e a t a loss o r a t l e a s t
unnecessarily inconvenienced in ascertaining the definite
basis of t h e order (Amunategue vs. CA, et at., L-30340,
June 30, 1979).
19. E v e r y c o u r t h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n to r e n d e r a
particular j u d g m e n t has inherent power and authority to
enforce it a n d to exercise equitable control over such
enforcement. The court has authority to inquire w h e t h e r
i t s j u d g m e n t h a s b e e n e x e c u t e d , a n d will r e m o v e
obstructions to t h e enforcement thereof. Such authority
extends not only to such orders and such writs as may be
necessary to carry out the judgment into effect and render
it binding and operative, but also to such orders as may
be necessary to prevent an improper enforcement of the
judgment. If a j u d g m e n t is sought to be perverted and
made t h e medium of consummating a wrong, the court on
proper application can prevent it [31 Am. JUT., Judgments,
Sec. 882, pp. 363 364] (Cabrias vs. Adil, L-49648,
Mar. 18, 1985).
419
RULE 36 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 2
420
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC. 2
AND ENTRY THEREOF
421
RULE 36 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 6
NOTES
422
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS S E C S . 3-5
AND ENTRY THEREOF
S e c . 4. Several judgments. — In an a c t i o n
against several defendants, the court may, when a
several judgment is proper, render judgment
against one or more of them, leaving the action to
p r o c e e d a g a i n s t t h e o t h e r s . (4)
S e c . 5. Separate judgments. — W h e n m o r e t h a n
o n e c l a i m for r e l i e f i s p r e s e n t e d i n a n a c t i o n , t h e
court, at any stage, u p o n a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the
issues m a t e r i a l to a p a r t i c u l a r claim a n d all
counterclaims arising out of the transaction or
o c c u r r e n c e which is t h e subject m a t t e r of the claim,
may r e n d e r a separate j u d g m e n t disposing of such
claim. The j u d g m e n t shall terminate the action
with respect to the claim so disposed of and the
action shall proceed as to the remaining claims. In
423
RULE 36 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 6
NOTES
3. A d e c i s i o n t h a t h a s a c q u i r e d finality becomes
i m m u t a b l e a n d u n a l t e r a b l e . A final j u d g m e n t may no
longer be modified in any respect, even if t h e modification
is m e a n t to correct e r r o n e o u s conclusions of fact a n d law;
a n d w h e t h e r it be m a d e by t h e court t h a t r e n d e r e d it or
by t h e h i g h e s t court of t h e land (Collantes vs. CA, et al.,
G.R. No. 169604, Mar. 6, 2007).
424
RULE 36 JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS SEC. 6
AND ENTRY THEREOF
425
RULE 37 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 1
RULE 37
N E W TRIAL OR R E C O N S I D E R A T I O N
NOTES
426
RULE 37 NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SEC. 1
427
RULE 37 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
(e) It is b a s e d on t h e g r o u n d of f r a u d , a c c i d e n t ,
m i s t a k e or excusable negligence b u t does not specify the
facts constituting these grounds and/or is not accompanied
by an affidavit of m e r i t s (Sec. 2 of t h i s Rule). Note t h a t
fraud a n d m i s t a k e m u s t b e alleged w i t h p a r t i c u l a r i t y
(Sec. 5, Rule 8).
F u r t h e r m o r e , s a i d m o t i o n m u s t comply w i t h t h e
provisions of Rule 15, o t h e r w i s e it will not be accepted for
filing a n d / o r will not s u s p e n d t h e r u n n i n g of t h e
r e g l e m e n t a r y period. See notes a n d cases u n d e r Sec. 6,
Rule 15.
It should also be observed t h a t heretofore, u n d e r Sec.
4 of t h e I n t e r i m Rules, no p a r t y shall be allowed to file a
s e c o n d m o t i o n for reconsideration of a final o r d e r or
j u d g m e n t of t h e t r i a l c o u r t s . However, a second motion
for new trial w o u l d s t i l l b e a v a i l a b l e u n d e r t h e
c i r c u m s t a n c e s set out in Sec. 5 of t h i s Rule. This section
h a s now expressly a d o p t e d t h e foregoing prohibition in
t h e I n t e r i m R u l e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o second m o t i o n s for
reconsideration.
428
RULE 37 N E W TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SEC. 1
429
RULE 37 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
430
RULE 37 NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SEC. 1
431
RULE 37 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
10. Negligence m u s t be e x c u s a b l e a n d g e n e r a l l y
imputable to t h e p a r t y b u t t h e negligence of counsel is
binding on t h e client j u s t as t h e l a t t e r is bound by the
mistakes of his lawyer (Gaba vs. Castro, G.R. No. 56171,
Jan. 31, 1983; Ayllon vs. Sevilla, et al., G.R. No. 79244,
Dec. 10, 1987). However, negligence of t h e counsel may
also be a ground for new trial if it was so g r e a t such t h a t
t h e p a r t y w a s p r e j u d i c e d a n d p r e v e n t e d from fairly
p r e s e n t i n g his case (People vs. Manzanilla, 43 Phil. 167;
cf. Republic vs. Arro, et al., L-48241, June 11, 1987).
1 1 . Newly discovered evidence, to w a r r a n t a new
trial, (a) m u s t have been discovered after trial, (b) could
not have been discovered and produced at the trial despite
reasonable diligence, and (c) if presented, would probably
a l t e r t h e result of t h e action (National Shipyards and
Steel Corp. vs. Asuncion, et al., 103 Phil. 67). Mere initial
hostility of a witness at the trial does not constitute his
testimony into newly discovered evidence (Arce vs. Arce,
106 Phil. 630).
432
RULE 37 N E W TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SEC. 2
433
R U L E 37 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
434
RULE 37 NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SECS.3-5
435
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
2. T h e f i r s t s e n t e n c e of Sec. 5 i m p l e m e n t s t h e
"omnibus motion" rule u n d e r Sec. 8, Rule 15, with the
second sentence providing for t h e exception.
3. A second motion for new trial may be e n t e r t a i n e d
w h e r e t h e ground therefor was not available or existing
at t h e time w h e n t h e first motion was filed. T h u s , if the
first motion was based on fraud and was denied, a second
motion on t h e ground of newly discovered evidence can
still be e n t e r t a i n e d if such evidence was discovered and
became available only after t h e first motion had been
filed.
436
H.ULW
NOTES
437
RULE 37 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
o r l e s s t h a n all o f t h e m a t t e r i n c o n t r o v e r s y , o r o n l y
o n e , o r l e s s t h a n all, o f t h e p a r t i e s t o it, t h e c o u r t
may order a n e w trial or grant reconsideration as
to such issues if severable without interfering with
t h e j u d g m e n t o r final o r d e r u p o n t h e r e s t . (6a)
NOTES
1. T h i s p r o c e d u r e is p e r m i s s i b l e w h e r e e i t h e r a
several or a s e p a r a t e j u d g m e n t is proper (see Secs. 4 and
5, Rule 36).
2. Where one p a r t y files a motion for new t r i a l or
reconsideration a n d t h e o t h e r p a r t y seeks to perfect an
appeal from t h e said decision, t h e court should withhold
action on t h e a p p e a l until after t h e motion for new t r i a l or
r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s h a l l h a v e b e e n resolved (Simsion vs.
Belmonte, L-25388, Aug. 31, 1970).
3. Where defendant's motion for new trial was denied
by t h e t r i a l court, it h a s been held t h a t he can perfect an
appeal from t h e j u d g m e n t and also proceed on certiorari
to set aside t h e order denying his motion for new trial.
There is no incompatibility between t h e two remedies as
one is directed against the j u d g m e n t and the other, against
the order denying t h e new t r i a l (Banco Filipino Savings
& Mortgage Bank vs. Campos, L-39905, Mar. 31, 1975).
C o n s i d e r i n g t h e provisions of Sec. 9 of t h i s Rule and
Sec. 1, Rule 4 1 , resort to these dual remedies now may
only be allowed u n d e r exceptional circumstances where
the factual situation and t h e d e m a n d s of justice justify
such recourses, and t h e claims involved in t h e case are so
438
RULE 37 N E W TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION SEC. 8
439
RULE 37 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
NOTE
440
RULE 38
R E L I E F FROM J U D G M E N T S , O R D E R S ,
OR OTHER P R O C E E D I N G S
NOTES
441
RULE 38 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
T h i s p r o c e d u r a l c h a n g e is a c o n s e q u e n c e of t h e
uniform procedure adopted for trial courts (Rule 5) and in
consideration of t h e fact t h a t municipal trial courts are
a l r e a d y c o u r t s o f r e c o r d a n d , for t h a t m a t t e r , w i t h
expanded jurisdiction (see R.A. 7691; Mesina, et al. vs.
Meer, G.R. No. 146845, July 2, 2002).
4. A p e t i t i o n for r e l i e f i s , in effect, a s e c o n d
opportunity for an aggrieved p a r t y to ask for a new trial
(Sayman vs. CA, et al, L-29479, Feb. 21, 1983). Hence,
fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence, as
grounds for a petition for relief, have the same concepts
t h a t they have in motions for new trial. Also, as in a
motion for new trial, a mistake of law (especially where
t h e p a r t y w a s of limited intelligence) w a s considered
sufficient to justify a p e t i t i o n for relief (Vasquez vs.
Mesagal, 100 Phil. 360).
442
RULE 38 RELIEF FROM J U D G M E N T S , SEC. 3
ORDERS OR OTHER PROCEEDINGS
NOTES
443
RULE 38 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
444
RULE 38 RELIEF FROM JUDGMENTS, SEC. 3
ORDERS OR OTHER PROCEEDINGS
445
RULE 38 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-5
NOTES
446
RULE 38 RELIEF FROM J U D G M E N T S , SEC. 6
ORDERS OR OTHER PROCEEDINGS
NOTES
AA1
RULE 38 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 7
448
RULE 39
EXECUTION, SATISFACTION A N D
EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
449
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
vs. Zulueta, 106 Phil. 264; cf. Denso [Phil.], Inc. vs.
IAC, et al., G.R. No. 75000, Feb. 27, 1987; Montilla vs.
CA, et al., L-47968, May 9, 1988).
2. On the aspect of appealability, these revised Rules
u s e t h e a d j e c t i v e "final" w i t h r e s p e c t t o o r d e r s a n d
resolutions since, to t e r m i n a t e a case, the trial courts issue
orders, while t h e appellate courts and most of t h e quasi-
judicial agencies issue resolutions. J u d g m e n t s a r e not so
qualified since t h e u s e of t h e so-called i n t e r l o c u t o r y
j u d g m e n t s is not favored in t h i s jurisdiction, while such
categorization of an order or a resolution for purposes of
d e n o t i n g t h a t it is a p p e a l a b l e is to d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m
from interlocutory orders or resolutions. However, by
force of extended usage, t h e p h r a s e "final and executory
j u d g m e n t " i s s o m e t i m e s used a n d t o l e r a t e d , a l t h o u g h
t h e u s e o f " e x e c u t o r y " a l o n e w o u l d suffice. T h e s e
observations also apply to the several and separate
j u d g m e n t s contemplated in Rule 36, or p a r t i a l j u d g m e n t s
which totally dispose of a p a r t i c u l a r claim or severable
p a r t of the case, subject to t h e power of the court to suspend
or defer action on an appeal from or any further proceeding
in such special j u d g m e n t , or as provided by Rule 35 on
t h e m a t t e r of p a r t i a l s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t s which a r e not
c o n s i d e r e d as a p p e a l a b l e (see Sec. 4, Rule 35 a n d
explanation t h e r e i n ) .
The second p a r a g r a p h of this section is an innovation
in response to complaints over t h e delay caused by the
former p r o c e d u r e in o b t a i n i n g a writ of execution of a
j u d g m e n t , which h a s already been affirmed on appeal,
with notice to t h e p a r t i e s . As t h i n g s t h e n stood, after the
e n t r y of j u d g m e n t in t h e appellate court, t h e prevailing
party had to wait for the records of the case to be remanded
to t h e court of origin when and where he could t h e n move
for t h e issuance of a writ of execution. The intervening
time could sometimes be substantial, especially if the court
a quo is in a remote province, and could also be availed of
by t h e losing p a r t y to delay or t h w a r t actual execution.
450
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND SEC 1
EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
451
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
452
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC 1
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
453
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 1
454
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 1
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
455
RULE 39 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 1
456
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 2
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
458
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 4
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
to be e x e c u t e d in c a s e it s h a l l be finally s u s t a i n e d
i n w h o l e o r i n part. T h e bond t h u s g i v e n m a y b e
proceeded against on motion with notice to the
s u r e t y . (3a)
NOTES
1. T h i s is v i r t u a l l y t h e s a m e as in t h e f o r m e r
procedure except t h a t , with t h e clarification earlier noted
r e g a r d i n g t h e power of e i t h e r t h e court a quo or t h e
appellate court to allow discretionary execution under the
r e q u i r e m e n t s in t h e preceding section, the procedure for
t h e stay thereof w h e n s o u g h t in e i t h e r court and t h e
liability of the supersedeas bond shall be the same.
459
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC 4
NOTES
1. G e n e r a l l y , only j u d g m e n t s a n d final o r d e r s or
resolutions may be executed. The exceptions are orders
granting support pendente lite which can be executed even
if the main case is still p e n d i n g (Sec. 4, Rule 61), and
orders in injunction, receivership and accounting cases.
With respect to t h e latter, however, t h i s a m e n d e d Sec. 4
contemplates t h a t such directives are p u r s u a n t to a
j u d g m e n t , unlike t h e former section which referred to "a
j u d g m e n t or order directing an accounting in an action."
F o r t h a t m a t t e r , s u p p o r t pendente lite is c o n t a i n e d
generally in an interlocutory order and not a j u d g m e n t .
This imprecision in terminology may, however, be
disregarded, t h e i m p o r t a n t consideration being t h a t these
reliefs, as well as o t h e r s as may hereafter be so provided,
shall be enforceable upon t h e i r rendition a n d shall not be
stayed by an a p p e a l t a k e n therefrom, unless otherwise
ordered by t h e court.
460
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 4
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
3. A j u d g m e n t in an action w h e r e i n a c c o u n t i n g
is ordered, as a p r i m a r y or incidental relief, is a final
a n d a p p e a l a b l e j u d g m e n t (Miranda vs. CA, et al.,
L-33007, June 18, 1976; Hernandez vs. CA, et al., G.R.
Nos. 61420-21, Feb. 22, 1983 and cases therein cited). The
general rule in partition t h a t an appeal will not lie until
the partition and distribution proceedings are terminated
does not apply w h e r e t h e a p p e l l a n t claims exclusive
ownership of the whole property and denies the adverse
p a r t y ' s r i g h t to a n y p a r t i t i o n (Garbo vs. CA, et al.,
L-39384, June 22, 1984).
461
RULE 39 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 4
462
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 4
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
d a m a g e s in c a s e of r e v e r s a l of t h e j u d g m e n t (Hda.
Navarra, Inc. vs. Labrador, et al., 65 Phil. 536; cf. PVTA
vs. Lucero, et al., L-32550, Oct. 27, 1983).
(1) H o w e v e r , in Belfast Surety & Insurance
Co., Inc. vs. Solidum, et al. (CA-G.R. No. 40304-R,
Nov. 4, 1970, 67 O.G. No. 36, p. 7034), t h e Court
of Appeals held t h a t the mere filing of a bond is not
a good reason for t h e execution of a money judgment
pending appeal. It distinguished this situation from
the Navarra case wherein the money was deposited
with t h e bank in escrow, hence its withdrawal under
t h e security of a bond filed by the prevailing party
would not result in any damage to the depositor.
(2) T h e r e a f t e r , in Roxas vs CA, et al. (G.R.
No. 56960, J a n . 28, 1988), the Supreme Court clarified
its decisions wherein some s t a t e m e n t s made therein
g e n e r a t e d t h e perception t h a t t h e filing of a bond
by the successful p a r t y is a good reason for ordering
execution pending appeal, by calling attention to the
factual context in which such orders were allowed.
T h u s , in City of Manila vs. CA, et al. (L-35253,
J u l y 26, 1976), t h e City of M a n i l a h a d o b t a i n e d
j u d g m e n t for recovery of a parcel of land it had lent
to the Metropolitan Theater. Since said defendant
was insolvent and there was imminent danger t h a t
its creditor would foreclose the mortgage t h a t it had
theretofore constituted on the property, such
circumstances impelled the grant of immediate
e x e c u t i o n a n d t h e r e q u i r e m e n t of a bond by t h e
plaintiff was imposed merely as an additional
m e a s u r e for the protection of defendant's creditor. In
Hda. Navarra, Inc. vs. Labrador, et al., supra, the
special reason for immediate execution, and not merely
the posting of a bond, was to insure its receipt by the
party obtaining a favorable judgment in the civil case
therein, and the posting of a bond for delivery of said
proceeds secures such receipt by the prevailing party.
463
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 4
In People's Bank & Trust Co. vs. San Jose, et al. (96
Phil. 895), i m m e d i a t e execution w a s allowed for the
p a y m e n t of s u p p o r t of an h e i r of t h e e s t a t e u n d e r
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and his u r g e n t need therefor, not the
filing of t h e bond, w a s t h e p a r a m o u n t consideration
for such order. To consider t h e m e r e posting of a bond
as a "good r e a s o n " for i m m e d i a t e e x e c u t i o n of
j u d g m e n t s p e n d i n g a p p e a l would become routinary,
or the rule r a t h e r t h a n the exception, and this
situation is not contemplated or intended in t h e Rules.
464
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC 4
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
466
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
466
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 5
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
467
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
468
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 6
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
469
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
470
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 6
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
471
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 6
not apply to c o n t e m p t o r d e r s by r e a s o n of u n a u t h o r i z e d
r e e n t r y on t h e land by t h e ejected d e f e n d a n t (Azotes vs.
Blanco, 85 Phil. 90), or for t h e i s s u a n c e of w r i t s of
p o s s e s s i o n in foreclosure c a s e s w i t h i n t h e s t a t u t e of
l i m i t a t i o n s (Ramos vs. Mahalac, 89 Phil. 270). N e i t h e r
is t h i s section applicable to special proceedings, such as
land r e g i s t r a t i o n cases, hence t h e r i g h t to a s k for a writ
of possession t h e r e i n n e v e r prescribes (Rodil, et al. vs.
Benedicto, et al., L-28616, Jan. 22, 1980; cf. Heirs of
Cristobal Marcos vs. De Banuvar, et al., L-22110,
Sept. 28, 1968; Sta. Ana vs. Menla, L-15564, April 28,
1961); Republic vs. Nillas, G.R. No. 159395, Jan. 23, 2007).
472
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 6
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
473
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
d o r m a n t , p r o v i d e d i t i s filed w i t h i n t h e s t a t u t e o f
limitations. T h a t second revived j u d g m e n t can also be
enforced in t h e s a m e m a n n e r as t h e original j u d g m e n t
and in accordance with t h e provisions of Sec. 6.
NOTES
474
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 8
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
475
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
(d) If it be for t h e d e l i v e r y of t h e p o s s e s s i o n of
real or personal property, to deliver the possession
o f t h e s a m e , d e s c r i b i n g it, t o t h e p a r t y e n t i t l e d
thereto, and to satisfy any costs, d a m a g e s , rents, or
profits covered by the j u d g m e n t out of the personal
property of the person against wh om it was
rendered, and if sufficient personal property cannot
be found, then out of the real property; and
(e) I n a l l c a s e s , t h e w r i t o f e x e c u t i o n s h a l l
specifically state the amount of the interest,
costs, d a m a g e s , rents, or profits due as of the
date of the issuance of the writ, aside from the
principal obligation under the judgment. For this
p u r p o s e , t h e m o t i o n for e x e c u t i o n s h a l l s p e c i f y
the amounts of the foregoing reliefs sought by
t h e m o v a n t . (8a)
NOTES
476
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 8
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
477
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
4. A w r i t of e x e c u t i o n m u s t c o n f o r m w i t h t h e
j u d g m e n t a n d if it is d i f f e r e n t from or e x c e e d s t h e
t e r m s of t h e j u d g m e n t , it is a nullity (Villoria us. Piccio,
et al., 95 Phil. 802) a n d m a y be q u a s h e d on motion
(Vda. de Dimayuga us. Raymundo, et al., 76 Phil. 143),
and a p p e a l may be t a k e n from a denial of said motion
(Romero, et al. us. CA, et al., L-39659, July 30, 1971, where
it was held t h a t certiorari could even be availed of as the
court a quo had issued a w r i t of possession in excess of
its jurisdiction). A w r i t of execution is void when issued
for a g r e a t e r s u m t h a n is w a r r a n t e d by t h e j u d g m e n t or
is for t h e original a m o u n t of the j u d g m e n t despite partial
p a y m e n t thereof. The exact a m o u n t due cannot be left
to t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e sheriff (Windor Steel Mfg.
Co., Inc. us. CA, et al., L-34332, Jan. 27, 1981).
478
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 8
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
o r d e c r e e d i n t h e dispositive p a r t thereof, t h e r e a r e
e x c e p t i o n s , viz.: (a) w h e r e t h e r e i s a m b i g u i t y o r
uncertainty, the body of t h e opinion may be referred to
for p u r p o s e s of c o n s t r u i n g t h e j u d g m e n t b e c a u s e t h e
dispositive p a r t of a decision must find support from the
decision's ratio decidendi; and (b) where extensive and
explicit discussion and settlement of the issue is found in
the body of the decision (Ong Ching Kian Chung, et al.
vs. China National Cereal Oil and Foodstuffs Import and
Export Corp., et al., G.R. No. 131502, June 8, 2000;
Intramuros Tennis Club, Inc., et al. vs. Phil. Tourism
Authority, et al, G.R. No. 135630, Sept. 26, 2000).
479
RULE 39 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
480
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 9
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
w r i t o f e x e c u t i o n a n d a l l l a w f u l fees. T h e j u d g m e n t
obligor shall pay in cash, certified bank check
payable to t h e j u d g m e n t obligee, or any o t h e r form
of payment acceptable to the latter, the a m o u n t of
the judgment debt under proper receipt directly to
the obligee or his authorized representative if
present at the time of payment. T h e l a w f u l fees
shall be handed under proper receipt to the
executing sheriff who shall t u r n over the said
amount within the same day to the clerk of court of
the court t h a t issued the writ.
If the j u d g m e n t obligee or his authorized
representative is not present to receive payment,
the j u d g m e n t obligor shall deliver the aforesaid
p a y m e n t t o t h e e x e c u t i n g sheriff. T h e l a t t e r s h a l l
t u r n over all t h e a m o u n t s c o m i n g into his
possession within the same day to the clerk of court
of the court t h a t issued the writ, or if the same is
not practicable, deposit said a m o u n t to a fiduciary
account in the nearest government depository bank
of t h e Regional Trial Court of t h e locality.
The clerk of said court shall thereafter a r r a n g e
for t h e r e m i t t a n c e o f t h e d e p o s i t t o t h e a c c o u n t o f
the court that issued the writ whose clerk of court
shall then deliver said payment to the j u d g m e n t
obligee in satisfaction of the judgment. The excess,
if any, shall be delivered to the j u d g m e n t obligor
w h i l e t h e l a w f u l fees s h a l l b e r e t a i n e d b y t h e c l e r k
o f c o u r t for d i s p o s i t i o n a s p r o v i d e d b y l a w . I n n o
case shall t h e e x e c u t i n g sheriff d e m a n d t h a t any
p a y m e n t by check be m a d e payable to him.
(b) Satisfaction by levy. — If t h e j u d g m e n t
o b l i g o r c a n n o t p a y all o r p a r t o f t h e o b l i g a t i o n i n
cash, certified bank check or other mode of p a y m e n t
a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e j u d g m e n t o b l i g e e , t h e officer s h a l l
levy u p o n t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e j u d g m e n t o b l i g o r o f
481
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
482
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 10
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
T h e g a r n i s h e e s h a l l m a k e a w r i t t e n r e p o r t to
t h e c o u r t w i t h i n five (5) d a y s from s e r v i c e o f t h e
notice of garnishment stating whether or not the
judgment obligor has sufficient funds or credits to
satisfy the a m o u n t of the judgment. If not, the
report shall state how much funds or credits the
g a r n i s h e e h o l d s for t h e j u d g m e n t o b l i g o r . T h e
garnished a m o u n t in cash, or certified bank check
issued in the name of the judgment obligee, shall
be delivered directly to the judgment obligee within
t e n (10) w o r k i n g d a y s f r o m s e r v i c e o f n o t i c e o n
said g a r n i s h e e r e q u i r i n g s u c h d e l i v e r y , e x c e p t t h e
lawful f e e s w h i c h s h a l l b e paid d i r e c t l y t o t h e court.
I n t h e e v e n t t h e r e are t w o o r m o r e g a r n i s h e e s
h o l d i n g d e p o s i t s o r c r e d i t s s u f f i c i e n t t o satisfy t h e
j u d g m e n t , t h e j u d g m e n t obligor, i f a v a i l a b l e , s h a l l
have the right to indicate the garnishee or
garnishees who shall be required to deliver the
amount due, otherwise, the choice shall be made
by the judgment obligee.
The e x e c u t i n g sheriff shall observe the same
p r o c e d u r e u n d e r p a r a g r a p h (a) w i t h r e s p e c t t o
delivery of payment to the judgment obligee.
(8a, 15a)
483
RULE 39 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 11
P h i l i p p i n e s , the c o u r t in lieu of d i r e c t i n g a
conveyance thereof m a y by an o r d e r divest t h e title
of any party and vest it in others, which shall have
t h e f o r c e a n d effect o f a c o n v e y a n c e e x e c u t e d i n d u e
f o r m o f l a w . (10a)
(b) Sale of real or personal property. — If t h e
j u d g m e n t b e for t h e s a l e o f r e a l o r p e r s o n a l
p r o p e r t y , t o s e l l s u c h p r o p e r t y , d e s c r i b i n g it, a n d
apply the proceeds in conformity with the
j u d g m e n t . (8[c]a)
(c) Delivery or restitution of real property. — T h e
officer s h a l l d e m a n d o f t h e p e r s o n a g a i n s t w h o m
t h e j u d g m e n t for t h e d e l i v e r y o r r e s t i t u t i o n o f r e a l
p r o p e r t y i s r e n d e r e d a n d all p e r s o n s c l a i m i n g r i g h t s
under him to peaceably vacate the property within
t h r e e (3) w o r k i n g d a y s , a n d r e s t o r e p o s s e s s i o n
thereof to the j u d g m e n t obligee, otherwise, the
officer s h a l l o u s t all s u c h p e r s o n s t h e r e f r o m w i t h
the assistance, if necessary, of a p p r o p r i a t e peace
officers, a n d employing such m e a n s as may be
reasonably necessary to retake possession, and
place the j u d g m e n t obligee in possession of such
property. Any costs, damages, rents or profits
a w a r d e d by t h e j u d g m e n t shall be satisfied in the
s a m e m a n n e r a s a j u d g m e n t for m o n e y . (13a)
(d) Delivery of personal property. — In j u d g m e n t s
for t h e d e l i v e r y o f p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y , t h e o f f i c e r
shall take possession of the same and forthwith
deliver it to the p a r t y entitled and satisfy any
j u d g m e n t for m o n e y a s t h e r e i n p r o v i d e d . (8a)
NOTES
484
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 11
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
485
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 12
NOTE
NOTES
486
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 12
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
487
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 13
488
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 13
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
489
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
490
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 13
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
491
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
3. T h e s e e x e m p t i o n s m u s t be claimed, otherwise
they a r e deemed waived (Herrera vs. McMicking, 14 Phil.
641). It is not t h e d u t y of t h e sheriff to s e t off t h e
exemptions on his own initiative.
4. T h e u s u f r u c t u a r y r i g h t of a widow over a lot
whereon she h a d constructed a residential house is not
e x e m p t from e x e c u t i o n a s i t i s not t h e " h o m e s t e a d "
contemplated u n d e r t h i s section. Such usufructuary right
may even be t r a n s f e r r e d or disposed of, hence it is an
i n t e r e s t in property which can be sold on execution, unlike
t h e usufruct of p a r e n t s over p r o p e r t y of t h e i r children
u n d e r p a r e n t a l a u t h o r i t y t h e n provided for in Art. 321 of
the Civil Code (Vda. de Bogacki vs. Inserto, et al., L-39187,
Jan. 30, 1982), a n d a m e n d e d by Art. 226, Family Code.
5 . O t h e r p r o p e r t i e s s p e c i a l l y e x e m p t e d from
execution, as contemplated in t h e above section, are:
(a) Property mortgaged to the DBP (Sec. 26, CA. 458);
(b) P r o p e r t y t a k e n o v e r b y t h e A l i e n P r o p e r t y
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (Sec. 9[f], U.S. Trading With the Enemy
Act);
(c) Savings of n a t i o n a l prisoners deposited with the
Postal Savings B a n k (Act 2489);
(d) Backpay of pre-war civilian employees (R.A. 304);
(e) P h i l i p p i n e G o v e r n m e n t b a c k p a y t o g u e r i l l a s
(R.A. 897);
492
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 14
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
(f) P r o d u c e , w o r k a n i m a l s a n d farm i m p l e m e n t s
of a g r i c u l t u r a l lessees, subject to l i m i t a t i o n (Sec. 21,
R.A. 6389);
(g) B e n e f i t s from p r i v a t e r e t i r e m e n t s y s t e m s
of companies and establishments, with limitations
(R.A. 4917);
(h) Laborer's wages, except for debts i n c u r r e d for
food, shelter, clothing and medical attendance (Art. 1708,
Civil Code);
(i) Benefit p a y m e n t s from the SSS (Sec. 16, R.A.
1161, as amended by P.D. 24, 65 and 177);
G) C o p y r i g h t s and other r i g h t s in i n t e l l e c t u a l
property u n d e r the former copyright law, P.D. 49 (cf. Sec.
239.3, R.A. 8293); and
(k) Bonds issued u n d e r R.A. 1000 (NASSCO vs. CIR,
L-17874, Aug. 31, 1963).
6. S a l a r i e s , as d i s t i n g u i s h e d from w a g e s , w e r e
formerly not exempt from execution. The t e r m "wage"
d e n o t e s c o m p e n s a t i o n for m a n u a l l a b o r , s k i l l e d o r
unskilled, while the term "salary" denotes a higher degree
of employment or superior grade or service and implies a
position or office (Gaa vs. CA, et al., L-44169, Dec. 31,
1985). This distinction has been eliminated by Par. (i).
7. See notes under Secs. 7 and 8, Rule 57 regarding
other properties exempt from attachment, hence likewise
exempt from execution.
493
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
NOTE
494
RULE 39 EXECUTION. SATISFACTION SEC. 15
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
t h e s a l e i s t o t a k e p l a c e , for s u c h t i m e a s m a y
be reasonable, considering the character and
c o n d i t i o n o f t h e property;
(b) I n c a s e o f o t h e r p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y , b y
p o s t i n g a s i m i l a r n o t i c e i n t h e t h r e e (3) p u b l i c
p l a c e s a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d , for not l e s s t h a n five (5)
days;
(c) I n c a s e o f r e a l p r o p e r t y , b y p o s t i n g for
t w e n t y (20) d a y s in t h e t h r e e (3) p u b l i c p l a c e s a b o v e -
mentioned, a similar notice particularly describing
the property and stating where the property is to
b e sold, a n d i f t h e a s s e s s e d v a l u e o f t h e p r o p e r t y
e x c e e d s fifty t h o u s a n d (P50,000.00) p e s o s , by
p u b l i s h i n g a c o p y of t h e n o t i c e o n c e a w e e k for t w o
(2) c o n s e c u t i v e w e e k s i n o n e n e w p a p e r s e l e c t e d b y
raffle, w h e t h e r i n E n g l i s h , F i l i p i n o , o r a n y major
regional language published, edited and circulated
or, i n t h e a b s e n c e thereof, h a v i n g g e n e r a l
c i r c u l a t i o n in t h e p r o v i n c e or city;
(d) In all c a s e s , w r i t t e n n o t i c e of t h e sale s h a l l
be g i v e n to t h e j u d g m e n t obligor, at l e a s t t h r e e (3)
days before the sale, except as provided in
p a r a g r a p h (a) h e r e o f w h e r e n o t i c e s h a l l b e g i v e n
at a n y t i m e before t h e sale, in t h e s a m e m a n n e r as
personal service of pleadings and other papers as
p r o v i d e d by s e c t i o n 6 of Rule 13.
The notice shall specify the place, date and
e x a c t t i m e of t h e s a l e w h i c h s h o u l d not be e a r l i e r
t h a n n i n e o'clock i n t h e m o r n i n g and not later t h a n
t w o o'clock in t h e afternoon. The place of t h e sale
m a y be a g r e e d u p o n by t h e parties. In t h e a b s e n c e
of such a g r e e m e n t , the sale of real property or
p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y not c a p a b l e of m a n u a l d e l i v e r y
shall be h e l d in t h e office of t h e clerk of c o u r t of t h e
R e g i o n a l Trial Court or t h e Municipal Trial Court
which issued the writ or which was designated
495
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 16
NOTE
T h e o f f i c e r s h a l l n o t b e l i a b l e for d a m a g e s ,
for t h e t a k i n g o r k e e p i n g o f t h e p r o p e r t y , t o a n y
t h i r d - p a r t y c l a i m a n t if s u c h bond" is filed. N o t h i n g
496
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 16
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
497
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 16
498
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 16
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
499
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 16
500
R U L E 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 16
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
501
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 17, 1 8
NOTES
502
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION S E C . 19
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
503
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 19
504
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 20
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
505
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 21 22
NOTE
1. The m e a s u r e of d a m a g e s to which t h e j u d g m e n t
creditor is entitled a g a i n s t t h e unlawful intervenor is the
difference b e t w e e n t h e a m o u n t which would have been
realized were it not for t h e illegal intervention (but not to
exceed t h e j u d g m e n t account) and t h e total a m o u n t which
he actually recovered on t h e j u d g m e n t from all sources,
including t h e a m o u n t actually realized at t h e auction sale,
plus t h e expenses incurred as a consequence of t h e illegal
i n t e r v e n t i o n (see Mata vs. Lichauco, 36 Phil. 809).
NOTES
506
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 23-25
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
507
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 26
(d) A s t a t e m e n t t h a t t h e r i g h t of r e d e m p t i o n
e x p i r e s o n e (1) y e a r f r o m t h e d a t e o f the
registration of the certificate of sale.
Such certificate must be registered in the
registry of deeds of the place where the property is
s i t u a t e d . (27a)
NOTES
508
RULE 39 EXECUTION. SATISFACTION SECS. 27-28
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
509
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 29
510
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 29-30
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
1. T h e " s u c c e s s o r in i n t e r e s t " of t h e j u d g m e n t
debtor, then referred to in Sec. 29(a) (now, Sec. 27[aJ),
includes a person to whom he has transferred his right
511
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 29-30
of r e d e m p t i o n , or one to w h o m he h a s c o n v e y e d his
i n t e r e s t s in t h e property for purposes of redemption, or
one who succeeds to his p r o p e r t y by o p e r a t i o n of law,
or a person w i t h a joint i n t e r e s t in t h e property, or his
spouse or heirs (Magno vs. Viola, et al., 61 Phil. 80)
2. While t h e former Sec. 30 (now, Sec. 28) provided
t h a t t h e period of r e d e m p t i o n was 12 m o n t h s "after the
sale," said period is actually to be reckoned from t h e date
of registration of t h e certificate of sale a n d t h e period has
now been changed to one year. Also, while Sec. 29(b)
defined a r e d e m p t i o n e r as one who h a s a lien by
a t t a c h m e n t or j u d g m e n t , t h e s a m e does not per se create
s u c h l i e n as it is t h e levy p u r s u a n t to s a i d w r i t of
a t t a c h m e n t or j u d g m e n t t h a t c r e a t e s a lien on the
property; hence, t h e definition h a s been r e s t a t e d to read
t h a t such lien is "by virtue" thereof.
512
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 29-30
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
513
RULE 39 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 29-30
514
RULE 39 EXECUTION. SATISFACTION SECS. 31-32
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
515
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 33
NOTE
1. D u r i n g t h e period of redemption, t h e j u d g m e n t
debtor is entitled to t h e possession and to receive the fruits
of t h e p r e m i s e s a n d is not r e q u i r e d to pay r e n t to the
creditor or p u r c h a s e r (Dizon vs. Gaborro, et al., L-36821,
June 22, 1978). In fact, it had earlier been ruled t h a t if
the sheriff p u t s the p u r c h a s e r at public auction in
p o s s e s s i o n of t h e l a n d d u r i n g t h e o n e - y e a r p e r i o d of
r e d e m p t i o n , a n a c t i o n for forcible e n t r y lies a g a i n s t
t h e sheriff a n d said p u r c h a s e r (Fabico vs. Ong Pauco,
43 Phil. 572).
Despite s u c h t h e o r y a n d legal r a t i o n a l e , since the
j u d g m e n t obligor is still t h e owner of t h e p r e m i s e s and
r e n t a l s c o n s t i t u t e civil fruits in law, t h e former Sec. 34
of t h i s Rule provided t h a t if t h e p r e m i s e s a r e r e n t e d out to
a third person, t h e p u r c h a s e r or redemptioner was entitled
to t h e r e n t a l s , t h e s a m e to be s u b s e q u e n t l y accounted for
and to be considered as a credit upon the redemption price.
Aside from t h e dubious basis of such a rule, t h a t provision
further entailed complicated rules on how to credit the
r e n t a l s a n d t h e possible effects on extension of the right
of r e d e m p t i o n .
The p r e s e n t Sec. 32 has p u t things a r i g h t by
providing for t h e rule t h a t all r e n t s , e a r n i n g s and income
d e r i v e d from t h e p r o p e r t y p e n d i n g r e d e m p t i o n s h a l l
belong to t h e j u d g m e n t obligor u n t i l t h e expiration of his
period of redemption, and not to the p u r c h a s e r or
redemptioner.
516
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 33
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
from t h e d a t e o f t h e r e g i s t r a t i o n o f t h e c e r t i f i c a t e o f
sale, t h e p u r c h a s e r i s e n t i t l e d t o a c o n v e y a n c e a n d
p o s s e s s i o n of t h e p r o p e r t y ; or, if so r e d e e m e d
w h e n e v e r s i x t y (60) d a y s h a v e e l a p s e d a n d n o o t h e r
redemption has been made, and notice therefor
g i v e n , a n d t h e t i m e for r e d e m p t i o n h a s e x p i r e d , t h e
last r e d e m p t i o n e r i s e n t i t l e d t o t h e c o n v e y a n c e a n d
p o s s e s s i o n , b u t i n all c a s e s t h e j u d g m e n t o b l i g o r
s h a l l h a v e t h e e n t i r e p e r i o d o f o n e (1) y e a r from t h e
date of the registration of the sale to r e d e e m the
p r o p e r t y . T h e d e e d s h a l l be e x e c u t e d by t h e officer
m a k i n g t h e s a l e o r b y h i s s u c c e s s o r i n office, a n d i n
the latter case shall have the same validity as
t h o u g h t h e officer m a k i n g t h e sale h a d c o n t i n u e d
in office a n d e x e c u t e d it.
Upon the expiration of the right of redemption,
the purchaser or redemptioner shall be substituted
t o a n d a c q u i r e all t h e r i g h t s , t i t l e , i n t e r e s t a n d
claim of the judgment obligor to the property as of
t h e t i m e o f t h e levy. T h e p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y
shall b e g i v e n t o t h e p u r c h a s e r o r last r e d e m p t i o n e r
by t h e s a m e officer u n l e s s a t h i r d party is a c t u a l l y
holding the property adversely to the judgment
obligor. (35a)
NOTES
517
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 33
518
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 33
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
519
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 34
NOTE
520
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 35-36
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
521
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C . 37
NOTE
522
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 38-39
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTE
523
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 40-42
o b l i g o r m a y pay t o t h e s h e r i f f h o l d i n g t h e w r i t o f
execution the amount of his debt or so much thereof
a s m a y b e n e c e s s a r y t o satisfy t h e j u d g m e n t , i n t h e
manner prescribed in section 9 of this Rule, and the
s h e r i f f ' s r e c e i p t s h a l l be a s u f f i c i e n t d i s c h a r g e for
the a m o u n t so paid or directed to be credited by the
j u d g m e n t o b l i g e e o n t h e e x e c u t i o n . (41a)
524
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 43
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTES
525
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 43
526
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SECS. 44-45
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
NOTE
527
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW COMPENDIUM S E C S . 46, 47
(b) An a d m i s s i o n of t h e satisfaction of j u d g m e n t
executed a n d acknowledged in t h e s a m e m a n n e r as a
conveyance of real property by the j u d g m e n t obligee or
his counsel;
(c) T h e i n d o r s e m e n t of s u c h a d m i s s i o n by t h e
j u d g m e n t creditor or his a t t o r n e y on t h e face of the record
of t h e j u d g m e n t ; or
(d) By order of t h e court, upon satisfactory proof of
such satisfaction of j u d g m e n t .
NOTE
528
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 47
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o a n o t h e r , t h e j u d g m e n t o r final
order is conclusive upon the title to the thing, the
will o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , o r t h e c o n d i t i o n , s t a t u s o r
relationship of the person; however, the probate of
a will or g r a n t i n g of l e t t e r s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s h a l l
o n l y be prima facie e v i d e n c e of t h e d e a t h of t h e
testator or intestate;
(b) In o t h e r c a s e s , t h e j u d g m e n t or final o r d e r
is, w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e m a t t e r d i r e c t l y a d j u d g e d o r
as to any other matter that could have been raised
in relation thereto, conclusive between the parties
and their successors in interest by title subsequent
to the c o m m e n c e m e n t of the action or special
p r o c e e d i n g , l i t i g a t i n g for t h e s a m e t h i n g a n d u n d e r
the same title and in the same capacity; and
(c) I n a n y o t h e r l i t i g a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s a m e
parties or their successors in interest, that only is
d e e m e d to h a v e b e e n a d j u d g e d in a former j u d g m e n t
o r final o r d e r w h i c h a p p e a r s u p o n its face t o h a v e
been so adjudged, or which was actually and
necessarily included therein or necessary thereto.
(49a)
NOTES
529
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 47
530
RULE 39 EXECUTION. SATISFACTION SEC. 47
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
531
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 47
5. T h e r e is i d e n t i t y of c a u s e s of action w h e n the
j u d g m e n t s o u g h t will b e i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e p r i o r
j u d g m e n t (Tan vs. Arador, et al, L-38745, Aug. 6, 1975)
or if the s a m e evidence will s u s t a i n t h e second action
(1 Martin 161162, citing 34 C.J. 805; Aroc vs. PHHC,
supra; Vda. de Vocal vs. Vda. de Suria, et al, L-26281,
May 31, 1979) even if t h e forms or n a t u r e of t h e two
actions be different (Cayco, et al. vs. Cruz, 106 Phil. 65;
Gitgano vs. Borromeo, et al, supra).
532
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 47
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
533
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 48
o r i g i n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n over a c t i o n s for t h e a n n u l m e n t
of j u d g m e n t s of the Regional Trial Courts (Sec. 9). The
Regional Trial Courts shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction over actions for t h e a n n u l m e n t of judgments
of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (Sec. 19).
8. The rule of res judicata applies to final decisions
of quasi-judicial agencies (Amistoso vs. Ong, et al., G.R.
No. 60219, June 29, 1984). It also applies to j u d g m e n t s
rendered in probate proceedings (Sy Kao, et al. vs. CA, et
al., G.R. No. 61752, Sept. 28, 1984). In a land registration
p r o c e e d i n g , filed by t h e p l a i n t i f f a f t e r he h a d b e e n
declared t h e owner of t h e land involved in a civil case, the
opposition t h e r e t o , filed by t h e defendant who lost in said
civil case, is b a r r e d in said land registration proceeding
u n d e r t h e doctrine of res judicata. All t h e elements are
p r e s e n t and it is of no moment t h a t t h e court in the civil
case was in t h e exercise of general jurisdiction and in the
land registration case, in the exercise of special or limited
jurisdiction. The contrary ruling in Abellera vs. Farol
[74 Phil. 284] is abandoned (Valisno, et al. vs. Plan, et
al, G.R. No. 55152, Aug. 19, 1986).
534
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION SEC. 48
AND EFFECTS OF JUDGMENTS
w a n t o f n o t i c e t o t h e party, c o l l u s i o n , fraud, o r c l e a r
m i s t a k e of law or fact. (50a)
NOTES
535
RULE 39 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 48
536
RULE 40
S e c t i o n 1. Where to appeal. — An a p p e a l f r o m a
j u d g m e n t or final o r d e r of a M u n i c i p a l Trial Court
m a y b e t a k e n t o t h e R e g i o n a l Trial Court e x e r c i s i n g
jurisdiction over the area to which the former
pertains. The title of the case shall remain as it
w a s i n t h e c o u r t o f o r i g i n , but t h e party a p p e a l i n g
t h e c a s e s h a l l b e further referred t o a s t h e a p p e l l a n t
a n d t h e a d v e r s e p a r t y a s t h e a p p e l l e e , (n)
NOTE
537
RULE 40 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
file a n o t i c e of a p p e a l a n d a r e c o r d on a p p e a l w i t h i n
t h i r t y (30) d a y s a f t e r n o t i c e o f t h e j u d g m e n t o r final
order.
T h e p e r i o d of a p p e a l s h a l l be i n t e r r u p t e d by a
t i m e l y m o t i o n for n e w t r i a l o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . N o
m o t i o n for e x t e n s i o n of t i m e to file a m o t i o n for n e w
t r i a l o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s h a l l b e a l l o w e d , (n)
NOTE
S e c . 3. How to appeal. — T h e a p p e a l is t a k e n by
filing a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w i t h t h e c o u r t t h a t r e n d e r e d
t h e j u d g m e n t o r f i n a l o r d e r a p p e a l e d from. The
notice of appeal shall indicate the parties to the
a p p e a l , t h e j u d g m e n t o r final o r d e r o r part t h e r e o f
a p p e a l e d from, a n d s t a t e t h e m a t e r i a l d a t e s s h o w i n g
the timeliness of the appeal.
A r e c o r d on a p p e a l s h a l l be r e q u i r e d o n l y in
special proceedings and in other cases of multiple
or separate appeals.
RULE 40 A P P E A L FROM T H E MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS SECS. 4, 5
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
T h e form a n d c o n t e n t s o f t h e r e c o r d o n a p p e a l
s h a l l be as p r o v i d e d in s e c t i o n 6, R u l e 4 1 .
Copies of the notice of appeal, and the record
on appeal where required, shall be served on the
a d v e r s e party, (n)
NOTE
NOTE
539
RULE 40 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTES
540
RULE 40 APPEAL FROM T H E MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS SEC. 6
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
541
RULE 40 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
NOTE
542
RULE 40 A P P E A L FROM T H E M U N I C I P A L TRIAL COURTS SEC. 8
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
(c) U p o n t h e f i l i n g o f t h e m e m o r a n d u m o f t h e
appellee, or the expiration of the period to do so,
t h e c a s e s h a l l b e c o n s i d e r e d s u b m i t t e d for d e c i s i o n .
The R e g i o n a l Trial Court s h a l l d e c i d e t h e c a s e o n
the basis of the entire record of the proceedings had
in the court of origin and such memoranda as are
filed, (n)
NOTES
543
RULE 40 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
t h e r e o v e r , s h a l l t r y t h e c a s e o n t h e m e r i t s a s i f the
c a s e w a s o r i g i n a l l y filed w i t h it. I n c a s e o f reversal,
t h e c a s e s h a l l b e r e m a n d e d for f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s .
If the case w a s tried on the merits by the lower
c o u r t w i t h o u t j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e s u b j e c t matter,
t h e R e g i o n a l Trial C o u r t o n a p p e a l s h a l l n o t d i s m i s s
t h e c a s e i f i t h a s o r i g i n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n thereof, but
shall d e c i d e the case in a c c o r d a n c e with the
p r e c e d i n g section, w i t h o u t prejudice to the
admission of amended pleadings and additional
e v i d e n c e i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e , (n)
NOTE
544
RULE 40 A P P E A L FROM T H E MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS SEC. 9
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTES
545
RULE 40 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
546
RULE 40 APPEAL FROM THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS SEC. 9
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
547
RULE 40 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
548
RULE 40 APPEAL FROM T H E MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS SEC. 9
TO T H E REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
549
RULE 41
A P P E A L FROM THE
R E G I O N A L TRIAL C O U R T S
S e c t i o n 1. Subject of appeal. — An a p p e a l m a y be
t a k e n from a j u d g m e n t or final order that
completely d i s p o s e s of the case, or of a particular
matter therein w h e n declared by these Rules to be
appealable.
N o a p p e a l m a y b e t a k e n from:
(a) An o r d e r d e n y i n g a p e t i t i o n for r e l i e f or
a n y s i m i l a r m o t i o n s e e k i n g r e l i e f from
judgment;
(b) An i n t e r l o c u t o r y o r d e r ;
(c) A n o r d e r d i s w a l l o w i n g o r d i s m i s s i n g a n
appeal;
(d) An o r d e r d e n y i n g a m o t i o n to s e t a s i d e a
judgment by consent, confession or compromise
on t h e g r o u n d of fraud, mistake or duress,
or any other ground vitiating consent;
(e) A n o r d e r o f e x e c u t i o n ;
(f) A j u d g m e n t or f i n a l o r d e r for or a g a i n s t
one or more of several parties or in separate
claims, c o u n t e r c l a i m s , cross-claims and
third-party complaints, while the main case
is pending unless the court allows an
appeal therefrom; and
(g) A n o r d e r d i s m i s s i n g a n a c t i o n w i t h o u t
prejudice.
In any of the foregoing circumstances, the
a g g r i e v e d p a r t y m a y file a n a p p r o p r i a t e s p e c i a l civil
a c t i o n as p r o v i d e d in R u l e 66. (As amended in A.M.
No. 07-7-12-SC, effective Dec. 27, 2007)
550
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 1
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTES
551
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
552
RULE 41 A P P E A L FROM T H E SEC. 2
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
553
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
554
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 2
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
556
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
NOTES
556
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 3
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
567
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
558
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 3
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
559
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
560
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE S E C S . 4-5
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTES
561
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
562
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 6
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTES
563
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
564
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 7
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
565
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
at t h e i n s t a n c e of t h e a p p e l l e e , m a y d i r e c t its
amendment by the inclusion of any omitted matters
which are d e e m e d essential to the determination of
t h e i s s u e o f l a w o r fact i n v o l v e d i n t h e a p p e a l . I f
t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r d e r s t h e a m e n d m e n t o f t h e record,
t h e a p p e l l a n t , w i t h i n t h e t i m e l i m i t e d i n t h e order,
or such extension thereof as may be granted, or if
n o t i m e i s fixed b y t h e o r d e r w i t h i n t e n (10) d a y s
from receipt thereof, shall redraft the record by
including therein, in their proper chronological
s e q u e n c e , s u c h a d d i t i o n a l m a t t e r s a s t h e c o u r t may
have directed him to incorporate, and shall
t h e r e u p o n s u b m i t t h e r e d r a f t e d r e c o r d for approval,
u p o n notice to the appellee, in like m a n n e r as the
o r i g i n a l draft. (7a)
NOTES
566
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 9
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTES
567
RULE 41 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
568
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE SEC. 9
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
569
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 10
o r d e r s e n u m e r a t e d i n R u l e 109 w h i c h a r e d e c l a r e d
appealable, and in civil actions where several appeals may
likewise be t a k e n from certain aspects thereof. The lower
court r e t a i n s jurisdiction over t h e special proceeding or
civil action, and since t h e original record r e m a i n s with it
for purposes of further remedies which t h e p a r t i e s may
avail of, a record on appeal has to be filed by any appellant.
T h e s a m e p r o c e d u r e is followed, u n d e r t h e same
rationale, in civil cases which a d m i t of multiple appeals.
For instance, a j u d g m e n t in an action for recovery or for
p a r t i t i o n of p r o p e r t y is s e p a r a t e l y appealable from the
proceedings on that part of the judgment wherein
accounting for receipts from t h e property is ordered as a
p r i m a r y or i n c i d e n t a l relief. W h e n such accounting is
t h e r e a f t e r s u b m i t t e d a n d e i t h e r approved or rejected by
t h e t r i a l court, a n o t h e r a p p e a l lies therefrom.
Special civil actions, b e c a u s e of t h e n a t u r e of the
proceedings therein, provide further examples. In
expropriation (Rule 67), an order d e t e r m i n i n g t h e right
of the plaintiff to expropriate and the subsequent
adjudication on t h e issue of j u s t compensation may be the
subject of s e p a r a t e a p p e a l s . In judicial foreclosure of
mortgage (Rule 68), t h e j u d g m e n t in t h e main case on the
r i g h t to foreclose, t h e order confirming t h e foreclosure
sale, a n d t h e deficiency j u d g m e n t a g a i n s t a third-party
m o r t g a g o r may be t h e subject of s e p a r a t e appeals. In
judicial partition (Rule 69), an order directing t h e partition
of t h e land over t h e objection of a p a r t y who claims total
ownership thereof is appealable, a n d a n o t h e r a p p e a l may
be t a k e n from t h e j u d g m e n t r e n d e r e d on t h e project or
s c h e d u l e of p a r t i t i o n s u b m i t t e d by t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r s
appointed by t h e court for t h a t purpose.
570
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE S E C . 10
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
571
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 10-11
572
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE S E C . 12
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
NOTE
573
RULE 41 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
NOTES
574
RULE 41 APPEAL FROM THE S E C . 13
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
575
RULE 42 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
576
RULE 42
NOTES
577
RULE 42 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
578
RULE 42 PETITION FOR REVIEW SEC. 2
FROM T H E RTC TO T H E CA
NOTES
579
RULE 42 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 3 , 4-5
of P a r . 17 of t h e I n t e r i m Rules.
NOTE
S e c . 5. Contents of comment. — T h e c o m m e n t of
t h e r e s p o n d e n t s h a l l b e f i l e d i n s e v e n (7) l e g i b l e
copies, accompanied by certified true copies of such
material portions of the record referred to therein
t o g e t h e r w i t h o t h e r s u p p o r t i n g p a p e r s a n d s h a l l (a)
state whether or not he accepts the statement of
m a t t e r s i n v o l v e d i n t h e p e t i t i o n ; (b) p o i n t o u t s u c h
insufficiencies or inaccuracies as he believes exist
i n p e t i t i o n e r ' s s t a t e m e n t o f m a t t e r s i n v o l v e d but
w i t h o u t r e p e t i t i o n ; a n d (c) s t a t e t h e r e a s o n s w h y
580
RULE 42 PETITION FOR REVIEW S E C S . 6-7
FROM T H E RTC TO T H E CA
NOTES
581
RULE 42 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
NOTES
2. The t h i r d p a r a g r a p h is t h e g e n e r a l rule t h a t a
perfected a p p e a l s t a y s t h e challenged j u d g m e n t or final
order. T h a t stay of j u d g m e n t , however, is not applicable
to civil c a s e s u n d e r t h e Rule on S u m m a r y P r o c e d u r e
which, as revised, provides in Sec. 21 thereof t h a t the
582
RULE 42 PETITION FOR REVIEW SEC. 9
FROM T H E RTC TO T H E CA
NOTES
583
RULE 43
A P P E A L S F R O M T H E [ C O U R T O F TAX A P P E A L S
AND] Q U A S I - J U D I C I A L A G E N C I E S TO
THE COURT OF APPEALS*
S e c t i o n 1. Scope. — T h i s R u l e s h a l l a p p l y to
a p p e a l s [from j u d g m e n t s or final o r d e r s of t h e Court
o f T a x A p p e a l s a n d ] f r o m a w a r d s , j u d g m e n t s , final
orders or resolutions of or authorized by any quasi-
judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi-judicial
f u n c t i o n s . A m o n g t h e s e a g e n c i e s a r e t h e Civil
Service Commission, Central Board of Assessment
Appeals, Securities and Exchange Commission,
Office of t h e P r e s i d e n t , L a n d R e g i s t r a t i o n
A u t h o r i t y , S o c i a l S e c u r i t y C o m m i s s i o n , Civil
Aeronautics Board, Bureau of Patents, Trademark
a n d T e c h n o l o g y Transfer,** N a t i o n a l E l e c t r i f i c a t i o n
Administration, Energy Regulatory Board, National
Telecommunications Commission, Department of
A g r a r i a n R e f o r m u n d e r R e p u b l i c Act 6657,
Government Service Insurance System, Employees
Compensation Commission, Philippine Atomic
Energy Commission, Board of Investments,
Construction Industry Arbitration Commission, and
v o l u n t a r y a r b i t r a t o r s a u t h o r i z e d b y l a w . (n)
NOTES
' S e e N o t e 2 of S e c t i o n 1 of t h i s Rule.
" S e e r e o r g a n i z e d b u r e a u s a s p r o v i d e d i n R.A. 8 2 9 3 ( I n t e l l e c t u a l
Property Code).
584
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM QUASI-JUDICIAL A G E N C I E S SEC. 1
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
4. A p r o s e c u t o r c o n d u c t i n g a p r e l i m i n a r y
investigation performs a quasi-judicial function,
but his office is not a quasi-judicial body. Unlike the
quasi-judicial agencies contemplated in this Rule, it does
not e x e r c i s e a d j u d i c a t o r y or r u l e - m a k i n g functions.
The preliminary investigation conducted therein is not a
trial of the case on the merits but only determines whether
a crime h a s been committed and t h a t t h e accused is
probably guilty thereof. While the prosecutor is making
t h a t determination, he is not acting as a quasi-court since
it is the court itself t h a t will pass judgment on the accused.
Hence, the Office of the Prosecutor is not a quasi-judicial
body and its action a p p r o v i n g the filing of an infor-
mation is not appealable to the Court of Appeals under
Rule 43 (Bautista vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 143375,
July 6, 2001); Orosa vs. Roa, G.R. No. 140423,
585
RULE 43 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
July 14, 2006 cf. Alcaraz vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. 164715
Sept. 20, 2006).
NOTES
586
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES SEC. 3
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
S e c 3. Where to appeal. — An a p p e a l u n d e r t h i s
R u l e m a y b e t a k e n t o t h e Court o f A p p e a l s w i t h i n
the period and in the manner herein provided,
w h e t h e r t h e a p p e a l i n v o l v e s q u e s t i o n s o f fact, o f
law, o r m i x e d q u e s t i o n s o f fact a n d l a w . (n)
NOTES
2. As a g e n e r a l p r o p o s i t i o n , a p p e a l s on p u r e
questions of law are brought to the Supreme Court since
Sec. 5(2)(e), Art. VIII of the Constitution includes in the
enumeration of cases within its jurisdiction "(a)ll cases in
which only an e r r o r or q u e s t i o n of law is involved."
It should not be overlooked, however, t h a t t h e s a m e
provision vesting jurisdiction in the Supreme Court of the
cases enumerated therein is prefaced by the statement t h a t
it may "(r)eview, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on
appeal or certiorari as the law or the Rules of Court may
provide," the judgments or final orders of lower courts in
the cases therein enumerated. Accordingly, the aforesaid
provisions of Rules 42 and 43 constitute the exceptions.
For t h a t matter, this is the same reason why appeals
from the judgment or final order of the inferior courts,
even on p u r e q u e s t i o n s of law, a r e appealable to t h e
Regional Trial Court in line with the specific provision
therefor in Sec. 1, Rule 40.
587
RULE 43 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-5
588
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES SEC. 6
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
NOTE
NOTE
1. It h a s b e e n c l a r i f i e d t h a t P a r . (c) of t h e
enumerated requirements in Sec. 6, requiring "certified
t r u e copies of the record referred to therein and other
supporting papers," does not mean t h a t all supporting
papers referred to should be certified.
It is significant t h a t in appeals under Rule 42, only
judgments or final orders of the lower courts need to be
589
RULE 43 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 7-8
NOTE
690
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES SECS. 9-10
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
NOTE
591
RULE 44 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS 11-12
r e s o l u t i o n s o u g h t t o b e r e v i e w e d , i t m a y g i v e due
course to the petition; otherwise, it shall dismiss
t h e s a m e . T h e f i n d i n g s o f fact o f t h e c o u r t o r a g e n c y
concerned, w h e n supported by substantial evidence,
s h a l l b e b i n d i n g o n t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l s , (n)
NOTES
2. S e c . 12 of t h i s R u l e h a s b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d to
m e a n t h a t t h e a p p e a l will not stay t h e award, judgment,
f i n a l o r d e r o r r e s o l u t i o n u n l e s s t h e g o v e r n i n g law
directs o t h e r w i s e (Lapid vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 142261,
June 29, 2000).
592
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES SEC. 13
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
NOTES
1. A s p e c i a l p r o c e d u r e for t h e t r a n s m i t t a l a n d
contents of the record to be elevated to the Court of Appeals
is provided for in Sec. 11. Also, unlike the rule in other
cases, an appeal u n d e r this Rule shall not stay the award,
j u d g m e n t , final o r d e r or resolution u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e
provided by the Court of Appeals.
593
P R O C E D U R E IN THE COURT OF A P P E A L S
RULE 44
NOTE
594
R U L E 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES S E C S . 3, 4
NOTES
595
RULE 44 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 5-7
S e c . 5. Completion of record. — W h e r e t h e r e c o r d
of the d o c k e t e d case is incomplete, the clerk of court
of the Court of Appeals shall so inform said court
and r e c o m m e n d to it measures necessary to complete
the record. It shall be the duty of said court to take
appropriate action t o w a r d s the completion of the
r e c o r d w i t h i n t h e s h o r t e s t p o s s i b l e t i m e , (n)
S e c . 7. Appellant's brief. — It s h a l l be t h e d u t y of
t h e a p p e l l a n t t o file w i t h t h e c o u r t , w i t h i n forty-
596
R U L E 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES SEC. 8
five (46) d a y s f r o m r e c e i p t o f t h e n o t i c e o f t h e c l e r k
t h a t all t h e e v i d e n c e , o r a l a n d d o c u m e n t a r y , a r e
a t t a c h e d t o t h e r e c o r d , s e v e n (7) c o p i e s o f h i s l e g i b l y
t y p e w r i t t e n , m i m e o g r a p h e d o r p r i n t e d brief, w i t h
p r o o f o f s e r v i c e o f t w o (2) c o p i e s t h e r e o f u p o n t h e
a p p e l l e e . (10a, R46)
NOTES
597
RULE 44 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 10
NOTES
598
RULE 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES SECS. 11-13
599
RULE 44 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 13
f o r m o f t h e f a c t s a d m i t t e d b y b o t h p a r t i e s and o f
those in controversy, together with the substance
of the proof relating t h e r e t o in sufficient detail to
make it clearly intelligible, with page references to
the record;
(e) A c l e a r a n d c o n c i s e s t a t e m e n t of t h e i s s u e s
o f fact o r l a w t o b e s u b m i t t e d t o t h e c o u r t for its
judgment;
(f) U n d e r t h e h e a d i n g " A r g u m e n t , " t h e
a p p e l l a n t ' s a r g u m e n t s o n e a c h a s s i g n m e n t o f error
with page references to the record. The authorities
r e l i e d u p o n s h a l l b e c i t e d b y t h e p a g e o f t h e report
a t w h i c h t h e c a s e b e g i n s a n d t h e p a g e o f t h e report
on w h i c h the citation is found;
(g) U n d e r t h e h e a d i n g "Relief," a s p e c i f i c a t i o n
of the order or j u d g m e n t w h i c h the appellant seeks;
and
(h) I n c a s e s n o t b r o u g h t u p b y r e c o r d o n
appeal, the appellant's brief shall contain, as an
a p p e n d i x , a c o p y o f t h e j u d g m e n t o r final o r d e r
a p p e a l e d from. (16a, R46)
NOTES
1. F o r a discussion of t h e r a t i o n a l e a n d purposes
of t h e m a t t e r s r e q u i r e d to be c o n t a i n e d in appellant's
brief, see De Liano, et al. vs. CA., et al. (G.R. No. 142316,
Nov. 22, 2001).
2. T h e failure of t h e a p p e l l a n t to m a k e a specific
a s s i g n m e n t of e r r o r s in his brief or of page references to
t h e record as r e q u i r e d in t h i s section is a ground for the
d i s m i s s a l of his a p p e a l (Sec. Iff J, Rule 50). See, however,
Philippine Coconut Authority vs. Corona International,
Inc. (G.R. No. 139918, Sept. 29, 2000) directing a liberal
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s ground.
600
RULE 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES S E C . 13
601
RULE 44 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 14
602
RULE 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES S E C . 15
w i t h r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e p a g e s o f the r e c o r d i n s u p p o r t
thereof, but w i t h o u t repetition of m a t t e r s in
a p p e l l a n t ' s s t a t e m e n t o f facts; a n d
(c) U n d e r t h e h e a d i n g " A r g u m e n t , " t h e
a p p e l l e e s h a l l s e t forth h i s a r g u m e n t s i n t h e c a s e
o n e a c h a s s i g n m e n t o f error w i t h p a g e r e f e r e n c e s
to the record. The authorities relied on shall be
cited by the page of the report at which the case
begins and the page of the report on which the
c i t a t i o n is f o u n d . (17a, R46)
NOTES
603
RULE 44 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 15
NOTES
604
RULE 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES S E C . 15
605
RULE 44 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 15
as to t h e r e s p o n d e n t who a p p e a l e d is b i n d i n g on the
r e s p o n d e n t who did not, as t h e evidence of the former is
t h e s a m e as t h a t of t h e l a t t e r (Director of Lands, et al. vs.
Reyes, et al., L-27594, Feb. 27, 1976; Alinsunurin, etc. vs.
Director of Lands, et al, L-28144, Feb. 27, 1976).
606
RULE 44 ORDINARY APPEALED CASES S E C . 15
607
RULE 45
APPEAL BY CERTIORARI
TO THE SUPREME COURT
NOTES
608
RULE 45 A P P E A L BY CERTIORARI SEC. 1
TO THE SUPREME COURT
609
RULE 45 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
610
RULE 45 A P P E A L BY CERTIORARI SEC. 1
TO THE SUPREME COURT
Phil. 401; Roque vs. Buan, G.R. No. 22459, Oct. 31, 1967;
Leonardo vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 51263, Feb. 28, 1983;
Republic vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 61647, Oct. 12, 1984;
Moran vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 59956, Oct. 13, 1984;Nakpil
& Sons, et al. vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 47851, Oct. 3, 1986);
(g) W h e n t h e C o u r t of Appeals manifestly over-
looked certain relevant facts not disputed by t h e p a r t i e s
and which, if properly considered, would justify a different
conclusion (Abellana vs. Dosdos, LI9498, Feb. 26, 1965;
Uytiepo vs. Aggabao, L-28671, Sept. 30, 1970; Carolina
Industries, Inc. vs. CMS Stock Brokerage, Inc., L-46908,
May 17, 1980); or
(h) Where the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals
a r e c o n t r a r y to t h o s e of t h e t r i a l court, or a r e m e r e
conclusions without citation of specific evidence, or where
the facts set forth by the petitioner are not disputed by
the respondent, or where the findings of fact of the Court
of Appeals are premised on absence of evidence but are
contradicted by t h e evidence of record (Manero vs. CA,
et al, L-49542, Sept. 12, 1980; Ducusin vs. CA, et al,
G.R. No. 58286, May 16, 1983; Cesar vs. Sandiganbayan,
et al, G.R. Nos. 54719-50, Jan. 17, 1985; Sacay vs.
Sandiganbayan, et al, G.R. Nos. 66497-98, July 10,
1986; Manlapaz vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 56589, Jan. 12,
1987).
611
RULE 45 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
b. C e r t i o r a r i , as a m o d e of a p p e a l , involves the
review of t h e j u d g m e n t , a w a r d or final order on the merits.
The original action for certiorari may be directed against
an interlocutory order of t h e court prior to appeal from
t h e j u d g m e n t or w h e r e t h e r e is no appeal or any other
plain, speedy or a d e q u a t e remedy.
c. A p p e a l by c e r t i o r a r i m u s t be m a d e within the
r e g l e m e n t a r y period for a p p e a l . An original action for
c e r t i o r a r i may be filed not l a t e r t h a n sixty (60) days from
notice of t h e j u d g m e n t , order or resolution sought to be
assailed.
d. Appeal by c e r t i o r a r i s t a y s t h e judgment, award
or o r d e r a p p e a l e d from. An original action for certiorari,
u n l e s s a w r i t of p r e l i m i n a r y injunction or a temporary
r e s t r a i n i n g o r d e r shall have been issued, does not stay
t h e challenged proceeding.
e. In a p p e a l by c e r t i o r a r i , the petitioner and
r e s p o n d e n t a r e t h e original p a r t i e s to t h e action, and the
lower court or quasi-judicial agency is not to be impleaded.
I n c e r t i o r a r i a s a n o r i g i n a l action, t h e p a r t i e s are the
aggrieved p a r t y a g a i n s t t h e lower court or quasi-judicial
agency and t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t i e s , who thereby
respectively become t h e p e t i t i o n e r and respondents.
f. In certiorari for p u r p o s e s of appeal, the prior filing
of a motion for r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n is not required; while in
certiorari as an original action, a motion for reconsideration
is a condition p r e c e d e n t , subject to certain exceptions.
g. In a p p e a l by certiorari, t h e appellate court is in
t h e exercise of i t s a p p e l l a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n and power of
review, while in c e r t i o r a r i as an original action, the higher
c o u r t exercises o r i g i n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r its power of
c o n t r o l a n d s u p e r v i s i o n over t h e proceedings of lower
courts.
The foregoing distinctions set out in this book were
first a d o p t e d by t h e S u p r e m e Court in Paa vs. CA, et al.
612
R U L E 45 A P P E A L BY CERTIORARI SEC. 2
TO THE SUPREME COURT
(G.R. No. 12560, Dec. 4, 1997); see also San Miguel Corp.,
et al. vs. Layos, Jr., et al, (G.R. No. 149640, Oct. 19, 2007).
7. The S u p r e m e Court can t r e a t a p e t i t i o n filed
erroneously under Rule 65 as one filed under Rule 45 if
the petitioner had alleged grave abuse of discretion in said
petition under the following circumtances: (1) If the petition
was filed within 15 days of notice of the judgment or final
order or resolution appealed from; or (2) If the petition is
meritorious (Hanjin Heavy Industries and Construction
Co., Ltd. vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 167938, Feb. 19, 2009).
NOTE
613
RULE 45 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M 8EC. 3
NOTES
2. P r o o f of s e r v i c e of c o p i e s on t h e l o w e r c o u r t
concerned, as t h e public respondent, a n d on t h e adverse
614
RULE 45 A P P E A L BY CERTIORARI SEC. 4
TO THE SUPREME COURT
615
RULE 45 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 5-6
NOTES
S e c . 6. Review discretionary. — A r e v i e w is n o t a
matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion,
616
RULE 45 A P P E A L BY CERTIORARI S E C S . 7-8
TO THE SUPREME COURT
617
RULE 46 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
NOTES
2 . P u r s u a n t t o S e c . 7 , t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t may
r e q u i r e t h e filing of a c o m m e n t , reply, rejoinder a n d
s u r r e j o i n d e r w h e n necessary, as well as briefs, memo-
r a n d a or such o t h e r d o c u m e n t s as it may deem necessary
for a full discussion and consideration of t h e issues on
a p p e a l . See, however, t h e resolution of the Court in A.M.
No. 99-2-04-SC (Appendix R) limiting t h e pleadings t h a t
m a y be filed a f t e r t h e reply, a n d t h e p r o c e d u r e to be
followed t h e r e a f t e r .
NOTE
618
RULE 46
ORIGINAL C A S E S
NOTES
619
RULE 46 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
620
RULE 46 ORIGINAL CASES SEC. 3
NOTES
621
RULE 46 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
622
RULE 46 ORIGINAL CASES SEC. 3
623
RULE 46 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
4 . W h e r e t h e r e a l p a r t y i n i n t e r e s t i s a body
corporate, j u s t like in o t h e r pleadings earlier discussed,
an officer of t h e corporation can sign t h e certificate against
forum s h o p p i n g , b u t he m u s t be duly a u t h o r i z e d by a
resolution of t h e board of directors (Eslaban, Jr., etc. vs.
Vda. de Onorio, G.R. No. 146062, June 28, 2001).
NOTES
624
RULE 46 ORIGINAL CASES SEC. 7
NOTES
625
RULE 46 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
NOTE
626
RULE 46 ORIGINAL CASES SEC. 7
627
RULE 47
A N N U L M E N T OF J U D G M E N T S OR
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
S e c t i o n 1. Coverage. — T h i s R u l e s h a l l g o v e r n
the a n n u l m e n t by the Court of Appeals of judgments
or final orders and r e s o l u t i o n s in civil actions of
R e g i o n a l T r i a l C o u r t s for w h i c h t h e o r d i n a r y
r e m e d i e s o f n e w t r i a l , a p p e a l , p e t i t i o n for r e l i e f o r
other appropriate r e m e d i e s are no longer available
t h r o u g h n o f a u l t o f t h e p e t i t i o n e r , (n)
NOTES
1. A n n u l m e n t of a j u d g m e n t is a r e m e d y in law
i n d e p e n d e n t of t h e case w h e r e t h e j u d g m e n t sought to be
a n n u l l e d w a s r e n d e r e d . The j u d g m e n t may be annulled
on t h e ground of extrinsic or collateral fraud. A person
w h o i s n o t a p a r t y t o t h e j u d g m e n t m a y s u e for its
a n n u l m e n t provided he can prove t h a t the same was
obtained t h r o u g h fraud or collusion a n d t h a t he would be
adversely affected t h e r e b y . An action for a n n u l m e n t of
j u d g m e n t may be availed of even if t h e j u d g m e n t to be
a n n u l l e d h a d a l r e a d y been fully executed or implemented
(Islamic Da'Wah Council of the Phil. vs. CA, et al., G.R.
No. 80892, Sept. 29, 1989).
I t s h o u l d also b e o b s e r v e d t h a t , a s h a s b e e n t h e
accepted doctrine and now expressly s t a t e d in Sec. 2 of
this Rule, lack of jurisdiction is the second ground
a u t h o r i z e d for a n n u l m e n t of j u d g m e n t s or final orders and
resolutions.
628
RULE 47 A N N U L M E N T OF J U D G M E N T S OR SEC. 2
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
NOTES
629
RULE 47 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
3. T h e second p a r a g r a p h of t h i s section p u t s a
condition upon t h e invocation of extrinsic fraud as a
ground for the a n n u l m e n t sought. Indeed, if such ground
had really been availed of by the p a r t y in a motion for
new trial or petition for relief in the original court and
was rejected w i t h finality, he should not be permitted
a n o t h e r c h a n c e on t h e s a m e g r o u n d which h a d been
concluded by the adjudication of the case thereon. If, on
the other hand, he did not avail himself thereof, then he
must suffer t h e consequences of his implied waiver.
4. The defining role of this section was illustrated in
Ancheta vs. Ancheta (G.R. No. 145370, Mar. 4, 2004), a
saga of legal errors involving estranged spouses as the
p a r t i e s . The t h e r e i n respondent husband had filed an
action in the trial court for the annulment of their marriage
due to psychological incapacity of his wife; he deliberately
alleged in the complaint a wrong residential address for
the defendant wife; the sheriff served the summons on
the wrong person t h r o u g h a wrong mode of substituted
service; for failure to answer, the wife was declared in
default; the public prosecutor assigned to the case did not
raise any objection to the proceedings; and the trial court
rendered a so-called order declaring the marriage null and
void ab initio.
630
RULE 47 A N N U L M E N T OF J U D G M E N T S OR SEC. 3
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
631
RULE 47 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
NOTES
632
RULE 47 A N N U L M E N T OF J U D G M E N T S OR SEC. 4
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the n u m b e r of respondents. A
certified t r u e copy of t h e j u d g m e n t or final o r d e r or
resolution shall be attached to the original copy of
t h e p e t i t i o n i n t e n d e d for t h e c o u r t a n d i n d i c a t e d as
such by the petitioner.
The p e t i t i o n e r shall also submit t o g e t h e r with
the petition affidavits of witnesses or d o c u m e n t s
s u p p o r t i n g t h e cause of action or defense a n d a
sworn certification that he has not theretofore
commenced any other action involving the same
issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals
or different divisions thereof, or any o t h e r t r i b u n a l
or agency; if there is such other action or
proceeding, he must state the status of the same,
and if he should thereafter learn t h a t a similar
a c t i o n o r p r o c e e d i n g h a s b e e n filed o r i s p e n d i n g
before the S u p r e m e Court, the Court of Appeals, or
different divisions thereof, or any o t h e r t r i b u n a l or
agency, he undertakes to promptly inform the
aforesaid courts and other tribunal or agency
t h e r e o f w i t h i n five ( 5 ) d a y s t h e r e f r o m , (n)
NOTES
633
RULE 47 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 56
S h o u l d prima facie m e r i t b e f o u n d i n t h e
p e t i t i o n , t h e s a m e s h a l l b e g i v e n d u e c o u r s e , and
s u m m o n s s h a l l b e s e r v e d o n t h e r e s p o n d e n t , (n)
Sec. 6. Procedure. — T h e p r o c e d u r e in o r d i n a r y
civil c a s e s shall be o b s e r v e d . S h o u l d a trial be
necessary, the reception of the evidence may be
r e f e r r e d to a m e m b e r of t h e c o u r t or a j u d g e of a
R e g i o n a l Trial Court, (n)
NOTES
634
RULE 47 A N N U L M E N T OF J U D G M E N T S OR SEC. 7
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
NOTES
635
R U L E 47 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
NOTE
636
RULE 47 ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS OR SEC. 10
FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS
NOTE
NOTE
1. Sec. 19(6), in relation to Sec. 9(2), both of B.P. Blg. 129, is considered as the jurisdictional basis for this
power of the Regional Trial Courts to annul the judgments
or final orders of the lower courts.
637
R U L E 48
PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
S e c t i o n 1. Preliminary conference. — At a n y t i m e
d u r i n g t h e p e n d e n c y o f a c a s e , t h e c o u r t m a y call
the parties and their counsel to a preliminary
conference:
(a) T o c o n s i d e r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a n a m i c a b l e
settlement, except when the case is not allowed by
law to be c o m p r o m i s e d ;
(b) T o d e f i n e , s i m p l i f y a n d c l a r i f y t h e i s s u e s
for d e t e r m i n a t i o n ;
(c) T o f o r m u l a t e s t i p u l a t i o n s o f f a c t s a n d
admissions of d o c u m e n t a r y exhibits, limit the
n u m b e r of w i t n e s s e s to be p r e s e n t e d in c a s e s falling
within the original jurisdiction of the court, or
those within its appellate jurisdiction where a
m o t i o n for n e w t r i a l i s g r a n t e d o n t h e g r o u n d o f
newly discovered evidence; and
(d) T o t a k e u p s u c h o t h e r m a t t e r s w h i c h m a y
aid t h e c o u r t in t h e p r o m p t disposition of t h e case.
( R u l e 7, CA I n t e r n a l R u l e s ) (n)
638
RULE 48 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE SEC. 3
p r o c e e d i n g s i n t h e c a s e u n l e s s , w i t h i n five (5) d a y s
from n o t i c e thereof, a n y party s h a l l s a t i s f a c t o r i l y
show valid cause why the same should not be
f o l l o w e d , (n)
NOTES
639
RULE 49
ORAL ARGUMENT
S e c t i o n 1. When allowed. — At i t s o w n i n s t a n c e
or upon motion of a party, the court may h e a r the
parties in oral a r g u m e n t on the merits of a case, or
on any material incident in connection there-
w i t h , (n)
The oral a r g u m e n t shall be limited to such
m a t t e r s as t h e c o u r t m a y specify in its o r d e r or
r e s o l u t i o n , ( l a , R48)
NOTES
640
RULE 49 ORAL ARGUMENT
NOTE
641
RULE 50
D I S M I S S A L OF APPEAL
642
RULE 50 DISMISSAL OF APPEAL SEC. 1
(h) F a i l u r e o f t h e a p p e l l a n t t o a p p e a r a t t h e
preliminary conference or to comply with orders,
circulars, or directives of the court without
justifiable cause; and
(i) T h e f a c t t h a t t h e o r d e r o r j u d g m e n t
a p p e a l e d from i s n o t a p p e a l a b l e , ( l a )
NOTES
643
RULE 50 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
5. It w a s f o r m e r l y h e l d t h a t t h e f a i l u r e of t h e
record on appeal to show on its face all the facts reflecting
t h e t i m e l i n e s s of t h e a p p e a l r e n d e r s it m a n d a t o r y for
t h e a p p e a l t o b e d i s m i s s e d , a s s a i d facts a r e j u r i s -
dictional (Reyes vs. Carraso, L-28783, Mar. 31, 1971;
Workmen's Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Augusto, et al., L-31060,
July 29, 1971; Imperial Insurance, Inc. vs. CA, et al.,
L-28722, Oct. 29, 1971). However, this "material data"
rule has been liberalized starting with the case of Pimentel,
et al. vs. CA, et al. (L-39684, J u n e 27, 1975).
B u t w h e r e t h e m o t i o n to d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l for
non-compliance with Sec. 1(a) of this Rule was filed with
t h e court a quo, said appeal should not be dismissed but
the lower court should order the a m e n d m e n t and
completion thereof. This is different from the rule where
644
RULE 50 DISMISSAL OF APPEAL SEC. 1
7 . F a i l u r e t o file a p p e l l a n t ' s b r i e f w i t h i n t h e
reglementary period need not necessarily cause dismissal
of the appeal where the same was due to force majeure,
i.e., power blackouts which prevented completion of the
printing and a request for extension was seasonably filed,
w i t h t h e brief t h e r e a f t e r actually filed by a p p e l l a n t
(Padosas vs. CA, et al., L-30871, April 25, 1974).
NOTES
645
RULE 50 REMEDIAL LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
646
RULE 50 DISMISSAL OF APPEAL SEC. 2
t h e former p r a c t i c e , t a k i n g a n i m p r o p e r a p p e a l w a s
sometimes resorted to as a dilatory strategy since t h e
appellant was aware t h a t the appealed case would merely
be transferred to the proper appellate court. Thus, for
i n s t a n c e , a j u d g m e n t of t h e lower c o u r t b a s e d on a
stipulation of facts would be taken to the Court of Appeals
although no question of fact was involved. Under this
new procedure, such a p p e a l which at most could only
involve questions of law shall no longer be transferred to
the Supreme Court but shall be dismissed outright.
647
R U L E 50 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
648
RULE 51
JUDGMENT
NOTES
649
RULE 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
650
RULE 51 JUDGMENT SEC. 2
651
RULE 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 3
NOTE
652
RULE 51 JUDGMENT SEC. 3
for t h e p r o n o u n c e m e n t o f a j u d g m e n t o r f i n a l
r e s o l u t i o n . (2a)
NOTES
653
R U L E 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4, 5
NOTE
654
RULE 51 JUDGMENT SEC. 6
NOTES
655
RULE 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 7-8
o r d e f e c t i n a n y r u l i n g o r o r d e r o r i n a n y t h i n g done
o r o m i t t e d b y t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r b y a n y o f t h e parties
is g r o u n d for g r a n t i n g a n e w t r i a l or for s e t t i n g
aside, modifying, or o t h e r w i s e disturbing a
j u d g m e n t or order, unless refusal to take such
actions appears to the court i n c o n s i s t e n t with
substantial justice. The court at every stage of
the proceedings must disregard any error or
d e f e c t w h i c h d o e s n o t affect t h e s u b s t a n t i a l rights
o f t h e p a r t i e s . (5a)
NOTES
656
RULE 51 JUDGMENT SEC. 9
657
RULE 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
for f i l i n g t o t h e c l e r k w h o s h a l l i n d i c a t e t h e r e o n
the date of promulgation and cause true copies
thereof to be served upon the parties or their
c o u n s e l , (n)
NOTES
2. Sec. 10 a d o p t s t h e new c o n c e p t of e n t r y of
j u d g m e n t or final resolution, t h a t is, the date when it
became executory shall be deemed the date of its entry,
and not the date of the actual mechanical act of writing
out the fallo in the book of entries of j u d g m e n t s as was
658
RULE 51 JUDGMENT S E C . 11
NOTES
659
RULE 51 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
3. In c a s e s p e n d i n g on a p p e a l in t h e C o u r t of
A p p e a l s , a motion for d i s c r e t i o n a r y e x e c u t i o n of t h e
j u d g m e n t of the trial court may be filed in the Court of
Appeals provided it is in possession of t h e original record
or the record on appeal. If it g r a n t s the motion, it will not
issue a writ of execution but shall order the resolution
granting the motion therefor. A copy of such resolution
and a certified t r u e copy of the judgment or final order to
be executed shall forthwith be t r a n s m i t t e d to said trial
court.
660
RULE 52
NOTES
661
RULE 62 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 14
Subsequently, effective July 28, 1986, Sec. 11 of B.P. Blg. 129 was amended by Executive Order No. 33 providing
t h a t in the former I n t e r m e d i a t e Appellate Court, which
was t h e r e i n renamed as the Court of Appeals, "no second
motion for reconsideration from the same party shall be
entertained" (Sec. 6). This restriction has been adopted
662
RULE 52 MOTION FOR R E C O N S I D E R A T I O N SECS. 1-4
663
R U L E 63
NEW TRIAL
NOTES
664
RULE 53 NEW TRIAL SEC. 1
665
RULE 53 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS 2-4
NOTES
666
RULE 53 NEW TRIAL S E C S . 2-4
the time the first motion for new trial was filed, e.g., where
the first motion was based on fraud and the second is based
on newly discovered evidence t h e requisites for which
concurred only after the filing of the first motion. This
would not be possible in the Court of Appeals where the
only ground for a motion for new trial is newly discovered
evidence.
667
RULE 54
INTERNAL BUSINESS
NOTES
668
RULE 54 INTERNAL BUSINESS SECS. 1-2
669
R U L E 56
PUBLICATION OF JUDGMENTS
AND FINAL RESOLUTIONS
S e c t i o n 1. Publication. — T h e j u d g m e n t s a n d
final resolutions of the court shall be published in
t h e Official G a z e t t e a n d i n t h e R e p o r t s officially
authorized by the court in the language in which
they h a v e been originally written, together with the
syllabi therefor prepared by the reporter in
c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e w r i t e r s thereof. M e m o r a n d a
o f all o t h e r j u d g m e n t s a n d final r e s o l u t i o n s not s o
p u b l i s h e d shall be made by the reporter and
p u b l i s h e d i n t h e Official G a z e t t e a n d t h e a u t h o r i z e d
reports, (la)
NOTE
670
RULE 55 PUBLICATION OF J U D G M E N T S SEC 2
AND FINAL RESOLUTIONS
NOTES
1. The syllabus is an abstract, a headnote, or a note
prefixed to the report of an adjudged case, containing an
epitome or brief s t a t e m e n t of the rulings of the court upon
the points decided in t h e case (Kuhn vs. Coal Co., 215
U.S. 356, 30 S. Ct. 140, 54 L.Ed. 228). The weight of its
authority in the different s t a t e s depends on whether the
syllabus should contain also findings of fact or, like our
practice, shall be confined to points of law. The better
rule, in our experience, should be t h a t ordinarily where a
headnote, even though prepared by the court, is given no
special force by s t a t u t e or rule of court, the opinion is to
be looked to for the original and authentic s t a t e m e n t on
the grounds of decision (Burbank vs. Ernst, 232 U.S. 162,
34 S. Ct. 299, 58 L. Ed. 551).
671
RULE 56 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
in Fuellas. x x x"
NOTES
672
PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT
RULE 56
A. ORIGINAL CASES
NOTES
673
RULE 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
674
RULE 56 ORIGINAL CASES SEC. 2
675
B. A P P E A L E D CASES
S e c . 3. Mode of appeal. — An a p p e a l to t h e
S u p r e m e C o u r t m a y be t a k e n o n l y by a p e t i t i o n for
review on certiorari, except in criminal cases where
t h e p e n a l t y i m p o s e d is d e a t h , recluaion perpetua or
life i m p r i s o n m e n t , (n)
NOTE
1. R u l e s 41 a n d 42 of t h e 1964 R u l e s of Court,
which prescribed a common mode of appeal to the Court
of Appeals and t h e S u p r e m e Court, were superseded by
R.A. 5 4 3 3 , R.A. 5440 a n d , f u r t h e r , by B.P. Blg. 129.
Appeals to t h e S u p r e m e Court in civil cases may be made
only by petition for review on certiorari from the Court of
Appeals (Rule 45) a n d from t h e Regional Trial Courts
(Rule 45 in relation to Sec. 17, R.A. 296). Even in criminal
cases, appeal to t h e S u p r e m e Court shall be by petition
for review on certiorari, except where the penalty imposed
by t h e lower court is d e a t h , reclusion perpetua or life
i m p r i s o n m e n t . The d e a t h p e n a l t y s h a l l be subject to
automatic review and, in t h e l a t t e r two cases, t h e same
may be elevated by ordinary a p p e a l (see Note 1 under
Sec. 1, Rule 45, and Note 11 u n d e r Secs. 1 to 3, Rule 122).
Sec. 4. Procedure. — T h e a p p e a l s h a l l be
governed by and disposed of in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Constitution, laws,
R u l e s 45, 48, s e c t i o n s 1, 2, a n d 5 to 11 of R u l e 51, 52
a n d t h i s R u l e , (n)
NOTE
676
RULE 56 APPEALED CASES SEC. 5
NOTES
677
RULE 56 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
NOTES
678
RULE 56 APPEALED CASES SEC. 7
NOTES
679
RULE 56 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
680
RULE 56 APPEALED CASES SEC. 7
681
RULE 56 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
682
RULE 56 APPEALED CASES SEC. 7
683
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
1. T h e r e v i s e d R u l e s of C o u r t p r o v i d e for t h e
p r o v i s i o n a l r e m e d i e s of p r e l i m i n a r y a t t a c h m e n t , pre-
liminary injunction, receivership, replevin and support
pendente lite. Contempt, which u n d e r the old Rules was
also considered a provisional remedy, is now classified as
a special civil action.
684
RULE 56 PROVISIONAL REMEDIES SEC. 5
685
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M
6. In p r e l i m i n a r y a t t a c h m e n t a n d in preliminary
injunction, t h e a m o u n t of t h e bond to be posted by the
applicant is addressed to t h e sound discretion of the court.
In receivership, t h e bond as fixed by t h e court is now
a l w a y s r e q u i r e d of t h e p e t i t i o n e r , w h e t h e r or not the
a p p o i n t m e n t of a receiver has been applied for ex parte.
In replevin, t h e bond to be posted by t h e applicant is in
an a m o u n t double t h e value of t h e personal property to
be seized. In applications for support pendente lite, no
bond is generally required from the applicant.
686
RULE 56 PROVISIONAL REMEDIES SEC. 6
687
RULE 57
PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT
688
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC.
(e) I n a n a c t i o n a g a i n s t a p a r t y w h o h a s
r e m o v e d o r d i s p o s e d o f h i s property, o r i s a b o u t t o
d o so, w i t h i n t e n t t o d e f r a u d h i s c r e d i t o r s ;
(f) In an a c t i o n a g a i n s t a party w h o d o e s not
r e s i d e i n t h e P h i l i p p i n e s , o r o n w h o m s u m m o n s may
be s e r v e d by p u b l i c a t i o n , ( l a )
NOTES
689
R U L E 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
690
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 1
6. B a s e d on t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d effects of
attachment, it may be classified as (a) preliminary, which
is resorted to at the commencement of the action or at any
time before entry of judgment, for the temporary seizure
of property of the adverse party; and (b) final, or levy
upon execution, which is available after the judgment in
t h e m a i n a c t i o n h a s become e x e c u t o r y , and for t h e
satisfaction of said judgment.
As to form and procedure of enforcement, there is the
r e g u l a r form of a t t a c h m e n t which refers to corporeal
property in the possession of the party, and garnishment
which refers to money, stocks, credits and other incorporeal
property which belong to the party but are in the possession
or under the control of a third person.
The purposes of preliminary attachment are (a) to
seize t h e p r o p e r t y of t h e debtor in a d v a n c e of final
judgment and to hold it for purposes of satisfying said
judgment, or (b) to enable the court to acquire jurisdiction
over the action by the actual or constructive seizure of
the property in those instances where personal service of
summons on the creditor cannot be effected (Mabunag
vs. Gallimore, 81 Phil. 354; Quasha, et al. vs. Juan, et
al., L-49140, Nov. 19, 1982). T h u s , a proceeding in
attachment is in rem where the defendant does not appear,
and in personam where he appears in the action (Banco
Espahol-Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil. 921). Where a lien
already exists, e.g., a maritime lien, the same is equivalent
to an attachment (Quasha, et al. vs. Juan, et al, supra),
just like t h a t under a real estate mortgage.
691
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
692
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 2
NOTES
693
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
NOTES
694
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 4
NOTES
695
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
696
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 6
697
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
698
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 7
699
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
700
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 7
(e) T h e i n t e r e s t o f t h e p a r t y a g a i n s t w h o m
attachment is issued in property belonging to the
e s t a t e o f t h e d e c e d e n t , w h e t h e r a s heir, l e g a t e e , o r
devisee, by serving the executor or administrator
or other personal representative of the decedent
w i t h a c o p y of t h e w r i t a n d n o t i c e , t h a t said i n t e r e s t
is a t t a c h e d . A c o p y of said writ of a t t a c h m e n t a n d
of said n o t i c e s h a l l a l s o be filed in t h e office of t h e
clerk of the court in which said estate is being
s e t t l e d a n d s e r v e d u p o n t h e heir, l e g a t e e o r d e v i s e e
concerned.
If the property sought to be attached is in
custodia legis, a c o p y of t h e writ of a t t a c h m e n t shall
be filed with the proper court or quasi-judicial
agency, and notice of the attachment served upon
t h e c u s t o d i a n of s u c h property. (7a)
NOTES
701
RULE 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
702
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 7
703
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
NOTE
1. G a r n i s h m e n t is a species of a t t a c h m e n t for
reaching property or credits pertaining or payable to a
judgment debtor. It results in a forced novation by the
substitution of creditors, that is, the judgment debtor who
is the original creditor of the garnishee is, through service
of the writ of garnishment, substituted by the judgment
creditor who thereby becomes the creditor of the garnishee.
Garnishment has also been described as a warning to a
person, who has in his possession property or credits of
the judgment debtor, not to pay the money or deliver the
property to the latter but to instead appear and answer
the plaintiffs suit.
It is not necessary to serve s u m m o n s upon the
garnishee in order t h a t the t r i a l court may acquire
jurisdiction to bind him. He need not be impleaded as a
party to the case. All that is necessary is the service upon
him of the writ of garnishment, as a consequence of which
704
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT S E C S . 9-10
705
RULE 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 11
NOTES
706
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 12
707
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 13
NOTES
1. Preliminary attachment shall be discharged when
it is established that -
(a) The debtor has posted a counter-bond or has made
the requisite cash deposit (Sec. 12);
(b) The attachment was improperly or irregularly
issued (Sec. 13) as where there is no ground for attachment
(see Sec. 1), or the affidavit and/or bond filed therefor are
defective or insufficient (Sec. 3);
708
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 13
709
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 14
710
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 14
t h e bond u n l e s s t h e a c t i o n t h e r e f o r i s filed w i t h i n
o n e h u n d r e d t w e n t y (120) d a y s from t h e d a t e o f t h e
filing of t h e bond.
The s h e r i f f s h a l l not be liable for d a m a g e s , for
t h e t a k i n g o r k e e p i n g o f s u c h property, t o a n y s u c h
t h i r d - p a r t y c l a i m a n t , if s u c h b o n d s h a l l be filed.
Nothing herein contained shall prevent such
c l a i m a n t o r a n y t h i r d p e r s o n from v i n d i c a t i n g h i s
claim to the property, or prevent the attaching
party from c l a i m i n g d a m a g e s a g a i n s t a third-party
c l a i m a n t w h o filed a frivolous or plainly s p u r i o u s
claim, in t h e s a m e or a s e p a r a t e a c t i o n .
W h e n t h e w r i t of a t t a c h m e n t is i s s u e d in favor
of t h e R e p u b l i c of t h e P h i l i p p i n e s , or a n y officer
d u l y r e p r e s e n t i n g it, t h e filing of s u c h bond s h a l l
not be r e q u i r e d , and in c a s e t h e sheriff is s u e d for
d a m a g e s as a r e s u l t of t h e a t t a c h m e n t , he s h a l l be
r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e S o l i c i t o r G e n e r a l , a n d if h e l d
liable t h e r e f o r , t h e a c t u a l d a m a g e s a d j u d g e d by t h e
c o u r t s h a l l be paid by t h e National T r e a s u r e r o u t
of t h e f u n d s to be a p p r o p r i a t e d for t h e p u r p o s e .
(14a)
NOTES
711
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 1516
712
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 17
NOTES
1. W h e r e t h e w r i t of e x e c u t i o n is r e t u r n e d
unsatisfied, the liability of the counter-bond automatically
a t t a c h e s w i t h o u t t h e need for t h e plaintiff to file a
supplemental pleading to claim payment from the surety
(Vanguard Assurance Corp. vs. CA, et al., L-25921,
May 27, 1975), but the creditor must have made a demand
on the surety for satisfaction of the judgment and the
surety was given notice and a summary hearing in the
same action as to his liability under his counter-bond
(Towers Assurance Corp. vs. Ororama Supermart, et al.,
L-45848, Nov. 9, 1977; Leelin Marketing Corp. vs C & S
Agro Dev. Co., et al., supra).
713
R U L E 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 18-19
o r d e r for i t s i s s u a n c e i s g e n e r a l l y n o t a p p e a l a b l e . T h e r e
i s n o n e e d for a s e p a r a t e a c t i o n t o r e c o v e r o n t h e c o u n t e r -
b o n d (Imperial Insurance, Inc. vs. De los Angeles, L-28030,
Jan. 18, 1982). W h i l e S e c . 17 p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e c o u n t e r -
bond i s l i a b l e for "the a m o u n t d u e u n d e r t h e j u d g m e n t , "
t h e s u r e t y c a n n o t b e h e l d l i a b l e for a n y d e f i c i e n c y i n t h e
recovery if it is in e x c e s s of the a m o u n t stated in the
counter-bond as, in this case, the terms thereof constitute
t h e l a w b e t w e e n t h e p a r t i e s , a n d n o t t h e R u l e s o f Court
(Central Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Ubay, et al.,
L-40334, Feb. 28, 1985).
NOTE
1. Secs. 18 a n d 19 p r o v i d e for t h e p r o c e d u r e in t h e
d i s p o s i t i o n o f (1) m o n e y w h i c h w a s d e p o s i t e d b y a p a r t y
714
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 20
715
RULE 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M 8 E C . 20
NOTES
716
RULE 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT SEC. 20
If t h e case is a p p e a l e d and t h e j u d g m e n t of t h e
appellate court is in favor of the party whose property
was attached, he can ask for damages sustained by him
during the pendency of the appeal by filing a motion in
the appellate court at any time before such judgment on
appeal becomes executory (Luneta Motor Co. vs. Menendez,
et al, 117 Phil. 970), but if he did not apply for damages
in the trial court, he cannot ask for damages during the
pendency of the trial by motion in the appellate court.
However, where the writ of preliminary attachment issued
by the trial court was declared null and void in an original
action before the appellate court, the damages sustained
by the p a r t y whose property was a t t a c h e d can be
adjudicated on appeal in the main case by the Court of
Appeals, especially since Sec. 9 of B.P. Blg. 129 grants it
the power to resolve factual issues in cases falling within
its original or appellate jurisdiction. The appellate court
shall h e a r and decide the application and include in its
judgment the award against the surety, or it may refer
such claim to the trial court and allow it to hear and decide
the same (Hanil Dev. Co., Ltd. vs. IAC, et al, G.R. No.
71229, Sept. 30, 1986).
5. The surety must be notified of the application for
d a m a g e s , o t h e r w i s e the j u d g m e n t t h e r e o n cannot be
executed against him. Where the judgment became final
and the surety was not impleaded by such notice, the
s u r e t y is r e l i e v e d from liability (Visayan Surety &
Insurance Co. vs. Pascual, 85 Phil. 779). For the same
rule in injunction bonds, see Visayan Surety & Insurance
Co. vs. Lacson (96 Phil. 878). The damages recoverable
for a wrongful attachment is limited to the amount of the
bond (Pads vs. COMELEC, L-29026, Aug. 22, 1969).
6. The procedure for claiming damages outlined in
Sec. 20 is exclusive, hence such claims for damages cannot
be the subject of an independent action, except:
(a) Where the principal case was dismissed for lack
717
RULE 57 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 20
of j u r i s d i c t i o n by t h e t r i a l court w i t h o u t giving an
opportunity to the party whose property was attached to
apply for and prove his claim for damages; and
(b) Where the damages by reason of the attachment
was sustained by a third person who was not a party to
the action wherein such writ was issued (Santos vs. CA,
et al.. 95 Phil. 360).
7. The claim for damages against the bond in an
alleged wrongful attachment can only be sought in the
same court where the bond was filed and the attachment
was issued. Where the action filed in the Court of First
Instance of Manila, which issued the writ of preliminary
attachment, was subsequently dismissed for improper
venue, it was not error for said court to set the case for
hearing only on the issue of damages but which application
for d a m a g e s was l a t e r w i t h d r a w n by t h e defendant.
Neither did the Court of First Instance of Cebu, wherein
the same case was subsequently refiled, have jurisdiction
to rule on the issue of damages on the bond as therein
claimed by the same defendant since it was not the court
which issued the writ of preliminary attachment subject
of defendant's claim for damages and it had no jurisdiction
over the surety company which issued said bond, pursuant
to Sec. 20 of this Rule. The doctrine in Santos vs. CA, et
al., supra, is not applicable since in said case, the principal
action was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and no claim
for damages could therefore have been presented therein
(Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp., et al. vs. Hontanosas,
et al, L-35951, Aug. 31, 1977).
718
RULE 58
PRELIMINARY I N J U N C T I O N
NOTES
719
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS 1. 9
720
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION S E C S . 1, 9
721
R U L E 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 1. 9
722
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION S E C S . 1, 9
723
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
724
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 2
725
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
726
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 2
727
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
728
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 2
729
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
NOTES
730
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 4
731
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 4
NOTES
732
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 4
733
RULE 88 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 4
734
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 4
735
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
736
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 5
737
RULE 58 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 5
NOTES
738
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 5
739
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC S
740
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION S E C S . 6-7
741
RULE 08 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 8
NOTES
NOTES
742
RULE 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SEC. 8
743
R U L E 59
RECEIVERSHIP
S e c t i o n 1. Appointment of receiver. — U p o n a
verified application, one or more receivers of the
property which is the subject of the action or
p r o c e e d i n g may be a p p o i n t e d by the Court of
A p p e a l s or by t h e S u p r e m e Court, or a m e m b e r
thereof, in the following cases:
(a) When it a p p e a r s from the verified appli-
c a t i o n , a n d s u c h o t h e r p r o o f a s t h e c o u r t may
require, that the party applying for the appointment
of a r e c e i v e r h a s an i n t e r e s t in the property or fund
w h i c h is the subject of t h e a c t i o n or proceeding,
a n d t h a t s u c h p r o p e r t y or fund is in d a n g e r of
being lost, r e m o v e d , or materially injured u n l e s s a
receiver be a p p o i n t e d to a d m i n i s t e r and preserve
it;
(b) W h e n i t a p p e a r s i n a n a c t i o n b y t h e
m o r t g a g e e for foreclosure of a m o r t g a g e that the
property is in danger of being dissipated or
materially injured, and t h a t its value is probably
insufficient to d i s c h a r g e t h e mortgage debt, or that
t h e p a r t i e s h a v e so s t i p u l a t e d in t h e c o n t r a c t of
mortgage;
(c) After j u d g m e n t , to preserve the property
d u r i n g the p e n d e n c y of an appeal, or to d i s p o s e of
it a c c o r d i n g to the j u d g m e n t , or to aid e x e c u t i o n
w h e n t h e e x e c u t i o n has been returned unsatisfied
or the j u d g m e n t obligor refuses to apply his
property in satisfaction of the judgment, or
o t h e r w i s e to carry the j u d g m e n t into effect;
(d) W h e n e v e r i n o t h e r c a s e s i t a p p e a r s
that the a p p o i n t m e n t of a receiver is the most
c o n v e n i e n t and feasible m e a n s of preserving,
744
RULE 59 RECEIVERSHIP SEC. 1
NOTES
746
RULE 59 RECEIVERSHIP SEC. 1
747
RULE 69 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS 3-4
d a m a g e s he may s u s t a i n by r e a s o n of t h e appoint-
ment of such r e c e i v e r in c a s e t h e a p p l i c a n t shall
have procured such a p p o i n t m e n t w i t h o u t sufficient
cause; and the court may, in its discretion, at any
time after the a p p o i n t m e n t , require an additional
bond as further security for s u c h d a m a g e s . (3a)
NOTE
748
RULE 59 RECEIVERSHIP S E C S . 5, 6
NOTE
749
RULE 59 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
NOTES
750
RULE 59 RECEIVERSHIP S E C S . 7, 8
NOTE
1. T h e s e s a n c t i o n s , c o n t e m p t and d a m a g e s , a r e
considered necessary and justified to obviate t h e dis-
respectful practice of those who would trifle with court
orders by withholding cooperation from the receiver,
intentionally or through neglect. Contempt proceedings,
direct or indirect, depending on the acts committed, provide
a more expeditious mode of resolving disputes over property
sought to be placed under receivership unless the
controversy actually calls for a civil action to resolve the
issue of ownership or possession. Since, as noted earlier,
the receiver legally represents all the parties to the action,
the damages arising from refusal or neglect to surrender
to him the properties to be placed under his management
shall inure in favor of said parties.
751
RULE 59 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 9
NOTES
752
RULE 60
REPLEVIN
S e c t i o n 1. Application. — A p a r t y p r a y i n g for
the recovery of possession of personal property
may, at the commencement of the action or at any
t i m e b e f o r e a n s w e r , a p p l y for a n o r d e r for t h e
delivery of such property to him, in the m a n n e r
hereinafter provided, (la)
NOTES
753
RULE 60 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
754
RULE 60 REPLEVIN SEC. 3
NOTE
755
RULE 60 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-6
S e c . 5 . Return o f property. — I f t h e a d v e r s e p a r t y
objects to the sufficiency of the applicant's bond,
or of the surety or sureties thereon, he cannot
immediately require the return of the property, but
if he does not so object, he may, at any time before
the delivery of the property to the applicant, require
the return thereof, by filing with the court where
the action is p e n d i n g a bond executed to the
applicant, in double the value of the property as
s t a t e d in the applicant's affidavit for t h e d e l i v e r y of
the property to the applicant, if such delivery be
a d j u d g e d , a n d for t h e p a y m e n t o f s u c h s u m t o h i m
as may be recovered against the adverse party, and
by serving a copy of such bond on the applicant.
(5a)
756
RULE 60 REPLEVIN SEC. 7
sufficiency of t h e bond, or of t h e s u r e t y or s u r e t i e s
thereon; or if t h e adverse party so objects, a n d t h e
c o u r t affirms its a p p r o v a l of t h e applicant's bond
or a p p r o v e s a new bond, or if the adverse p a r t y
requires the r e t u r n of the property but his bond is
objected to a n d found insufficient and he does not
f o r t h w i t h file a n a p p r o v e d b o n d , t h e p r o p e r t y s h a l l
b e d e l i v e r e d t o t h e a p p l i c a n t . I f for a n y r e a s o n t h e
p r o p e r t y is not delivered to t h e applicant, t h e sheriff
m u s t r e t u r n i t t o t h e a d v e r s e p a r t y . (6a)
NOTES
757
RULE 60 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
758
RULE 60 REPLEVIN SECS. 8-10
NOTE
NOTES
759
RULE 60 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-10
760
RULE 60 REPLEVIN SECS. 8-10
761
RULE 60 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. S-io
c o m m i t t e d by t h e plaintiffs a n d u n c o n n e c t e d with
defendant's deprivation of possession by the plaintiff.
Even where the judgment is t h a t defendant is entitled to
the property but no order was made requiring the plaintiff
to return it or assessing damages in default of return, there
could be no liability on the p a r t of the sureties until
judgment was entered that the property should be restored
(Sapugay, et al. us. CA, et al., G.R. No. 86792, Mar. 21,
1990).
9. A writ of replevin may be served anywhere in the
Philippines. The jurisdiction of a court to hear and decide
a case should not be confused with its power to issue
writs and processes p u r s u a n t to and in the exercise of
said jurisdiction. Applying said rule, Malaloan, et al. vs.
Court of Appeals, et al. [G.R. No. 104879, May 6, 1994]
reiterated the distinction between the jurisdiction of the
trial court and the administrative area in which it could
enforce its orders and processes pursuant to the jurisdiction
conferred upon it (Fernandez, et al. us. International
Corporate Bank, et al., G.R. No. 131283, Oct. 7, 1999).
762
RULE 61
S e c t i o n 1. Application. — At t h e c o m m e n c e m e n t
of the proper action or proceeding, or at any time
p r i o r to t h e j u d g m e n t or final o r d e r , a verified
a p p l i c a t i o n for s u p p o r t pendente lite m a y be filed
b y a n y p a r t y s t a t i n g t h e g r o u n d s for t h e c l a i m a n d
the financial conditions of both parties, and
accompanied by affidavits, depositions or other
a u t h e n t i c d o c u m e n t s i n s u p p o r t thereof, ( l a )
Sec. 2. Comment. — A c o p y of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n
a n d all s u p p o r t i n g d o c u m e n t s shall be s e r v e d
u p o n t h e a d v e r s e p a r t y , w h o s h a l l h a v e five (5) d a y s
to c o m m e n t on the same, unless a different period
i s fixed b y t h e c o u r t u p o n h i s m o t i o n . T h e c o m -
m e n t shall be verified and shall be accompanied
by affidavits, depositions or o t h e r a u t h e n t i c docu-
m e n t s i n s u p p o r t t h e r e o f . (2a, 3a)
NOTES
763
RULE 61 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-5
Sec. 4 . Order. — T h e c o u r t s h a l l d e t e r m i n e
provisionally t h e p e r t i n e n t facts, a n d shall r e n d e r
such orders as justice and equity may require,
having due regard to the probable outcome of the
c a s e a n d s u c h o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s a s m a y aid i n
the p r o p e r resolution of the question involved. If
t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s g r a n t e d , t h e c o u r t s h a l l fix t h e
a m o u n t of money to be provisionally paid or such
o t h e r forms of s u p p o r t as should be provided, taking
into account the necessities of the applicant and
t h e t e r m s o f p a y m e n t o r m o d e for p r o v i d i n g t h e
support. If the application is denied, the principal
case shall be tried a n d decided as early as possible.
(5a)
764
RULE 61 S U P P O R T P E N D E N T E LITE S E C S . 4-5
NOTES
765
RULE 61 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 45
766
RULE 61 S U P P O R T P E N D E N T E LITE SEC. 6
NOTES
767
RULE 61 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 7
Sec. 7. Restitution. — W h e n t h e j u d g m e n t or
final o r d e r o f t h e c o u r t finds t h a t t h e p e r s o n w h o
h a s b e e n p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t pendente lite is n o t
liable therefor, it shall o r d e r t h e recipient thereof
to r e t u r n to t h e former the a m o u n t s already paid
w i t h legal i n t e r e s t from t h e d a t e s o f a c t u a l p a y m e n t ,
without prejudice to the right of the recipient to
o b t a i n r e i m b u r s e m e n t i n a s e p a r a t e a c t i o n from t h e
p e r s o n legally o b l i g e d t o give t h e s u p p o r t . S h o u l d
t h e r e c i p i e n t fail t o r e i m b u r s e s a i d a m o u n t s , t h e
person who paid the same may seek reimbursement
768
RULE 61 S U P P O R T P E N D E N T E LITE SEC. 7
t h e r e o f in a s e p a r a t e a c t i o n from t h e p e r s o n legally
o b l i g e d to g i v e s u c h support, (n)
NOTE
769
S P E C I A L CIVIL ACTIONS
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
770
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
771
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
772
R U L E 62
INTERPLEADER
Sec. 2. Order. — U p o n t h e f i l i n g of t h e c o m -
plaint, the court shall issue an order requiring the
conflicting claimants to interplead with one
another. If the interests of justice so require, the
court may direct in such order that the subject
m a t t e r b e p a i d o r d e l i v e r e d t o t h e c o u r t . (2a, R63)
Sec. 3. Summons. — S u m m o n s s h a l l be s e r v e d
upon the conflicting claimants, together with a
c o p y o f t h e c o m p l a i n t a n d o r d e r . (3, R63)
773
RULE 62 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 5-7
NOTES
774
RULE 62 INTERPLEADER SECS. 5-7
775
RULE 82 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC8 5-7
776
RULE 62 INTERPLEADER S E C S . 5-7
777
RULE 63
DECLARATORY RELIEF
AND SIMILAR REMEDIES
NOTES
778
RULE 63 DECLARATORY RELIEF SEC. 1
A N D SIMILAR REMEDIES
779
RULE 63 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 2-3
780
RULE 63 DECLARATORY RELIEF S E C S . 4-6
A N D SIMILAR REMEDIES
to be h e a r d u p o n s u c h q u e s t i o n . (3a, R64)
NOTES
781
RULE 63 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-6
782
RULE 63 DECLARATORY RELIEF S E C S . 4-6
A N D SIMILAR REMEDIES
783
RULE 63 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 4-6
784
RULE 64
785
RULE 64 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 1-4
NOTES
786
RULE 64 REVIEW OF J U D G M E N T S , ETC. SEC. 5
O F C O M E L E C A N D COA
787
RULE 64 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
a n d brief a r g u m e n t s r e l i e d u p o n for r e v i e w , a n d p r a y
for j u d g m e n t a n n u l l i n g o r m o d i f y i n g t h e q u e s t i o n e d
j u d g m e n t , final o r d e r or r e s o l u t i o n . Findings of
fact o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n s u p p o r t e d b y s u b s t a n t i a l
e v i d e n c e s h a l l b e final a n d n o n - r e v i e w a b l e .
T h e p e t i t i o n s h a l l be a c c o m p a n i e d by a c l e a r l y
legible d u p l i c a t e o r i g i n a l o r c e r t i f i e d t r u e copy o f
t h e j u d g m e n t , final o r d e r or r e s o l u t i o n subject
thereof, t o g e t h e r with certified t r u e copies of
such material portions of the record as are referred
to therein and other d o c u m e n t s relevant and
p e r t i n e n t t h e r e t o . The requisite n u m b e r of copies
o f t h e p e t i t i o n s h a l l c o n t a i n p l a i n c o p i e s o f all
d o c u m e n t s a t t a c h e d to t h e o r i g i n a l copy of said
petition.
The petition shall s t a t e t h e specific m a t e r i a l
d a t e s s h o w i n g t h a t i t w a s filed w i t h i n t h e p e r i o d
fixed h e r e i n , a n d s h a l l c o n t a i n a s w o r n c e r t i f i c a t i o n
against forum shopping as provided in the third
p a r a g r a p h o f s e c t i o n 3 , R u l e 46.
The petition shall further be accompanied by
p r o o f of s e r v i c e of a c o p y t h e r e o f on t h e C o m m i s s i o n
concerned and on the adverse party, and of the
t i m e l y p a y m e n t o f d o c k e t a n d o t h e r lawful fees.
The failure of p e t i t i o n e r to comply with any of
the foregoing r e q u i r e m e n t s shall be sufficient
g r o u n d for t h e d i s m i s s a l o f t h e p e t i t i o n , (n)
NOTES
788
RULE 64 REVIEW OF J U D G M E N T S , ETC. S E C . 6-7
O F C O M E L E C A N D COA
789
RULE 64 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
NOTES
NOTE
790
RULE 65
CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
791
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. l
792
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC 1
AND MANDAMUS
793
RULE 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
794
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 1
AND MANDAMUS
795
RULE 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
796
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 1
AND MANDAMUS
797
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
798
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 1
AND MANDAMUS
799
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
800
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 2
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
801
R U L E 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
802
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 3
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
803
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
804
RULE 65 CERTIORARI. PROHIBITION SEC. 3
AND MANDAMUS
805
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
806
R U L E 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 3
AND MANDAMUS
807
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
808
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC 4
AND MANDAMUS
s a m e is in a i d of t h e court's a p p e l l a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n .
If t h e p e t i t i o n i n v o l v e s an act or o m i s s i o n of a quasi-
j u d i c i a l a g e n c y , u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e p r o v i d e d b y law
or t h e s e r u l e s , t h e p e t i t i o n shall be filed w i t h a n d
be c o g n i z a b l e o n l y by t h e Court of A p p e a l s .
NOTES
809
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
810
RULE 65 CERTIORARI. PROHIBITION SEC. 4
AND MANDAMUS
3 . F o r m e r l y , t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l s could t a k e
cognizance of these original actions only in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction. Thus, if the decision in the main
case was not appealable, or, if appealable, the same was
within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court,
the petition could not be instituted in the Court of Appeals,
as it would not thereby be acting in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction (Breslin vs. Luzon Stevedoring Co., 84 Phil.
618; Pineda & Ampil Mfg. Co., et al. vs. Bartolome, et al.,
95 Phil. 930). Also, t h e C o u r t of A p p e a l s h a d no
jurisdiction to e n t e r t a i n a petition for certiorari and
prohibition to nullify a writ of execution as the order
granting the writ is not appealable (J.M. Tuazon & Co.,
Inc. vs. Estabello, L-20610, Jan. 9, 1975).
In a case, the Supreme Court entertained an original
action for certiorari and prohibition where the question
presented in said petition was one of law, by analogy with
t h e rule t h a t a p p e a l s on p u r e q u e s t i o n s of law a r e
811
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
812
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 5
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
1. T h e a m e n d m e n t s in t h i s section e n u m e r a t e
who shall be impleaded as public r e s p o n d e n t s in the
action and their permissible participation therein, as well
as the duties and liabilities of the private respondents. It
will be r e c a l l e d t h a t in a p p e a l by c e r t i o r a r i u n d e r
Rule 45, the Court of Appeals shall no longer be impleaded
as a respondent. The reason for the difference is t h a t
Rule 45 governs an appellate review by certiorari, hence
t h e r e can properly be no public respondent since t h e
dispute is actually between the contending parties in the
case, t h a t is, the appellant and the appellee in the Court
of Appeals who are respectively the petitioner and the
respondent in the Supreme Court.
On t h e o t h e r h a n d , Rule 65 involves an original
special civil action specifically directed against the person,
court, agency or party a quo which had committed not
only a mistake of judgment but an error of jurisdiction,
hence they should be made public respondents in t h a t
action b r o u g h t to nullify their invalid acts. It shall,
however, be the duty of the party litigant, whether in an
appeal under Rule 45 or in a special civil action in Rule
65, to defend in his behalf and the party whose
adjudication is assailed, as he is the one interested in
sustaining the correctness of the disposition or the validity
of the proceedings.
2. The party interested in sustaining the proceedings
in the lower court must be joined as a co-respondent and
813
RULE 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 6
814
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC. 6
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
1. In t h e p e t i t i o n s u n d e r t h i s Rule filed in t h e
Regional Trial Court, no prior service of a copy thereof on
the respondent is required. The trial court, as provided
in this section, shall first determine whether the petition
is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process
and, if so, shall order the respondent to comment thereon.
Such order shall be served on said respondent together
with a copy of the petition and any annexes thereto. This
procedural aspect is similar to t h a t in petitions for relief
from judgments, orders and so forth (Sec. 4, Rule 38).
On the other hand, p u r s u a n t to the second paragraph
of t h i s section, in p e t i t i o n s for c e r t i o r a r i before t h e
Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, there must be
proof of prior service of a copy of said petition on the
respondent, aside from the other requirements such as
the contents and certifications provided therefor. The
failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the fore-
going r e q u i r e m e n t s shall be sufficient ground for the
dismissal of the petitions (Sec. 2, Rule 56, in relation to
Sec. 3, Rule 46).
2. The respondent, is now required to file a comment,
instead of an answer, to the petition and this applies to
any court wherein the action is filed. If it is in the Re-
gional Trial Court, there shall be a hearing or submission
of memoranda, as provided in and subject to the provisions
of Sec. 8. In the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court,
no hearing is required but the Court may require a reply
816
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 7-8
816
RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION SEC 9
AND MANDAMUS
NOTES
817
RULE 65 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 9
NOTE
818
RULE 66
QUO WARRANTO
NOTES
819
RULE 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 1
820
R U L E 66 QUO WARRANTO S E C S . 2-4
821
R U L E 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 5. 6
NOTES
822
RULE 66 QUO WARRANTO S E C S . 7, 8-9
r e s p o n d e n t is unlawfully in p o s s e s s i o n thereof.
All p e r s o n s w h o c l a i m t o b e e n t i t l e d t o t h e p u b l i c
office, p o s i t i o n or f r a n c h i s e may be m a d e p a r t i e s ,
a n d t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e r i g h t s , t o s u c h p u b l i c office,
position or franchise determined, in the same
a c t i o n . (7a)
Sec. 7. Venue. — A n a c t i o n u n d e r t h e p r e c e d i n g
six s e c t i o n s c a n b e b r o u g h t o n l y i n t h e S u p r e m e
Court, t h e Court of Appeals, or in the Regional
Trial Court e x e r c i s i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e terri-
torial area where the respondent or any of the
r e s p o n d e n t s r e s i d e s , but w h e n t h e Solicitor General
c o m m e n c e s the action, it may be brought in a
R e g i o n a l Trial Court in t h e City of Manila, in t h e
Court of A p p e a l s , or in t h e S u p r e m e Court. (8a)
NOTE
823
R U L E 66 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 10-11
824
RULE 66 QUO WARRANTO S E C . 12
w i t h i n o n e (1) y e a r after t h e e n t r y o f t h e j u d g m e n t
e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e p e t i t i o n e r ' s r i g h t t o t h e office i n
q u e s t i o n . (16a)
NOTES
825
RULE 66 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SEC. 12
826
RULE 66 QUO WARRANTO S E C . 12
827
RULE 67
EXPROPRIATION
NOTES
828
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 1
829
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 2
830
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 2
NOTES
831
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
832
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 2
833
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
834
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 3
NOTES
835
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 4
836
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 5
NOTES
837
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTES
838
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION S E C S . 6-
839
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
840
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION S E C S . 8-9
c o u r t for t h e b e n e f i t of t h e p e r s o n a d j u d g e d in t h e
same proceeding to be entitled thereto. But the
j u d g m e n t shall r e q u i r e t h e p a y m e n t o f t h e s u m o r
sums awarded to either the defendant or the court
before t h e plaintiff c a n e n t e r u p o n t h e property, o r
r e t a i n it for t h e p u b l i c u s e or p u r p o s e if e n t r y h a s
a l r e a d y b e e n m a d e . (9a)
NOTES
841
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
842
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION S E C S . 8-9
843
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 10-11
844
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SECS. 12-14
NOTES
845
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12-14
846
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION S E C . 12-14
847
RULE 67 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12-14
848
RULE 67 EXPROPRIATION SEC. 12-14
849
RULE 68
FORECLOSURE OF
REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
NOTES
850
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF SEC. 1
REAL ESTATE MORTAGE
851
R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
NOTES
852
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF SEC. 2
REAL ESTATE MORTAGE
853
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
854
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF SEC. 3
REAL ESTATE MORTAGE
NOTES
855
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
856
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF SEC. 4
REAL ESTATE MORTAGE
857
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 5-6
S e c . 6. Deficiency judgment. — I f u p o n t h e s a l e
of any real property as provided in the next
preceding section there be a balance due to the
plaintiff after applying the proceeds of the sale, the
court, upon motion, shall render judgment against
t h e d e f e n d a n t for a n y s u c h b a l a n c e for w h i c h , by
the record of the case, he m a y be personally liable
t o the plaintiff, u p o n w h i c h e x e c u t i o n m a y issue
i m m e d i a t e l y if t h e balance is all d u e at t h e time of
the rendition of the judgment; otherwise, the
plaintiff shall be entitled to execution at such time
as the balance remaining becomes due under the
terms of the original contract, which time shall be
stated in t h e j u d g m e n t . (6a)
858
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF S E C S . 5-6
REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
NOTES
859
RULE 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 7-8
860
RULE 68 FORECLOSURE OF S E C S . 7-8
REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
NOTES
861
R U L E 68 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 7-8
862
RULE 69
PARTITION
NOTES
863
RULE 69 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
864
RULE 69 PARTITION SECS. 4-6
c o m m a n d i n g t h e m t o s e t off t o t h e p l a i n t i f f a n d
to e a c h party in i n t e r e s t s u c h part and p r o p o r t i o n
of t h e p r o p e r t y as t h e c o u r t shall direct. (3a)
865
RULE 69 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 7-8
866
RULE 69 PARTITION S E C S . 9-11
r e n t s a n d profits. (8a)
867
RULE 69 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 12-13
NOTES
868
RULE 69 PARTITION SECS. 12-13
869
RULE 70
870
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY A N D SEC. 2
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
NOTES
871
R U L E 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
872
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SEC. 2
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
873
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
874
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SEC. 3
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
875
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC 2
876
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SEC. 2
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
et al, L-48419, Oct. 27, 1983; Santos, vs. CA, et al., G.R.
No. 60310, Mar. 27, 1984; Dionio vs. IAC, et al.,
G.R. No. 63698, Jan. 12, 1987). This applies to verbal
contracts on a month-to-month basis (Zablan vs. CA, et
al, G.R. No. 57844, Sept. 30, 1987; Miranda vs. Ortiz, et
al, G.R. No. 59783, Dec. 1, 1987).
9. Where forcible entry was made through stealth,
t h e one-year period should be counted from the time
the plaintiff learned thereof (Vda. de Prieto vs. Reyes,
L-21470, June 23, 1965; City of Manila vs. Garcia,
et al, L-26053, Feb. 21, 1967; Elane vs. CA, et al,
G.R. No. 80638, April 26, 1989).
Where defendant's e n t r y upon t h e land was with
p l a i n t i f f s t o l e r a n c e r i g h t from t h e d a t e a n d fact of
entry, unlawful detainer proceedings may be instituted
within one year from the demand on him to vacate as there
is an implied promise on his part to vacate upon demand
(Yu vs. De Lara, L-10684, Nov. 30, 1962). The s t a t u s of
such a defendant is analogous to t h a t of a t e n a n t or lessee,
the t e r m of whose lease has expired but whose occupancy
is c o n t i n u e d by t h e tolerance of the lessor (Vda. de
Cachuela vs. Francisco, L-31985, June 25, 1980). The
same rule applies where the defendant purchased the
house of the former lessee, who was already in a r r e a r s in
t h e p a y m e n t of r e n t a l s , and t h e r e a f t e r occupied t h e
premises without a new lease contract with the landowner
(Dakudao, et al. vs. Consolacion, et al, G.R. No. 54753,
June 24, 1973; Peran vs. Presiding Judge, etc.,
G.R. No. 57259, Oct. 13, 1983).
10. Where the complaint fails to specifically aver facts
constitutive of forcible entry or unlawful detainer as where
it does not state how entry was effected or how and when
dispossession started, the action should either be accion
publiciana or accion reivindicatoria in the Court of First
Instance [now, the Regional Trial Court] (Sarona, et al
vs. Villegas, et al, supra; Daveza, et al. vs. Montecillo,
877
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
878
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SEC. 2
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
879
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
NOTE
1. With t h e a d o p t i o n of t h e Rule on S u m m a r y
Procedure, effective August 1, 1983, which applies, inter
alia, to forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases but with
limits on the amount involved, ejectment cases involving
reliefs within the jurisdictional amount were governed by
said rule on summary procedure, but those exceeding that
jurisdictional amount were covered by this Rule.
Effective November 15, 1991, the Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure applied to all cases of forcible entry
and unlawful d e t a i n e r irrespective of the amount of
d a m a g e s or u n p a i d r e n t a l s s o u g h t to be recovered.
Consequently, the rules therein on summary procedure
were adopted for the special civil action of ejectment under
this Rule, which from the outset had always been intended
to provide for a summary proceeding but which fell short
of its objective. Parenthetically, the aforementioned
Revised Rule on Summary Procedure still applies to all
other civil cases where the plaintiffs claim does not exceed
P 10,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
Excluded from t h i s p r e s e n t a m e n d e d Rule are
ejectment cases covered by the agricultural tenancy laws
880
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SECS. 4-7
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
881
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
882
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY A N D SECS. 10-11
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
883
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 12-13
884
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY A N D SECS. 12-14
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
NOTES
885
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SECS. 12-U
886
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SECS. 12-14
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
887
RULE 70 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 12-14
888
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SECS. 12-14
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
889
R U L E 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 15. 20
890
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C S . 15, 2 0
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
NOTES
891
R U L E 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 16
NOTES
892
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C . 16
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
3. A l l e g a t i o n s of o w n e r s h i p a r e not r e q u i r e d in
ejectment suits as the only issue is physical possession.
However, such allegations either by the plaintiff or the
defendant do not oust the court of jurisdiction provided
the purpose thereof, and the reception of evidence thereon,
is only to prove the character and extent of possession
and the damages for the detention (Subano vs. Vallecer,
105 Phil. 1264 fUnrep.J). Formerly, Sec. 31(c), R.A. 5967,
granted jurisdiction to the then City Courts to decide the
questions of physical possession "in conjunction with" the
issue of ownership in the same action (cf. Pelaez vs. Reyes,
L-48168, Aug. 31, 1978), but this has been eliminated by
B.P. Blg. 129. See note 7 under Sec. 2 of this Rule.
893
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 17-18
894
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY A N D SECS. 17-18
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
NOTES
895
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 17-18
896
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SECS. 17-18
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
897
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C 8 . 17-18
898
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C . 19
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
899
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 19
m o n t h or p e r i o d at t h e rate d e t e r m i n e d by the
j u d g m e n t of the lower court on or before the tenth
d a y o f e a c h s u c c e e d i n g m o n t h o r p e r i o d . The
s u p e r s e d e a s bond shall be t r a n s m i t t e d by the
Municipal Trial Court, with the other papers, to the
c l e r k o f t h e R e g i o n a l Trial Court t o w h i c h the
action is appealed.
All a m o u n t s so paid to the appellate court shall
be deposited with said court or authorized
g o v e r n m e n t d e p o s i t o r y bank, a n d s h a l l be held
t h e r e u n t i l t h e final d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e a p p e a l ,
u n l e s s t h e court, by a g r e e m e n t of t h e interested
parties, or in the a b s e n c e of reasonable grounds of
opposition to a motion to withdraw, or for justifiable
reasons shall decree otherwise. Should the
d e f e n d a n t fail to make the p a y m e n t s above
prescribed from time to time d u r i n g the pendency
of the appeal, the appellate court, upon motion of
the plaintiff, and upon proof of such failure, shall
order the e x e c u t i o n of the j u d g m e n t appealed from
with r e s p e c t to the restoration of p o s s e s s i o n , but
s u c h e x e c u t i o n s h a l l not be a bar to t h e appeal
t a k i n g its course until the final disposition thereof
on the merits.
After the case is decided by the Regional Trial
Court, any money paid to the court by the defendant
for p u r p o s e s o f t h e s t a y o f e x e c u t i o n s h a l l b e
disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the
j u d g m e n t of the Regional Trial Court. In any case
w h e r e i n it a p p e a r s t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s been
deprived of the lawful possession of land or building
p e n d i n g the appeal by virtue of the e x e c u t i o n of
the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court, damages
for such deprivation of p o s s e s s i o n and restoration
of p o s s e s s i o n may be allowed the defendant in the
judgment of the Regional Trial Court disposing of
the appeal. (8a)
900
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C . 19
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
NOTES
901
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 19
902
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C . 19
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
903
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 19
904
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND S E C . 21
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
905
RULE 70 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 21
NOTES
906
RULE 70 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND SEC. 21
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
907
RULE 71
CONTEMPT
NOTES
908
RULE 71 CONTEMPT SEC. 3
909
RULE 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 2
910
RULE 71 CONTEMPT SEC. 3
NOTES
911
R U L E 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 6-7
912
R U L E 71 CONTEMPT SEC. 3
NOTES
913
RULE 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 3
914
RULE 71 CONTEMPT SEC. 4
NOTE
915
R U L E 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M SEC. 5
NOTE
916
RULE 71 CONTEMPT S E C S . 6-7
917
R U L E 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C S . 8-9
NOTES
918
RULE 71 CONTEMPT SECS. 10-11
a g g r i e v e d p a r t y b y r e a s o n o f t h e m i s c o n d u c t for
which the contempt charge was prosecuted, with
t h e c o s t s o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s , and s u c h r e c o v e r y shall
be for t h e b e n e f i t of t h e party injured. If t h e r e is
no a g g r i e v e d party, the bond shall be liable and
d i s p o s e d o f a s i n c r i m i n a l c a s e s . (8a)
NOTES
1. As a m e n d e d , Sec. 8 now a l l o w s a n y c o u r t
concerned, and not only a superior court, to imprison the
disobedient respondent until he performs the act ordered
by t h e c o u r t . As held by t h e S u p r e m e Court, such
i m p r i s o n m e n t is r e m e d i a l in n a t u r e and coercive in
c h a r a c t e r . It relates to something to be done by the
r e s p o n d e n t and by doing the same he can obtain his
d i s c h a r g e . In effect, u n d e r such c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e
respondent "carries the keys to his prison in his own
pocket" (Galvez vs. Republic Surety & Insurance Co., Inc.,
105 Phil. 944; cf. Quinio vs. CA, et al, G.R. No. 113867,
July 13, 2000).
919
RULE 71 REMEDIAL LAW COMPENDIUM SECS. 10-11
920
R U L E 71 CONTEMPT S E C . 12
5. As in c r i m i n a l cases, a j u d g m e n t absolving a
person charged with criminal contempt or dismissing the
contempt charged is not appealable (Pajao vs. Provincial
Board of Canvassers of Leyte, 88 Phil. 588; Mison vs.
Subido, L-27704, May 28, 1970), unless, as in criminal
cases, t h e r e has been no adjudication on the merits but
only a dismissal on motion of the person charged based on
jurisdictional grounds (Amoren vs. Pineda, et al., L 23666,
Sept. 23, 1967); but these rulings do not apply to civil
contempt (Converse Rubber Corp. vs. Jacinto Rubber, etc.,
supra) and appeal lies from the order finding the defendant
guilty or absolving him of the charge.
NOTES
921
RULE 71 R E M E D I A L LAW C O M P E N D I U M S E C . 12
2. U n d e r s u b s t a n t i a l l y t h e same considerations,
it was held t h a t a city council does not have the power
to subpoena witnesses and to p u n i s h non-attendance
for c o n t e m p t since t h e r e is n e i t h e r a constitutional
nor statutory conferment on it of such powers. Unlike
Congress whose contempt power is sui generis and inheres
in it as a coordinate branch of Government, no such power
can be implied in the legislative functions delegated to
local legislative bodies, especially since the contempt power
is essentially of a judicial n a t u r e (Negros Oriental II
Electric Cooperative, Inc., et al. vs. Sangguniang
Panlungsod of Dumaguete, et al, G.R. No. 72492, Nov. 5,
1987).
922