(Vera vs. Rigor, G.R. No.

147377, August
10, 2007)

The Rule mandatorily requires the parties to seasonably file their

briefs and failure to do so shall be cause for the dismissal of the
action. The pre-trial and its governing rules are not technicalities
which the parties may ignore or trifle with.

* * * * * * * * 

Facts: 

Respondent Ernesto Rigor filed with the RTC a complaint for sum of
money with damages against petitioner Dr. Emmanuel Vera. During the
pre-trial conference, the parties failed to reach an amicable settlement,
hence, the trial court terminated the pre-trial and set the case for initial
hearing. During the initial hearing, the trial court, upon manifestation of
petitioner’s counsel, realized that respondent failed to file a pre-trial
brief.

Petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the complaint raising as ground

respondent’s failure to file a pre-trial brief. The trial court issued a
Resolution granting the motion and dismissing the complaint.
Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied by the
trial court.

Issue:

May a civil case be dismissed for failure of the plaintiff to file a pre-trial
brief?

Held:

Yes. Section 6, Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as

amended, provides that 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. Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as
failure to appear at the pre-trial.

Corollarily, Section 5 of the same Rule states that the failure of the
plaintiff to appear at the pre-trial shall be cause for dismissal of the
action.

Clearly, the above Rule mandatorily requires the parties to seasonably

file their briefs and failure to do so shall be cause for the dismissal of the
action.

While the trial judge erroneously proceeded with the trial conference, the
fact remains that respondent did not file a pre-trial brief. Pursuant to
Section 6, Rule 18 quoted above, such failure is a cause for dismissal of
the action. We have to emphasize that pre-trial and its governing rules
are not technicalities which the parties may ignore or trifle with.

Obviously, since respondent did not file a pre-trial brief, it follows that the
trial judge failed to conduct the pre-trial conference in accordance with
Rule 18. In fact, he did not issue the required pre-trial order stating the
various matters which should have been included therein. Indeed, the
trial judge showed his ignorance of the Rules, specifically Rule 18. And
by failing to take appropriate steps to enable the parties reach an
amicable settlement, the trial judge showed his gross inefficiency. (Vera
vs. Rigor, G.R. No. 147377, August 10, 2007)