Amended Complaint, Nature of

Under Section 8, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court, an amended complaint

supersedes an original one. As a consequence, the original complaint is
deemed withdrawn and no longer considered part of the record. In the
present case, the Amended Complaint is, thus, treated as an entirely new
complaint. As such, respondents had every right to move for the dismissal
of the said Amended Complaint. Were it not for the filing of the said
Motion, respondents would not have been able to file a petition for certiorari
before the CA which, in turn, rendered the presently assailed judgment in
their favor. [Mercado et al. v. Spouses Espina, G.R. No. 173987 February
25, 2012]

Section 8, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court provides:

Sec. 8. Effect of amended pleading. – An amended pleading supersedes the

pleading that it amends. However, admissions in superseded pleadings
may be received in evidence against the pleader; and claims or defenses
alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be
deemed waived.

Amended Complaint is an Initiatory Pleading

There is likewise no merit in petitioner’s assertion that the amended

complaint was not an initiatory pleading. Section 8, Rule 10 of the Rules
of Court clearly provides that an amended complaint supersedes the
complaint that it amends. [Negros Merchants Enterprises v. China Banking
Corporation, G.R. No. 150918, August 17, 2007.]

FACTS OF THE CASE: In the instant case, Lizares was not

authorized to file the complaint for and in behalf of petitioner
corporation. Thus, the complaint is not deemed filed by the proper
party in interest and should be dismissed. The words used in petitioner’s
verification and certification of no-forum shopping clearly state that Lizares
solely caused the preparation of the present case, without even averring that
he had done so in behalf of petitioner. There was no belated filing of a
proper verification and certification, or even a copy of the board resolution
or a secretary’s certificate attesting that Lizares was authorized to file said
complaint or the amendment thereto. Instead, petitioner merely declared
without qualification or explanation in its Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
that "there was sufficient compliance as could be gleaned from the
complaint.

Sample Case on Amended Complaint Superseding the Original

Complaint
Here, the original complaint contained a proper verification and certification
against forum shopping duly signed by Naval-Sai as plaintiff. The
verification and certification in the amended complaint, on the other hand,
was only signed by her counsel, Atty. Norberto L. Ela. Atty. Ela was not
authorized to sign on behalf of Naval-Sai, as in fact, she assigned one
Rodolfo Florentino as agent.30 The Court of Appeals pointed out that in the
certification in the amended complaint, Atty. Ela specified that it should be
taken and read together with the original complaint. The Court of Appeals
took this as a cautionary move on the part of Naval-Sai, justifying the
relaxation of the rules on the ground of substantial compliance. We find,
however, that this cautionary move is ineffectual because under the
Rules of Civil Procedure, an amended complaint supersedes the original
complaint.31 For all intents and purposes, therefore, the original
complaint and its verification and certification ceased to exist. This,
notwithstanding, we find there was still substantial compliance with the
Rules.

[Uy v. CA, G.R. No. 173186, September 16, 2015.]

Amended Complaint Requires Certification to File an Action

Royales vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (127 SCRA 470 (1984)), this
Court ruled that "non-compliance with the condition precedent
prescribed by PD 1508 could affect the sufficiency of the plaintiff's
cause of action and make his complaint vulnerable to dismissal on the
ground of lack of cause of action or prematurity."