Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 25

LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.

7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]


REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

REMEDIES OF A PARTY DECLARED IN DEFAULT i. If the same should prove insufficient to justify a
OTERO V TAN judgment for the plaintiff, the complaint must be
GR NO. 200134 AUGUST 15, 2012 dismissed.
ii. And if a favorable judgment is justifiable, it cannot
Facts: exceed in amount or be different in kind from what is
prayed for in the complaint.
A complaint for collection of sum of money and damages was filed by Tan
before the MTCC CDO against Otero. Despite receipt of summons and a copy of LCD: the statement of account was merely hearsay as the genuineness and due
the said complaint, Otero failed to file his answer. Tan filed a motion to declare execution of the same were not established, given that during the ex parte
Otero in default, which the court granted. Tan was allowed to present his evidence presentation of evidence, Tan did not present anyone who could attest that the
ex parte. MTCC rendered a decision directing Otero to pay his debt and damages. statement of account were genuine and duly executed. Nonetheless, the Court
Otero filed an appeal before RTC, averring that he had been deprived of due found for Tan. The statement of accounts, while inadmissible are mere summaries,
process. RTC affirmed the MTCC decision. Oteros Motion for reconsideration had that do not disprove Oteros liability. The testimonies of his employees also
been denied. Otero filed a petition for review before the CA. The CA dismissed the established that Otero do not pay whenever he drops by tans Petron outlet to buy
petition. It held that any defense which Otero may have against Tans claim is the petroleum products. Lastly, both the MTCC and RTC gave credence to Tans
already waived due to Oteros failure to his answer, despite being duly served with testimony.
summons and his voluntary appearance in court.
Notes:
Issue:
1. A defendant who fails to file an answer may, upon motion, be declared by
Did the Court of Appeal err in ruling that by virtue of default, Otero is barred from the court in default.
alleging whatever defenses he may have against Tan i.e. due execution and a. Loss of standing in court, the forfeiture of ones right as a
authenticity of the statements of account? party litigant, contestant or legal adversary, is the
consequence of an order of default.
Held: b. A party in default loses his right to present his defense,
control the proceedings, and examine or cross-examine
Yes. witnesses.
c. He has no right to expect that his pleadings would be
1. a defendant who was declared in default may nevertheless appeal from acted upon by the court nor may be object to or refute
the judgement by default albeit on different grounds. evidence or motions filed against him
2. While it may be said that by defaulting, the defendant leaves himself at 2. In Lina v. CA, et al., 15 this Court enumerated the remedies available to
the mercy of the court, the rules nevertheless see to it that any judgment party who has been declared in default, to wit:
against him must be in accordance with the evidence required by law.
a. The evidence of the plaintiff, presented in the defendants
a. The defendant in default may, at any time after discovery
absence, cannot be admitted if it is basically incompetent.
thereof and before judgment, file a motion, under oath, to
b. Although the defendant would not be in a position to object,
set aside the order of default on the ground that his
elementary justice requires that only legal evidence should be
failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or
considered against him.

1
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

excusable neglect, and that he has meritorious defenses; FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND JUDICIAL PAPERS
(Sec 3, Rule 18)
b. If the judgment has already been rendered when the Discuss the rule on payment of docket fees.
defendant discovered the default, but before the same has
become final and executory, he may file a motion for new When an action is filed, the filing must be accompanied by the payment of
trial under Section 1(a) of Rule 37; requisite docket and filing fees. Jurisdiction over the case is acquired only upon
c. If the defendant discovered the default after the judgment payment of the prescribed fees. Without payment, complaint is not considered
has become final and executory, he may file a petition for filed1.
relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and
d. He may also appeal from the judgment rendered against Is the rule absolute?
him as contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if no
petition to set aside the order of default has been No. The rule has been applied with liberality as when the payment was allowed
presented by him. (Sec. 2, Rule 41)16(Emphasis ours) within a reasonable time but not beyond the prescriptive period.

3. Indeed, a defending party declared in default retains the right to appeal How are pleadings etc filed?
from the judgment by default.
a. However, the grounds that may be raised in such an appeal are The filing of pleadings, appearances, motions, notices, orders and other papers
restricted to any of the following: with the court shall be made:
i. first, the failure of the plaintiff to prove the material 1. by filing them personally with the clerk of court or
allegations of the complaint; 2. by sending them by registered mail.
ii. second, the decision is contrary to law; and
iii. third, the amount of judgment is excessive or different If pleadings are filed by mail, what is the date of the filing of the
in kind from that prayed for.17 pleading?
b. In these cases, the appellate tribunal should only consider the
pieces of evidence that were presented by the plaintiff during The date of the mailing of motions, pleadings or any other papers or payments or
the ex parte presentation of his evidence. deposits, as shown by the post office stamp on the envelope or the
4. A defendant who has been declared in default is precluded from raising registry receipt, shall be considered as the date of their filing, payment or
any other ground in his appeal from the judgment by default since, deposit in court.
otherwise, he would then be allowed to adduce evidence in his defense,
which right he had lost after he was declared in default. 18 What do you do with the envelope?
a. Indeed, he is proscribed in the appellate tribunal from adducing
any evidence to bolster his defense against the plaintiffs claim. The envelope shall be attached to the record of the case.

What is service of pleading?

1 Nestle Philippines v FY Sons Inc GR No. 150780 May 5, 2006.

2
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

Service of pleading is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or 5. judgments;
paper concerned. 6. other papers.

Distinguish filing from service of pleadings. How is service upon a party made if he is represented by counsel?

Filing is the act of presenting the pleading of other papers to the clerk of court 1. If a party has appeared by counsel, service upon him shall be made upon
whereas service of pleadings refers to the act of providing a party with a copy of his counsel, or one of them
the pleading or paper concerned. a. unless service upon the party himself is ordered by the court.
2. Where one counsel appears for several parties, he shall be entitled to
What are papers required to be filed and served? one copy of any paper served upon him by the opposite side.

1. judgment Note:
2. resolution
3. order 1. when a party is represented by counsel, notice should be made
4. pleading subsequent to the complaint upon the counsel of record at his given address 2. This may be
5. written motion done personally or by leaving a copy at his office with his clerk or
6. notice with a person having charge thereof3.
7. appearance 2. Notice of court processes should be made upon such counsel.
8. demand Notice upon the party himself is not considered in law unless
9. offer of judgement service upon the party is ordered by the court. Courts dismissal
10. similar papers. order of a case does not become final without notice to counsel
of record4.
What are the papers required to be filed?
SERVICE ON COUNSEL IS MANDATORY UNLESS OTHERWISE ORDERED BY THE COURT
1. pleadings
2. appearances IMPROPER SERVICE IS INEFFECTUAL AND DOES NOT BIND THE PARTY
3. motions
4. notices CABILI V BADELLES
5. orders GR NO. L -17786 SEPTEMBER 29, 1962
6. judgments
7. all other papers. Facts:

What are the papers required to be served to the adverse party?

1. Pleadings 2 UERM Employees Assn v. Min of Lavor GR No 75333 August 31,1989.


2. motions; 3 Adamson Ozanam Education Inst Inc v Adamson Univ Faculty & Employees Assn GR No. 86819
3. notices; November 9 1989.
4. orders; 4 Jalorar v. Ytoriaga 80 SCRA

3
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

Badelles filed before the CFI Lanao a petition for quo warranto to juridical entity and
question Cabilis right to hold office. Badelles counsel San Juan, Africa and has no resident
Benedicto filed the petition. Senior Attorney Jose Africa of that firm requested that agent but has an
all pleadings, notices, orders and other papers be served at his office at 480 Padre agent or officer in
Faura Manila. In order to avoid any confusion in the service of pleadings and the PH
orders, he made of record that only service at the given address will be considered Defendant is a within 30 days after receipt of summons by the
as service on Badelles and counsel. The Court took note of Atty Africas request. foreign private home office of the foreign private entity.
juridical entity and
Before the decision was sent by registered air mail on December 24 for has no resident Note: summons is served to SEC, which will then
the firm of atty Africa and received at their Manila office on January 4, Badelles agent or send a copy by registered mail within 10 days to
who was in Illigan, requested the judge for a copy of the decision. Badelles was agent/officer the home office of the foreign private corporation
given a copy but refused to sign receipt. The judge ordered his court interpreter to Service of summons Within the time specified in the order which shall
record the fact of delivery to Badelles. The judge also telegraphed informing them by publication not be less than 60 days after notice
that Badelles has been furnished with his personal copy. Non-resident Not less than 60 days after notice
defendant to whom
Issue: extraterritorial
service of summons
Has there been a proper service? is made
Answer to amended Within 15 days from service of the amended
Held: complaint [ matter of complaint
right]
There was no proper service. When a party appears by an attorney who makes of Answer to amended Within 10 days counted from notice to the court
record his appearance, service of pleadings is required to be made upon said complaint [ not a order admitting the same.
attorney and not upon the party. A notice given to the client and not to his matter of right]
attorney is not notice in law. Service upon counsel is mandatory. Personal Third or fourth party As if an original complaint, 15, 30, or 60 days as
information by a party of the rendition of a decision does not satisfy the right of complaint the case may be
counsel to receive the copy of the decision rendered. Supplemental within 10 days from notice of the order admitting
complaint the same, unless a different period is fixed by the
PERIODS OF FILING PLEADINGS court.

Answer to an original Within 15 days after service of summons, unless a Note:


complaint different period is fixed by the Court
Defendant is a Within 15 days after service of summons Upon motion and on such terms as are just, the court may extend the time to
foreign private plead. The court may also, upon like terms, allow an answer or other pleading to
juridical entity and be filed after the time fixed by law.
has a resident agent
Defendant is a Within 15 days after service of summons to said
foreign private agent or officer

4
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND COURT PAPERS (OTHER THAN JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS, AND quasi in rem
RESOLUTIONS) MAY BE DONE BY SUBSTITUTED SERVICE IF PERSONAL SERVICE AND SERVICE BY MAIL IS to acquire jurisdiction over Its purpose is not acquire
NOT SUCCESSFUL. the person of the defendant jurisdiction over the
To give notice to the defendant but mainly to
SERVICE OF JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS MUST BE PERSONAL OR BY REGISTERED defendant than an action has satisfy the constitutional
MAIL ONLY ( OR BY PUBLICATION WHERE SUMMONS IS SERVED BY PUBLICATION) been commenced against requirement of due process.
him
SERVICE MUST BE ON COUNSEL AS SERVICE ON PARTY IS NOT PERMITTED;
WHERE FINAL ORDER OR JUDGMENT IS NOT SERVED ON PARTY OR LAWYER, SAID JUDGMENT CANNOT
BECOME FINAL AND EXECUTORY.
Note:
SUMMONS
1. Defects of jurisdiction arising from irregularities in the
commencement of the proceedings, defective process or even
What is Summons?
absence of process may be waived by a failure to make
seasonable objections8.
Summons is the writ by which the defendant is notified of the action brought
a. Unlike the question of jurisdiction over the subject
against him5.
matter which may be invoked at any stage of the
proceedings, even on appeal, the issue of jurisdiction
What is the duty of the Clerk of Court upon the filing of the complaint?
over the person must be seasonably raised
i. it can well be pleaded in a motion to dismiss or
Upon the filing of a complaint, the clerk of court shall forthwith issue the
an affirmative defense in the answer,
corresponding summons to the defendants6.
otherwise it shall be deemed waived9.
What is the purpose of summons7?
What do you do if the appointment of guardian ad litem has not been
attached in the summons?
The purpose of summons is to acquire jurisdiction over the person, to give notice
to the defendant that an action has been commenced against him.
Order new summons with a copy the appointment10.
1. The defendant or respondent is thus put on guard as to the
What if the summons does not have a copy of the complaint?
demands of plaintiffs or petitioners.
2. The process is solely for the benefit of the defendant.
If the complaint is not attached, failure to object is waiver11.
Who may serve the summons?
Actions in personam Actions in rem and
8 Baticano v Chu JR 148 SCRA 541 (1987).
5 Republic v Domingo GR No. 175299 December 14, 2011. 9 Cerezo v Tuazon, GR No. 141538 March 23 2004.
6 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE , rule 14, 1. 10 Castanohal v. Castrano 51 OG 690.
7 1 OSCAR M. HERRERA, REMEDIAL LAW 118 (2007 ed.) 11 Pagalaran v. Ballatan 13 PHIL. 135 ( 1905).

5
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

The proper remedy is certiorari.


The summons may be served by the sheriff, his deputy, or other proper court
officer, of for justifiable reasons by any suitable person authorized by the court Note:
issuing the summons.
3. If the defendant has not been properly summoned, the
Note: period to file a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
over his person does not commence to run until he
1. Policemen no especially authorized by court cannot validly serve voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
summons12. court.
4. in substitution of deceased by legal representative, the
True or false. The motion to dismiss was not filed seasonably because it order of substitution is sufficient. There is no need for
was filed beyond the reglementary period. summons.

False. The Statement would have been absolutely true had there been a valid When may summons be served?
service of summons.
Service of summons may be made at night as well as during the day or even a
If summons was wrongfully served, should the case be dismissed? Sunday or holiday because of its ministerial character14.

No. An alias summons can be served on the defendant 13.


RULES ON SERVICE ARE STRICTLY CONSTRUED, HENCE:
In what instances is alias summons applicable?
ACTIONS IN 1. Against residents, service must be personal first then
1. If a summons is returned without being served on any PERSONAM substituted if unsuccessful or publication if whereabouts
or all of the defendants; unknown or temporarily outside the country.
2. if summons has been lost. 2. against non-residents, only personal service within the
state can confer jurisdiction over the defendant
How does alias summons get issued? ACTIONS IN 3. Against residents, service must be personal first then
REM OR QUASI substituted if unsuccessful or publication if whereabouts
The clerk of court issues the alias summons on demand of the plaintiff, IN REM unknown or temporarily outside the country.
provided any of the instances mentioned above are present. 4. against non-residents, only personal service outside the
country with leave of court, or publication with leave of
What would be the remedy in case the court erroneously exercised court
jurisdiction to someone who has not been properly served with ACTIONS Service only on those enumerated in the statute is allowed
summons? AGAINST
DOMESTIC
JURIDICAL
12 Bello v Ubo 117 SCRA 91 (1982).
13 Linger & Fisher GMPH v. IAC 125 SCRA 527 (1983). 14 Laus v CA 219 SCRA 688 (1993).

6
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

PERSONS the father of Violeta Venturaza at 3412 BA Tan St Barrio Obrero Tondo Manila, the
ACTIONS Service must be on resident agent, government regulator, or of address of the sps stated in the complaint. For failure of the sps to answer, MTC
AGAINST any officers, agents within the country. ruled in favour of Senoran. Given that summons cannot be served at the previous
FOREIGN address as the sps were no longer around, the deputy sheriff served it on Violeta
JURIDICAL Venturaza in her office at ADB, Pasay.
ENTITY
The Sps filed a motion to set aside the decision and declare the
Note: proceedings null and void for lack of jurisdiction. They allege that since there had
been an improper and invalid service of summons i.e. serving it at 3412 BA Tan
Although as a rule, modes of service of summons are strictly followed in order that when they have been living in Aurora St, pasay, the court did not acquire
the court may acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, such jurisdiction over them. The motion had been denied.
procedural modes are liberally construed in quasi-judicial proceedings. Substantial
compliance is considered adequate15. On appeal before the RTC, the MTC decision was affirmed with a few
modification i.e. lowering of attorneys fees. A petition for review was filed with the
Under sec 6 Rule 13 ( personal service of pleadings and other papers), personal CA. CA only affirmed the lower courts decision in toto.
service includes not only service on the party or counsel, but also leaving a copy
with the clerk or person having charge of his office or leaving it with a person of Issue:
sufficient age and discretion at the partys or counsels residence 16.
Was summons properly served on the Sps?
Under Sec 6, Rule 14 (service in person of defendant), service is made only on
the defendant himself17. Held:

Irregularities in personal service may be cured by proof that the copies have No.
actually been delivered to the defendant, which is equivalent to service (Moran).
Nonetheless, actual receipt still has to be timely; otherwise the defendant is still 1. In 1984 they were actual residents of 3412 B.A. Tan St., Barrio Obrero
deprived of due process18. Tondo, and Manila and, as correctly reflected in the 1984 Asian
SPS VENTURAZA V CA Development Bank Directory.
GR NO. 77760 DECEMBER 11, 1987 a. However, the change of their address, upon their transfer to
Pasay City in April 1985, could not be reflected in the 1985-86
Facts: PLDT Telephone Directory
i. this directory had already been printed and circulated
Senoran filed a complaint against Sps Venturaza with MTC for collection to the public before their transfer in April 1985 to
of sums of money. On June 10, 1985 summons was issued against Augusto Soan, Aurora St. in Pasay City.
b. The copy of the contract of lease dated April 1985 between
15 Santos v NLRC 254 SCRA 673 (1996) petitioner Romualdo Venturanza as lessee and Linda Galvez as
16 HERRERA supra note 1 at 923. lessor over an apartment unit located at 2511 Aurora St., Pasay
17 Id. City and the affidavit of Augusto Soan dated 29 April 1986
18 Toyota Cubao v CA GR No 126321 October 23 1997. stating that he never told the sheriff that the defendants were

7
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

residing in his house at 3412 B.A. Tan St., Barrio Obrero Tondo,
Manila, sufficiently negate the conclusion of the court that 3. It is only when a defendant can not be personally served with summons
summons had been served. within a reasonable time that a substituted service may be availed of, the
same to be effected in the following manner:
2. Upon careful examination of the sheriffs Return dated 10 June 1985, a. by leaving copies of the summons at the defendants'
which purports to serve as proof that summons had been served upon dwelling house or residence, with some person of
the defendants, together with a copy of the complaint, through Augusto suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or
Soan, no statement is made that an effort or attempt was exerted b. by leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular
to personally serve the summons on the defendants and that the place of business, with some competent person in
same had failed. charge thereof.
a. the Return does not even indicate the address of Sps Venturaza
to whom summons was supposed to have been served. 4. The substituted service should be availed only when the defendant
b. The presumption of regularity in the performance of official cannot be served promptly in person.
functions by the sheriff is not applicable in this case where it is a. Impossibility of prompt service should be shown by stating the
patent that the sheriff's return is defective. efforts made to find the defendant personally and the failure of
such efforts.
Note: b. The statement should be made in the proof of service.
c. This is necessary because substituted service is in derogation of
1. Under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, there are three (3) methods of the usual method of service.
service of summons in civil actions, namely:
i. personal service (See. 7); 5. Substituted service is a method extraordinary in character, and hence
ii. substituted service (Sec. 8); and may be used only as prescribed in the circumstances authorized by
iii. service by publication. statute.
b. Strict compliance with these modes of service is required in a. Thus, the statutory requirements of substituted service must be
order that the court may require jurisdiction over the person of followed strictly, faithfully and any substituted service other than
the defendant. authorized by the statute is considered ineffective.
c. Service of summons upon the defendant is the means by which
the court acquires jurisdiction over his person. 6. For a substituted service to be valid, summons served at the defendant's
i. This process is for the benefit of the defendant, and is residence must be served at his residence at the time of such service and
intended to afford the latter an opportunity to be heard not at his former place of residence.
on the claim against him. a. The terms "dwelling house" or "residence" are generally held to
ii. In the absence of valid waiver trial and judgment, refer to the time of service,
without such service, are null and void. i. hence it is not sufficient "to leave the copy at
defendant's former dwelling house, residence, or place
2. In an action strictly in personam, personal service of summons within the of abode, as the case may be, after his removal
forum is essential to the acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of the therefrom."
defendant who does not voluntarily submit himself to the authority of the ii. They refer to the place where the person named in the
court. summons is living at the time when the service is

8
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

made, even though he may be temporarily out of the


country at the time.
b. An effort or attempt should first be made to personally serve the SAMARTINO V RAON
summons and after this has failed, a substituted service may be GR NO. 131482 JULY 3 2002
caused upon the defendant, and the same must be reflected in
the proof of service. Facts:

The certificate of service of summons by the sheriff is prima facie evidence of the Raon and Crisostomo instituted a complaint for ejectment against
facts set out in such certificate. To overcome the presumption arising from the Regalado Samartino in MTC Cavite. At the time of the service of summons at
sheriffs return, the evidence must be clear and convincing19. Regalados house Regalado was not home, since he was undergoing treatment
and rehabilitation from drug dependency. Summons had been served on Roberto
The absence in the sheriffs return of a statement about the impossibility of Samartino, brother of Regalado. On the note, the laiason officer of NBI TRC
personal service does not conclusively prove that the service is invalid20. appeared before the court with a certification that Regalado cannot answer the
complaint within the reglementary period on the ground that he still has six
1. proof of prior attempts at personal service may be submitted by the months to complete the program.
plaintiff during the hearing of any incident assailing the validity of the
substituted service21. Notwithstanding the certification, the trial court declared Regalado in
2. while the sheriffs return carries with it the presumption, albeit disputable, default. After Raon and Crisostomo presented their evidence ex parte, the MTC
of regularity i.e. the entries are correct, it does not necessarily follow ruled in their favour. Since the judgement had become final and executory,
that an act done in relation to the official duty for which the return is Regalado filed with the RTC a petition for relief from judgement. RTC denied the
made was not done simply because it was not disclosed therein 22. petition, as well as Regalados motions for reconsideration.

Impossibility of service may be established by evidence 23. Regalado filed a petition for certiorari with the CA. the CA only dismissed
Dwelling house or residence refers to dwelling house at the time of service. the petition.
They refer to the place where the person named in the summons is living at the
time when the service is made, even though he may be temporarily out of the Issue:
country at that time.
1. Has there been proper service of summons?
By the terms of the law, plaintiff is not duty bound to see to it that the person 2. Did the court acquire jurisdiction over the person of Regalado?
upon whom the service was actually made delivers the summons to defendant or
informs him about it. The law presumes that for him24. Held:

19 Orosa v. CA 261 SCRA 376 (1996). No.


20 HERRERA supra note 1 at 927.
21 Id. 1. The above return failed to show the reason why personal service
22 Id. could not be made.
23 Id.
24 HERRERA supra note 1 at 929.

9
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

i. It failed to state that prompt and personal service on c. Before a person can be deprived of his property, he should first
the defendant was rendered impossible. be informed of the claim against him and the theory on which
such claim is premised.
ii. It was not shown that efforts were made to find the
defendant personally and that said efforts failed; Notes:
hence the resort to substituted service.
1. The impossibility of personal service justifying availment of substituted
b. As stated above, these requirements are indispensable because service should be explained in the proof of service; why efforts exerted
substituted service is in derogation of the usual method of towards personal service failed.
service. a. The pertinent facts and circumstances attendant to the service
i. It is an extraordinary method since it seeks to bind the of summons must be stated in the proof of service or Officers
defendant to the consequences of a suit even though Return;
notice of such action is served not upon him but upon b. Otherwise, the substituted service cannot be upheld.
another whom law could only presume would notify 2. It is only under exceptional terms that the circumstances warranting
him of the pending proceedings. substituted service of summons may be proved by evidence aliunde.
3. Since service of summons, especially for actions in personam, is essential
ii. For this reason, failure to faithfully, strictly, and fully for the acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, the
comply with the requirements of substituted service resort to a substituted service must be duly justified.
renders said service ineffective.[20] a. Failure to do so would invalidate all subsequent proceedings on
jurisdictional grounds.
c. Furthermore, nowhere in the return of summons or in the
records of this case is it shown that petitioners brother, on Any judgment may be annulled based on failure to show in the return impossibility
whom substituted service of summons was effected, was a of personal service within a reasonable time25.
person of suitable age and discretion residing at petitioners
residence
SPS VALMONTE V. CA
2. The trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of GR NO 108538 JANUARY 22 1996
Regalado.
Facts:
a. the service of summons is not only required to give the court
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, but also to afford Dimalanta filed a complaint for partition of real property and accounting
the latter an opportunity to be heard on the claim made against of rentals against Sps Alfredo and Lourdes Valmonte who are both residents of
him. Thus, compliance with the rules regarding the service of 90222 Carkeek Drive South Seattle Washington USA. Summons had been served
summons is as much an issue of due process as of jurisdiction. at Gedisco Center, Unit 304, 1564 A Mabini St Manila where Alfredo Valmonte
holds office. While Alfredo accepted the summons insofar as he is concerned, he
b. The essence of due process is to be found in the reasonable
refused to receive the summons against his wife, as he was not authorize to
opportunity to be heard and submit any evidence one may have
in support of his defense.

25 Syjuco v. Castro 175 SCRA 171 (1989).

10
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

receive it in her behalf. The process server left without leaving a copy of the b. this mode of service must be made outside the Philippines, such
summons and complaint for Lourdes. as through the Philippine Embassy in the foreign country where
the defendant resides.[8]
While Alfredo filed his answer with counterclaim, Lourdes failed to do the
same. Dimalanta moved that Lourdes be declared but the Trial court denied the 3. Moreover, there are several reasons why the service of summons on Atty.
motion. Dimalanta filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus before Alfredo D. Valmonte cannot be considered a valid service of summons on
the CA. CA reversed the lower courts ruling and declared Lourdes in default. Lourdes A. Valmonte.
a. Service of summons on Alfredo D. Valmonte was not made upon
Issue: the order of the court as required by Rule 14, 17 and certainly
was not a mode deemed sufficient by the court which in fact
Has Lourdes been properly served with summons? refused to consider the service to be valid and on that basis
declare Lourdes A. Valmonte in default for her failure to file an
Held: answer.
b. service in the attempted manner on Lourdes was not made upon
No. prior leave of the trial court as required also in Rule 14, 17. As
provided in 19, such leave must be applied for by motion
1. Partition and accounting under Rule 69, is in the nature of an action in writing, supported by affidavit of the plaintiff or some
quasi in rem. Such an action is essentially for the purpose of affecting the person on his behalf and setting forth the grounds for
defendants interest in a specific property and not to render a judgment the application.
against him. c. Because there was no order granting such leave, Lourdes was
not given ample time to file her Answer which, according to the
2. As Lourdes A. Valmonte is a nonresident who is not found in the rules, shall be not less than sixty (60) days after notice.
Philippines, service of summons on her must be in accordance with Rule 1. It must be noted that the period to file an
14, 17. Answer in an action against a resident
a. Such service, to be effective outside the Philippines, must be defendant differs from the period given in an
made either action filed against a nonresident defendant
1. by personal service; who is not found in the Philippines.
2. by publication in a newspaper of general 2. In the former, the period is fifteen (15) days
circulation in such places and for such time as from service of summons, while in the latter, it
the court may order, in which case a copy of is at least sixty (60) days from notice.
the summons and order of the court should be
sent by registered mail to the last known 4. Lourdes did not appoint her husband as her attorney-in-fact.
address of the defendant; or
3. in any other manner which the court may a. Although she wrote private respondent s attorney that all
deem sufficient. communications intended for her should be addressed to her
husband who is also her lawyer at the latters address in Manila,
no power of attorney to receive summons for her can be inferred
therefrom.

11
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

b. In fact the letter was written seven months before the filing of
this case below, and it appears that it was written in connection 3. The cases of De Leon v. Hontanosas and Gemperle v. Schenker were not
with the negotiations between her and her sister, respondent applied in this case since:
Rosita Dimalanta, concerning the partition of the property in a. The husband was in the conjugal home when the summons was
question. served, on top of the finding that the wife was only temporarily
c. As is usual in negotiations of this kind, the exchange of absent in De leon;
correspondence was carried on by counsel for the parties. b. The wife had been appointed as her husbands representative
d. But the authority given to Alfredo in these negotiations certainly and attorney in fact in Gemperle.
cannot be construed as also including an authority to represent
her in any litigation. 4. the period to file an Answer in an action against a resident defendant
differs from the period given in an action filed against a nonresident
Notes: defendant who is not found in the Philippines.
a. In the former, the period is fifteen (15) days from service of
1. In action in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person of the summons, while in the latter, it is at least sixty (60) days from
defendant is not essential for giving the court jurisdiction so long as the notice.
court acquires jurisdiction over the res.
1. Ownership of house is synonymous with dwelling26.
2. What gives the court jurisdiction in an action in rem or quasi in rem is
that it has jurisdiction over the res, i.e. the personal status of the plaintiff
2. Substituted service to wife is valid, but not when they are
not residents of the same place27.
who is domiciled in the Philippines or the property litigated or attached.
a. Service of summons in the manner provided in 17 is not for the 3. Service with only one copy of complaint on two
purpose of vesting it with jurisdiction but for complying with the defendants is irregular28.
requirements of fair play or due process, so that he will be 4. Service of summons on a co-owner of is not binding on
informed of the pendency of the action against him and the the others29.
possibility that property in the Philippines belonging to him or in
which he has an interest may be subjected to a judgment in
favor of the plaintiff and he can thereby take steps to protect his Napolyn is the sister of Tweetie. After her death, summons was served
interest if he is so minded on her. Was there a proper service?
b. Strict compliance with these requirements alone can assure
observance of due process. None, because there was no representative of Napolyn, hence any proceedings
i. That is why in one case, [9]although the Court held or judgment rendered is void. Service of summons upon the defendant is the
considered publication in the Philippines of the means by which the court acquires jurisdiction over the person. This process is for
summons (against the contention that it should be
made in the foreign state where defendant was
residing) sufficient, nonetheless the service was 26 Arevalo v. Quilatan 117 SCRA 700 ( 1982).
considered insufficient because no copy of the 27 Daran v. Angco 20 SCRA 1127 (1967).
summons was sent to the last known correct address in 28 Valmonte v. CA 252 SCRA 92 (1996).
the Philippines. 29 Bello v. Ubo GR No. L-30353 September 30 1982.

12
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

the benefit of the defendant, and is intended to afford the latter an opportunity to
be heard on the claim against him30. Malaysian law.

1. A resident defendant in an action in personam who cannot be personally


served with summons may be summoned either by means of substituted 1. the recognition to be accorded a foreign judgment is not necessarily
service in accordance with Rule 14, sec 8 affected by the fact that the procedure in the courts of the country in
2. it is when the action in personam is against a non-resident defendant which such judgment was rendered differs from that of the courts of
who cannot be found in the PH and does not voluntarily submit the country in which the judgment is relied on.[42]
himself to the jurisdiction of PH that summons by publication cannot be 2. Ultimately, matters of remedy and procedure such as those relating
made upon him for purposes of acquiring jurisdiction. to the service of summons or court process upon the defendant, the
a. Personal service of summons within the state is essential to the authority of counsel to appear and represent a defendant and the
acquisition of jurisdiction over his person. formal requirements in a decision are governed by the lex fori or the
3. for service of summons to be valid in actions in personam against a resident internal law of the forum,[43] i.e., the law of Malaysia in this case.
defendant who is temporarily outside of the Philippines, the residence must
be at the PH at the time of service of summons 3. In this case, it is the procedural law of Malaysia where the judgment
a. Former residence is not sufficient. was rendered that determines the validity of the service of court
process on private respondent as well as other matters raised by it.
ASIAVEST MERCHANT BANKERS V CA
a. As to what the Malaysian procedural law is, remains a
GR NO. 110263 JULY 20 2001
question of fact, not of law.
Facts: b. It may not be taken judicial notice of and must be pleaded
and proved like any other fact. Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132
Asiavest sought to enforce the decision of the High Court of Malaya of the Revised Rules of Court provide that it may be evidenced
ordering PNCC to pay (1) the indemnity of the performance bond it had put up in by an official publication or by a duly attested or authenticated
favour of PNCC to guarantee the completion of the Felda project and (2) the loan copy thereof.
it extended to Asiavest-CDP Sdn Bhd for the completion of Hanai and Kuantan By-
Pass project. c. It was then incumbent upon private respondent to present
evidence as to what that Malaysian procedural law is and to
PNCC questions the judgment insofar as there has been an improper show that under it, the assailed service of summons upon a
service of summons. financial officer of a corporation, as alleged by it, is invalid. It
did not.
Issue:
d. Accordingly, the presumption of validity and regularity of
service of summons and the decision thereafter rendered by
What law determines the matters of remedy and procedure?
the High Court of Malaya must stand
Held:
PHILIPPINE AMERICAN LIFE & GENERAL INSURANCE CO V. BREVA
30 Keister v. Navarro GR No L-29067 May 31 1977.

13
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

GR NO. 147937 NOVEMBER 11, 2004 1. The complaint was amended after the Phil Am filed the motion to dismiss.
The trial court even acknowledged this when it rendered its order denying
Facts: the motion to dismiss and ordered the issuance of an alias summons. The
Rules on Civil Procedure provide that the amended complaint supersedes
Morales filed a complaint for damages and reimbursement of insurance the complaint that it amends.[21]
premiums against Philam before the RTC. Summons was served on PhilAms
Regional Office and received by its Insurance Officer, Ruthie Babael. Phil Am filed 2. Contrary to the Phil Ams claim, the summons issued on the amended
a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over its persons as the complaint does not become invalid.
said officer was not among the officers upon whom the service of summons may a. In fact, summons on the original complaint which has already
be properly made. Morales filed an amended complaint, alleging that summons been served continues to have its legal effect.
and other court processes could also be served in Philam life Building UN avenue b. Thus, where the defendant has already been served summons
Manila, through its president or any of its officers authorized to receive summons. on the original complaint, the amended complaint may be served
upon him without need of another summons.
RTC denied the MTD and directed the issuance of the alias summons to i. Conversely, when no summons has yet been validly
be served in its main office in Manila. It held that the improper service of summons served on the defendant, new summons for the
is not a ground for dismissal of the complaint, considering that the case was still in amended complaint must be served on him.
its initial state. It ruled that the remedy was to issue an alias summons served at
the principal office of Phil Am. Phil Am filed a motion for reconsideration, but the 3. Since at the time the complaint was amended no summons had been
lower court denied it. Pending resolution of the motion for reconsideration, Phil Am properly served on Phil Am and it had not yet appeared in court, new
received the alias summons together with a copy of the amended complaint. Phil summons should have been issued on the amended complaint.
Am filed with the CA a petition for certiorari and prohibition. [23]

a. technically, the trial court should have ordered the issuance of


The CA dismissed the petition. It ruled that the trial court should have an original summons, not an alias summons.[24]
ordered the issuance of an original summons, not an alias summons. It also b. After all, an alias summons is merely a continuation of the
treated the alias summons as a matter of nomenclature, considering that the original summons.
rationale behind the service of summons to make certain that the corporation
would promptly and properly receive notice of the filing of an action against it has 4. In this case, however, there was no sense in issuing an alias summons on
been served in this case. the original complaint since the complaint had already been amended.
a. The trial court should have instead issued a new summons on
the amended complaint.
Issue:
5. It is not pertinent whether the summons is designated as an original or
Did the lower court err when it denied the MTD filed by Phil Am? an alias summons as long as it has adequately served its purpose.
a. What is essential is that the summons complies with the
Held: requirements under the Rules of Court and it has been duly
served on the defendant together with the prevailing complaint.
No. b. In this case, the alias summons satisfies the requirements under
the Rules, both as to its content and the manner of service.

14
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

i. It contains all the information required under the rules,


and it was served on the persons authorized to receive Held:
the summons on behalf of the petitioner at its principal
office in Manila. yes.
ii. Moreover, the second summons was technically not an
alias summons but more of a new summons on the 1. the service of summons on BPIs Branch Manager did not bind the
amended complaint. corporation for the branch manager is not included in the enumeration of
iii. It was not a continuation of the first summons the statute of the persons upon whom service of summons can be validly
considering that it particularly referred to the amended made in behalf of the corporation. Such service is therefore void and
complaint and not to the original complaint. ineffectual.

BPI V SANTIAGO 2. However, upon the issuance and the proper service of new
GR NO. 169116 MARCH 28 2007 summons on 11 March 2003, before the Writ of Preliminary Injunction
was issued on 20 March 2003, whatever defect attended the service
Facts: of the original summons, was promptly and accordingly cured.
a. on 7 March 2003, the Branch Clerk of Court issued a new
Sps Santiago and Centrogen filed a complaint seeking the issuance of summons which was properly served upon BPIs Corporate
TRO, injunction and in the alternative, the annulment of Real Estate Mortgage with Secretary on 11 March 2003, as evidenced by the Sheriffs
BPI. BPI filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the branch manager of Sta Cruz Return.
Branch is not among those authorized to received summons on its behalf. The b. The subsequent service of summons was neither disputed nor
lower court denied the motion to dismiss and emphasized that the nature of the was it mentioned by BPI except in a fleeting narration of facts
case merited its removal from the purview of Section 11, Rule 14 of the Rules of and therefore enjoys the presumption that official duty has been
court. Citing 5 Rule 58, the RTC declared the order dismissing the MTD valid regularly performed.[20] The Process Servers Certificate of Service
binding given the presence of extreme urgency. of Summons is a prima facie evidence of facts set out in that
certificate
The RTC issued an order enjoining the provincial sheriff from proceeding
with the extrajudicial of the property subject of real estate mortgage. It also 3. The fact that the original summons was invalidly served is of no moment
ordered service of new summons to BPI which is to be served at BPI head office since jurisdiction over BPI was subsequently acquired by the service of a
and received by the corporate secretary. Later on, the lower court granted the new summons.
application for the issuance of a writ of Preliminary injunction. Upon denial of BPIs
motion for reconsideration, it filed a petition for certiorari with the CA. Notes:

The CA affirmed the orders of the RTC. It also declared that jurisdiction 1. Citing Phil Am life v Brevea
was acquired upon the service of new summons.
A case should not be dismissed simply because an
Issue: original summons was wrongfully served. It should
be difficult to conceive, for example, that when a
Did the trial court acquire jurisdiction over BPI? defendant personally appears before a Court complaining

15
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

that he had not been validly summoned, that the case jurisdiction over Dela Pea, an indispensable party, which rendered all the
against him should be dismissed. An alias summons proceedings fatally defective.
can be actually served on said defendant.
The CA ruled in favour of Ong and Caballes. CA held that the substituted
2. There is no hard and fast rule pertaining to the manner of service of service of summons was improper absent any showing that Dela Pea could not be
summons. Rather, substantial justice demands that every case should be served personally with summons within a reasonable time
viewed in light of the peculiar circumstances attendant to each. . Since Dela Pea is an indispensable party no final determination can be
had if the court did not acquire jurisdiction over him. San Pedro filed a Motion for
a. In explaining the test on the validity of service of summons, Reconsideration, which had been denied by the CA.
Justice Florenz Regalado[24] stressed that substantial justice must
take precedence over technicality and thus stated: Issue:
i. The ultimate test on the validity and sufficiency on
service of summons is whether the same and the has the lower court acquired jurisdiction over San Pedro?
attachments thereto where ultimately received by the
corporation under such circumstances that no undue Held:
prejudice is sustained by it from the procedural lapse
and it was afforded full opportunity to present its Yes.
responsive pleadings.
ii. This is but in accord with the entrenched rule that the 1. The civil case is an action to quiet title.
ends of substantial justice should not be subordinated
to technicalities and, for which purpose, each case a. San Pedro alleged in his Petition in Civil Case No. 515-M-99 that
should be examined within the factual milieu peculiar to the mortgages in favor of Ong may, at first, appear valid and
it. effective, but are actually invalid or voidable for having been
made without the knowledge and authority of the spouses
SAN PEDRO V. WILLY ONG AND NORMITA CABALLES Narciso, the registered owners of the subject properties and San
GR NO. 177598 OCTOBER 17, 2008 Pedros predecessors-in-interest.
b. In asking the cancellation of the mortgages on the TCTs of the
Facts: subject properties, San Pedro was ultimately asking the RTC to
remove a cloud on his title to the same.
San Pedro filed with the RTC a petition for nullification of mortgage with
damages against sps Narciso, Dela Pea, Landayan, Ong and Caballes. RTC issued 2. in actions in rem or quasi in rem like actions to quiet title, jurisdiction
them summons, directing them to file their answers. All but Sps Dela Pea filed their over the person of the defendant is not a prerequisite to confer
answers. After the sheriff employed substituted service, Dela Pea was declared in jurisdiction on the court provided that the court acquires jurisdiction over
default. the res, although summons must be served upon the defendant in order
to satisfy the due process requirements
The RTC ruled in favour of San Pedro. Without filing a motion for
reconsideration, Ong and Caballes appealed to the Court of Appeals, citing lack of a. Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either

16
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

i. by the seizure of the property under legal process,


whereby it is brought into actual custody of the law; or 5. Personal service of summons is preferred to substitute service.
ii. as a result of the institution of legal proceedings, a. Only if the former cannot be made promptly can the process
in which the power of the court is recognized server resort to the latter.
and made effective. b. Moreover, the proof of service of summons must
i. indicate the impossibility of service of summons within
3. The improper service of summons on Dela Pea did not void the a reasonable time;
proceedings for lack of jurisdiction. In quasi in rem proceedings, the court ii. specify the efforts exerted to locate the defendant; and
need not acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the defendants, for as iii. state that the summons was served upon a person of
long as it has acquired jurisdiction over the res. sufficient age and discretion who is residing in the
a. The defect in the service of summons merely infringed Dela Peas address, or who is in charge of the office or regular
right to due process that precluded the RTC from rendering a place of business, of the defendant.
valid judgment with respect to her personal liability. c. It is likewise required that the pertinent facts proving these
b. Since Dela Peas right to due process is personal and pertains to circumstances be stated in the proof of service or in the officers
her alone, it could not be invoked by her other co-defendants so return.
as to escape the judgment of liability against them. d. The failure to comply faithfully, strictly and fully with all the
Notes: foregoing requirements of substituted service renders the service
of summons ineffective.
1. Summons is a writ by which the defendant is notified of the action
brought against him. Service of such writ is the means by which the SANTOS JR. V PNOC
court may acquire jurisdiction over his person. Any judgment without GR NO. 170943 SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
such service in the absence of a valid waiver is null and void
Facts:
2. To provide perspective, it is crucial to determine first whether the action
is in personam, in rem, or quasi in rem because the rules on service of PNOC-EC filed a complaint for sum of money against Santos in RTC to
summons under Rule 14 of the Revised Rules of Court apply according to collect the unpaid balance of the car loan it advanced while Santos was still a
the nature of the action. member of the Board of directors. Personal service to Santos failed, since he could
not be located in his last known address despite efforts to do so. On PNOCs
3. According to Section 6, Rule 14 of the Revised Rules of Court, summons motion, the trial court allowed service of summons by publication. PNOC caused
on the defendant in actions in personam must be served by handing a the publication of the summons in Remate, a newspaper of general circulation in
copy thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive it, by the Philippines. He also submitted the affidavit of publication of the advertising
tendering it to him.[28] manager, and the affidavit of PNOC employee who sent the summons by
registered mail at Santos last known address. When Santos failed to file his
4. Meanwhile, in actions in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person answer within the reglementary period, PNOC moved for the ex parte presentation
of the defendant is not a prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the court and formal offer of evidence. The court granted the motion.
provided that the court acquires jurisdiction over the res, although
summons must be served upon the defendant in order to satisfy the due After the court submitted the case for decision, Santos filed an omnibus
process requirements motion for reconsideration and to admit attached answer. He pointed out that the

17
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

affidavit of service failed to comply with sec 19 Rule 14 of the Rules of Court as it i. It now applies to any action, whether in personam, in
was not executed by the clerk of court. He also claimed that he was denied due rem, or quasi in rem.
process when he was not notified of the PNOCs motion for ex parte presentation
of evidence. 2. no.
a. Service of summons by publication is proved by the affidavit of
PNOC opposed the motion. It pointed out that it complied with the rules the printer, his foreman or principal clerk or of the editor,
on service by publication. business or advertising manager of the newspaper which
published the summons.
The court denied Santos motion for reconsideration. It held that the rules i. The service of summons by publication is
did not require the affidavit of complementary service by registered mail to be complemented by service of summons by registered
executed by the clerk of court. It also noted that due process had been observed mail to the defendants last known address.
as the copy of the order had been mailed to him at his last known address. ii. The complementary service is evidenced by an affidavit
showing the deposit of a copy of the summons and
Santos filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals. It only order for publication in the post office, postage prepaid,
sustained the findings of the lower court. directed to the defendant by registered mail to his last
known address.
Issue: b. The rules do not require that the affidavit of complementary
service be executed by the clerk of court.
1. Is service of summons by publication proper? i. While the trial court ordinarily does the mailing of
2. is the affidavit of complementary service executed by the clerk of court copies of its orders and processes, the duty to make
necessary? the complementary service is imposed on the party who
resorts to service by publication.
Held:
LCD: assuming the summons was defective, the court still acquired jurisdiction
over Santos because of his voluntary appearance in court.
1. yes.
a. since Santos could not be personally served with summons Note:
despite diligent efforts to locate his whereabouts, PNOC-EC
sought and was granted leave of court to effect service of 1. service may, by leave of court, be effected upon him by publication in a
summons upon him by publication in a newspaper of general newspaper of general circulation and in such places and for such times as
circulation. Santos was properly served with summons by the court may order in any action:
publication. a. where the defendant is designated as an unknown owner, or
b. In contrast to Santos position that substituted service may only the like, or
be availed of in an actions in rem, the present rule expressly b. Whenever his whereabouts are unknown and cannot be
states that it applies in any action where the defendant is ascertained by diligent inquiry.
designated as an unknown owner, or the like, or whenever his
whereabouts are unknown and cannot be ascertained by diligent 2. this rule applies [i]n any action where the defendant is designated as an
inquiry. unknown owner, or the like, or whenever his whereabouts are unknown

18
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

and cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry. Thus, it now applies The companies argue that the lower court did not acquire jurisdiction
to any action, whether in personam, in rem or quasi in rem.[ over their persons as the action do not fall to any of the cases contemplated in Sec
17, Rule 14.
3. The rules do not require that the affidavit of complementary service be
executed by the clerk of court. While the trial court ordinarily does the Issue:
mailing of copies of its orders and processes, the duty to make the
complementary service by registered mail is imposed on the party who 1. is the complaint for injunction and/or declaratory relief within the purview
resorts to service by publication. of the provisions of Sec 16, Rule 14 of the Rules?
2. is the extraterritorial service proper?
Sec 14 ( Service upon defendant whose identity or whereabouts are unknown)
covers two distinguishable situations: Held:
(1) where the identity of the defendant is unknown and
(2) where the address of the defendant is unknown. No.
a. It must therefore be shown that the address was unknown and
that such address cannot be ascertained wby diligent inquiry. 1. The complaint is an action in personam.
a. Monetary obligations do not, in any way, refer to status, lights
Section 14 allows summons by publication in any action. It is section 15 and obligations.
(extraterritorial service) in actions against non-resident defendants who cannot be i. What is sought is a declaration not only that CF Sharp
found in the philippines that limits summons by publication only to actions Inc is a corporation separate and distinct from C.F.
quasi in rem and in rem31. Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha and therefore, not liable for the
latter's indebtedness.
KAWASAKI PORT SERVICE CORPORATION V. AMORES b. there is no action relating to or the subject of which are the
GR NO. L-58340 JULY 16 1991 properties of the defendants in the Philippines
i. where a declaratory judgment as to a disputed fact
Facts: would be determinative of issues rather than a
construction of definite stated rights, status and other
CF Sharp Inc filed a complaint for injunction and/or declaratory relief with relations, commonly expressed in written instrument,
CFI Manila against 75 Japanese Corporation. As alternative to injunction, CF the case is not one for declaratory judgment
prayed for a judicial declaration that being a separate and independent ii. a declaratory relief proceeding is unavailable where
corporation, it is not liable for the liabilities of CF Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha. As the judgment would have to be made, only after a judicial
Japanese companies are non-residents, without business addresses in the investigation of disputed issues.
Philippines but in Japan, CF sharp prayed for leave of court to effect extraterritorial c. there is no action relating to or the subject of which are the
service of summons. CF Sharp also filed an ex parte motion for extraterritorial properties of the corporations in the Philippines
service by registered mail, with return cards. CFI granted the motion. i. they merely demanded or attempted to demand from
private respondent payment of the monetary
obligations of C.F. Sharp K.K.,
ii. No action in court has as yet ensued. Verily, the fact
31 HERRERA supra note 1 at 957. that C.F. Sharp Philippines is an entity separate and

19
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

distinct from C.F. Sharp K.K., is a matter of defense


that can be raised by the former at the proper time. Sansio Philippines filed a complaint for sum of money and damages
d. As regards the prayer for injunction, It was not prayed that the against Mogol before MeTC. At the request of Sansio, the process server of MeTC
corporations be excluded from any property located in the Manila served the summons and the copy of the complaint on sps Mogol at the
Philippines, nor was it alleged, much less shown, that their courtroom of MeTC Manila BR 24, while they are waiting for the hearing of Alicia
properties if any, have been attached. Mogols case for BP 22. After being informed of the summons and the complaint,
counsel of Sps Mogol took hold of the summons and complaint and read them. The
2. no. counsel advised the process server that the summons and copy of the complaint
be served only at the address stated in both documents and not anywhere else.
Since the complaint does not involve the personal status of plaintiff, nor The lawyer also advised the sps not receive the documents. The process server
any property in the Philippines in which defendants have or claim an indicated the what transpired when he served it and declared the summons
interest, or which the plaintiff has attached, but purely an action for unserved.
injunction, it is a personal action as well as an action in personam, not an
action in rem or quasi in rem. As a personal action, personal or Sansio moved that sps Mogol be declared in default. The sps parried,
substituted service of summons on the defendants, not extraterritorial citing Sec 3 Rule 6 of the Rules. They argued that the service should have been
service, is necessary to confer jurisdiction on the court. done first in the stated address. They aver that only when it cannot be done within
a reasonable time can the process server resort to substituted service.
Notes:
MTC declared the sps in default. It stated that Section 6, rule 14 does not
1. Status means a legal personal relationship, not temporary in nature nor specify where service is to be effected. Since service of summons is made by
terminable at the mere will of the parties, with which third persons and handing a copy thereof on the defendant in person, it may done whenever the
the state are concerned defendant may be found. The return indicating unserved should not be taken to
2. extraterritorial service of summons is proper only in four (4) instances, mean that the sps had not been served with summons.
namely:
a. when the action affects the personal status of the plaintiffs: After the denial of Sps MR, they filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition
b. when the action relates to, or the subject of which is, property and/or injunction before RTC. RTC dismissed the petition, holding that sec 6 Rule
within the Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a 14 does not mandate that the summons be served strictly at the address provided
lien or interest, actual or contingent; by the plaintiff in the complaint. It also added that same provision states that
c. when the relief demanded in such action consists, wholly or in service may be made wherever possible and practicable.
part, in excluding the defendant from any interest in property
located in the Philippines; and On appeal, the Court reversed the findings of the lower courts. It based
d. when the defendant non-resident's property has been attached its findings on the return of the sheriff stating that the summons are unserved.
within the Philippines."
Issue:
SANSIO PHILIPPINES V. SPOUSES MOGOL JR.
GR NO. 177007 JULY 14, 2009 Was there a valid service of summons?

Facts: Held:

20
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

1. It is enough that the defendant is handed a


Yes. copy of the summons in person by anyone
authorized by law.
1. Already accomplished was the operative act of handing a copy of the 2. This is distinct from substituted service under
summons to respondent spouses in person. Thus, jurisdiction over the Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court.
persons of the respondent spouses Mogol was already acquired by the ii. the fact that the summons was returned to the process
MeTC of Manila, Branch 25. That being said, the subsequent act of the server and respondent spouses Mogul subsequently
counsel of respondent spouses of returning the summons and the copy of declined to sign for them did not mean that the service
the complaint to the process server was no longer material. of summons in the persons of respondent spouses was
a. Section 6, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court does not require that a failure, such that a further effort was required to
the service of summons on the defendant in person must be serve the summons anew. A tender of summons, much
affected only at the latters residence as stated in the summons. less, a substituted service of summons, need no longer
b. Said provision is crystal clear that, whenever practicable, be resorted to in this case.
summons shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the
defendant; or if he refuses to receive and sign for it, by
tendering it to him. Nothing more is required. 2. the reliance to the statement unserved in the sheriffs return is
i. the service of the copy of the summons and the misplaced.
complaint inside the courtroom of the MeTC of Manila, a. The facts stated in the first paragraph of the Return on Service
Branch 24 was the most practicable act under the of Summons i.e. that the summons and the copy of the
circumstances, and the process server need not wait for complaint were already validly served on the said
respondent spouses Mogol to reach their given respondents. They merely refused to receive or obtain a copy of
address, i.e., at 1218 Daisy St., Employee Village, the same were not at all disputed by the respondent spouses
Lucena City, before he could serve on the latter the Mogol.
summons and the copy of the complaint.
ii. Due to the distance of the said address, service therein Notes:
would have been more costly and would have entailed
a longer delay on the part of the process server in 1. A summons is a writ by which the defendant is notified of the action
effecting the service of the summons. brought against him or her.
c. Axiomatically, Sections 6 and 7 of Rule 14 of the Rules of Court a. In a civil action, jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired either
cannot be construed to apply simultaneously. Said provisions do upon a valid service of summons or the defendant's voluntary
not provide for alternative modes of service of summons, which appearance in court.
can either be resorted to on the mere basis of convenience to b. When the defendant does not voluntarily submit to the court's
the parties. jurisdiction, or when there is no valid service of summons, any
i. Service of summons to be done personally does not judgment of the court, which has no jurisdiction over the person
mean that service is possible only at the defendants of the defendant, is null and void
actual residence. 2. Personal service of summons most effectively ensures that the notice
desired under the constitutional requirement of due process is
accomplished.[29]The essence of personal service is the handing or

21
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

tendering of a copy of the summons to the defendant himself, [30]wherever argument that the sheriff should have tried first to serve
he may be found; that is, wherever he may be, provided he is in the summons on him personally, before resorting to substituted
Philippines service of summons to his wife, is not meritorious 34.
3. Under our procedural rules, service of summons in the persons of the
defendants is generally preferred over substituted service. [32] GUIGUINTO CREDIT COOPERATIVE V TORRES
a. Substituted service derogates the regular method of personal GR NO. 170926 SEPTEMBER15, 2006
service. It is an extraordinary method, since it seeks to bind the
respondent or the defendant to the consequences of a suit, even Facts:
though notice of such action is served not upon him but upon
another whom the law could only presume would notify him of Guinoguinto Credit filed a complaint before RTC for collection of sum of
the pending proceedings money against its members Torres et al. Summons had been served through a
4. Sections 6 and 7 of Rule 14 of the Rules of Court cannot be construed to certain Pagtalunan referred to as Torres et al secretary at the given address.
apply simultaneously. Said provisions do not provide for alternative Guinoguinto filed a motion to declare Torres et al in default, which RTC granted.
modes of service of summons, which can either be resorted to on the The RTC ruled in favour of Guinoguinto. The Court of Appeals annulled the
mere basis of convenience to the parties. judgment of the court. It ruled that the Lower Court did not acquire jurisdiction
a. Service of summons to be done personally does not mean that over Torres et al, they were not served with summons or voluntarily appeared in
service is possible only at the defendants actual residence. court. It also added that no explanation why resort to substituted service of
i. It is enough that the defendant is handed a copy of the summons was made, in violation of Sec 6 Rule 14.
summons in person by anyone authorized by law.
ii. This is distinct from substituted service under Section 7, Issue:
Rule 14 of the Rules of Court.
1. Has summons been properly served?
1. Service to be done personally does not mean that service is possible at 2. Did the RTC acquire jurisdiction?
the defendants actual residence. It is enough that defendant is handed a
copy of the summons in person by anyone authorized by law32. Held:

2. This is distinct from substituted service under Sec 7 Rule 14 which 1. no.
requires that summons be served at the defendants residence in the a. since substituted service was availed of in lieu of personal
event personal service is not possible within a reasonable time for service, there should be a report stating that Pagtalunan was
justifiable reasons33. one with whom respondents had a relationship of trust and
confidence that would ensure that the latter will receive or be
3. In substituted service, the validity of service does not depend upon actual notified of the summons issued in their names.
receipt. But irregularity in service may be cured by proof of actual receipt. b. the process server hastily and capriciously resorted to
substituted service of summons without ascertaining the
a. Thus, where summons was in fact received by the defendant, his whereabouts of the respondents.

32 HERRERA supra note 1 at 922.


33 Id. 34 Boticano v. Chu 148 SCRA 541 ( 1987).

22
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

c. Such service of summons is not binding upon Nonilo and Sheryl efforts were made will not suffice for purposes of complying with the
Ann Torres whose relationship with Pagtalunan was neither rules of substituted service of summons.
readily ascertained nor adequately explained in the Return of 3. Personal service of summons is the mode which must be adopted
Summons. whenever practicable. It ought to be effected either by handing a copy
d. Also, no earnest efforts were made to locate respondent Aida thereof to the defendant in person, or if he refuses, by tendering it to
Torres who was allegedly working abroad at the time summons him.
was served on her person. 4. The pre-condition that substituted service may be resorted to only if
e. No explanation why substituted service was resorted to through personal service cannot be made within a reasonable time must be strictly
Pagtalunan was stated in the Return. followed.
f. The Return of Summons by the process server showed that no
effort was exerted and no positive step was taken to locate and Within a reasonable time presupposes that a prior attempt at personal service,
serve the summons personally on respondents. within a justifiable time frame as would be necessary to bring the defendant within
i. Without specifying the details of the attendant the jurisdiction of the court has failed35.
circumstances or of the efforts exerted to serve the
summons, a general statement that such efforts were POTENCIANO II V. BARNES
made will not suffice for purposes of complying with the GR NO. 159421 AUGUST 20, 2008.
rules of substituted service of summons.
2. No. Since the substituted service was not validly effected, the trial court Facts:
did not acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the respondents. The
order of default, the judgment by default, the writ of execution issued by Potenciano filed a complaint for damages against Barnes the owner and
it, as well as the auction sale of the respondents properties levied on president of GP Barnes Group for alleged harassment and maltreatment. Mr.
execution are, therefore, null and void. Herrera, a representative of E Himan Law office secured from the court copies of
the complaint with annexes and summons intended for Mr. Barnes. He indicated
that E Himan was Barnes counsel. On that date, the deputy sheriff issued a return
Notes: of summons.

1. Such requirements under Sections 6 and 7 of Rule 14 must be followed Potenciano filed a motion to declare Barnes in default. E Himan Law office
strictly, faithfully and fully in order not to deprive any person of his manifested by way of special appearance solely for the purpose of questioning the
property by violating his constitutional right to due process. T jurisdiction of the court over Barnes, that the law office does not represent Barnes
a. he statutory requirements of substituted service must be strictly as he has not engaged the services of the law office. Hence, the law office has no
construed since it is an extraordinary method of service in authority to bind Barnes.
derogation of personal service of summons, availed of only
under certain conditions imposed by the Rules of Court. The trial court declared Potenciano in default. E Himans motion for
b. Any substituted service other than that authorized under Section reconsideration was denied. Soon enough, the trial court ruled in favour of
7 is deemed ineffective and contrary to law. Potenciano. After Barnes denial of MNT with Diores Law Offices as counsel, he filed
2. Without specifying the details of the attendant circumstances or of the
efforts exerted to serve the summons, a general statement that such
35 HERRERA supra note 1 at 923.

23
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

a petition for certirorari, prohibition and mandamus praying for the nullification of Office who came to the office of the trial court
the lower courts decision. The CA granted the petition. claiming that E. Himan Law Office was the
counsel of Barnes.
The Court of Appeals held that there was no valid service of summons 2. Giving a copy of the summons to a messenger
since neither Mr. Herrera nor E. Himan Law Office was the defendant. When Mr. of a law firm, which was not even the counsel
Herrera, as a representative of E. Himan Law Office, received a copy of the of the defendant, cannot in any way be
summons, Barnes had not yet engaged the services of E. Himan Law Office. The construed as equivalent to service of summons
Court of Appeals ruled that the sheriff did not exert any effort to comply with on the defendant.
Section 6, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, either by handing a copy of the summons 2. No.
to Barnes in person and should Barnes refuse to receive and sign the summons, by a. Since there was no service of summons on Barnes, the trial court
tendering it to him. Since there was no valid service of summons on Barnes, the never acquired jurisdiction over Barnes and the trial courts order
trial court therefore did not acquire jurisdiction over Barnes. of default and the judgment by default are void.
b. There was no voluntary appearance.
Issue: i. There is no evidence on record that Barnes authorized
E. Himan Law Office to represent him in the case.
1. Has summons been properly served? 1. In fact, E. Himan Law Office filed a
2. Did the RTC acquire jurisdiction? Comment/Manifestation to the Motion to
Declare Defendant in Default, alleging that
Barnes had not yet engaged the services of E.
Held: Himan Law Office, which could not therefore
represent Barnes.
1. No. 2. Thus, the receipt of the summons by E. Himan
a. There was no service of summons on Barnes himself. Law Office and its filing of a
b. There was no attempt whatsoever on the part of the deputy Comment/Manifestation to the Motion to
sheriff to serve the summons on Barnes himself, who was the Declare Defendant in Default cannot be
defendant in the complaint. The deputy sheriff just handed a considered as voluntary appearance on the
copy of the summons, complaint, and the annexes to a certain part of Barnes.
Mr. Herrera who is a representative of E. Himan Law Office, ii. It was only on 15 August 2001 that Barnes made his
which claimed to be the counsel of Barnes. first appearance in the trial court by filing a Motion for
c. The handing of a copy to Mr. Herrera cannot even qualify as New Trial through his counsel of record, Diores Law
substituted service under Section 7 of Rule 14. Offices. The motion was precisely to question the
i. In this case, the deputy sheriff never made any effort validity of the order of default and the subsequent
to serve the summons on Barnes himself. judgment for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
ii. Neither was the copy of the summons served at Barnes defendant.
residence nor at his office or regular place of business,
as provided under Section 7 of Rule 14. Notes:
1. The deputy sheriff just handed a copy of the
summons to a messenger of E. Himan Law

24
LCD DIGESTS SESSION IV [UNTIL 3.7 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SYLLABUS]
REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
ATTY CUSTODIO.

1. Service of summons should be made on the defendant himself. However,


if for justifiable reasons the defendant cannot be served in person within
a reasonable time, substituted service of summons is proper.
2. Giving a copy of the summons to a messenger of a law firm, which was
not even the counsel of the defendant, cannot in any way be construed
as equivalent to service of summons on the defendant.
3. Other than valid service of summons on the defendant, the trial court can
still acquire jurisdiction over the defendant by his voluntary
appearance,11 in accordance with Section 20, Rule 14 of the Rules of
Court.

25