Rule 1 basically gives you an overview of what to expect in terms of the proceedings that we are going to

be discussing. Initially the focus is on the matter distinguishing a civil action vs criminal action. (will not go
in-depth) A civil action is an action whereby one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong so basically it means that you are trying to
cause an act to happen or you are trying to seek redress or indemnification for an act or omission
committed against you. Basically, it is in the nature of compensatory or remedial relief that is what you
seek when you file a civil action. On the other hand, A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes
a wrongdoer for a violation or offense punishable by law. The objective there is to penalize or punish, but
in the current state goes there is supposed to be a rehabilitative effect resulting from the imposition of
the penalty. So that is why we are leaning away from death penalty, that is why we are talking about
alternative means to penalize persons who may not have the appropriate discernment to know that they
have committed wrong therefore some of us are not punished. I am referring basically to minors,
incompetents. They are not punished as severely as those who has discernment that their act is
punishable by law. That is clear already. In between this two, a civil action and criminal action is a special
proceeding. A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to stablish a status, a right, or a
particular fact. So unlike civil action where the objective is to seek compensation or remedial relief for the
wrong or the omission committed against you. There is no cause of action in a special proceeding, what
the intention is for you to establish that you have all the requisite for the purpose of attaining the status
or the right that you seek. In court a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage is considered as special
proceeding, meaning it is docketed as special proceeding. Most court docket it as special proceeding some
court docket this as civil action. In the OSG they docket it as special proceeding because the ultimate
objective in declaration of nullity of marriage is for you to change your status from one who is being
married to one who is not married in that sense it falls under special proceedings and it is important for
you to know or have a very clear distinction about each and every action because the rules for civil,
criminal and special proceedings are very different. But there is catch all provision in all the rules that in
case that there is no rule that you can utilize to cover the particular phase of the proceeding then you can
apply the rules on civil procedure suppletory. Do that with the approval of the judge. These rules are only
applicable to proceedings held at court, from that you can surmise that in administrative proceedings or
proceedings before quasi-judicial body, they either have they own rules, so it is important to check on
what those rules are. Don’t go marching in there and think that your knowledge in rules of court will be
sufficient, no because administrative proceeding or for that matter quasi-judicial one of the important
objectives is to resolve a particular case speedily, so it does not take as long as full-blown civil action for
the case to be completed. They have their own set of rules that have to be abide by. Deadlines are not as
long as one in a formal court where you have to submit formal pleadings. Again, can you utilize the rules
of court in these proceedings? The answer is yes provided that whoever is the officer involve or presiding
in that body where you are appearing before agrees to it. For example: In many years I was a labor arbiter
in Butuan, Labor arbitration proceedings are very simple, why? There is a formal complain the
management need not answer after that there is a short period where you will try to settle the case, if
you are not able to settle the case diretso na yan sa position papers. There is no formal presentation of
evidence however there are instances specially in illegal dismissal cases where the management intends
to prove that the employee was not illegally dismissed and that they would want to have a presentation
of evidence which is fine as long as both parties agreed to it. You can not decide to do that if only the
management is willing to do that, and the employee is not, or the employee’s lawyer is not prepared to
go to the process of presentation of evidence. But you can do that. You can also expedite the proceeding
by not having a formal direct examination or cross examination, you can just submit, like in summary
proceedings before the MTC, the affidavit of the witness and after he identifies it, he can be cross
examined right away. In that sense some of the rules in civil procedure are utilize suppletorily, again,
because it was agreed upon by the parties. Anyway, it is important though that we remember that there
are certain cases as rule civil procedure will not apply. These are election cases, land registration, cadastral
cases, naturalization cases and insolvency proceedings. Procedure in these particular cases are specialized
to accomplish the objective of those particular proceedings, especially in election case, that has to be
quickly because they to declare a winner right away... Things like that, take that into consideration. In
insolvency proceeding, it can work in different ways, it can be the insolvent debtor who will proclaim that
he is insolvent and can no longer comply with his financial obligations when they fall due. Therefore, he
will seek relief from the court, the corporate rehabilitation courts. Our laws in insolvency permit the
creditors of that distressed company can get together and file to have the company declared insolvent.
Of course, that hardly happens here in the Philippines. Those are the intricacy of different types of the
proceeding.

When does an action in court commence? Section 5 tells us that A civil action is commenced by the filing
of the original complaint in court. If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is
commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether
the motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the court. What does that mean basically? An
action is commenced when it is filed in court but what about with respect to the defendant? The
defendant that is easy, when the summon is served upon him. But what if from an original complaint the
plaintiff decides to amend the complaint to include additional defendants, when do those additional
defendants or does the action commence with respect to those different defendants. This provision tells
us that it is upon the time that you file the appropriate motion to implead them or when you file an
amended complaint adding additional defendants that is the time the action commences as to them. And
that is the rule regardless of whether the court decides or permits you to implead them or not… You just
don’t implead everybody in a case so there might be instance that you might file an amended pleading to
include a particular person or somebody will file a pleading on the other hand that this person was not
impleaded. What is the classic example is? In cases against the bank, the plaintiff borrowed money from
the bank. He will allege in his complaint that the bank manager at the time that he was trying to obtain
the loan promise that he could get 5M. That is going to be the allegation 5m tapos ang ending was
supposedly hindi sya nabigyan ng 5M but of course may pera na dyan diba sabihin natin he was given 3M
pero di nya sasabihin na I won’t accept anything less than 5M, tatanggapin nya ung 3M. The 3M will not
be enough to support whatever project that was going to serve as the basis for him to pay his loan
obligation. So now he is going to go to the bank, usually the situation is the bank is already asking him to
pay the loan obligation, but he cannot do that baka nga di nya pa natatapos ung whatever business, hindi
nya nabili all the equipment to start up his business, kasi 3M lang. What will he do? He will go against the
bank for damages, he will say that he was put in that situation because of the incompetence of the (bank
manager) some of them got even more drastic, they will say because of the complicity of the bank officials
that they tricked me to believing that I will get 5M tapos I only get 3M. Ganyan ang mga allegations nila,
what do they do, apart from the bank they implead the bank manager. When you looked at the complaint,
you will check, other than the allegation in the complaint that the manager promises him to get 5M there
is nothing in the documents that will say that he will going to get 5M. and all the document that he signed
you will see that he only received 3M. What will happen in those cased and in those cases the bank
manager impleaded is probably already retired or close to retirement so they will ask that they will be
dropped as defendant in the case. why? On the basis of the argument that other than the allegation made
in the complaint, there is nothing in the evidence that is going to be presented that will prove that he was
tricked to believe that he was going to receive 5M php. In many instances, that matter of whether or not
to drop the bank manager as a defendant, I used to act upon it very quickly. I would drop the bank
manager as defendant because nga that kind of cases, all the proof you need are all the documents. If
your realy could not proceed with your enterprise or business that you will put up because you are bot
given 5M php bait mo tinanggap ung 3M? Those are the things that need to take into considerations when
we are talking about commencement of action.

Before we go to cause of action, let us just get this out of our heads. Now we know the differences about
criminal civil and special proceedings.

Let’s talk now about real actions vis a vis personal actions and on the hand actions in rem and quasi in
rem and actions in personam. What is real action here? Or at least knowing what is the importance in
knowing the difference between real action and personal action.

ASG: What is the significant of a real action and personal action.

Classmate: In real action, the complaint involves real properties.

ASG: It involves real property. It does not involve personal property, just real property. What is personal
action.

Classmate: It is against a person. A judgment against a person.

ASG: When we are talking about personal action we are talking about personal liability. The classic
example for this is my utang ka sakin, bayaran mo ako, that is a personal liability.

You have told me what distinguishes one from another, but what is the significance of this classification
of civil actions which should distinguish it from this one, actions in rem or quasi in rem or actions in
personam.

Classmate: The significance is to determine the jurisdiction of the case because in real action the value of
the property will determine the jurisdiction (THIS IS WRONG)

ASG: Is it the jurisdiction that is being determined?

Classmate: Venue. (THIS IS THE ANSWER)

ASG: In civil procedure, venue and jurisdiction are two different animals unlike in criminal procedure.

Classmate: It is significant because in real action the venue is determined where the property is situated
while in personal action the venue is determined by the residence of the plaintiff or the defendant.

ASG: Generally, it is important for you to be able to determine if it is a real or personal action para
malaman kung tama ung venue mo. For example, in an action for specific performance, what is an action
for specific performance? Is it a real action or personal action?

Classmate: It is a personal action because you are demanding a person to perform what is obligated to
him
ASG: Yes, so in that instance, where is your venue if you intend to file?

Classmate: The residence of the plaintiff.

ASG: Always the residence of the plaintiff?

Classmate: The residence of the defendants also.

ASG: Yes, at the election of the plaintiff.

Since we already concluded that real actions involved real properties what are generally the types of
action that at a glance na alam na natin na real action yan. And therefore, regardless where the plaintiff
or defendant lives ditto dapat ang venue ng kaso na yan.

Classmate: Unlawful detainer, forcible entry, ownership if the property,

ASG: Ownership or title of the property, what else?

Classmate: Possession of the property.

ASG: Possession of the property (dyan babagsak ung forcible entry at unlawful detainer)

Classmate: Foreclosure

ASG: So, any incumbrance, foreclosure of real estate mortgage. Because as you said, it involves a real
property.

Just think of civil cases involving real property.

Classmate: Cadastral?

ASG: Cadastral and Land registration iba yan eh.

Partition or subdivision of real property, so any of this come up they are classified as real action.

So let’s go to the other end don’t get confused, some people think that real actions are actions in rem, is
that true? Are real actions all are action in rem?

What does classification of action in rem and persoman, what is their significance? Or did you think that
they were synonymous to each other?

Classmate: In action in rem it involves a thing or an object, but it does not mean that it is a real action

ASG: does both of them involve real property?

Classmate: In actions in rem, all of them does not involve real property. Not all actions in rem involves
properties.

ASG: Yes, because some actions in rem involves status.

Why was there a need to distinguish between real action and personal action and action in rem and action
in personam, why just can’t be this the latin version of that? What is the significant of these?

Classmate: because the will determine the jurisdiction of the case (THIS IS WRONG)
ASG: No, by the way don’t continue to say that because you already spent a 1 day on jurisdiction of the
court. That is specified in BP 129, that is not whether the action is in rem or persoman that will determine
whether a particular court has the jurisdiction. It is whether or not the law provides for the particular
court jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is conferred by law.

…….. (Discussion NOT IMPORANT(WRONG))

Classmate: Action in rem binds the whole world while action in person is between the parties.

ASG: Yes, this is significant because it provides who will be covered or who will be bound by the ultimate
judgement of the court. In actions in rem, where the subject matter is the res, when the court makes a
ruling regarding that res it will bind the whole world because nga it is an action in rem or quasi in rem.

If it is an action in personam, who does it binds? …. When the court makes a ruling and said “JV you owe
judge Guillen this amount of money” that is an action in personam, meaning the liability is only for Jv,
hindi yan aabot sa mga (herir?) There is nothing in the ruling that says that if JV cannot pay his children
and grand children will bound to pay it until its is fully paid. Walang ganyan, it is personal, the liability or
the coverage, or the directive provided for in the judgement is personal to the defendant. That is the
importance there. As a result of that, we are aware that actions in rem binds the whole world while in
actions in personam only binds the persons who are liable. We have to see to it that when we file actions
that the person who you really want to be held accountable or liable are impleaded as parties to the case.
If you don’t implead them, they cannot be bound by the judgement, that is common sense… Example:
Kimberly, you come from the first family, Jv comes from the second family of your father. You have the
same father... but Jv is misrepresenting himself that he is the first family as the legitime. You can, because
it is damaging to you, asks that a ruling be made because of filiation. Sabihin natin Jv and (?) are siblings
but you only implead JV, in the end there is a ruling against Jv, can you say that, that ruling also applies to
Ms. Brawer because they are siblings so it should apply to her as well.

Classmate: No Ma’am because in personal action you can only bind the persons whom I am suing.

ASG: Correct, that is the importance here also when we are talking about in personam actions. If you want
to hold somebody liable because of certain injury committed to you, you have to implead everybody who
participated in committing that injury, and if you make a mistake and forget that Jv has a sister. Jv can be
held liable for the damages but you cannot, sabihin ntin na si Jv turns out to be insolvent, you cannot run
after his sister on the premise that you are also a sibling of his you should have made aware of this case
that I filed against you. In fact, in some instances that it happens, they even argue that o nakita ko nga
yan sa korte eh. It may be true but if you did not implead her as a part you can not claim any compensation
as against her or damage as against her. So, it is important that you are aware. Unlike in action in rem or
quasi in rem, where upon the issuance of the judgement, with respect to the res, when we are talking
about the res here, we are not only talking about real property, we can talk about status as well. As soon
as that judgment becomes final it automatically (binds), the ruling in so far as the whole world is
concerned. An example: a personal action but an action in rem because it involves status, a petition for
declaration of nullity of marriage. So suppose you get your marriage annulled, you start dating again, if
somebody or a basher, yung frenemy mo goes around and talks or starts all these chismis that you are a
loose woman because you are still married and running around with different men. You can really go after
her and she cannot argue na I did not see the decision in that case, that is not the point, the point is that
there is a final and executory judgement saying that you are already free to date whoever you want. And
you don’t have to slap that on everybody’s face for them to be made aware of that. You can go after your
friend for defaming you because you already technically have the status already to be able to date and
find another husband. Okay. So, we are already clear with these… We will go back to real and personal
actions when we go back to venue because there are also certain rules on venue that has to be followed.

The important thing to remember to though, unlike in criminal cases, venue can be agreed upon. Even if
the courts or rules of court provides that the venue should be on the certain court the parties themselves
can enter into agreement and to find for additional forum that will serve venue other than the venue that
is provided for in the rules of court. The parties can enter into contractual arrangement regarding venue
which is presumably done so it can be more convenient for both parties to sue and be sued.

Let’s move on to cause of action.

ASG: Kimberly what province do you come from?

Classmate: Laguna Ma’am.

ASG: Laguna, do they have sabungan there?

… Not so important

ASG: Let say that you are the queen of sabungeras in Siniluan, In fact you have acres and acres of land
there, all… there is nothing growing on those lands all they have are those little house for all your fighting
cocks, acres and acres of that. … So there is a big sabungan, Let say it is called Siniluan Arena, it is operated
by the municipality of Siniluan. Now, the municipality run by its corrupt mayor Jv said that I am not making
much money with this sabungan, even if this is huge, I am not making much money as I should so I am
going to change the rules. So, he told the municipal legislator, we are going to come up with a rule which
provided that for every panalo of the fighting cock, the winner has to pay 30%, if you loose you have to
give 15% and this rule will take effect immediately upon publication in the local newspaper, the news
about this new rules that is going to be promulgated applied in the Siniluan arena spread like wildfire,
spread all over the place until Kimberly heard of it, so nagalit si Kimberly kasi ano “edi walang maiiwan
sakin” how will I be able to raise all my fighting cocks if 30% is going to go in the hand of that no good
mayor na wala naming ginawa kundi mangurakot. I am going to file a case against him, I am going to file
a case for injunction. To prevent the municipal mayor and the legislature from promulgating the rules that
they arrive in. ‘by the way, it is not whether or not they follow the right process to come up with the rules,
let us assume that they did. Let’s focus on the plan of Kimberly. Question, will this action prosper? From
the facts that I have given you, will the action prosper?

Classmate: Yes ma’am, because it will damage my business as a sabungera, if it is too much, I will not be
able to carry my business and that won’t be a damage to my right. . (NOT CORRECT)

ASG: your main position is that ‘yes’ because you will sustain business. Any other opinion. All the facts
that I give you are all the facts that are allege in the complaint of Kimberly. Any other ideas? Or even the
same idea but with different reason.

Classmate: Yes, violation of right to property . (NOT CORRECT)

ASG: I am not saying that this is correct, who else? So, does everybody agree that Kimberly has a cause of
action
Classmate: No, because there is no cause of action because the rule Is not legally enacted. There is no
violation of right. . (NOT CORRECT)

….

Classmate: No, based on the fact, there is no allegation of a right or violation of a right. . (NOT CORRECT)

Classmate: No, because there is no obligation, the right of Kimberly was not violated since the law was
enacted properly and, on the complaint, there is no allegation that she obtained damages. (NOT CORRECT)

ASG: She has allegation, that enactment of that rule will damage to her business because it will take to
much of her earnings.

… Several answers were omitted (NOT CORRECT)

ASG: What is a cause of action? Let us see what the answer to this is.

Classmate: A cause of action is an act or omission where by which a party violates a right of another.

ASG: Given this (definition) what are then the elements of cause of action?

Classmate: 1. The person has a legal right 2. There is a legal duty to respect that right 3. Despite those
there is a breach or violation of that right.

What is missing in the story? Or is there cause of action? Are all the elements present in the story?

Classmate: No, because the violation was not alleged before commencing the action thus the action
should be dismissed for failure to state all the elements of cause of action.

ASG: so that is the key element here, there is no violation of your right yet, parang nataranta ka lang nung
narinig mo ung rule. “ Hay jusko, pano naman ang aking negosyo, idedemanda kita” not realizing that wala
pa naman violation in right, in fact I purposely omitted to include in the story a situation where one of the
fighting cocks of Kimberly was used in the area and she was told she will not get her full price if it is not
deducted of the 30%. Wala pa nga, di pa nga nangyayari, I did not even tell you na, enact into local
legislation. (diba napublished?) I just yes after publication. Wala diba, for all know that it is still under
publication and yet andyan na si Kimberly filing her injuction. She would have her cause of action exept
that this is missing, there is no violation yet. All the damages her worried about is really hypothetical kasi
di pa nangyayari. That is also the reason why if you file a case sometimes you have to wait otherwise it
will be dismissed for prematurity because di pa ngripen into cause of action itong case na ito even if 1.
She has a legal right, she is the queen of sabungan, she invested millions into this business. 2. There is a
legal duty to respect that right. Alam mo ung mga nagpapatakbo ng mga cockfighting pit they have to
maintain a good relation with the use of the sabungaeros so that their sanungan will continue to be
utilized by them otherwise baka sag alit ni Kimberly, “gagawa ako ng sarili kong sabungan”. They have to
maintain good relations with the sabungeros that go there regularly so there is a legal duty to respect that
right but unfortunately kahit na sabihin pa nating unconscionable pa talaga yang rules na yan technically
wala pang breach or violation of the right kasi nga di pa napublish ung rules na yan. They did not even
come into effect.