Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
LAGUILLES NOTES
on Civil Procedure Rules 1-39
General Provisions
These Rules shall apply in all the courts, except in election cases, land
registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other
cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character
and whenever practicable and convenient. (Sec. 1, Rule 1)
A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.
It is one which also governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, but
subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action.
▶ The liberal interpretation of the rules applies only to justifiable causes and
meritorious circumstances. (G.R. No. 207156, Turks Shawarma Co. v.
Pajaron, January 16, 2017)
▶ The rules of procedure are mere tools aimed at facilitating the attainment
of justice, rather than its frustration. A strict and rigid application of the rules
must always be eschewed when it would subvert the primary objective of the
rules, that is, to enhance fair trials and expedite justice. Technicalities should
never be used to defeat the substantive rights of the other party. Every party-
litigant must be afforded the amplest opportunity for the proper and just
determination of his cause, free from the constraints of technicalities.
Considering that there was substantial compliance, a liberal interpretation of
procedural rules in this labor case is more in keeping with the constitutional
mandate to secure social justice." (Ibid)
Inc)
Failure to State Cause of Action
▶ Whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid
judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer in the complaint. [De
Guzman v. Tabnagoi Realty, Inc., G.R. No. 154262, February 11, 2015]
▶ The inquiry is into the sufficiency, not the veracity, of the material
allegations, it follows that the analysis should be confined to the four corners
of the complaint, and no other. (Guillermo v. Philippine Information
Agency, G.R. No. 223751, March 15, 2017)
Q: Can a person institute more than one suit for a single cause of
action?
A: NO. A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of
action. (Sec. 3, Rule 2)
Q: What is the effect if two or more suits are instituted on the basis of
the same cause of action?
A: If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of
action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available
as a ground for the dismissal of the others. (Sec. 4, Rule 2)
1) There is another action pending between the same parties for the same
cause, or litis pendentia (Sec. 1[e]); or
2) If the first action has already been finally terminated, on the ground of res
judicata (Sec. 1[f]).
▶ The well-entrenched rule is that 'a party cannot, by varying the form of
action, or adopting a different method of presenting his case, escape the
operation of the principle that one and the same cause of action shall not be
twice litigated.' (FCD Pawnshop and Merchandising Co.v. Union Bank of
the Philippines, G.R. No. 207914, January 18, 2017)
▶ A cause of action may give rise to several reliefs, but only one action can
be filed. A single cause of action or entire claim or demand cannot be split
up or divided into two or more different actions. The rule on prohibiting the
splitting of a single cause of action is clear.” [Butiong Vs. Plazo, G.R. No.
187524, August 05, 2015]
▶ In Esperas v. CA, the Supreme Court held that the ultimate test in
determining the presence of identity of cause of action is to consider whether
the same evidence would support the cause of action in both the first and the
second cases. Under the same evidence test, when the same evidence
support and establish both the present and the former causes of action, there
is likely an identity of causes of action. [Riviera Golf Club, Inc., Vs. CCA
Holdings, B.V., G.R. No. 173783, June 17, 2015)
Two or more causes of action are joined in one complaint when they should
not have been joined. (Rule 2, Section 6)
▶ Where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or
different parties embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand
shall be the totality of the claims in all causes of action, irrespective of
whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions.”
Real Party in interest. — A real party in interest is the party who stands to
be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit. (Sec. 2, Rule 3)
▶ [I]f a suit is not brought in the name of or against the real party in interest,
a motion to dismiss may be filed on the ground that the complaint states no
cause of action." However, [the dismissal on this ground entails] an
examination of whether the parties presently pleaded are interested in the
outcome of the litigation, and not whether all persons interested in such
outcome are actually pleaded. The latter query is relevant in discussions
concerning indispensable and necessary parties, but not in discussions
concerning real parties in interest. Both indispensable and necessary parties
are considered as real parties in interest, since both classes of parties stand to
be benefited or injured by the judgment of the suit. (Spouses Lausv.
Optimum Security Services, Inc., G.R. No. 208343, February 3, 2016)
Real party in interest applies both to the plaintiff and defendant. The suit
may be dismissed if neither of them is a Real party in interest
Indispensable parties
Those without whom no final determination can be had of an action; they
must be joined under all conditions (Sec. 7, Rule 3)
▶ The nature of the solidary obligation under the surety does not make one
an indispensable party. An indispensable party is a party-in-interest without
whom no final determination can be had of an action, and who shall be
joined mandatorily either as plaintiffs or defendants. The presence of
indispensable parties is necessary to vest the court with jurisdiction, thus,
without their presence to a suit or proceeding, the judgment of a court cannot
attain real finality. The absence of an indispensable party renders all
subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to act, not
only as to the absent parties but even as to those present. (Living @ Sense,
Inc. Vs. Malayan Insurance Company, Inc. G.R. No. 193753. September 26,
2012)
The general rule with reference to the making of parties in a civil action
requires the joinder of all indispensable parties under any and all conditions,
their presence being a sine qua non of the exercise of judicial power. For this
reason, our Supreme Court has held that when it appears of record that there
are other persons interested in the subject matter of the litigation, who are
not made parties to the action, it is the duty of the court 1.) to suspend the
trial until such parties are made either plaintiffs or defendants. xxx 2.) Where
the petition failed to join as party defendant the person interested in
sustaining the proceeding in the court, the same should be dismissed. 3.)
When an indispensable party is not before the court, the action should be
dismissed.
even as to those present. (Guy v. Guy, G.R. No. 189486, September 05,
2012)
Joinder of Parties
Elements
(a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules
on joinder of parties;
(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions
governed by special rules;
(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but
pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be
allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided that:
1.) one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said
court and,
2.) the venue lies therein; and
(d) Where the claims in all the causes action are principally for
recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of
jurisdiction.
Necessary Parties
Are person who are not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party
if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a
complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action; may
or may not be joined (i.e. joint debtor is a necessary party in a suit against
his co-debtor) (Rule 3, Sec. 8).
▶ A necessary party's presence is not imperative, and his or her absence is
not debilitating. Nevertheless, it is preferred that they be included in order
that relief may be complete. (Caravan Travel and Tours International, Inc.
v. Abejar, G.R. No. 170631, February 10, 2016)
Indigent Parties
A party may be authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as an
indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application and hearing, is satisfied
that the party is one who has no money or property sufficient and available
for food, shelter and basic necessities for himself and his family. (Sec. 21,
Rule 3)
Requisites:
1) Party must have a gross income and that of their immediate family do not
exceed an amount double the monthly minimum wage of an employee; and
2) Party do not own real property with a fair market value as stated in the
current tax declaration of more than P300,000.00.
Such authority shall include an exemption from payment 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 was exempted from paying shall be a lien on any
judgment rendered in the case favorable to the indigent, unless the court
otherwise provides. (Rule 3, Sec. 21)
On the other hand, when the application does not satisfy one or both
requirements, then the application should not be denied outright; instead, the
court should apply the "indigency test" under Section 21 of Rule 3 and use
its sound discretion in determining the merits of the prayer for exemption
(Pangcatan v. Maghuyop, G.R. Nos. 194412 & 194566, November 16, 2016)
Alternative Defendants
Where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled
to relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative,
although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right to
relief against the other. (Rule 3, Section 13)
Class Suit
▶ Where the interests of the plaintiffs and the other members of the class
they seek to represent are diametrically opposed, the class suit will not
prosper. (Banda v. Ermita, G.R. No. 166620, April 20, 2010)
▶ The party bringing the class suit must have legal capacity to do so. (Chinese
Flour Importers Assoc. v. Price Stabilization Board, 9 Phil. 461).
Representative as parties
This rule is derived from Oposa v. Factoran, 7 where the Court held
that minors have the personality to sue on behalf of generations yet unborn:
First, they run the risk of foreclosing arguments of others who are
unable to take part in the suit, putting into question its
representativeness. Second, varying interests may potentially result in
arguments that are bordering on political issues, the resolutions of
which do not fall upon this court. Third, automatically allowing a
class or citizen's suit on behalf of minors and generations yet unborn
may result in the oversimplification of what may be a complex issue,
especially in light of the impossibility of determining future
generation's true interests on the matter.
In the answer of such defendant, the names and addresses of the persons
composing said entity must all be revealed. “(Rule 3, Sec. 15)
▶ In Ocampo v. Mendoza, the Supreme Court held that, for failing to show
that it is a juridical entity, endowed by law with the capacity to bring suits in
its own name, PISTON is devoid of any legal capacity to institute this
action. (G.R. No. 190431, January 31, 2017)
Whenever a party to a pending action dies AND the claim is not thereby
extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel:
1) To inform the court within 30 days after such death of the fact thereof;
and
2) To give the name and address of the deceased party's legal
representative/s. (Rule 16, Sec. 3)
The duty of counsel also applies to death of a party in cases pending appeal
▶ When a party to a pending action dies and the claim is not extinguished,
the Rules of Court require a substitution of the deceased in accordance with
Section 16 of Rule 3.
▶ The rule on the substitution of parties was crafted to protect every party's
right to due process. The estate of the deceased party will continue to be
properly represented in the suit through the duly appointed legal
representative. Moreover, no adjudication can be made against the successor
of the deceased if the fundamental right to a day in court is denied.”
▶ The purpose behind the rule on substitution is the protection of the right
of every party to due process. It is to ensure that the deceased party would
continue to be properly represented in the suit through the duly appointed
legal representative of his estate. Non-compliance with the rule on
substitution would render the proceedings and the judgment of the trial court
infirm because the court acquires no jurisdiction over the persons of the legal
representatives or of the heirs on whom the trial and the judgment would be
binding. (Cardenas v. Heirs of Spouses Aguilar, G.R. No. 1910749, March 2, 2016)
RULE 4. VENUE
Venue of real actions. — In the proper court which has jurisdiction over the
area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.”
Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the
municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property
involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.” (Sec. 1, Rule 4)
▶ In cases where the complaint assails only the terms, conditions, and/or
coverage of a written instrument and not its validity, the exclusive venue
stipulation contained therein shall still be binding on the parties, and thus,
the complaint may be properly dismissed on the ground of improper venue.
Conversely, therefore, a complaint directly assailing the validity of the
written instrument itself should not be bound by the exclusive venue
stipulation contained therein and should be filed in accordance with the
general rules on venue. To be sure, it would be inherently consistent for a
complaint of this nature to recognize the exclusive venue stipulation when it,
in fact, precisely assails the validity of the instrument in which such
stipulation is contained.” (Briones v. CA, GR. No. 204444, January 14,
2015)
▶ In Radiowealth Finance Co, Inc. v. Nolasco, the Supreme Court held that
the RTC carelessly interfered with the parties' agreement on the venue of
their dispute and interrupted what could have been an expeditious flow of
the proceeding. To reiterate, the choice of venue is a matter addressed to the
sound judgment of the parties based on considerations personal to them, i.e.,
convenience. It is only the parties who may raise objection on the same.
Absent such protest, it is an error for the RTC to decide that the venue was
improperly laid as it is tantamount to needlessly interfering to a mutually
agreed term. (G.R. No. 227146, November 14, 2016)
The procedure in the Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same as in the
Regional Trial Courts, except (a) where a particular provision expressly or
impliedly applies only to either of said courts, or (b) in civil cases governed
by the Rule on Summary Procedure.
RULE 6. PLEADINGS
Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of
the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.
Kinds Of Pleadings
▶ In case the defendant failed to file his answer, the court shall render
judgment, either motu proprio or upon plaintiff's motion, based solely on the
facts alleged in the complaint and limited to what is prayed for. The failure
of the defendant to timely file his answer and to controvert the claim against
him constitutes his acquiescence to every allegation stated in the complaint.
(Fairland Knitcraft Corp. v. Po, G.R. No. 217694, January 27, 2016)
Nature of a counterclaim
A counterclaim is in the nature of a cross complaint such that it must
be answered within 10 days from service. It is a cause of action
against plaintiff.
Exceptions:
If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters
so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental
complaint.
Caption. — The caption sets forth the name of the court, the title of the
action, and the docket number if assigned.
The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be
named in the original complaint or petition; but in subsequent 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 be indicated. (Sec. 1)
The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the
pleading; that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is
good ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for delay.
A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading
and that the allegations therein are true and correct of his knowledge and
belief.
In Chua v. People, (G.R. No. 216146, August 24, 2016, citing Fuji Television
v. Espiritu), the Supreme Court distinguished the effect of non-compliance
with the requirement of verification and non-forum shopping, to wit:
▶ In the case of natural persons, the rule requires the parties themselves to
sign the certification against forum shopping. The reason for such
requirement is that the petitioner himself knows better than anyone else
whether a separate case has been filed or pending which involves
▶ The application of the rules must be the general rule, and the suspension
or even mere relaxation of its application, is the exception. This Court may
go beyond the strict application of the rules only on exceptional cases when
there is truly substantial compliance with the rule. (Philippine Numismatic v.
Aquino, G.R. No. 206617, January 30, 2017)
Substantial Compliance
verification.”
On the other hand, as a rule, the certificate against forum shopping must be
signed by all plaintiffs or petitioners; otherwise, those who did not sign will
be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or justifiable situations,
such as when the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest and invoke
a common cause of action or defense, the signature of one of them in the
certificate against forum shopping is considered substantial compliance with
the rules. (Bacolor v. VL Makabali Hospital, Inc, G.R. No. 204325, April
18, 2016)
Exceptions:
Unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies them, and sets forth
what he claims to be the facts, but the requirement of an oath does not apply
when the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or
when compliance with an order for an inspection of the original instrument
is refused. (Rule 8, Section 8)
General Rule:
Exceptions:
Negative Defenses - The specific denial (Sec. 10, Rule 9) of the material
fact/s alleged in the pleading of the claimant essential to his cause/s of
action. (Sec. 5);
NEGATIVE PREGNANT
admitted."
DEFAULT
If the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the
court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending
party, and proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default.
Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant
such relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discretion
requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may be
delegated to the clerk of court. (Rule 9, Sec. 3)
Relief from order of default. — A party declared in default may at any time
after notice thereof and before judgment file a motion under oath to set aside
the order of default upon proper showing that his failure to answer was due
to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence and that he has a
meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may be set aside on
such terms and conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice.
(Rule 9, Sec. 3(b))
▶ The remedies of the motion to set aside order of default, motion for new
trial, and petition for relief from judgment are mutually exclusive, not
alternative or cumulative. This is to compel defendants to remedy their
default at the earliest possible opportunity. Depending on when the default
was discovered and whether a default judgment was already rendered, a
defendant declared in default may avail of only one of the three remedies.”
▶ Thus, if a defendant discovers his or her default before the trial court
renders judgment, he or she shall file a motion to set aside order of default.
If this motion to set aside order of default is denied, the defendant declared
in default cannot await the rendition of judgment, and he or she cannot file a
motion for new trial before the judgment becomes final and executory, or a
petition for relief from judgment after the judgment becomes final and
executory” (Lui Enterprises, In. v. Zuellig Pharma Corp., G.R. No. 193494,
March 12, 2014)
▶ The raison d'être in limiting the extent of relief that may be granted is
that it cannot be presumed that the defendant would not file an Answer and
allow himself to be declared in default had he known that the plaintiff will
be accorded a relief greater than or different in kind from that sought in the
Complaint. 38 No doubt, the reason behind Section 3 (d), Rule 9 of the
Rules of Court is to safeguard defendant's right to due process against
unforeseen and arbitrarily issued judgment. This, to the mind of this Court,
is akin to the very essence of due process. It embodies "the sporting idea of
fair play" 39 and forbids the grant of relief on matters where the defendant
was not given the opportunity to be heard thereon. (Leticia Diona, rep. By
her attorney-in-fact, Marcelina Diona Vs. Romeo A. Balangue, Sonny A.
Balangue, Reynaldo A. Balangue, and Esteban A. Balangue, Jr. G.R. No.
173559. January 7, 2013)
▶ The cause of action must exist at the time the action was begun, and the
plaintiff will not be allowed by an amendment to introduce a cause of action
which had no existence when the action was commenced. (Surigao Mine
Exploration Co. v. Harris, G.R. No. L-45543, May 17,1939)
court was unnecessary. Indeed, even if such a motion was filed, no hearing
was required therefor, because it is not a contentious motion. (G.R. No.
200042, July 7, 2016)
Rule 10 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Court allows the parties to supplement
their pleadings by setting forth transactions, occurrences, or events that
happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented.
When to file?
The motion for bill of particulars shall be filed before responding to a
pleading. Hence, it must be filed within the period granted by the Rules
(Rule 11) for the filing of a responsive pleading.
Upon the filing of the motion, the clerk of court must immediately bring it to
the attention of the court which may either deny or grant it outright, or allow
the parties the opportunity to be heard. (Rule 12, Section 2)
Effect of Noncompliance
If the plaintiff fails to obey, his complaint may be dismissed with prejudice
UNLESS otherwise ordered by the court (Rule 12, Sec. 4; Rule 17, Section
3);
If defendant fails to obey, his answer will be stricken off and his
counterclaim dismissed, and he will be declared in default upon motion of
the plaintiff (Rule 12, Section 4; Rule 17, Section 4; Rule 9, Sec. 3).
RULE 13. Filing and Service of Pleadings, Judgments and Other Papers
Filing is the act of presenting the pleading or other paper to the clerk of
court.
Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or paper
concerned. If any party has appeared by counsel, service upon him shall be
made upon his counsel or one of them, unless service upon the party himself
is ordered by the court. Where one counsel appears for several parties, he
shall only be entitled to one copy of any paper served upon him by the
opposite side. (Sec. 2, Rule 13)
mail when such service, when adopted, ensures as in this case receipt by the
adverse party. (G.R. No. 178789, November 14, 2012, Lim v. NAPOCOR)
Petitioner's delay in filing the motion for reconsideration was far from
being intentional and dilatory. Petitioner simply followed its usual mode of
filing its pleadings, which had been previously acceptable to the
Commission. The Energy Regulatory Commission itself adopts a liberal
policy in the construction of its Rules of Practice and Procedure "to secure
the most expeditious and least expensive determination of every proceeding .
. . on its merits." 68 Hence, the Commission should have given due course to
What is summons?
▶ Under the old rule, the distinction between the nature of actions was
important for it determines the mode of service of summons to be made.
However, in Santos v. PNOC (G.R. No. 170943, September 23, 2008), the
Supreme Court held that the in rem/in personam distinction was significant
under the old rule because it was silent as to the kind of action to which the
rule was applicable. Because of this silence, the court limited the application
of the old rule to in rem actions only. This has been changed. The present
rule expressly states that it applied to any action where the defendant is
designated as unknown owner, or the like, or whenever his whereabouts
Voluntary appearance
▶ While Rule 14, Section 20 of the Rules of Court provides that voluntary
appearance is equivalent to service of summons, the same rule also provides
that "[t]he inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds aside from lack
of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall not be deemed a
voluntary appearance. Sunrise Garden Corp. v. Court of Appeals, (G.R. Nos.
158836, 158967, 160726 & 160778, September 30, 2015)
The appearance of respondent First Alliance Real Estate Development, Inc. and K-
Personal service
Whenever practicable, the summons shall be served by handling a copy
thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and sign for it,
by tendering it to him. (Rule 14, Section 6)
Substituted service
If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a reasonable
time as provided in the preceding section, service may be effected (a) by
leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's residence with some
person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by leaving
the copies at defendant's office or regular place of business with some
competent person in charge thereof. (Rule 14, Section 7)
First, the party relying on substituted service or the sheriff must establish the
impossibility of prompt personal service. Before substituted service of
summons can be resorted to, the sheriff must have made several attempts to
personally serve the summons within a reasonable period of one month. And
by "several attempts," the sheriff is expected to have tried at least thrice on
at least two different dates.
When the defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and
the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff or relates to, or the
subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in which the defendant
has or claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent, or in which the relief
demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from any
interest therein, or the property of the defendant has been attached within the
Philippines, service may, by leave of court, be effected out of the Philippines
by personal service as under section 6; or by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in such places and for such time as the court may order,
in which case a copy of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by
registered mail to the last known address of the defendant, or in any other
manner the court may deem sufficient. Any order granting such leave shall
specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than sixty (60) days after
notice, within which the defendant must answer. (Rule 14, Section 15)
The Court had acquired jurisdiction over said defendant, through service of
the summons addressed to him upon Mrs. Schenker, it appearing from said
answer that she is the representative and attorney-in-fact of her husband. She
had authority to sue, and had actually sued on behalf of her husband.
(Gemerple v. Schenker, G.R. No. L-18164 January 23, 1967)
However, in the case Valmonte v. CA, Mrs. Valmonte did not appoint Mr.
Valmonte as her attorney-in-fact to represent her in litigations and in court.
Mr. Valmonte was merely acting as his wife's counsel in negotiations with
but this cannot be construed as an authorization. (Valmonte v. CA, G.R. No.
108538. January 22, 1996)
Proof of service
Rule 14, Section 18. Proof of service. — The proof of service of a summons
shall be made in writing by the server and shall set forth the manner, place,
and date of service; shall specify any papers which have been served with
the process and the name of the person who received the same; and shall be
sworn to when made by a person other than a sheriff or his deputy.
Rule 14, Section 19. Proof of service by publication. — If the service has
been made by publication, service may be proved by the affidavit of the
printer, his foreman or principal clerk, or of the editor, business or
advertising manager, to which affidavit a copy of the publication shall be
attached and by an affidavit showing the deposit of a copy of the summons
and order for publication in the post office, postage prepaid, directed to the
defendant by registered mail to his last known address.
Under the rules on Small Claims Cases a motion is an oral or written request
asking for an affirmative action from the court, that includes a letter.
Form
All motions shall be in writing except those made in open court or in the
course of a hearing or trial. (Rule 15, Section 2)
Except for motions which the court may act upon without prejudicing the
rights of the adverse party, every written motion shall be set for hearing by
the applicant.
Every written motion required to be heard and the notice of the hearing
thereof shall be served in such a manner as to ensure its receipt by the other
party at least three (3) days before the date of hearing, unless the court for
good cause sets the hearing on shorter notice. (Rule 15, Section 4)
Exception
Motions arguing that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter,
that there is another action pending between the same parties for the same
cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment or by statute of
limitations (Rule 9, Section 1)
Litigated Motions
They are motions which the court may not act upon without prejudicing the
rights of the adverse party. Made with notice to the adverse party to give an
opportunity to oppose e.g., motion for reconsideration, motion to dismiss
motion to declare defendant in default.
Ex Parte Motions
They are motions which the court may act upon without prejudicing the
rights of the adverse party. Made without the presence or a notification to the
other party because the question generally presented is not debatable e.g.,
motion for extension of time to file answer, motion for postponement,
motion for extension of time to file record on appeal.
Section 1, Rule 9 provides for only four instances when the court may motu
proprio dismiss the claim, namely: (a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter; (b) litis pendentia; (c) res judicata; and (d) prescription of action.
▶ The ground for dismissal must be evident from the pleadings or from the
evidence on record before a Court can dismiss a case motu proprio. (De
Leon v. Chu, G.R. No. 186522, September 2, 2015)
Resolution of motion
After the hearing, the court may dismiss the action or claim, deny the
motion, or order the amendment of the pleading. The court shall not defer
the resolution of the motion for the reason that the ground relied upon is not
indubitable. (Rule 16, Sec. 3)
a. Res judicata;
b. Extinguishment of the claim or demand;
c. Prescription; or
d. Unenforceability of the claim
If no motion to dismiss has been filed, any of the grounds for dismissal
provided for in this Rule may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the
answer and, in the discretion of the court, a preliminary hearing may be had
thereon as if a motion to dismiss had been filed. (Rule 16, Sec. 6)
Bar by dismissal
The action can no longer be re-filed if it was dismissed on the grounds of:
a. Res judicata;
b. Extinguishment of the claim or demand;
c. Prescription; or
d. Unenforceability of the claim
Two-Dismissal Rule
(1) There was a previous case that was dismissed by a competent court;
(2) Both cases were based on or include the same claim;
(3) Both notices for dismissal were filed by the plaintiff; and
(4) When the motion to dismiss filed by the plaintiff was consented to by
the defendant on the ground that the latter paid and satisfied all the
claims of the former.
If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the
presentation of his evidence in chief on the complaint, or to prosecute his
action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply with these Rules or
any order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the
defendant or upon the court's own motion, without prejudice to the right of
the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or in a separate
action. This dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the
merits, unless otherwise declared by the court. (Rule 17, Sec. 3)
Test of Non-prosequitur
This Court has said that "[t]he fundamental test for non prosequitur is
whether, under the circumstances, the plaintiff is chargeable with want of
due diligence in failing to proceed with reasonable promptitude. There must
be unwillingness on the part of the plaintiff to prosecute."
Likewise —
While a court can dismiss a case on the ground of non prosequitur, the real
test of such power is whether, under the circumstances, plaintiff is
chargeable with want of due diligence in failing to proceed with reasonable
promptitude. In the absence of a pattern or a scheme to delay the
disposition of the case or a wanton failure to observe the mandatory
requirement of the rules on the part of the plaintiff, . . . courts should decide
to dispense rather than wield their authority to dismiss. (Laurel v.
Vardeleon, G.R. No. 202967, August 15, 2015)
The provisions of this Rule shall apply to the dismissal of any counterclaim,
cross-claim, or third-party complaint. A voluntary dismissal by the claimant
by notice as in section 1 of this Rule, shall be made before a responsive
pleading or a motion for summary judgment is served or, if there is none,
before the introduction of evidence at the trial or hearing. (Rule 17, Sec. 4)
Concept of Pre-Trial
Pre -trial is a mandatory procedural device by which the court is called upon,
after the filing of the last pleading, to compel the parties and their lawyers to
appear before it for the purposes enumerated under Section 2, Rule 18.
After the last pleading has been served and filed, if shall be the duty of the
plaintiff to promptly move ex parte that the case be set for pre-trial.
The motion is to be filed within 5 days after the last pleading joining the
issue has been served and filed (Admin. Circular No. 3-99, Jan. 15, 1999).
If the plaintiff fails to file said motion within the given period, the Clerk of
Court shall issue a notice of pre-trial. (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, Re: Pre-trial
guidelines, Effective August 16, 2004)
The plaintiff need not wait until the last pleading has been actually served
and filed as the expiration of the period for filing the last pleading will
suffice. (Sarmiento v. Juan, No. 56605 January 28, 1983).
Notice of pre-trial
The notice 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 party represented by him. (Sec. 3, Rule 18)
Appearance of parties
It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsel to appear at the pre-trial.
The non-appearance of a party may be excused only if a valid cause is
shown therefor or if a representative shall appear in his behalf fully
authorized in writing to enter into an amicable settlement, to submit to
alternative modes of dispute resolution, and to enter into stipulations or
admissions of facts and of documents. (Sec. 4, Rule 18)
The failure of the plaintiff to appear when so required pursuant to the next
preceding section shall be cause for dismissal of the action. The dismissal
shall be with prejudice, unless other-wise ordered by the court. A similar
failure on the part of the defendant shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to
present his evidence ex parte and the court to render judgment on the basis
thereof. (Sec. 5, Rule 18)
The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party, in such
manner as shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three (3) days before the
date of the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial briefs which shall contain,
among others:
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to
appear at the pre-trial.
▶ Clearly, the said Rules command, in no uncertain terms, the filing of the
preliminary conference brief and compliance with the required contents of
the said brief. By the Rules' express language, the failure to comply
therewith shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the preliminary
conference which, in turn, shall be a sufficient cause for the dismissal of the
protest. (Cabrera v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 182084, October 8, 2008)
Within five (5) days from date of filing of the reply, the plaintiff must
promptly move ex parte that the case be set for pre-trial conference. If the
plaintiff fails to file said motion within the given period, the Branch COC
shall issue a notice of pre-trial.
Reading A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC together with Rule 17, Section 3 and Rule 18,
Section 1 of the Rules of Court accommodates the outright dismissal of a
complaint upon plaintiff's failure to show justifiable reason for not setting the
case for pre-trial within the period provided by the Rules. Thus, trial courts
must consider the facts of each case.
This court has allowed cases to proceed despite failure by the plaintiff to
promptly move for pre-trial when it finds that "the extreme sanction of
dismissal of the complaint might not be warranted":
It must be stressed that even if the plaintiff fails to promptly move for
pre-trial without any justifiable cause for such delay, the extreme
sanction of dismissal of the complaint might not be warranted if no
substantial prejudice would be caused to the defendant, and there are
special and compelling reasons which would make the strict
application of the rule clearly unjustified.
xxx xxx xxx
This is not to say that adherence to the Rules could be dispensed with.
However, exigencies and situations might occasionally demand
flexibility in their application. Indeed, on several occasions, the Court
relaxed the rigid application of the rules of procedure to afford the
parties opportunity to fully ventilate the merits of their cases. This is
in line with the time-honored principle that cases should be decided
only after giving all parties the chance to argue their causes and
defenses. Technicality and procedural imperfection should thus not
serve as basis of decisions.
Nature:
Intervention is ancillary and supplemental to an existing action. Hence, it
cannot exist independent of the principal action and the dismissal of the
latter shall also cause the dismissal of the complaint-in-intervention.
Note:
Intervention is a prohibited pleading in forcible entry and unlawful detainer
cases under Sec. 13, Rule 70.
A person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success
of either of the parties, or an interest against both, or is so situated as to be
adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the
custody of the court or of an officer thereof may, with leave of court, be
allowed to intervene in the action. The court shall consider whether or not
the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights
of the original parties, and whether or not the intervenor's rights may be fully
protected in a separate proceeding. (Rule 18, Sec. 1)
A leave of court is necessary in order that the third party may be allowed to
intervene in the action.
An intervention cannot legally alter the nature of the action and the issue
joined by the original parties. (Clardidades v. Mercader, G.R. No. L-20341,
May 14, 1966)
Time to intervene
1) Appeal;
2) File a petition for mandamus if there is grave abuse of discretion.
3) If the grant of intervention is improper, the remedy available to the
parties is Certiorari.
4) File a separate action
The Court explained in Ongco v. Dalisay that "the period within which a
person may intervene is restricted and after the lapse of the period set in
Section 2, Rule 19, intervention will no longer be warranted. This is
because, basically, intervention is not an independent action but is
ancillary and supplemental to an existing litigation."
In Ongco, the Court further traced the developments of the present rule on
the period to file a motion for intervention. The former rule was that
intervention may be allowed "before or during a trial." Thus, there were
Court rulings that a motion for leave to intervene may be filed "before or
during a trial," even on the day when the case is submitted for decision as
long as it will not unduly delay the disposition of the case. There were also
rulings where the Court interpreted "trial" in the restricted sense such that
the Court upheld the denial of the motion for intervention when it was
filed after the case had been submitted for decision. In Lichauco v. CA,
intervention was allowed at any time after the rendition of the final
judgment. In one exceptional case, the Court allowed the intervention in a
case pending before it on appeal in order to avoid injustice.
To cure these inconsistent rulings, the Court clarified in Ongco that "[t]he
uncertainty in these rulings has been eliminated by the present Section 2,
Rule 19, which permits the filing of the motion to intervene at any time
before the rendition of the judgment, in line with the ruling in Lichauco.
The Court held in Ongco that under the present rules, [t]he period within
which a person may intervene is also restricted. . . after the lapse of this
period, it will not be warranted anymore. This is because, basically,
intervention is not an independent action but is ancillary and supplemental
to an existing litigation.
The Court further held in Ongco that "there is wisdom in strictly enforcing
the period set by Rule 19 of the Rules of Court for the filing of a motion
for intervention. Otherwise, undue delay would result from many belated
filings of motions for intervention after judgment has already been
rendered, because a reassessment of claims would have to be done. Thus,
those who slept on their lawfully granted privilege to intervene will be
rewarded, while the original parties will be unduly prejudiced."
Subpoena
Subpoena ad testificandum
Ordinary subpoena. Requires a person to whom the order is directed to
attend and to testify at the hearing or the trial of an action or at any
investigation conducted by a competent authority or for the taking of his
deposition. It is used to compel a person to testify. (Roco v. Contreras, et.al.,
supra)
Service of subpoena
Service of a subpoena shall be made 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 whom it is served, tendering to him the
fees for one day's attendance and the kilometrage allowed by these Rules,
except that, when a subpoena is issued by or on behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines or an officer or agency thereof, the tender need not be made. The
service must be made so as to allow the witness a reasonable time for
preparation and travel to the place of attendance. If the subpoena is duces
tecum, the reasonable cost of producing the books, documents or things
demanded shall also be tendered. (Rule 21, Sec.6)
required, and the cost of such warrant and seizure of such witness shall be
paid by the witness if the court issuing it shall determine that his failure to
answer the subpoena was willful and without just excuse. (Rule 21, Sec.8)
The provisions of sections 8 and 9 of this Rule shall not apply to a witness
who resides more than one hundred (100) kilometers 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 which his case is pending
was obtained. (Rule 21, Sec.10)
Quashing of subpoena
1) It is unreasonable or oppressive;
2) The relevancy of the books, documents or things does not appear;
3) The person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the
reasonable cost of the production thereof; or
4) The witness fees and the kilometrage allowed by these Rules were not
tendered when the subpoena was served.
1) The witness is not bound thereby; where the residence is more than
100km from place of trial.
2) The witness fees and the kilometrage allowed by these Rules were not
tendered when the subpoena was served.
Modes of discovery
The modern pre-trial procedure by which one party gains vital information
concerning the case in order to aid him in his litigation. (Riguera 2013,
citing Steven Gifis, Law Dictionary 61 [1975]).
Purpose: to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the parties, to
ascertain the facts relative to the issues and enable the parties to obtain the
fullest possible knowledge of issues and facts before civil trials.
The primary purpose of discovery is to enable the parties to obtain the fullest
possible knowledge of the issues and facts before trial and thus prevent the
situation where trials are carried on in the dark. It makes the parties lay
down their cards on the table so that justice can be rendered on the merits of
the case. (Riguera 2013, citing Koh v. IAC, 144 SCRA 259).
Availing modes of discovery is not mandatory but the failure to avail may be
sanctioned under Rules 25 and 26.
Rules 27 and 28 always require prior leave of court, unlike other modes of
discovery which could be availed of without leave of court as long as the
defendant has filed or served a responsive pleading.
upon written interrogatories. The term deposition also refers to the testimony
or statement so taken. (Riguera 2013)
The purpose for which a deposition may be used depends on who the
deponent is and on who will be using the deposition. Rule 23, Section 4(c)
lays down the relevant rules:
b) The deposition of a party or of anyone who at the time of the taking the
deposition was an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or
private corporation, partnership, or association which is a party may
be used by an adverse party for any purpose.
c) The deposition of a witness, whether or not a party, may be used by any
party for any purpose if the court finds:
(3) that the witness is unable to attend or testify because of age, sickness,
infirmity, or imprisonment;
(4) that the party offering the deposition has been unable to procure the
attendance of the witness by subpoena; or
(5) upon application and notice, that such exceptional circumstance exist
as to make it desirable, in the interest of justice and with due regard
to the importance of presenting the testimony of the witness orally in
open court, to allow the deposition to be used. (Rule 23, Section 4)
General rule:
Plaintiff may not be permitted to take depositions before answer is served.
Reason: He must wait for the joinder of issues because only this time that it
Scope of Examination
Applies also for depositions under Rule 24
1) Not privileged;
2) Relevant to the subject of the pending action;
3) Not restricted by court order for the protection of parties and
deponents;
4) Not meant to annoy, embarrass or oppress the deponent or party.
(a) As to notice. — All errors and irregularities in the notice for taking a
deposition are waived unless written objection is promptly served
upon the party giving the notice.
At any time during the taking of the deposition, on motion or petition of any
party or of the deponent, and upon a showing that the examination is being
conducted in bad faith or in such manner as unreasonably to annoy,
embarrass, or oppress the deponent or party, the court in which the action is
pending or the Regional Trial Court of the place where the deposition is
being taken may order the officer conducting the examination to cease
forthwith from taking the deposition, or may limit the scope and manner of
the taking of the deposition, as provided in section 16 of this Rule. If the
order made terminates the examination, it shall be resumed thereafter only
upon the order of the court in which the action is pending. Upon demand of
the objecting party or deponent, the taking of the deposition shall be
suspended for the time necessary to make a notice for an order. In granting
or refusing such order, the court may impose upon either party or upon the
witness the requirement to pay such costs or expenses as the court may deem
reasonable. (Rule 23, Sec. 18)
Under the same conditions specified in section 1 of Rule 23, any party
desiring to elicit material and relevant facts from any adverse parties shall
file and serve upon the latter written interrogatories to be answered by the
party served or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a
partnership or association, by any officer thereof competent to testify in its
behalf. (Rule 25, Sec. 1)
proponent of the question may prefer. The proponent may thereafter apply to
the proper court of the place where the deposition is being taken, for an
order to compel an answer. The same procedure may be availed of when a
party or a witness refuses to answer any interrogatory submitted under Rules
23 or 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 order, including attorney's fees.
If the application is denied and the court finds that it was filed without
substantial justification, the court may require the proponent or the counsel
advising the filing of the 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. Rule 29, Sec. 1)
Unless thereafter allowed by the court for good cause shown and to prevent
a failure of justice, a party not served with written interrogatories may not be
compelled by the adverse party to give testimony in open court, or to give a
deposition pending appeal. (Rule 25, Sec. 6)
At any time after issues have been joined, a party may file and serve upon
any other party may file and serve upon any other party a written request for
the admission by the latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant
document described in and exhibited with the request or of the truth of any
material and relevant matter of fact set forth in the request. Copies of the
documents shall be delivered with the request unless copy have already been
furnished. (Rule 26, Sec. 1)
▶ A request for admission must be served directly upon the party requested.
Otherwise, that party cannot be deemed to have admitted the genuineness of
any relevant matters of fact set forth therein on account of failure to answer
the request for admission. (Riguera 2013, citing Lañada vs. CA, 1 February
2002).
Exceptions:
1. The requested party files and serves upon the party requesting the
admission a sworn statement either specifically denying or setting
forth in detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully either admit or
deny those matters., within a period designated in the request, which
shall not be less than 15 days after service thereof or within such
further time as the court may allow on motion.
2. When the request for admission is not directly served upon the party
requested, the party requested cannot be deemed to have admitted the
genuineness of any relevant matters of fact set forth therein on
account of failure to answer the request for admission. (Riguera
2013, citing Lañada vs. CA, 1 February 2002).
If a party after being served with a request under Rule 26 to admit the
genuineness of any document or the truth of any matter of fact serves a
sworn denial thereof and if the party requesting the admissions thereafter
proves the genuineness of such document or the truth of any such matter of
fact, he may apply to the court for an order requiring the other party to pay
him the reasonable expenses incurred in making such proof, including
attorney's fees. Unless the court finds that there were good reasons for the
denial or that admissions sought were of no substantial importance, such
order shall be issued. (Rule 29, Sec. 4)
Effect of admission
Any admission made by a party pursuant to such request is for the purpose
of the pending action only and shall not constitute an admission by him for
any other purpose nor may the same be used against him in any other
proceeding. (Rule 26, Sec. 3)
Unless otherwise allowed by the court for good cause shown and to prevent
a failure of justice a party who fails to file and serve a request for admission
on the adverse party of material and relevant facts at issue which are, or
ought to be, within the personal knowledge of the latter, shall not be
permitted to present evidence on such facts. (Rule 26, Sec. 5)
Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor, the court in which
an action is pending may (a) order any party to produce and permit the
inspection and copying or photographing, by or on behalf of the moving
party, of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,
photographs, objects or tangible things, not privileged, which constitute or
contain evidence material to any matter involved in the action and which are
in his possession, custody or control, or (b) order any party to permit entry
upon designated land or other property in his possession or control for the
purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property
or any designated relevant object or operation thereon. The order shall
specify the time, place and manner of making the inspection and taking
copies and photographs, and may prescribe such terms and conditions as are
just. (Rule 27, Sec. 1)
Requisites:
controversy, the court in which the action is pending may in its discretion,
order him to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician.
Since the results of the examination are intended to be made public, the same
are not covered by the physician-patient privilege. Furthermore such
examination is not necessary to treat or cure the patient but to assess the
extent of injury or to evaluate his physical or mental condition (Rule 130,
Sec. 24[c]).
Requisites:
Requisites:
1. Physical or mental condition must be the subject of controversy.
2. Motion showing good cause must be filed.
3. Notice of motion must be given to the party to be examined and to all
other parties.
A party examined waives any privilege he may have in that action or any
other involving the same controversy:
1) By requesting and obtaining a report of the examination so ordered; or
2) By taking the deposition of the examiner.
Where the party examined requests and obtains a report on the results of the
examination, the consequences are that:
1) He has to furnish the other party a copy of the report of any previous
or subsequent examination of the same physical and mental
examination; and
Rules 27 and 28 always require prior leave of court, unlike other modes of
discovery which could be availed of without leave of court as long as the
defendant has filed or served a responsive pleading.
Sanctions:
The remedies above are available under Rule 23 and Rule 25.
1. Order that the matters regarding which questions were asked shall be
taken to be established for purposes of the action in accordance with
the claim of the party obtaining the order;
2. Refuse to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated
claims or defenses;
3. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party;
4. In lieu of the foregoing orders or in addition thereto, an order directing
the arrest of any party or agent of any party for disobeying any such
orders, except an order to submit to a physical or mental examination.
The court upon proper application may order the former to pay the
reasonable expenses in making such proof, including attorney's fees.
If:
1. A party requests for the admission of either:
a. the genuineness of any document, or
b. the truth of any matter of fact
2. The party requested refuses to admit the same and thereafter serves a
sworn denial thereof, and;
3. Later, the party requesting for admission proves the genuineness or
truthfulness, as the case may be; then, the party requesting for the
admission may apply to the court for an order requiring the adverse
party to pay reasonable expenses incurred in making such proof,
including attorney's fees.
1.Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party;
2. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party;
3. Order him to pay reasonable expenses incurred, including attorney's fees.
Other sanctions:
1. Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed;
2. Dismiss the action or proceeding;
3. Arrest the disobedient party or his agent.
Note:
The Republic of the Philippines cannot be required to pay expenses and
attorney's fees under this Rule. The matter of how and when the above
sanctions should be applied is one that primarily rests on the sound
discretion of the court where the case is pending.
In a limited sense, trial refers to the stage of a case when the parties present
their evidence before the court up to the point when the case is deemed
submitted for decision. (Riguera 2013)
General rule: A court may adjourn a trial from day to day, and to any stated
time
Exception: The court can go beyond the period provided by law when
authorized in writing by the Court Administrator of the Supreme Court.
The parties to any action may agree, in writing, upon the facts involved in
the litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts agreed upon,
without the introduction of evidence.
If the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the trial shall be held
as to the disputed facts in such order as the court shall prescribe. (Rule 30,
Sec.6)
Subject to the provisions of section 2 of Rule 31, and unless the court for
special reasons otherwise directs, the trial shall be limited to the issues stated
in the pre-trial order and shall proceed as follows:
When proper
If the defendant instead of filing a motion to dismiss files an answer,
invoking the ground as an affirmative defense.
Consolidation.
Separate trials.
The judge of the court where the case is pending shall personally receive the
evidence to be adduced by the parties. However, in default or ex parte
hearings, and in any case where the parties agree in writing, the court may
delegate the reception of evidence to its clerk of court who is a member of
the bar. The clerk of court shall have no power to rule on objections to any
question or to the admission of exhibits, which objections shall be resolved
by the court upon submission of his report and the transcripts within ten (10)
days from termination of the hearing. (Rule 30, Section 9)
Who is a commissioner?
By written consent of both parties, the court may order any or all of the
issues in a case to be referred 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, an auditor and an examiner. (Rule 32,
Section 1)
b) Powers of the commissioner
Report of commissioner
Upon the filing of the report, the parties shall be notified by the clerk, and
they shall be allowed ten (10) days within which to signify grounds of
objections to the findings of the report, if they so desire. Objections to the
report based upon grounds which were available to the parties during the
proceedings before the commissioner, other than objections to the findings
and conclusions therein, set forth, shall not be considered by the court unless
they were made before the commissioner. (Rule 32, Section 10)
Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days referred to in the
preceding section, the report shall be set for hearing, after which the court
shall issue an order adopting, modifying, or rejecting the report in whole or
in part, or recommitting it with instructions, or requiring the parties to
present further evidence before the commissioner or the court. (Rule 32,
Section 11)
▶ A demurrer to evidence may be issued when, upon the facts and the law,
the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. Where the plaintiff's evidence
together with such inferences and conclusions as may reasonably be drawn
therefrom does not warrant recovery against the defendant, a demurrer to
evidence should be sustained. A demurrer to evidence is likewise sustainable
when, admitting every proven fact favorable to the plaintiff and indulging in
his favor all conclusions fairly and reasonably inferable therefrom, the
plaintiff has failed to make out one or more of the material elements of his
case, or when there is no evidence to support an allegation necessary to his
claim. It should be sustained where the plaintiff's evidence is prima facie
1. Defendant shall have the right to present evidence. (Rule 33, Section 1)
2. The date for reception of defendant's evidence should be set.
3.The order is interlocutory and therefore not appealable but can be subject
of petition for certiorari in case of grave abuse of discretion or
oppressive exercise of judicial authority.
Effect of grant
What is a judgment?
These are statement of facts and not conclusions of law. Statement of facts in
judgment must contain not only the ultimate facts. The supporting
evidentiary facts must as well be established. This rule, however, does not
require that the court shall state in its decision all the facts found in the
records. (Riano 2011, citing People vs. Derpo, 168 SCRA 447, 455).
Contents of a judgment
I) The opinion of the court – Contains the findings of facts and conclusions
of law;
II) The disposition of the case – The final and actual disposition of the
rights litigated (the dispositive part); and
III) Signature of the judge (Herrera, p. 145)
Judgment without trial
Default judgment –
when the defendant has not responded to a summons or has failed to appear
before a court of law.
When made?
If no appeal or motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed within the
time provided in these Rules, the judgment or final order shall forthwith be
entered by the clerk in the book of entries of judgments. The date of finality
of the judgment or final order shall be deemed to be the date of its entry. The
record shall contain the dispositive part of the judgment or final order and
shall be signed by the clerk, within a certificate that such judgment or final
order has become final and executory. (Rule 36, Section 2)
It is the starting point of the 6-month period for filing a petition for relief
(Sec. 3 Rule 38), the 5-year period for filing a motion for execution (Sec. 6
Rule 39), and the 10-year period for filing an action for revival of judgment
(Art. 1144 Civil Code). (Riguera 2013)
KINDS OF JUDGMENT:
One rendered to record some judicial act done at a former time but which
was not carried into the record. Since the only function of a nunc pro tunc
judgment or order is to place into the record a judicial action actually taken,
it cannot correct judicial errors, however flagrant and glaring these may be.
(Riguera 2013, citing Henderson vs. Tan, 87 Phil. 466), nor can it construe
what a judgment means. (Ibid., citing Lichauco vs. Tan Po, 51 Phil. 862).
This kind of judgment presupposes that there are several claims for relief
presented in a single action. The court may render separate judgment on one
of the several claims. The judgment will terminate the action with respect to
that claim and the action shall proceed as to the remaining claims. The court
may stay the execution of the separate judgment until the rendition of a
judgment on all the other claims. (Riano 2011, citing Sec. 5 Rule 36)
Memorandum decision
It is a decision of appellate court which adopts the true findings of fact and
conclusion of fact and conclusion of the trial court if it is affirming the
latter's decision.
Appeal on either is not allowed unless the court allows the appeal. (Sec. 1(g)
Rule 41).
The judgment shall set out their individual or proper names if known.
▶ But like any other rule, it has exceptions, namely: (1) the correction of
clerical errors; (2) the so-called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party; (3) void judgments; and (4) whenever circumstances
transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust and
inequitable. (Gomeo Metal Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 202531,
August 17, 2016 citing FGU Insurance v. Regional Trial Court, 659 Phil.
117, 123 (2011))
A judgment becomes final and executory upon the expiration of the period to
appeal therefrom and no appeal has been perfected (Sec. 1 Rule 39)
The judgment attains finality by the lapse of the period for taking an appeal
without such appeal or motion for reconsideration being filed.
Law of the case has been defined as the opinion delivered on a former
appeal, and means, more specifically, that whatever is once irrevocably
established as the controlling legal rule of decision between the same parties
in the same case continues to be the law of the case, whether correct on
general principles or not, so long as the facts on which such decision was
predicated continue to be the facts of the case before the court.
▶ The doctrine of law of the case simply means, therefore, that when an
appellate court has once declared the law in a case, its declaration continues
to be the law of that case even on a subsequent appeal, notwithstanding that
the rule thus laid down may have been reversed in other cases. For practical
considerations, indeed, once the appellate court has issued a pronouncement
on a point that was presented to it with full opportunity to be heard having
been accorded to the parties, the pronouncement should be regarded as the
law of the case and should not be reopened on remand of the case to
determine other issues of the case, like damages. But the law of the case, as
the name implies, concerns only legal questions or issues thereby
adjudicated in the former appeal. (Development Bank of the Philippines
INTERLOCUTORY
Conversely, an order that does not finally dispose of the case, and does not
end the Court's task of adjudicating the parties' contentions and determining
their rights and liabilities as regards each other, but obviously indicates that
other things remain to be done by the Court, is "interlocutory," e.g., an order
denying a motion to dismiss under Rule 16 of the Rules . . . Unlike a "final"
judgment or order, which is appealable, as above pointed out, an
"interlocutory" order may not be questioned on appeal except only as part of
an appeal that may eventually be taken from the final judgment rendered in
the case. (Heirs of Dimaampao v. Alug, G.R. No. 198223, February 18,
2015)
Post-judgment remedies
Remedies against judgment or final orders:
Before finality
1) Motion for new trial or reconsideration (Rule 37)
2) Appeal
3) Reopening of the case
After finality
1) Relief from judgment (Rule 38)
2) Annulment of judgment (Rule 47)
3) Special Civil Action for Certiorari (Rule 65)
4) Collateral attack
▶ For a full-blown trial to be dispensed with, the party who moves for
summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating clearly the absence of
genuine issues of fact, or that the issue posed is patently insubstantial as to
constitute a genuine issue.
▶ Genuine issue means an issue of fact which calls for the presentation of
evidence as distinguished from an issue which is fictitious or contrived.
(Republic v. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp., G.R. No. 209324, December 9,
2015)
Burden of proof
▶ The party who moves for summary judgment has the burden of
demonstrating clearly the absence of any genuine issue of fact, or that the
issue posed in the complaint is patently unsubstantial so as not to constitute a
genuine issue for trial. Trial courts have limited authority to render summary
judgments and may do so only when there is clearly no genuine issue as to
any material fact. When the facts as pleaded by the parties are disputed or
contested, proceedings for summary judgment cannot take the place of trial.
(Yap v. Siao, G.R. Nos. 212493 & 212504, June 1, 2016)
In actions for:
a. Declaration of nullity of marriage
b. Annulment of marriage
c. Legal separation
Exhibits to Support the Motion for Summary Judgment
If on motion under this Rule, judgment is not rendered upon the whole case
or for all the reliefs sought and a trial is necessary, the court at the hearing of
the motion, by examining the pleadings and the evidence before it and by
interrogating counsel shall ascertain what material facts exist without
substantial controversy and what are actually and in good faith controverted.
It shall thereupon make an order specifying the facts that appear without
substantial controversy, including the extent to which the amount of
damages or other relief is not in controversy, and directing such further
proceedings in the action as are just. The facts so specified shall be deemed
established, and the trial shall be conducted on the controverted facts
accordingly. (Rule 35, Section 4)
A judgment not on the entire case but only on the specified factual issues,
with the court proceeding to try the other factual issues Note: Propriety of
Summary Judgment may be corrected only on appeal or other direct review,
not by certiorari.
Should it appear to its satisfaction at any time that any of the affidavits
presented pursuant to this Rule are presented in bad faith, or solely for the
purpose of delay, the court shall forthwith order the offending party or
counsel to pay to the other party the amount of the reasonable expenses
which the filing of the affidavits caused him to incur including attorney's
fees, it may, after hearing further adjudge the offending party or counsel
guilty of contempt. (Rule 35, Section 6)
It is settled that the trial court has the discretion to grant a motion for
judgment on the pleadings filed by a party if there is no controverted matter
in the case after the answer is filed.
Grounds:
RSP);
6) Where the defendant is declared in default, the court shall proceed to
render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may
warrant, unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to
submit evidence (Sec. 3 Rule 9)
7) During pre-trial, the court may render a judgment on the pleadings if it
finds a valid ground therefor. (sec. 2(g) Rule 18).
8) As a penalty for non-compliance or refusal to answer in discovery
proceedings, the court may render judgment by default against the
recalcitrant or disobedient party. (Secs. 3 & 5, Rule 29)(Riguera 2013)
JUDGMENT OF THE
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
PLEADINGS
Based not only on the pleadings but
Based solely on the pleadings,
also on depositions, admissions and
without introduction of evidence
affidavits
Generally available only to the
plaintiff, unless the defendant
Available to both parties.
presents a
counterclaim.
The answer fails to tender an issue
There may be issues involved in the
or there is an admission of material
case but these issues are irrelevant
allegations
No genuine issue of fact to be tried
No issue of fact at all.
except as to the amount of damages.
10-day notice of hearing required 3-day notice of hearing required
Within the period for taking an appeal, the aggrieved party may move the
trial court to set aside the judgment or final order and grant a new trial for
one or more of the following causes materially affecting the substantial
rights of said party:
Within the same period, the aggrieved party may also move for
reconsideration upon the grounds that the damages awarded are excessive,
that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that
the decision or final order is contrary to law. (Rule 37, Section 1)
Fraud in Sec. 1(a) Rule 37 refers to extrinsic fraud, that is, deception or
trickery by which the aggrieved party was prevented from having trial or
presenting his case before the court. (Riguera 2013)
Intrinsic Fraud refers to acts of a party during the trial which does not
affect the presentation of the case (ex. presentation of a forged promissory
note). It is not a ground for new trial.
A motion for new trial shall include all grounds then available and those not
so included shall be deemed waived. A second motion for new trial, based
on a ground not existing nor available when the first motion was made, may
be filed within the time herein provided excluding the time during which the
first motion had been pending.
is prevented from presenting his side of the case (ex. prevent witness from
testifying). Fraud, as a ground for new trial, must be extrinsic or collateral,
that is, it is the kind of fraud which prevented the aggrieved party from
having a trial or presenting his case to the court, or was used to procure the
judgment without fair submission of the controversy (Regalado).
When to file?
Motion for new trial or reconsideration must be filed within 15 days from
notice of judgment and resolved by the court within 30 days from
submission for resolution.
If a new trial is granted in accordance with the provisions of this Rules the
original judgment or final order shall be vacated, and the action shall stand
for trial de novo; but the recorded evidence taken upon the former trial,
insofar as the same is material and competent to establish the issues, shall be
used at the new trial without retaking the same. (Rule 37, Section 6)
▶ “To standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules and to afford
litigants fair opportunity to appeal their cases, the Court deems it practical to
allow a fresh period of 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal in
the Regional Trial Court, counted from receipt of the order dismissing a
motion for a new trial or motion for reconsideration.
▶ Henceforth, this "fresh period rule" shall also apply to Rule 40 governing
appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial Courts; Rule
42 on petitions for review from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of
Appeals; Rule 43 on appeals from quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of
Appeals; and Rule 45 governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court.
The new rule aims to regiment or make the appeal period uniform, to be
counted from receipt of the order denying the motion for new trial, motion
for reconsideration (whether full or partial) or any final order or resolution.
(NATIONAL Power Corporation V. The Provincial Treasurer Of Benguet,
G.R. No. 209303. November 14, 2016 citing Neypes v. CA, (GR 141524,
September 14, 2005 )
Petition for Relief under Sec. 1 is similar to a motion for new trial on the
ground of FAME, the difference being that the motion for new trial under
Rule 37 is filed before the judgment becomes final, while a petition for relief
in this section presupposes a final judgment or order (Riguera)
A petition provided for in either of the preceding sections of this Rule must
be verified, filed within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the
judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside, and not more than
six (6) months after such judgment or final order was entered, or such
proceeding was taken (Rule 38, Sec.3)
▶ Execution is fittingly called the fruit and end of law, and aptly called the
life of law.
▶ Execution is the process of the court for carrying its decree into effect. In
an action to recover possession of lands, as in this case, if the judgment is for
the Plaintiff, the writ of execution will be an order to deliver the possession
to the Plaintiff. (Heirs of Guiambangan v. Municipality of Kalamansig,
Sultan Kudarat, G.R. 204899, July 27, 2016)
The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of
justice so requires, direct the court of origin to issue the writ of execution.
Once a judgment is issued by the court in a case, and that judgment becomes
final and executory, the principle of immutability of judgments
automatically operates to bar any modification of the judgment. The
modification of a judgment requires the exercise of the court's discretion. At
that stage — when the judgment has become final and executory — the
court is barred from exercising discretion on the case; the bar exists even if
the modification is only meant to correct an erroneous conclusion of fact or
law as these are discretionary acts that rest outside of the court's purely
ministerial jurisdiction. (Spouses Tabalno v. Dingal, Sr., G.R. No. 191526,
October 5, 2015)
Under Supreme Court Circular No. 24-94, a Motion for the Issuance of a
Writ of Execution must contain a notice to the adverse party –
If the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, such execution
may forthwith be applied for in the lower court from which the action
originated, on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting therewith certified
true copies of the judgment or judgments or the final order or orders sought
to be enforced and of the entry thereof, with notice to the adverse party.
The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of
justice so requires, direct the court of origin to issue the writ of execution.
(Pallada vs Rtc Of Kalibo, G.R. No. 129442. March 10, 1999)
General Rule
Where the judgment or order has become executory, the court cannot refuse
to issue a writ of execution.
Exceptions
c) Where the judgment has been novated by the parties (Dormitorio v. Fernandez,
et al., L-25889, 21 Aug. 1976);
d) When a petition for relief or an action to enjoin the judgment is filed and
a preliminary injunction is prayed for and granted (see Sec. 5, Rule
38);
e) When the judgment has become dormant, the 5-year period under Sec. 6
of this Rule having expired without the judgment having been revived
(Cunanan v. CA, et al., L- 25511, 28 Sept. 1968); or