EVIDENCE which are purely speculative.

 “The truth”:
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The ultimate objective of the rules of evidence is to
render justice by arriving at the truth of a matter in
1. Concept of Evidence dispute i.e., by knowing the facts and the meaning of
2. Scope of the Rules of Evidence these facts.
3. Distinguish: Proof and Evidence a) Factual or moral truth - the truth which the court
4. Distinguish: Factum probans and Factum seeks to know.
probandum b) Judicial truth - the truth as found by the courts based
5. Admissibility of Evidence on the evidence presented to it.
6. Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence c) Ideal or perfect justice - when the judicial truth is
7. Presumptions likewise the factual truth.
8. Construction of the Rules on Evidence
9. Quantum of Evidence Where the factual/moral or judicial truth differ, still there
is justice so long as the court observed both substantive
1. CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE and procedural due process.

The means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining  The factual truth may not be the same as the judicial
in a judicial proceeding, the truth respecting a matter truth since judicial truth is dependent on the evidence
of fact [S1, R128] (1) presented. One maybe guilty as sin, but maybe acquitted
based on the evidences presented where the court based
 The factual truth may not be the same as the its conclusion. [SLU Notes, Sagsago]
judicial truth since judicial truth is dependent on the
evidence presented. One maybe guilty as sin, but
maybe acquitted based on the evidences presented 2. SCOPE OF THE RULES OF
where the court based its conclusion. EVIDENCE

Dual concept of evidence General rule: Principle of Uniformity

1) As the very materials presented in court consisting The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and
of objects, documents or oral narration of witnesses. in all trials and hearings.
2) As a system, process or methodology of proving a
fact. Hence, it would refer to providing answers to Exceptions: If otherwise provided by:
such questions as who may and who may not be (1) Law [e.g. 1987 Constitution, statutes];
witnesses, what may be allowed as proof, how they (2) Rules of Court;
are to be presented; what requirements are to be (3) SC issuances [e.g., Judicial Affidavit Rule, Rules on
observed, what weight and importance is to be given Procedure for Environmental Cases, Child Witness
a certain evidence in relation to other pieces of Rule, Rules on Electronic Evidence, Rules on DNA
evidence. Evidence]
(4) Jurisprudence [e.g., Star Two vs. Ko, GR 185454,
Definition explained: 2011, where evidence was presented to support a
 “The means sanctioned by these rules”- The procedure motion for reconsideration of the denial of motion to
for determining the truth is as provided for under Rules dismiss but the adverse party failed to attend the
128 to Rule 133, including the amendments thereto and hearing for their reception. The evidence not
their interpretation given by the Courts. formally offered was considered when it had been
identified by testimony, duly recorded and it had
 “Of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding”- the rules been incorporation in the records of the case.
or procedure is applicable only to controversies tried by
the regular courts of law; the procedure or rules of Applicability of the Rules on Evidence
evidence does not apply in quasi-judicial or The rules of evidence, being part of the Rules of Court,
administrative tribunals or to court martial. The latter apply only to judicial proceedings. (S1, R128) (1)
may adopt the rules in their discretion.
The Rules of Court shall not apply to: (ELCNIO)
1. Election cases
 “Respecting a matter of fact”- the fact to be 2. Land Registration cases;
established or the point in controversy must be capable 3. Cadastral Proceedings;
of being proven or ascertained by the rules of evidence. 4. Naturalization Proceedings;
The rules do not apply and cannot be used to answer 5. Insolvency Proceedings; and
questions or controversies involving religion or faith; 6. Other cases as may be provided by law;
dogma, philosophy, literature, fantasy or fiction or those
Except by analogy or in a suppletory character and court is not affected.
whenever practicable and convenient. (S4, R1) 2) As to waiver –
a. Rules intended for the protection of the parties
 In quasi-judicial proceedings, the same apply by maybe waived. E.g., Rules on the
analogy or suppletory AND whenever practicable Disqualification of Witnesses, the Privileged
and convenient [S4, R1], except in cases where the Communication Rule, The Original Document
governing law or rules specify otherwise, e.g., the Rule.
Rules on Electronic Evidence covers quasi-judicial b. Rules grounded on public policy cannot be
and administrative bodies [S2, R1, Rules on waived. E.g., Rule on the Identity of State
Electronic Evidence]; special rules are laid down in Secrets; rule on the inadmissibility of coerced
EO 292, series of 1987 [Revised Administrative confessions and evidence resulting from illegal
Code], etc. searches and seizures; and the two-witness rule
on treason.
 Administrative investigations shall be conducted
without necessarily adhering strictly to the technical
rules of procedure and evidence applicable to judicial 3. DISTINGUISH: PROOF AND
proceedings [Dela Cruz v. Malunao, AM No. P-11- EVIDENCE
3019, 2012]
Evidence Proof
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING [S3, R1] The medium or means by Result or effect of
(1) Civil – includes special civil actions which a fact is proved or evidence. [Regalado]
(2) Criminal disproved; Mode and
(3) Special Proceeding manner of proving
competent facts in
 Disbarment is not included as it is an exercise of judicial proceedings.
the judiciary’s quasi-executive powers. [Bustos vs. Lucero, 1948]
Sources of the Rules
 Strictly, evidence is the medium of proof whereas
1) The Principal Source (Rules 128 – 133) proof is the result of evidence. Thus, the materials
2) The Philippine constitution particularly, its consisting of the weapon used, the confession of the
provisions on the Bill of Rights (with exclusionary accused, the testimony of the complainant and witnesses,
rule implications) and Article VIII provisions on the the result of the paraffin test, will constitute the evidence
Supreme Court. of guilt. Their combined effect will be proof of guilt
3) Special Laws passed by Congress which either Beyond Reasonable Doubt. The two terms are often used
create, amend or supplement existing rules of interchangeably.
evidence.
4) Decisions of the Supreme Court (Article 8, Civil  Bare allegations unsubstantiated by evidence, are not
Code). equivalent to proof. (Domingo v. Robles, GR 153743,
5) Supreme Court issuances, e.g., Judicial Affidavit 2005)
Rule.
4. DISTINGUISH: FACTUM PROBANS
AND FACTUM PROBANDUM
Power to Prescribe Rules on Evidence
 New laws may be issued under the principle that “No
person has a vested right in the rules of evidence”. Factum Probans Factum Probandum
Parties to a pending case cannot demand that a new rule Fact offered in Fact that needs to be
of evidence should not apply to them because it will be evidence as proof of proved.
adverse to their cause. Rules of evidence may be altered another fact.
or repelled at any time and will apply to pending cases Evidentiary or Ultimate fact to be
even if the effect is adverse to a party therein. The probative facts by proven; or the
exceptions are rules which partake of the nature of Ex which the factum proposition to be
post facto laws or Bills of Attainder. [SLU Notes, probandum will be established. That which
Sagsago] proved; Facts or a party wants to prove
material evidencing the to the court.
Stipulation and Waiver of a Rule of Evidence proposition.
1) Generally, parties cannot, either by agreement or by e.g., written contract; e.g., guilt or innocence,
contract, stipulate what rules shall be binding upon the promissory note to breach of contract;
the Court. But the parties may however stipulate on prove the existence of existence of an
the effects of certain types of evidence on their an unpaid debt. obligation; the fact of
contractual rights as long as the jurisdiction of the payment; injury or
 damage incurred.
Existent Hypothetical  It is relevant if “it has such a relation to the fact in
issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
Illustration: existence” (S4, R128) (4)
If P claims to have been injured by the negligence of D
who denies having been negligent, the negligence is the 2) Competency. The evidence is not excluded by the
fact to be established. It is the factum probandum. The rules.
evidence offered by P constitutes the material to prove
the liability of D. The totality of the evidence to prove  Competency is determined by the prevailing
the liability is the factum probans (Riano, 2016). exclusionary rules of evidence.

Relevancy is an affair of logic, human experience and

Classes of Evidence According to Form
common sense while competency is determined by law.
(1) Object - those addressed to the senses of the court.
[S1, R130] (1)
 Illegally obtained evidence cannot be admitted
(2) Documentary - consists of writings, recordings, because they are the “fruit of the poisonous tree”.
photographs or any material containing letters, Examples of illegally obtained evidence are evidence
words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols or their obtained without a valid search warrant (this is however
equivalent or other modes of written expressions subject to exceptions) (Under Section 3 (2), Article III of
offered as proof of their contents. Photographs the 1987 Constitution) (2010 Bar)
include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray
films, motion pictures or videos. [S2, R130] (2a)
(3) Testimonial - evidence elicited from the mouth of a
witness [Riano, citing Black’s Law Dictionary]. It b. Relevance of evidence and collateral matters
involves two levels of perception: that of the witness
perceiving the event, and that of the judge Relevancy of Evidence
evaluating the witness. Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as
to induce belief in its existence or non-existence. (Sec. 4,
Rule 128)

 There is no hierarchy with respect to the physical  None but facts having rational probative value are
forms of evidence. A fact may be proved by any kind; admissible. Thus –
the court may admit. There is no rule (in general) that (1) The material presented as evidence must affect the
prefers one form rule as against another. [Adzuara vs. issue or question. It must have a bearing on the
Court of Appeals, GR 125134, 1999] outcome of the case. It requires both:
a) Rational or logical relevancy in that it has a
connection to the issue and therefore it has a
5. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE tendency to establish the fact which it is offered
Admissibility to prove. The evidence must therefore have
The character or quality which any material must probative value.
necessarily possess for it to be accepted and allowed to b) Legal relevancy in that the evidence is offered
be presented or introduced as evidence in court. It to prove a matter which has been properly put
answers the question: should the court allow the material in issue as determined by the pleadings in civil
to be used as evidence by the party? cases, or as fixed by the pre-trial order, or as
determined by substantive law. If so, the matter
Weight has materiality.
The value given or significance or impact, or importance (2) Legal relevancy in that the evidence is offered to
given to the material after it has been admitted; its prove a matter which has been properly put in issue
tendency to convince or persuade. Hence a particular as determined by the pleadings in civil cases, or as
evidence may be admissible but it has no weight. fixed by the pre-trial order, or as determined by
Conversely, an evidence may be of great weight or substantive law. If so the matter has materiality.
importance but it is not admissible.
Illustrations:
a. Requisites for admissibility of evidence; (i) Criminal case: the fact that the crime was committed
exclusions under the Constitution, laws, and at nighttime is rationally or logically relevant to a
the Rules of Court killing at 12 midnight but evidence thereon would
be not be legally relevant if nighttime was not
Conditions for Admissibility (Axioms of Admissibility, alleged in the Information. It would be immaterial.
Wigmore) (ii) Civil Case: In an action for sum of money based on
1) Relevancy. The evidence is relevant to the issue; a promissory note, evidence that the defendant was
and misled into signing the note would be rationally
 relevant but if fraud was never alleged as a defense,
then evidence thereof would be legally irrelevant or
immaterial. B. JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL
ADMISSIONS
Collateral matters
General Rule: Evidence on collateral matters is not 1. What need not be proved
allowed. 2. Matters of judicial notice
a. Mandatory
Exception: Evidence on collateral matters shall be
b. Discretionary
allowed when it tends in any reasonable degree to
3. Judicial admissions
establish the probability or improbability of fact in issue.
a. Effect of judicial admissions
Illustration: Although evidence of character is generally b. How judicial admissions may be
inadmissible (Sec. 51, Rule 130), the accused may prove contradicted
his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral c. Pre-trial admissions
trait involved in the offense charged. (Sec. 51(a)(1),
Rule 130)
C. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
c. Multiple admissibility
d. Conditional admissibility 1. Nature and object of evidence
e. Curative admissibility 2. Requisites of admissibility
3. Categories of object evidence
f. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence 4. Chain of custody in relation to
Section 21 of the Comprehensive
 The identity of the perpetrator of a crime and a
Dangerous Act of 2002
finding of guilt may rest solely on the strength of
circumstantial evidence. 5. DNA Evidence
a. Meaning of DNA
The commission of a crime, the identity of the b. Application of DNA testing order
perpetrator, and the finding of guilt may all be c. Post-conviction DNA testing;
established by circumstantial evidence. The remedy
circumstances must be considered as a whole and should d. Assessment of probative value of
create an unbroken chain leading to the conclusion that DNA evidence and admissibility
the accused authored the crime. e. Rules on evaluation of reliability
of the DNA testing methodology
The determination of whether circumstantial evidence is
sufficient to support a finding of guilt is a qualitative test
not a quantitative one. The proven circumstances must D. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
be "consistent with each other, consistent with the E. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and at the same F. OFFER AND OBJECTION
time inconsistent with the hypothesis that he is innocent,
and with every other rational hypothesis except that of
guilt." [Bacerra vs. PP, GR 204544, July 3, 2017,
Leonen, J.]
1. Limitations on the rule-making power of the SC
i. The rules of procedure shall provide for a simplified
and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition
of cases.
ii. The rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same
grade; and
iii. The rules shall not diminish, increase or modify
g. Positive and negative evidence substantive rights.
h. Competent and credible evidence
10. Burden of proof and burden of  Substantive rights are created by substantive law so the Rules of
Procedure should not increase, diminish or modify them. In effect, the
evidence Rules of Court should not amend the substantive law. It can only
11. Presumptions interpret substantive law but should not change it completely.
a. Conclusive presumptions
 The 1987 Constitution, however, took away the power of Congress
b. Disputable presumptions to repeal, alter or supplement rules concerning pleading, practice and
c. Presumptions in civil actions procedure. The power to promulgate rules is no longer shared by the
Court with Congress, more so with the executive. [Echegaray vs.
and proceedings; against an Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601 (1999)]
accused in criminal cases
12. Construction of the rules on evidence 2. Power of the Supreme Court to amend and suspend
procedural rules
13. Quantum of evidence
  Appellate jurisdiction refers to a process which is but a
Power to Amend continuation of the original suit, not a commencement of a new action.
The SC has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal, or even establish [Morales vs. CA, G.R. No. 126623 (1997)]
new rules for a more simplified and inexpensive process, and the
speedy disposition of cases. [Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524 (2005)] 5. Courts Of General And Special Jurisdiction
General - Competent to decide their own jurisdiction and to take
The constitutional faculty of the Court to promulgate rules necessarily cognizance of all kinds of cases, unless otherwise provided by the law
carries with it the power to overturn judicial precedents on points of or Rules
remedial law through the amendment of the Rules of Court. [Pinga v. Special - No power to decide their own jurisdiction and can only try
Heirs of Santiago, G.R. No. 170354 (2006)] cases permitted by statute
Power to Suspend - Court of Tax Appeals (RA 1125)
The Rules of Court shall be liberally construed in order to promote - Sandiganbayan (PD 1486 as amended)
their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of - Sharia District Courts and the Sharia Circuit Courts (PD
every action and proceeding. [Sec. 6, Rule 1] 1083 , also known as the Code of Muslim Personal Law);
- Family Courts
 The power of the Supreme Court to suspend its own rules or to - Drugs Court
except a particular case from its operations whenever the purposes of - Special Commercial Courts
justice require it, cannot be questioned. [De Guzman v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 103276(1996)]
6. Constitutional And Statutory Courts
 Litigation is not a game of technicalities, but every case must be Constitutional - Owe creation and existence to the Constitution and
prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed rules of procedure to cannot be legislated out of existence or deprived by law of the
ensure an orderly and speedy administration of justice. Only for the jurisdiction and powers unqualifiedly vested in them
most persuasive of reasons can such rules be relaxed to relieve a Statutory - Created, organized and with jurisdiction exclusively
litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of his determined by law
thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed.  The first cannot be abolished by Congress without amending the
[Novateknika v. PNB, G.R. No. 194104 (2013)] Constitution while the second can be so abolished by just simply
repealing the law which created them
 What constitutes good and sufficient cause that would merit
suspension of the rules is discretionary upon the courts. [CIR v. Mirant
Pagbilao Corp., G.R. No. 159593 (2006)] 7. Courts Of Law And Equity
Courts of law are tribunals administering only the law of the land,
The reasons which would warrant suspension of the Rules are: whereas courts of equity are tribunals which rule according to the
(1) The existence of special and compelling circumstances; precepts of equity or justice, and are sometimes called “courts of
(2) The merits of the case; conscience.” (Ballentine’s Law Dict., 2nd Ed., p. 303)
(3) A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the
party favored by the suspension; Courts of Law dispose cases according to what the promulgated law
(4) A lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous says while Courts of Equity adjudicate cases based on the principles of
or dilatory; and equity. Principle of equity means principles of justice, fairness, fair
(5) The rights of the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced play or of what is right and just without inquiring into the terms of the
thereby. [Sarmiento vs. Zaratan, G.R. No. 167471 (2007)] statutes

 Philippine courts are basically courts of law, not courts of equity.

A. Nature Of Philippine Courts Equity, which has been aptly described as a “justice outside legality,”
is applied only in the absence of, and never against, statutory law.
1. Meaning Of A Court
Aequetas nunquam contravenit legis. [GF Equity, Inc. v. Valenzona,
Place where justice is administered. [Riano citing Black’s Law GR 156841, 2005]
Dictionary, Am. Jur. and C. J. S.]
2. Distinguish: Court and Judge  Equity is available only in the absence of law and not as its
A court is an organ of government with a personality replacement. [PTA of ST. Matthew Christian Academy v. Metropolitan
separate and distinct from the judge who sits on it. Bank and Trust Co., 2010]
[People vs. Carlos, 1947]

 Jurisdiction does not attach to the judge but to the court. The 8. Principle Of Judicial Hierarchy
continuity of a court and the efficacy of its proceedings are not affected  Where courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a subject matter, a
by the death, resignation, or cessation from the service of the judge case must be filed before the lowest court possible having the
presiding over it. [ABC Davao Auto Supply vs. CA, 1998] appropriate jurisdiction, except if one can advance a special reason
which would allow direct recourse to a higher court. The principle of
3. Classification of Philippine Courts
hierarchy of courts requires that recourses should be made to the lower
Constitutional and Statutory Courts courts before they are made to the higher courts. [Republic vs.
Superior Courts and First-Level courts (inferior courts) Caguioa, GR 174385, 2013]
Courts of Original jurisdiction and Courts of Appellate
jurisdiction  Parties must observe the hierarchy of courts before they can seek
Civil Courts and Criminal Courts relief directly from the SC – the rationale is two-fold:
Courts of law and Courts of equity (1) It would be an imposition upon the limited time of the Court; and
Courts of record; probate Courts; Land Registration Courts; (2) It would inevitably result in a delay, in the adjudication of cases,
Ecclesiastical Courts; Military Courts which are remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum,
or a trier of facts. [People vs. Azarraga, GR 187117, 2011]

4. Courts Of Original And Appellate Jurisdiction  A disregard of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts warrants, as a
Original Courts are those where a case is originally commenced, rule, the outright dismissal of a petition. [De Castro vs. Carlos, GR
while Appellate Courts are those where a case is reviewed. 194994, 2013]
(Ballentine's Law Dict., 2nd Ed., p. 91)
  The SC may disregard the doctrine if warranted by the nature and The principle that once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that
importance of the issues raised in the interest of speedy justice and to jurisdiction continues until the court has done all that it can do in the
avoid future litigations. exercise of that jurisdiction.
Flowchart here
Regular courts The doctrine holding that even the finality of the judgment does not
SUPREME COURT totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the case. What the court
COURT OF APPEALS loses is the power to amend, modify or alter the judgment. Even after
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS the judgment becomes final, the court still retains jurisdiction to
MetTC MTCC MTC MCTC enforce and execute it.

9. Doctrine Of Non-Interference Or Doctrine Of Judicial

Stability C. Jurisdiction Of Various Philippine Courts
General Rule: No court has the authority to interfere by injunction 1. Supreme Court
with the judgment of another court of coordinate jurisdiction or to pass 2. Court of Appeals
upon or scrutinize and much less declare as unjust a judgment of 3. Court of Tax Appeals
another court. 4. Sandiganbayan
Exception: The doctrine of judicial stability does not apply where a 5. Regional Trial Courts
third party claimant is involved [Santos vs. Bayhon, 1991] 6. Family Courts
7. Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts,
 Courts of equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, and Municipal Circuit Trial
each other’s orders [Lapu-lapu Development and Housing Corp. vs. Courts
Group Management Corp., 2002]
SUPREME COURT
 The principle also bars a court from reviewing or interfering with
the judgment of a co-equal court over which it has no ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
appellate jurisdiction or power of review. [Villamor vs. Salas, 1991] Cases affecting:
i. Ambassadors,
 The doctrine applies with equal force to administrative bodies. ii. Other public ministers, and
When the law provides for an appeal from the decision of an iii. Consuls
administrative body to the SC or CA, it means that such body is co-
equal with the RTC in terms of rank and stature, and logically beyond Petitions for:
the control of the latter [Phil Sinter Corp. vs. Cagayan Electric Power, i. Certiorari
2002] ii. Prohibition
iii. Mandamus
iv. Habeas Corpus
I.JURISDICTION v. Quo Warranto
A. Classification of jurisdiction [Sec. 5(1), Art. VIII, Constitution]
1. Distinguish: Original And Appellate
 Parties seeking to question the resolutions of the Office of the
Original Appellate
Courts which, under the law, Courts which have the power to
OMB in criminal cases or non-administrative cases, may file an
actions or proceedings may review on appeal the decisions or original action for certiorari with the SC, not with the CA, when it is
originally be commenced orders of a lower court believed that the OMB acted with grave abuse of discretion.
[Ombudsman vs. Heirs of Margarita Vda. De Ventura, GR 151800,
2009, citing Estrada vs. Desierto, GR 156160, 2004)
2. Distinguish: General And Special
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
General Special Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against:
Competent to decide on their own Those which have no power to 1) Court of Appeals [S17, RA 296]
jurisdiction and to take cognizance decide on their own jurisdiction 2) COMELEC [S7, Art, IX, Constitution]
of all kinds of cases, unless and only try cases permitted by 3) Commission on Audit [S7, Art, IX, Constitution]
otherwise provided by the law or statute.
rules. (e.g. RTCs) (e.g. MTCs) 4) Sandiganbayan [PD 1606, as amended]
5) Court on Tax Appeals (en banc) [R.A. No. 9282; 1 Regalado 54]
3. Distinguish: Exclusive And Concurrent
 The certiorari jurisdiction of the SC has been rigorously
Exclusive Concurrent streamlined, such that R65 only admits case based on specific grounds
Power to adjudicate a case of Power conferred upon different provided therein. The rule applies if there is no appeal, or any other
proceeding to the exclusion of all courts, whether of the same or
other courts at that stage different ranks, to take cognizance plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. The
at the same stage of the same case independent action for certiorari will lie only if grave abuse of
in the same or different territories discretion is alleged and proven to exist. [Lagua vs. CA, GR 173390,
2012]
B. Doctrines Of Hierarchy Of Courts And Continuity Of  In Araullo vs. Aquino III, 2014, the SC held that petitions for
Jurisdiction certiorari and prohibition are appropriate remedies to raise
constitutional issues and to review and/or prohibit or nullify the acts of
An established policy that parties must observe the hierarchy of courts executive and legislative officials. With respect to the Court, however,
before they can seek relief directly from the Supreme Court. The the remedies of certiorari and prohibition are necessarily broader in
rationale for this rule is two-fold: scope and reach, and the writ of prohibition or certiorari may be issued
a. It would be an imposition upon the limited time of the Supreme to correct errors of jurisdiction committed not only by a tribunal,
Court; and corporation, board, or officer exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, and
b. It would inevitably result in a delay, intended or otherwise, in the ministerial functions but also to set right, undo, and restrain any act of
adjudication of cases, which in some instances, had to be remanded or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of (GADALEJ), by any branch or instrumentality of the Government,
procedure, or as better equipped to resolve the issues because the even if the latter does not exercise judicial, quasi-judicial, and
Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. ministerial functions.
DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION/ CONCURRENT ORIGINAL
DOCTRINE OF CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION a) With Court of Appeals
 i. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, against: Exceptional circumstances where SC may resolve factual issues:
1) RTCs i. Conclusion is grounded on speculation, surmises or
2) CSC conjectures;
3) CBAA ii. Inference is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible;
4) NLRC [St. Martin Funeral Homes vs. NLRC, 1998] iii. Grave abuse of discretion;
5) QJAs [Heirs of Hinog vs. Melicor, 2005] iv. Judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
v. Findings of fact are conflicting;
 Subject to the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts vi. No citation of specific evidence on which the factual findings
are based;
 Although there is concurrent jurisdiction as the Constitution grants vii. Finding of absence of facts is contradicted by the presence of
this to the SC, SC AM No. 07-7-12, December 4, 2007, provides that if evidence on record;
the petition involves an act/omission of a QJA, the petition shall only viii. Findings of the CA are contrary to those of the TC;
be cognizable by the CA and must be filed there. ix. CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant and undisputed
i. Petitions for Writ of Kalikasan [S3, Rules of Procedure facts that, if properly considered, would justify a different
for Environmental Cases] conclusion;
x. Findings of the CA are beyond the issues of the case;
b) With CA and RTC xi. Such findings are contrary to the admissions of both parties.
i. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against [Josefa vs. Zhandong, GR 150903, 2003]
lower courts and bodies
ii. Petitions for quo warranto
iii. Petitions for writs of habeas corpus COURT OF APPEALS

 Subject to the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC [see, S1, R47]
c) With RTC affecting ambassadors, public ministers and consuls.
d) With CA, RTC and Sandiganbayan – Petitions for Writ of Amparo CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
[S3, Rule on the Writ of Amparo] and Habeas Data [S3, Rule on the With SC
Writ of Habeas Data] i. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against:
1) RTCs
Appellate Jurisdiction 2) CSC
The SC shall have the power to review, revise, reverse, modify, or 3) CBAA
affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may 4) Other QJAs mentioned in R43
provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in: 5) NLRC
i. In all cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any
treaty, international or executive agreement, law, PD,  Although there is concurrent jurisdiction as the Constitution grants
proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in this to the SC, SC AM No. 07-7-12, December 4, 2007, provides that
question. if the petition involves an act/omission of a QJA, the petition shall
ii. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, only be cognizable by the CA and must be filed there.
assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation
thereto. ii. Petitions for Writ of Kalikasan
iii. All cases in which the jurisdiction of the lower court is in
issue. With SC and RTC
iv. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is i. Petitions for CPM against lower courts and bodies
reclusion perpetua or higher. ii. Petitions for quo warranto
v. All cases in which only an error or question of law is iii. Petitions for writs of habeas corpus
involved. [S5(2), Art. VIII, Constitution]
With SC, RTC, Sandiganbayan
By way of Petition for Review on Certiorari (Appeal by Certiorari Petitions for Writ of Amparo [S3, Rule on the Writ of Amparo] and
under R45) against: Habeas Data [S3, Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data]
i. CA
ii. Sandiganbayan EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION
iii. RTC a) By Ordinary Appeal
 Pure questions of law [S1, R45] i. From judgments of RTC and Family Courts
 Cases falling under S5, Art. VIII, Constitution (refer ii. Over decisions of the MTCs in cadastral and land
above) registration cases pursuant to its delegated jurisdiction
iv. CTA, in its decisions rendered en banc b) By Petition for Review
v. MeTC, MTC, MCTC in the exercise of their delegated i. From judgments of the RTC rendered in its appellate
jurisdiction, where the decision, had it been rendered by the jurisdiction
RTC, would be appealable directly to the SC. ii. From decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of the CSC
and other bodies mentioned in R43
 When there is no dispute as to fact, the question of whether the iii. From decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in
conclusion drawn therefrom is correct or not, is a question of law administrative disciplinary cases
[First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc. vs. PBComm, GR 202836,
June 19, 2018, Leonen, J.]  The enumeration of QJAs under S1, R43 is not exclusive. [Wong
vs. Wong, GR 180364, 2014]
Only pure questions of law are involved when no evidentiary matters
are to be evaluated by the SC. If the only issue is whether or not the
conclusions of the trial court are in consonance with law and SANDIGANBAYAN
jurisprudence, then the issue is a pure question of law. [Urbano vs.
Chavez, 1990] Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
i. Violations of RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Note that the SC has held that appeals from QJAs, even only a question Act
of law alone, may be brought to the CA via R43 of the Rules of Court. ii. Violations of RA 1379 or An Act Declaring Forfeiture in
This constitutes an exception to the general rule that appeals on pure Favor of the State Any Property Found to have been
questions of law are brought to the SC. [Santos vs. Committee on Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer or Employee and
Human Settlement, GR 158071, 2009] Providing for the Proceedings Therefor
 iii. Bribery, where one or more of the principal accused are amount refers to the demand or claim
occupying the following positions in the government, whether b) Matters of probate (testate or intestate), where the
in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the amount refers to gross value of the estate
commission of the offense c) In all other cases where the amount refers to the demand,
iv. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind,
other crimes committed by the public officials and employees attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs
mentioned in subsection a of section 4 as amended, in relation iv. All actions involving the contract of marriage and family
to their office relations, and all civil actions and special proceedings falling
v. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Juvenile and
with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14-A Domestic Relations Court
vi. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, v. All civil actions and special proceedings falling within the
injunctions and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its exclusive original jurisdiction of the Court of Agrarian
appellate jurisdiction and petitions of similar nature, including Reform
quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which vi. All cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
may be filed under EO Nos. 1, 2, 14, 14-A, issued in 1986. tribunal, person, or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
[S4, PD 1606, as amended by RA 10660] functions. This jurisdiction is often describes as “general”
jurisdiction of the RTC making it a court of “general
RTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the Information jurisdiction.”
– vii. Intra-Corporate controversies
a) Does not allege any damage to the government or any viii. Petitions for Declaratory Relief [S1, R63]
bribery;
b) Alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from Concurrent Original Jurisdiction
the same or closely related transactions or acts in an amount a) With SC in cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers and
not exceeding 1 million consuls
Subject to rules promulgated by SC, the cases falling under the b) With SC and CA
jurisdiction of the RTC shall be tried in a judicial region other than i. Petitions for CPM against lower courts and bodies
where the official holds office. ii. Petitions for QW
iii. Petitions for writs of habeas corpus
c) With SC, CA and Sandiganbayan
Exclusive original jurisdiction shall be vested in the proper RTC, Petitions for Writ of Amparo [S3, Rule on the Writ of Amparo]
MeTC, MTC, and MCTC, as the case may be, where none of the and Habeas Data [S3, Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data]
accused are occupying positions with SG 27 or higher, or military and
PNP officers mentioned above. Appellate Jurisdiction over cases decided by lower courts in their
respective territorial jurisdictions, except those made in the exercise of
The SB shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction final judgments, delegated jurisdiction, which are appealable in the same manner as
resolutions or orders or RTCs whether in the exercise of their own decisions of the RTC
original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein
provided. [S4, PD 1606, as amended by RA 10660] Special Jurisdiction
SC may designate certain branches of RTC to try exclusively criminal
The SB shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land
issuance of the writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas reform cases not falling within the jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial
corpus, injunctions and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its body and other special cases in the interest of justice
appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including
quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be FAMILY COURTS
filed under EO Nos. 1, 2, 14, 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided that the
jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be exclusive of the SC. [S4, a) Criminal cases where one or more accused is below 18 but not less
PD 1606, as amended by RA 10660] than 9 years old or where one or more victims was a minor at the
time of the commission of the offense
b) Petitions for guardianship, custody of children and habeas corpus in
Concurrent Original Jurisdiction relation to children
c) Petitions for adoption of children and revocation thereof
WITH SC, CA and RTC d) Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of
Petitions for Writ of Amparo [S3, Rule on the Writ of Amparo] and marriage and those relating to status and property relations of
Habeas Data [S3, Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data] husband and wife or those living together under different status and
agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of
gains
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT e) Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment
f) Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of the
Family Code
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction g) Petitions for –
i. All civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable 1) Declaration of status of children as dependent, abandoned, or
of pecuniary estimation neglected children
ii. Civil actions involving title to, or possession of real property, or 2) Voluntary or involuntary commitment of children
any interest therein, where assessed value exceeds 20K, outside 3) Suspension, termination, or restoration of parental authority
Metro Manila, or exceeds 50K in Metro Manila 4) Other cases cognizable under PD 603, EO 56, s. 1986, and
Exception: FEUD other related laws
h) Petitions for constitution of family home
 An action “involving title to real property” means that the i) Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act, as
plaintiff’s cause of action is based on a claim that he owns such amended (now RA 9165)
property or that he has the legal rights to have exclusive control, j) Violations of RA 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against
possession, enjoyment, or disposition of the same. Title is the “legal Child Abuse Exploitation and Discrimination Act)
link between (1) a person who owns the property and (2) the property k) Cases of Violence Against Women and Children [S5, RA 8369]
itself.” [Heirs of Sebe vs. Heirs of Sevilla, GR 174497, 2009] METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS,
iii. If the amount involved exceeds 300K outside MM or exceed MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
400K in MM in the following cases:
a) Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction a) How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired
a) Where value of personal property, estate, or amount of demand Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by his filing of the complaint
does not exceed 300K outside MM or does not exceed 400K in or petition. By doing so, he submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
MM, exclusive of interests, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s court. [Davao Light & Power Co., Inc. vs. CA, 1991]
fees, litigation expenses, and costs, expenses, and costs, in the
following cases: b) How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired
1) Civil actions i. By his voluntary appearance In court and his submission to
2) Probate proceedings (testate/intestate) its authority; or
3) Provisional remedies in proper cases ii. By service of summons. [R14.20; Macasaet vs. Co, GR
b) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer (FEUD) 156759, 2013]
When defendant raises questions of ownership in his pleadings
and the question of possession cannot be resolved without  Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is necessary for the
deciding issue of ownership, the latter issue shall be resolved court to validly try and decide a case only in an action in personam. It
only to determine the former issue. is not a prerequisite in an action in rem or quasi in rem, provided that
Forcible Entry Unlawful Detainer the court acquires jurisdiction over the res. [Alba v. CA, GR 164041,
Possession of the defendant is unlawful Possession of the defendant is 2005]
ab initio as he acquires property by inceptively lawful ab initio but
force, intimidation, strategy, threat, or becomes illegal by reason of the
stealth (FISTS). termination of his right to possession
An objection to jurisdiction over the person of the defendant may be
of the property under his contract raised as –
(express or implied) with the  a ground in a Motion to Dismiss [R16.1(a)]; or
plaintiff.
No previous demand for defendant to Demand is jurisdictional.
 an affirmative defense in an Answer [R16.6]
vacate the premises is necessary.
Plaintiff must prove that he was in prior Plaintiff need not have been in prior However, if not raised in such Motion or Answer, it is deemed waived.
physical possession of the premises until physical possession. It is not one of those defenses not deemed waived under Section 1,
he was deprived thereof by defendant. Rule 9. [Boston Equity Resources, Inc. v. CA, GR 173946, 2013]
The 1-year period is generally counted Period is counted from the date of
from date of actual entry on land. last letter of demand.
Issue: Who was in prior possession de Issue: Whether the defendant’s right 2. Jurisdiction over the subject-matter
facto? to possess has expired or not. The power of a particular court to hear the type of case that is then
before it [Riano citing Black’s Law Dictionary]
c) All civil actions involving title to, or possession of, real property,
or any interest therein where assessed value of property or  Jurisdiction over the subject matter refers to the power or authority
interest therein does not exceed 20K outside MM or does not of courts to hear and decide cases of a general class. It is conferred by
exceed 50K in MM the Constitution or by law. It is not acquired through administrative
d) Inclusion and exclusion of voters [S49, OEC] issuances or court orders. It is not acquired by agreement, stipulation,
waiver, or silence. Any decision by a court, without a law vesting
Special Jurisdiction over petitions for writ of habeas corpus OR jurisdiction upon such court, is void [De Pedro vs. Romasan Dev’t
application for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all RTC judges Corporation, GR 194751, November 26, 2014, Leonen, J.]
in the province or city
It is the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to
Delegated Jurisdiction of 1st level courts assigned by SC to hear and which the proceedings in question belong. [Reyes v. Diaz (1941)]
decide cadastral and land registration cases covering:
a) Lots where there is no controversy or opposition a) Meaning of Jurisdiction over the Subject-Matter is the
b) Contested lots the value of which does not exceed 100K, power of a particular court to hear the type of case that is then
said value is to be ascertained: before it.
1) By claimant’s affidavit;
2) By agreement of respective claimants, if there are more than It is the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to
one;
which the proceedings in question belong. [Reyes vs. Diaz, 1941]
3) From corresponding tax declaration of the real property
Subject matter jurisdiction refers to the judicial power that has been
 MTC decisions in cadastral and land registration cases are vested in a specific type of court by the legal system, in terms of what
appealable in the same manner as RTC decisions [S34, BP 129, as kinds of action it can decide. (e.g. Regional Trial Courts as compared
amended by RA 7691] to Shari’a Courts) and what powers it can exercise in relation thereto.
(e.g. issuance of Provisional Remedies) Specifically:
D. Aspects Of Jurisdiction
Courts may exercise their powers validly and with binding effect if With respect to the Supreme Court, it has the plenary judicial power
they acquire jurisdiction over: (a) the cause of action or the subject vested in it by the Constitution (S5, Art. VIII), of which it cannot be
matter of the case; (b) the thing or the res; (c) the parties; and (d) the deprived by Congress, pursuant to S2, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution.
remedy [De Pedro vs. Romasan Dev’t Corporation, GR 194751,  It includes the power of judicial review, which is the power of the
November 26, 2014, Leonen, J.] courts to test the validity of executive and legislative acts for their
conformity with the Constitution. (Garcia vs. Executive
1. Jurisdiction Over The Parties Secretary, GR 157584, 2009)
The manner by which the court acquires jurisdiction over the parties
depends on whether the party is the plaintiff or the defendant With respect to any other court, it is the judicial power vested in such
 Jurisdiction over the parties refers to the power of the court to make particular kind of court by the pertinent law. E.g. the jurisdiction of the
decisions that are binding on persons. The courts acquire jurisdiction Shari’a Circuit Court is the judicial power that is vested in it by Art.
over complainants or petitioners as soon as they file their complaints or 155, PD 1803.
petitions. Over the persons of defendants or respondents, courts acquire
jurisdiction by a valid service of summons or through their voluntary Three (3) consequences automatically and inevitably flow from the
submission. Generally, a person voluntarily submits to the court’s judicial power conferred by law on a court:
jurisdiction when he or she participates in the trial despite improper 1) Subject-matter jurisdiction exists only when and it is because it is
service of summons. prescribed by law;
The mode of acquisition of jurisdiction over the plaintiff and the 2) By the very essence of judicial power, subject-matter jurisdiction
defendant applies to both ordinary and special civil actions like can be vested by law only upon a court; and
mandamus or unlawful detainer cases [De Pedro vs. Romasan Dev’t 3) Therefore, a body that purports to be a court is not a court if there
Corporation, GR 194751, November 26, 2014, Leonen, J.] is no law that has vested it with judicial power.
For example: The Maeng Tribal Court is not a court because there is no before the court. [Province of Aklan vs. Jody King Construction and
law that has vested it with judicial power. [Badua vs. Cordillera Dev’t Corp., GR 197592, 2013]
Bodong, GR 92649, 1991]
Exceptions:
The CSC may have been vested with the power to settle actual i. Where there is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the
controversies under EO 292, but it is not a court because it is not part doctrine
of the judicial department of government. [Prof. Avena] ii. Where the challenged administrative act is patently illegal,
amounting to lack of jurisdiction
b) Distinguish: Jurisdiction and Exercise of Jurisdiction iii. Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will
Jurisdiction refers to the power or authority of the court. [Arranza v. irretrievably prejudice the complainant
BF Homes (2000)] while the exercise of this power or authority is the iv. Where the amount involved is relatively small
exercise of jurisdiction. v. Where the question involved is purely legal and will ultimately
have to be decided by the courts
 Jurisdiction is not the same as the exercise of jurisdiction. As vi. Where judicial intervention is urgent
distinguished from the exercise of jurisdiction, jurisdiction is the vii. When its application may cause great and irreparable damage
viii. Where the controverted act violates due process
authority to decide a cause, and not the decision rendered therein.
ix. When the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies
Where there is jurisdiction over the person and the subject matter, the
has been rendered moot
decision on all other questions arising in the case is but an exercise of x. When there is no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy
jurisdiction. The errors which the court may commit in such exercise of xi. When strong public interest is involved
jurisdiction are merely errors of judgment which are proper subject of xii. In quo warranto proceedings
an appeal. [Tolentino vs. Leviste, GR 156118, 2004]
c) How jurisdiction is conferred and determined e) Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction over subject matter is conferred by law, which may be (Also known as Doctrine of Continuity of Jurisdiction)
either the Constitution or statute and determined by the allegations in
the complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts Once jurisdiction of a court attaches, it continues until the case is
constituting the plaintiff’s cause or causes of action. [Medical Plaza finally terminated. The trial court cannot be ousted by subsequent
Makati Condominium v. Cullen, GR 181416, 2013] happenings or events, although of a character which would have
prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance. The court
Consequences of rule that jurisdiction is conferred by law. It cannot be: retains that jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the case. [Bantua vs.
i. Conferred by voluntary act or agreement of the parties; Mercader, GR 136048, 2001)]
ii. Acquired, waived, enlarged, or diminished by any act or
omission of the parties; or Where a court has already obtained and is exercising jurisdiction over a
iii. Conferred by the acquiescence of the court [Dela Rosa vs. controversy, its jurisdiction to proceed to the final determination of the
Roldan, GR 133882, 2006] case is not affected by new legislation placing jurisdiction over such
iv. Conferred by administrative policy of any court [Arranza vs. proceeding in another tribunal. [Southern Food vs. Salas, GR 56428,
BF Homes, Inc., GR 131683, 2000] 1992]
v. Conferred by a court’s unilateral assumption of jurisdiction
[Tolentino vs. Social Security Commission, 1985] As a consequence, jurisdiction is not affected by a new law placing a
vi. Conferred by consent or waiver [Cadimas vs. Carrion, GR proceeding under the jurisdiction of another tribunal, except:
180394, 2008] i. Where there is an express provision in the statute
ii. The statute is clearly intended to apply to actions pending
Generally, the jurisdiction of a court is determined by the statute in before its enactment. [People v. Cawaling (1998)]
force at the time of the commencement of the action, unless such
statute provides for its retroactive application. [Baritua vs. Mercader,
GR 136048, 2001]
f) Objections to Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter
Once vested by the allegations in the complaint, jurisdiction also When it appears from the pleadings or evidence on record that the
remains vested irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, the court shall
recover upon all or some claims asserted therein. [City of Dumaguete dismiss the same. [Rule 9, Sec. 1]
v. PPA, GR 168973, 2011]
The court may on its own initiative object to an erroneous jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is not affected by the pleas set up by the defendant in his and may ex mero motu, take cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any
answer or in a motion to dismiss, otherwise, jurisdiction would be point in the case where the fact is developed. The court has a clearly
dependent on his whims. [Sindico vs. Diaz, GR 147444, 2004] recognized right to determine its own jurisdiction in any proceeding
It also does not depend upon defenses set up in the answer or upon the [Fabian v. Desierto, GR 129742, 1998].
motion to dismiss; otherwise, the question would depend almost
entirely on the defendant. The jurisdiction of a court over a subject matter of the action is a
matter of law and may not be conferred by consent or agreement of
 The MTC does not lost jurisdiction over ejectment cases by mere the parties. The lack of jurisdiction of a court may be raised at any
allegation of a tenancy relationship. However, if after hearing, tenancy stage of the proceedings, even on appeal. [SEAFDEC vs. NLRC,
had in fact been shown to be the real issue, the court should dismiss the 1992]
case for lack of jurisdiction. [Hilado v. Chavez, GR 134742, 2004]
The earliest opportunity of a party to raise the issue of jurisdiction is in
d) Distinguish: Doctrine of Primary Administrative Jurisdiction a motion to dismiss filed before the filing or service of an answer. Lack
and Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies of jurisdiction over subject matter is a ground for a motion to dismiss.
[R16, S1 (b)]
 The doctrine primary jurisdiction holds that if a case is such that its
determination requires the expertise, specialized training and If no motion is filed, the defense of lack of jurisdiction may be raised
knowledge of the proper administrative bodies, relief must first be as an affirmative defense in the answer. [R16, S6].
obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy is supplied
by the courts even if the matter may well be within their proper  When the court dismisses the complaint for lack of jurisdiction over
jurisdiction. subject matter, it is submitted that the court should not remand the case
to another court with the proper jurisdiction. Its only has authority to
The objective of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is to guide the dismiss and not to make any other order. [Riano]
court in determining whether it should refrain from exercising its
jurisdiction until after an administrative agency has determined some
question or some aspect of some question arising in the proceeding
  The rule is that a party is entitled only to such relief consistent with
g) Effect of Estoppel on Objection to Jurisdiction and limited to that sought by the pleadings or incidental thereto. A trial
General Rule: Estoppel does not apply to confer jurisdiction to a court would be acting beyond its jurisdiction if it grants relief to a party
tribunal that has none over a cause of action. Jurisdiction is conferred beyond the scope of the pleadings [Gonzaga vs. CA, GR 142037, 2004]
by law. Where there is none, no agreement of the parties can provide
one. Settled is the rule that the decision of a tribunal not vested with
appropriate jurisdiction is null and void. [SEAFDEC-AQD v. NLRC 4. Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation
(1992)] “Res,” in civil law is a “thing” or “object.” It is everything that may
form an object of rights as opposed to a “persona,” which is the subject
Exception: Participation in all stages of the case before the trial court, of rights. It includes object, subject matter or status. [Riano citing
that included invoking its authority in asking for affirmative relief, Black’s Law Dictionary]
effectively barred petitioner by estoppel from challenging the court’s
jurisdiction. [Soliven v. Fastforms (2004)]  Jurisdiction over the thing or res is the power of the court over an
object or thing being litigated. The court may acquire jurisdiction over
 Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy espoused the doctrine of estoppel by laches, the thing by actually or constructively seizing or placing it under the
which held that a party may be barred from questioning a court’s court’s custody [De Pedro vs. Romasan Dev’t Corporation, GR
jurisdiction after invoking the court’s authority in order to secure 194751, November 26, 2014, Leonen, J.]
affirmative relief against its opponent, when laches would prevent the
issue of lack of jurisdiction from being raised for the first time on Jurisdiction over the res refers to the court’s jurisdiction over the thing
appeal by a litigant whose purpose is to annul everything done in a trial or the property which is the subject of the action. [Riano]
in which it has actively participated [Francel Realty Corp. vs. Sycip,
GR 154684, 2005] Jurisdiction over the res may be acquired:
i. By placing the property under its custody or by seizure of the
 Tijam must be construed as an exception to the general rule and thing under legal process whereby it is brought into actual
applied only in the most exceptional cases where the factual milieu is custody of law (custodia legis); and
similar to that in the said case [Figueroa vs. People, GR 147406, 2008] E.g. Attachment or garnishment of property

Jurisdiction by estoppel ii. By statutory authority conferring upon the court the power to deal
While it is true that the issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any time, with certain property within the territorial jurisdiction.
this rule presupposes that estoppel has not supervened. In this case, E.g. Suits involving the status of the parties or suits involving the
respondent (defendant below) actively participated in all stages of the property in the Philippines of non-resident defendants
proceedings before the trial court and invoked its authority by asking
for an affirmative relief. Clearly, respondent is estopped from This is called potential jurisdiction over the res and results from
challenging the trial court’s jurisdiction, especially when an adverse institution of a legal proceedings under such statute by which the
judgment has been rendered. [Soliven vs. Fastform, GR 139031, 2004] power of the court is recognized and made effective [Biaco vs.
Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, GR 161417, 2007]
Other Principles
Cannot be subject of compromise In order that the court may exercise power of the res, it is not necessary
No compromise upon jurisdiction of courts shall be valid [Art. 2035, that the court should take actual custody of the property, potential
CC] custody thereof being sufficient. There is potential custody when, from
the nature of the action brought, the power of the court over the
Retroactivity property is impliedly recognized by law [Marcos, Jr. vs. Republic, GR
The provisions of RA 7691 amending BP 129 shall apply to all civil 189434, 2014]
cases that have not yet reached the pre-trial stage [S7, RA 7691].
In a quasi in rem action, jurisdiction of the person of the nonresident
The resolution of the SC amending provision of the Rules of Court defendant is not necessary and service of summons is required only for
does not have to specify that it has retroactive effect as it pertains to the purpose of complying with the requirement of due process. An
procedural matter. Contrary to private respondent’s allegation that the action quasi in rem is an action between parties where the direct object
matter was no longer pending and undetermined, the issue of whether is to reach and dispose of property owned by them, or of some interest
the petition for certiorari was timely filed was still pending therein [De Midgely vs. Ferandos, 1975]
reconsideration when the amendment to Sec. 4, R65 took effect on
September 1, 2000, hence, covered by its retroactive application [Siena  The CA, not the CTA, has jurisdiction over a case alleging non-
Realty Corp. vs. Gal-lang, GR 145169, 2004] compliance with the pertinent provisions of the LGC on tax
delinquency sale. A plain reading of Magpile’s petition before the RTC
3. Jurisdiction Over The Issues would show that he did not assail the legality or validity and
An issue is a disputed point or question to which parties to an action reasonableness or correctness of the RPT assessment and collection.
have narrowed down their several allegations and upon which they are What he is questioning is the alleged denial of due process in the
desirous of obtaining a decision. [Riano citing Black’s Law Dictionary] levying of his property [Salva vs. Magpile, GR 220440, 2017]
5. Jurisdiction over the remedies
The SC had occasion to note that in some instances it has been held Courts exercise the powers conferred on them with binding effect if
that that the court must also have jurisdiction over the issues – that is, they acquire jurisdiction over: "(a) the cause of action or the subject
the issue being tried and decided by the court be within the ssues raised matter of the case; (b) the thing or the res; (c) the parties; and (d) the
in the pleadings of the parties. [Reyes v. Diaz, 1941] remedy [First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc. vs. PBComm, GR
202836, June 19, 2018, Leonen, J., citing De Pedro case, infra]
Generally, jurisdiction over the issues is conferred and determined by:
i. The pleadings of the parties, which present the issues to be tried A petition for annulment of judgment is a recourse that is equitable in
and determine whether or not the issues are of fact or law [Reyes character. It is independent of the case and is “allowed only in
v. Diaz]; exceptional cases as where there is no available or other adequate
ii. Stipulation of the parties as when, in the pre-trial, the parties remedy.”
enter into stipulations of facts or enter into agreement simplifying An action for annulment of judgment may be filed to assail Regional
the issues of the case [S2, R18]; Trial Court judgments when resort to other remedies can no longer be
iii. Waiver or failure to object to evidence on a matter not raised in had through no fault of petitioner.
the pleadings. Here, the parties try with their express or implied
consent [S5, R10]. An action for annulment of judgment may be based on only two
grounds: 1) extrinsic fraud; and 2) lack of jurisdiction.
 Summary Procedure And Barangay Conciliation
Extrinsic fraud shall not be a valid ground if it was availed of, or could
have been availed of, in a motion for new trial or petition for relief. CASES COVERED BY REVISED RULES OF PROCEDURE
Lack of jurisdiction being a valid ground for annulment of judgments, FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES
circumstances that negate the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction — This Rule shall govern the procedure in actions before the MeTCs,
including defective service of summons — are causes for an action for MTC in Cities, MTCs and MCTCs for payment of money where the
annulment of judgments. value of the claim does not exceed P200, 000 exclusive of interest and
costs. [Section 2, AM No. 08-8-7-SC, February 1, 2016]
However, this court had an occasion to say that an action for
annulment of judgment "may not be invoked (1) where the party has  The limit has been raised to 300, 000, to take effect on August 1,
availed himself of the remedy of new trial, appeal, petition for relief, or 2018 [AM No. 08-8-7-SC, July 10, 2018] However, this was
other appropriate remedy and lost; or (2) where he has failed to avail superseded in a later resolution, amending the jurisdictional amount of
himself of those remedies through his own fault or negligence.” Thus, these courts under RA 7691 to 400, 000 for the MeTCs and 300, 000
an action for annulment of judgment is not always readily available for the MTC in Cities, MTCs and MCTCs, exclusive of interest and
even if there are causes for annulling a judgment [De Pedro vs. costs, to take effect on April 1, 2019 [SC Resolution, February 26,
Romasan Development Corporation, GR 194751, November 26, 2014, 2019]
Leonen, J.]
Applicability
All actions which are purely civil in nature, where the claim or relief
E. Distinguish: Error of Jurisdiction and Error of Judgment prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or reimbursement of
sum of money, and
Error of Jurisdiction Error of Judgment Civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed before the institution of the
One where the act complained of One which the court may commit criminal action, or reserved upon the filing of the criminal action in
was (1) without jurisdiction, (2) in in the exercise of its jurisdiction.
excess of jurisdiction, or (3) with It includes errors of procedure or court (pursuant to Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
grave abuse of discretion mistakes in the court’s findings. Procedure)
amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
Correctible only by the Correctible by appeal.
extraordinary writ of certiorari. [Cabrera vs. Lapid, GR 129098,
The claim or demand may be;
[Cabrera vs. Lapid, GR 129098, 2006] 1) For money owned under any of the following;
2006] i. Contract of Lease;
But note: S8, R40 allows an RTC
ii. Contract of Loan;
with original jurisdiction over a iii. Contract of Services;
case brought on appeal from a iv. Contract of Sale; or
lower court without jurisdiction
over the subject matter to decide
v. Contract of Mortgage;
case on the merits. 2) For damages arising from any of the following;
Decision is a total nullity and may Erroneous judgment is not a void i. Fault or negligence;
struck down at any time, even on judgment. ii. Quasi-contract; or
appeal; EXCEPT when party
raising the issue is barred by iii. Contract;
estoppel [Suntay vs. Gocolay, GR 3) The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration
144892, 2005] award involving a money claim covered by this Rule pursuant to
Renders a judgment void or Ground for reversal only if it is
voidable. shown that prejudice has been Sec. 417, LGC.
caused. [Section 2, AM No. 08-8-7-SC, February 1, 2016]

F. Distinguish: Jurisdiction and Venue Commencement of Small Claims Action [SEC. 5]

How commenced: By filing with the court an accomplished and
Venue Jurisdiction verified STATEMENT OF CLAIM in duplicate
Place where the case is to be heard Authority to hear and determine a
and tried. [Nocum vs. Tan, GR case. CASES COVERED BY RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE
145022, 2005]
Rule shall govern the summary procedure in the MTC, MTC in Cities,
Procedural. Substantive.
Establishes a relation between Establishes a relation between the MCTC in the following cases falling within their jurisdiction:
plaintiff and defendant, or court and the subject matter.
petitioner and respondent. Civil Cases Criminal Cases
May be changed by the written Fixed by law and cannot be
All cases of forcible entry and unlawful Violation of Bouncing Checks Law (BP
agreement of the parties; or conferred by the act or agreement
detainer (FEUD), irrespective of the 22)
waived. of the parties.
amount of damages or unpaid rentals Violations of Municipal or City
Not a ground for a motu propio Lack of jurisdiction over the subject sought to be recovered. Where attorney‘s Ordinances
dismissal [Rudolf Lietz Holdings, matter is a ground for a motu fees are awarded, the same shall not Violations of Rental Law
Inc. vs. RD of Paranaque City, GR propio dismissal. exceed P20,000
133240, 2000]
All other cases where the total amount of All other criminal cases where the penalty
Except in Summary Procedure
the plaintiff‘s claim does not exceed P100, prescribed is imprisonment not exceeding
cases [R4, Rule on SP]
000 (outside MM) or P200,000 (in MM), 6 months, or fine not exceeding P1,000, or
Objection to an improper venue Question on jurisdiction over the exclusive of interest and costs. (except both, irrespective of other imposable
must be raised either in a MTD or SM may be raised at any stage of probate proceedings) penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the
in the Answer because of S1, R9 the proceedings since it is conferred [Section 1, RRSP, as amended by AM No. civil liability arising therefrom, provided,
(objections and defenses not by law, although a party may be 02-11-09-SC] that in offenses involving damage to
pleaded are deemed waived). barred from raising it on the ground property through criminal negligence, rule
of estoppel [La’o vs. Republic, GR shall govern where the
160719, 2006]
imposable fine does not exceed P10k.

Rule shall not apply:

Venue is procedural, not jurisdictional, hence, it may be waived. It is
(1) To a civil case where plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the
meant to provide convenience to the parties, rather than restrict their
same complaint with another cause of action subject to ordinary
access to the courts as it relates to the place of trial [Heirs of Lopez vs.
procedure
De Castro, GR 112905, 2000]
(2) To a criminal case where offense charged is necessarily related to
 While the rules on venue are for the convenience of plaintiffs, these another criminal case subject to ordinary procedure
rules do not give them unbounded freedom to file their cases wherever
they may please [Hygienic Packaging Corporation vs. Nutri-Asia, Inc. A.2. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO ANSWER (SEC. 6)
GR 201302, January 23, 2019, Leonen, J.] If defendant fail to answer the complaint within the period provided,
court (motu proprio or on motion of plaintiff) shall render judgment
G.Jurisdiction Over Small Claims, Cases Covered By The Rules On The judgment:
(1) As may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and
(2) Limited to what is prayed for iv. Actions which may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.
9) Any class of disputes which the President may determine in
the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the
The court may in its discretion reduce the amount of damages and Secretary of Justice;
attorney’s fees claimed for being excessive or unconscionable without 10) Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian
prejudice to the applicability of Sec. 4, Rule 18 ROC, if there are 2 or Reform Law (CARL) (Secs. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);
more defendants. 11) Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-
employee relations [Montoya vs. Escayo, et al., 1989]
Determination of Applicability 12) Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may be
The court shall issue an order declaring whether or not the case shall be filed directly in court. [Sanchez vs. Hon. Tupas, 1988]
governed by this Rule. A patently erroneous determination of the Rule
of Summary Procedure is a ground for disciplinary action.  Presidential Decree No. 1508 requires that the parties who actually
reside in the same city or municipality should bring their controversy
Prohibited pleadings under the rules of Summary Procedure first to the Barangay Court for possible amicable settlement before
(D3R2 MCBENTI) filing a complaint in court. This requirement is compulsory (as ruled in
the cited case of Morato vs. Go, 125 SCRA 444), [1983] and non-
1) Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or compliance of the same could affect the sufficiency of the cause of
information except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over action and make the complaint vulnerable to dismissal on the ground of
the subject matter, or failure to comply with the barangay lack of cause of action or prematurity (Peregrina vs. Panis, 133 SCRA
conciliation; 75) [1984]. It must be borne in mind that the purpose of the
2) Motion for a bill of particulars; conciliation process at the barangay level is to discourage
3) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or indiscriminate filing of cases in court in order to decongest the clogged
for opening of trial; dockets and in the process enhance the quality of justice dispensed by
4) Petition for relief from judgment; courts [Sanchez vs. Hon. Tupas, 1988]
5) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any
other paper; Remedies of a party if the compromise or agreement in the Lupong
6) Memoranda; Tagapamayapa is not followed:
7) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any
interlocutory order issued by the court; 1) Under Section 417 of the Local Government Code, such amicable
8) Motion to declare the defendant in default; settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by execution by
9) Dilatory motions for postponement; the Barangay Lupon within six (6) months from the date of
10) Reply; settlement;
11) Third party complaints; and 2) By filing an action to enforce such settlement in the appropriate
12) Intervention city or municipal court, if beyond the six-month period; or
3) To consider it rescinded and insist upon his original demand
under Art. 2041, Civil Code. [Miguel vs Montanez, GR 191336,
January 25, 2012]
CASES COVERED BY BARANGAY CONCILIATION
General Rule: ALL disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation  Because the respondent failed to comply with the terms of
pursuant to the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law and prior the Kasunduang Pag-aayos, said agreement is deemed rescinded
recourse thereto is a precondition before filing a complaint in court or pursuant to Article 2041 of the New Civil Code and the petitioner can
any government offices. insist on his original demand. Perforce, the complaint for collection of
sum of money is the proper remedy.
Exceptions where parties may go directly to court. In these cases,
referral to barangay conciliation is not a condition precedent for filing Considering that the Kasunduang Pag-aayos is deemed rescinded by
a case to court: the non-compliance of the respondent of the terms thereof, remanding
1) Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or the case to the trial court for the enforcement of said agreement is
instrumentality thereof; clearly unwarranted. [Miguel vs Montanez, supra]
2) Where one party is a public Officer or employee and the dispute
relates to the performance of his official functions;  Barangay conciliation is a condition precedent for filing a case. The
3) Where the dispute involves real properties located in different failure to comply with a condition precedent is a ground for a MTD
cities and municipalities, unless the parties thereto agree to under Section 1(j), R16 but the dismissal is without prejudice [Section
submit their difference to amicable settlement by an appropriate 5, R16]
Lupon;
4) Any complaint by or against corporations, partnerships or H. How Jurisdiction Is Determined
juridical entities, since only individuals shall be parties to
Barangay conciliation proceedings either as complainants or
respondents [Sec. 1, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules]
5) Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of
II. CIVIL PROCEDURE
different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay
units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit A.GENERAL PROVISIONS
their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon;
6) Offenses for which the law prescribes a maximum penalty of B. ACTIONS
imprisonment exceeding one [1] year or a fine of over P5,000.00; An action is the legal and formal demand of one’s right from another
7) Offenses where there is no private offended party; person made and insisted upon in a court of justice. The determinative
8) Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent operative act, which converts a claim into an action is its filing with a
injustice from being committed or further continued, specifically court of justice. [Riano] It is the method of applying legal remedies
the following: according to definite established rules [Natcher vs. CA, GR 133000,
i. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or 2001]
detention [Sec. 412 (b) (1), Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law]; As distinguished from the cause of action, which is the fact or
ii. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of combination of facts which affords a party a right to judicial
his rightful custody over another or a person illegally interference in his behalf [Into v. Valle (2005)] and which is the basis
deprived of or on acting in his behalf; of ordinary civil actions. [Rule 2, Sec.1]
iii. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as
preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal 1. Meaning of ordinary civil actions
property and support during the pendency of the action;
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 [Sec. Local Action Transitory Action
Venue depends upon the location of the Venue depends upon the residence of the
3(a) R1, RoC] and is governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions. property involved in the litigation plaintiff or the defendant at the option of
(Riano) the plaintiff (Riano)
E.g. Action to recover real property E.g. Action to recover sum of money
2. Meaning of special civil actions
A special civil action is generally brought or filed for the same purpose  The determination of whether the action is local or transitory is
as that of an ordinary civil action but subject to different rules [R1.3 necessary to determine the proper venue of the action [S1, R4 in
(a), par. 2] relation to S2, R4]

Rules 62 to 71 provide for SCAs. However, despite having particular Basis of distinction
rules which govern them, the rules for ordinary civil actions still apply. If action is founded on privity of contract between parties, then the
action is transitory.
3. Meaning of criminal actions
One by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or But if there is no privity of contract and the action is founded on privity
omission punishable by law [R1, Sec. 3(b)] of estate only, such as a covenant that runs with the land in the hands
of remote grantees, then the action is local and must be brought in the
4. Distinguish: civil actions and special proceedings place where the land lies.

Civil Actions Special Proceedings 7. Actions in rem, in personam and quasi in rem
The purpose of an action is either to The purpose of a special proceeding is to
protect a right or prevent or redress a establish a status, a right or a particular
wrong fact (Sec. 3, Rule 1, ROC) In Rem In Personam Quasi in Rem
Involves a right and a violation of May involve a right but there need One which seeks to One which seeks to one which seeks to
such right by the defendant, which not be a violation of such a right determine the state enforce personal directly subject the
causes some damage or prejudice or condition of a rights and property or interest
to the plaintiff thing obligations brought of named
Cannot be immediately and Can be immediately and directly against the person. defendants to the
directly appealed to the appellate appealed to the appellate court Its purpose is to obligation or lien
court until after final judgment on impose, through the of the plaintiff
the merits judgment of the
court, some
liability directly
upon the person of
the defendant
5. Personal actions and real actions Jurisdiction over Jurisdiction over Jurisdiction over
the person is not a the person is the person is not a
Personal Actions Real Actions prerequisite to necessary for the prerequisite to
All other actions [Rule 4.2] which An action affecting title to or confer jurisdiction court to validly try confer jurisdiction
does not affect title to or possession of real property, or on the court, and decide the case on the court,
possession of real property or any interest therein [Rule 4, Sec.1] provided that it has which can be made provided that it has
interest therein jurisdiction over through valid jurisdiction over
A personal action is ‘transitory,’ A real action is ‘local,’ i.e. its the res [Lucas vs. service of the res [Lucas vs.
i.e. its venue depends upon the venue depends upon the location Lucas, GR 190710, summons [Lucas Lucas, GR 190710,
residence of the plaintiff or the of the property involved in the 2011] vs. Lucas, GR 2011]
defendant [BPI vs. Hontanosas, litigation 190710, 2011]
GR 157163, 2014] Decision is binding Any judgment Judgment therein is
If the plaintiff seeks the recovery If the plaintiff seeks the recovery as against the therein is binding binding only upon
of personal property, the of real property, or if the action whole world only upon the the parties who
enforcement of a contract or the affects title to real property or for [Paderanga vs. parties properly joined in the action
recovery of damages, his the recovery of possession, or for Buissan, 1993] impleaded [Macasaet vs. Co,
complaint is a personal action that partition or condemnation of, or [Paderanga vs. GR 156759, 2013]
may be filed in the place of foreclosure of mortgage on, real Buissan, 1993]
residence of either party. property, then the complaint is a E.g. Probate E.g. Action for sum E.g. Attachment,
real action that must be brought proceedings, of money; action foreclosure of real
Such personal actions may include before the court where the real cadastral for damages, estate mortgage,
those brought for the recovery of property is located [Racpan vs. proceedings, specific action for partition,
personal property, or for the Barroga-Haigh, GR 234499, June petition for performance, and action for
enforcement of some contract or 6, 2018] adoption, action for breach of accounting
recovery of damages for its annulment of contract
breach, or for the recovery of marriage or
damages for the commission of an correction of
injury to the person or property entries in the birth
[Racpan vs. Barroga-Haigh, GR certificate
234499, June 6, 2018]  Distinction is important –
 To determine the binding effect of a decision the court may
 The distinction is important for purposes of determining venue. The render over a party whether impleaded or not. [Paderanga vs.
question of whether or not venue has been properly laid depends to a Buissan, 1993]
great extent on the kind of action (real or personal) as presented in the  To determine whether or not jurisdiction over the person of the
complaint [PICOP vs. Samson, 1975] defendant is required, and the type of summons to be employed
[Riano]
Not every action involving real property is a real action because the
realty may only be incidental to the subject matter of the suit. The SC
held that the conveyance of real property was only incidental to the C.CAUSE OF ACTION
determination of matters incapable of pecuniary estimation. The cases 1. Meaning of Cause Of Action
were deemed personal actions because the principal action or remedy
Cause of action – the act or omission by which a party violates a right
sought does not involve title to or possession of real property. The case
of another. [Rule 2.2]
of Heirs of Bautista involved a complaint to redeem a land subject of a
free patent and the case of Olivarez involved an action for rescission of
Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action [Rule
contract involving real property [Heirs of Bautista vs. Lindo, GR
2.1]
208232, 2014; Olivarez Realty vs. Castillo, GR 196251, 2014]
A cause of action stems from the sources of obligations under Art.
Refer also to Go vs. UCPB, GR 156187, 2004
1156 of the Civil Code:
(1) Law,
6. Local and transitory actions (2) Contract,
(3) Quasi-contract,
 (4) Acts and omissions punishable by law and
(5) Quasi-delict. [Sagrada Orden etc v. NACOCO (1952)]  In determining the sufficiency of a cause of action for resolving a
motion to dismiss, a court must determine, hypothetically admitting the
Elements of a Cause of Action: factual allegations in a complaint, whether it can grant the prayer in the
1) A right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under complaint
whatever law it arises or is created;
2) An obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not to It is well to point out that the plaintiff's cause of action should not
violate such right; and merely be "stated" but, importantly, the statement thereof should be
3) Act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the "sufficient." This is why the elementary test in a motion to dismiss on
right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the such ground is whether or not the complaint alleges facts which if true
defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action would justify the relief demanded. As a corollary, it has been held that
for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief. only ultimate facts and not legal conclusions or evidentiary facts are
considered for purposes of applying the test. This is consistent with
It is, thus, only upon the occurrence of the last element that a cause of Section 1, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court which states that the complaint
action arises, giving the plaintiff the right to maintain an action in court need only allege the ultimate facts or the essential facts constituting the
for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief. plaintiffs cause of action. A fact is essential if they cannot be stricken
out without leaving the statement of the cause of action inadequate.
If the allegations of the complaint do not state the concurrence of these Since the inquiry is into the sufficiency, not the veracity, of the
elements, the complaint becomes vulnerable to a motion to dismiss on material allegations, it follows that the analysis should be confined to
the ground of failure to state a cause of action. [Guillermo, et al. vs. the four corners of the complaint, and no other [Guillermo, et al. vs.
PIA, DPWH, GR 223751, March 15, 2017, Leonen, J.] PIA, DPWH, GR 223751, March 15, 2017, Leonen, J.]

 Unless the plaintiff has a valid and subsisting cause of action at the  The existence of the ground to dismiss can be determined only from
time his action is commenced, the defect cannot be cured or remedied the facts alleged in the complaint and from no other, and the court
by the acquisition or accrual of one while the action is pending, and a cannot consider other matters aliunde.
supplemental complaint or an amendment setting up such after-accrued
cause of action is not permissible. How to Determine the Existence of Cause of Action
A cause of action must exist at the time of filing of the complaint – General Rule: Determination shall be based only on the facts alleged in
else, the case shall be dismissible for being a groundless suit the complaint and from no other, and the court cannot consider other
[Swagman Hotels and Travel vs. CA, GR 161135, 2005] matters aliunde.

Exceptions: Instances when the Court has considered other matters

2. Distinguish: right of action and cause of action aside from the facts alleged in the complaint, such as:
Right of Action Cause of Action  Documents attached to the complaint [Agrarian Reform
The remedial right or right to relief The delict or wrongful act or omission
Beneficiaries Association v. Nicolas, GR 168394, 2008] – this
granted by law to a party to institute an committed by the defendant in violation case refers to actionable documents which by express provision
action against a person who has of the primary rights of the plaintiff of the Rules of Court are deemed part of the pleading
committed a delict or wrong against him
 Appended annexes, other pleadings, and admissions on record
Right to sue as a consequence of the The delict or wrong
delict [Zepeda v. China Banking Corp., GR 172175, 2006] – the
Whether such acts give him right of Determined by the averments in the jurisprudence establishing this supposed exception ultimately
action determined by substantive law pleading regarding the acts committed points to dismissals based on lack of cause of action, as opposed
by the defendant
to failure of the complaint to state a cause of action
 There can be no right of action without a cause of action being first
5. Splitting a single cause of action and its effect
established [Regalado citing Español v. The Chairman of PVA (1985)]
Splitting a single COA is the act of instituting two or more suits on the
3. Distinguish: failure to state a cause of action and lack of cause of
basis of the same cause of action. [Rule 2, Sec.4] or splitting a single
action
COA is prohibited by the Rules – Thus, a party may not institute more
than one suit for a single cause of action [S3, R2]
Failure to State a COA Lack of Cause of Action
Refers to the insufficiency of the Refers to a situation where the evidence
pleading and is a ground for dismissal does not prove the cause of action in the Splitting a cause of action is the act of dividing a single cause of
under R16 pleading [Macaslang vs. Zamora, GR action, claim or demand into two or more parts, and bringing suit for
156375, 2011] one of such parts only, intending to reserve the rest for another separate
action. The purpose of the rule is to avoid harassment and vexation to
 Failure to state a cause of action is not the same as lack of cause of the defendant and avoid multiplicity of suits [Quadra v. CA, NLRC,
action; the terms are not interchangeable. It may be observed that lack GR 147593, 2006]
of cause of action is not among the grounds that may be raised in a
motion to dismiss under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court. The dismissal Tests to ascertain whether two suits relate to a single or common cause
of a Complaint for lack of cause of action is based on Section 1 of Rule of action are:
33. (1) Whether the same evidence would support and sustain both the 1st
If the Complaint fails to state a cause of action, a motion to dismiss and 2nd causes of action [“same evidence” test]
must be made before a responsive pleading is filed; and the issue can
(2) Whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the
be resolved only on the basis of the allegations in the initiatory
complaint in the other
pleading. On the other hand, if the Complaint lacks a cause of action,
the motion to dismiss must be filed after the plaintiff has rested its (3) Whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time
case. of filing of the first complaint
In the first situation, the veracity of the allegations is immaterial; Also fundamental is the test of determining whether the cause of
however, in the second situation, the judge must determine the veracity action in the second case existed at the time of the filing of the first
of the allegations based on the evidence presented [Asia Brewery, et al. complaint. Of the three tests cited, the third one is especially
vs. Equitable PCI, GR 190432, 2017] applicable to the present case. The facts clearly show that the filing of
the first ejectment case was grounded on the petitioner's violation of
 Dismissal due to lack of cause of action may be raised any time after stipulations in the lease contract, while the filing of the second case
the questions of fact have been resolved on the basis of stipulations, was based on the expiration of the lease contract.
admissions, or evidence presented by the plaintiff [PNB vs. Sps. [Umale v. Canoga Park Development Corp., GR 167246, 2011]
Rivera, GR 189577, 2016]

4. Test of the sufficiency of a cause of action  Singleness of Cause of Action

The test of singleness of cause of action lies in the singleness of the of law or any rule of jurisprudence which compels a party to join all his
delict or wrong violating the rights of one person causes of action and bring them all at one and the same time. Plaintiff
can always file separate actions for each cause of action. [Nabus vs.
Dismissal as effect of splitting a cause of action CA, 1991; Baldovi v. Sarte (1917)]
The filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available
as a ground for the dismissal of the others. [R2.4]  There is no sanction against non-joinder of separate causes of action
since a plaintiff needs only a single cause of action to maintain an
Defendant’s remedy action [Regalado]
The remedy is for the defendant to file a Motion to Dismiss under R16
on the ground that Requisites [R2.5]
1) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on
i. Another action pending between the same parties for the same joinder of parties;
cause (litis pendentia) 2) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions
Filing of the first complaint may be pleaded in abatement of the governed by special rules;
second complaint, [R16.1(e)]; or 3) Where causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to
ii. Cause of action is barred by a prior judgment (res judicata) different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the
A judgment upon the merits in any of the complaints is available RTC provided one of the causes of action are within that court’s
as ground for dismissal of the others [R16.1(f)] jurisdiction and venue lies therein;
4) Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for
Rationale recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test
 Prevent repeated litigation between the same parties in regard to of jurisdiction (“Totality Rule”)
the same subject or controversy
 Protect the defendant from unnecessary vexation. Nemo debet Misjoinder of Causes of Action
vexare pro una et eadem causa (No man shall be twice vexed for Misjoinder is not a ground for dismissal of an action [R2.6]
one and the same cause)
 Avoid the costs and expenses incident to numerous suits [City of Effect of Misjoinder
Bacolod vs. SM Brewery, 1969] An erroneously joined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on
the initiative of the court, be severed and proceeded with separately.
 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  If there is no objection to the improper joinder or the court did not
cannot be split up or divided into two or more different actions. The motu proprio direct a severance, then there exists no bar in the
rule on prohibiting the splitting of a single cause of action is clear. simultaneous adjudication of all the erroneously joined causes of
action, as long as the court trying the case has jurisdiction over all of
the causes of action therein notwithstanding the misjoinder
It is a settled rule that the application of the doctrine of res judicata to
identical causes of action does not depend on the similarity or If the court has no jurisdiction to try the misjoined action, then it must
differences in the forms of the two actions. A party cannot, by varying be severed. Otherwise, adjudication rendered by the court with respect
the form of the action or by adopting a different method of presenting to it would be a nullity. [Ada v. Baylon, GR 182435, 2012]
his case, escape the operation of the doctrine of res judicata. 9 The test
of identity of causes of action rests on whether the same evidence
would support and establish the former and the present causes of action D. PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS
Who may be Parties
The underlying objectives or reliefs sought in both the quieting-of title 1) Natural persons;
and the annulment-of-title cases are essentially the same – adjudication 2) Juridical persons;
of the ownership of the disputed lot and nullification of one of the two 3) Entities authorized by law. [R3.1]
certificates of title. The difference in form and nature of the two
actions is immaterial and is not a reason to exempt petitioner from the
effects of res judicata. The philosophy behind this rule prohibits the Entities Authorized by Law [Riano]
parties from litigating the same issue more than once [Rivera Golf i. A corporation by estoppel is precluded from denying its
Club, Inc. vs. CCA Holdings, GR 173783, 2015] existence, and the members are liable as general partners [Sec.
21, Corporation Code]
 Public policy is firmly set against unnecessary multiplicity of suits; ii. A partnership with capital of at least P3,000 which fails to
the rule of res judicata, like that against splitting causes of action, are comply with the registration requirements is liable as a
all applications of the same policy, that matters once settled by a partnership to third persons [Arts. 1768, 1772, Civil Code]
Court's final judgment should not thereafter be invoked against. Re- iii. The estate of a deceased person is a juridical entity that has a
litigation of issues already settled merely burdens the Courts and the personality of its own [Nazareno v. CA]
taxpayers, creates uneasiness and confusion, and wastes valuable time iv. The Roman Catholic Church may be a party; as to its properties,
and energy that could be devoted to worthier cases. As the Roman the Archbishop or diocese to which they belong may be a party.
maxim goes, Non bis in idem [Aguila vs. JM Tuason & Co., 1968, JBL [Ponce v. Roman Catholic]
Reyes, J.] v. A legitimate labor union may sue and be sued in its registered
name [Art. 242(e), Labor Code]
6. Joinder and misjoinder of causes of action
Joinder of Causes of Action – the assertion of as many causes of 1. Real parties in interest; indispensable parties; representatives as
action as a party may have against another in one pleading alone. parties; necessary parties; indigent parties; alternative
[R2.5] defendants

It is also the process of uniting two or more demands or rights of action Real Party-in-Interest
in one action. [Riano] The party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the
suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. [R3, S2]
Ratio
To avoid a multiplicity of suits and to expedite disposition of litigation  A real party in interest is the party who, by the substantive law, has
at minimum cost [Ada v. Baylon (2012)] the right sought to be enforced. Applying the foregoing, it is clear that
Atty. Aceron is not a real party in interest in the case below as he does
not stand to be benefited or injured by any judgment therein. He was
Rule is merely permissive merely appointed by the petitioners as their attorney-in-fact for the
The rule however is purely permissive as there is no positive provision limited purpose of filing and prosecuting the complaint against the
respondents. Such appointment, however, does not mean that he is
subrogated into the rights of petitioners and ought to be considered as a  A party is indispensable if his interest in the subject matter of the
real party in interest. Clearly, an attorney-in-fact is not a real party in suit and in the relief sought is inextricably intertwined with the other
interest [Ang vs. Sps. Ang, GR 186992, 2012] parties’ interest [Macababbad, et al. vs. Masirag, et al. GR 161237,
2009]
Definition of Interest
“Interest” means material interest or an interest in issue to be affected General Rule: Although joinder of parties is generally permissive [R3,
by the decree or judgment of the case, as distinguished from mere S6]
curiosity about the question involved. [Ang v. Sps. Ang, GR 186993,
2012] Exception: The joinder of a party becomes compulsory when the one
involved is an indispensable party. [R3, S7]
Nature of Interest
The interest must be ‘real,’ which a present and substantial interest as  A person is not an indispensable party if his interest in the
distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, controversy or subject matter is separable from the interest of the other
subordinate, or consequential interest. [Rayo v. Metrobank, GR parties, so that it will not necessarily be directly or injuriously affected
165142, 2007] by a decree which does not complete justice between them. [Riano]

It should be material and direct, as distinguished from a mere Necessary Party

incidental interest. [Mayor Rhustam Dagadag v. Tongnawa, GR Not an indispensable party but ought to be joined as a party if complete
161166-67, 2005] relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete
determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action [R3, S8]
Why necessary to determine Real Party-in-Interest
General Rule: Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the Indispensable Party Necessary Party
name of the real party in interest. Must be joined under any and all Should be joined whenever possible
conditions
Exception: Unless authorized by law or the Rules, [R3, S2]
Presence is mandatory, a condition sine Action can proceed even in their absence;
Spouses as parties qua non for exercise of judicial power interest is separable from that of the
General Rule: Husband and wife shall sue and be sued jointly indispensable party; he has to be joined
whenever possible to afford complete
Exception: As provided by law. [R3, S4] relief to those already parties and to avoid
multiple litigations
 This is an illustration of joinder of pro-forma parties required by the No valid judgment if not joined The case may be determined but the
judgment will not resolve the entire
Rules. The propriety of suits by or against the spouses should now take controversy
into account the pertinent provisions of the Family Code [Regalado] Those with such an interest in the Interests are so far separable that a final
controversy such that a final decree would decree can be made in their absence
necessarily affect their rights without affecting them
Failure to name a Real Party-in-Interest
If the 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 Indigent Party
complaint “states no cause of action.” [Balagtas vs. CA, GR 109073, One who has no money or property sufficient and available for food,
1999] shelter, and basic necessities [R3, S21]
Remedies Compare with:
 Amendment of pleadings (Alonso v. Villamor, 1910); or 1) Indigent Litigants whose gross income and that of their immediate
 Complaint may be deemed amended to include the real party-in- family do not exceed amount double the monthly minimum wage of
interest (Balquidra v. CFI Capiz, 1977) an employee and who does not own real property with a FMV of
more than 300K shall be exempt from payment of legal fees (Salary
When real-party-in-interest bound despite not being formally Test)
impleaded 2) The legal fees shall be a lien on any judgment rendered in the case
As an exception, the real litigant may be held bound as a party even if favorably to the indigent litigant, unless the court otherwise
not formally impleaded provided he had his day in court. [Albert v. provides
University Publishing Co., (1958)] 3) To be entitled to the exemption herein provided, the litigant shall
execute an affidavit that he and his immediate family do not earn a
gross income abovementioned, nor they own real property with the
 Three (3) instances when a person who is not a real party in assessed value aforementioned, supported by an affidavit of a
interest can file a case on behalf of the real party: disinterested person attesting to the truth of the litigant’s affidavit
(Property Test) [S19, R141]
1) Representative suit under Rule 3 section 3 of the Rules of Court
where a representative files the case on behalf of his principal Consequence if party is not actually indigent
The proper docket and other lawful fees shall be assessed and collected
2) Class suit is specie of a representative suit insofar as the persons by the Clerk of Court. If payment is not made within the time fixed by
who institute it represent the entire class of persons who have the the court, execution shall issue, or the payment thereof, without
same interest or who suffered the same injury. However, unlike prejudice to such other sanctions as the court may impose [S3, R21]
representative suits, the persons instituting a class suit are
themselves real parties in interest and are not suing merely as Compare with “Indigent Litigants”
representatives. A class suit can prosper only provided the requisites Any falsity in the affidavit of a litigant or disinterested party shall be
provided by the Rules are present sufficient cause to dismiss the complaint or action or to strike out the
pleading of that party, without prejudice to whatever criminal liability
3) Citizen suit is a suit where a Filipino can invoke environmental may have been incurred [S18, R141]
laws on behalf of other citizens including those yet to be born. This When authority to litigate as indigent a matter of right
is found under Rule 2 Section 5 of the Rules of Procedure for  When an application to litigate as an indigent is filed, the court
Environmental Cases [see Leonen, J., Concurring Opinion in Hon. shall scrutinize the affidavits and supporting documents to determine if
Paje, DENR Secretary vs. Hon. Teodoro Casino, et al., February 3, the applicant complies with the standards prescribed in S19, R141. If
2015] so, the authority to litigate as an indigent litigant is automatically
granted and the grant is a matter of right [Sps. Algura vs. City of Naga,
Indispensable Party GR 150135, 2006]
Party-in-interest without whom no final determination can be had of an
action who shall be joined either as plaintiff or defendant [R3, S7]
When requirement under Section 19, Rule 141 not met
If the trial court finds that one or both of the requirements have not Remedy in case of non-joinder of Necessary Parties [R3, S9]
been met, it would set a hearing to enable the applicant to prove When a pleading asserting a claim, omits to join a necessary party, the
compliance with Section 21, par. 1, Rule3. The adverse party may pleader must:
adduce countervailing evidence. Trial court will then rule on the i. Set forth the name of the necessary party, if known, and
application. ii. State the reason why the necessary party is omitted. [R3, S9, (1)]
 Section 21 of Rule 3 also provides that the adverse party may later
still contest the grant of such authority at any time before judgment is PERMISSIVE JOINDER
rendered by the trial court, possibly based on newly discovered Parties can be joined, as plaintiffs or defendants, in one single
evidence not obtained at the time the application was heard. If the court complaint or may they maintain or be sued in separate suits [R3, S6]
determines after hearing, that the party declared as an indigent is in fact
a person with sufficient income or property, the proper docket and Requisites:
other lawful fees shall be assessed and collected by the clerk of court. 1) Right to relief arises out of the same transaction or series of
If payment is not made within the time fixed by the court, execution transactions
shall issue or the payment of prescribed fees shall be made, without Transaction – not only a stipulation or agreement but any event
prejudice to such other sanctions as the court may impose [Sps. Algura resulting in wrong, whether the wrong was done by violence,
vs. City of Naga, GR 150135, 2006] neglect, or breach of contract
Series of transactions – transactions connected with the same
Summary of Rules for Indigent Litigants subject of the action
If the applicant for exemption meets the salary and property 2) A question of law or fact common to all the plaintiffs or defendants
requirements under S19, R141, then the grant of application is 3) Such joinder is not otherwise proscribed by the Rules on jurisdiction
mandatory. and venue
On the other hand, when the application does not satisfy one or both  Compare to joinder of causes of action where it is enough if the
requirements, the application should not be denied outright, instead the causes of action arise out of the same contract, as there is no need for a
court should apply the “indigency test” under S21, R3 and use its common question of fact or law
sound discretion in determining the merits of the prayer for exemption
[Sps. Algura vs. City of Naga, GR 150135, 2006] A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as
many causes of action against an opposing party. One of the
Alternative Defendants conditions for such joinder of causes of action is that the party joining
Where the plaintiff is uncertain against whom of several persons he is the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties
entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them in the alternative, [S5, R2]
although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right to
relief against the other. [R3, S13] 3. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties
Misjoinder
2. Compulsory and permissive joinder of parties When one is made a party to the action although he should not be
impleaded
COMPULSORY JOINDER [R3, S7]
Parties in interest without whom no final determination can be had of Non-joinder
an action (i.e. indispensable parties) shall be joined either as plaintiffs When one is not joined when he is supposed to be joined but is not
or defendants impleaded in the action. [Riano]
Effect of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties
Effect of non-joinder of indispensable parties Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is a ground for dismissal
 The absence of an indispensable parties renders all subsequent of an action. [R3, S11]
actions of the trial court null and void for want of authority to act, not
only as to the absent parties but even as to those present. [Go v. Effect of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties; When ordered by
Distinction Properties Development, Inc. GR 194024, (2012)] the court
Non-joinder of an indispensable party is not a ground for outright
 The non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a ground for the dismissal of the action. At any stage of a judicial proceeding and/or at
dismissal of an action. At any stage of a judicial proceeding and/or at such times as are just, parties may be added on the motion of a party or
such times as are just, parties may be added on the motion of a party or on the initiative of the tribunal concerned. If the plaintiff refused to
on the initiative of the tribunal concerned. If the plaintiff refuses to implead an indispensable party despite order of the court, that court
implead an indispensable party despite the order of the court, that court may dismiss the complaint for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the
may dismiss the complaint for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order. The remedy is to implead the non-party claimed to be
order. The remedy is to implead the non-party claimed to be indispensable [Pamplona Plantation v. Rodel Tinghil, GR 159121,
indispensable [Heirs of Mesina vs. Heirs of Fian, GR 201816, 2013] 2005]
 In Domingo v. Scheer, this Court held that the proper remedy when Should the court find the reason for the non-joinder of a necessary
a party is left out is to implead the indispensable party at any stage of party unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion of such necessary party,
the action. The court, either motu proprio or upon the motion of a if jurisdiction over his person may be obtained. Failure to comply with
party, may order the inclusion of the indispensable party or give the such order without justifiable cause is deemed a waiver of the claim
plaintiff opportunity to amend his complaint in order to include against such party. [R3, S9, pars. 1-2]
indispensable parties. If the plaintiff to whom the order to include the
indispensable party is directed refuses to comply with the order of the Objections to defects in parties
court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or Objections to defects in parties should be made at the earliest
upon the court's own motion.51 Only upon unjustified failure or refusal opportunity, that is, at the moment such defect becomes apparent, by a
to obey the order to include or to amend is the action dismissed. In an motion to strike the names of the parties wrongly impleaded.
action for reconveyance, all the owners of the property sought to be Objections to misjoinder cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
recovered are indispensable parties [Macababbad, et al. vs. Masirag, et [Lapanday Agricultural & Development Corporation v. Estita, GR
al. GR 161237, 2009] 162109, 2005]
Effect of non-joinder of necessary parties 4. Class suit
Non-joinder of a necessary party does not prevent the court from Requisites [R3, S12]
proceeding in the action. The judgment rendered therein shall not a) Subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general
prejudice the rights of such necessary party [R3, S9 (3)] interest to many persons;
b) The persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join them all
as parties, and to bring them all before the court; 6. Effect of death of party litigant
c) Parties actually before the court are sufficiently numerous and
representative of the class as to fully protect the interests of all Duty of Counsel upon Death of Client [R3, S16]
concerned; 1) Inform court of such fact within 30 days after the death;
d) The representative sues or defends for the benefit of all 2) Give the name and address of the legal representatives.

Right to Intervene Effect of failure to comply

In a class suit, any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to Failure to comply is a ground for disciplinary action
protect his individual interest. [R3, S12]
Action of Court upon Notice of Death
If a class suit is improperly brought, the action is subject to dismissal Upon receipt of notice, shall determine if claim is extinguished by such
regardless of the cause of action. [R16, S1 (d)] death.
1) Claim does not survive: the proper action would be to dismiss the
No dismissal upon the instance of plaintiff or due to compromise case. Substitution would not be required
However, no class suit may be dismissed upon the instance of the 2) Claim survives: the court shall order the legal representative of the
plaintiff or compromised, without the approval of the court. [R17, S2] deceased to appear and be substituted for him within 30 days, or
within such time as may be granted [S16, R3]
Taxpayer’s suit or derivative suit is in the nature of class suit
A taxpayer's suit or a stockholder's derivative suit is in the nature of a Survival of Action
class suit, although subject to the other requisites of the corresponding Survival depends on the nature of the action and the damage sought
governing law especially on the issue of locus standi. [Regalado]
1) Causes of Action that Survive:
A derivative suit is action brought by minority shareholders in the a) The wrong complained of affects primarily and principally
name of the corporation to redress wrongs committed against it, for property and property rights
which the directors refuse to sue. It is a remedy designed by equity and b) Injuries to the person are merely incidental [Cruz vs. Cruz, GR
has been the principal defense of the minority shareholders against 173292, 2010]
abuses by the majority. In a derivative action, the real party in interest c) E.g. Actions to recover personal property from the estate; actions
is the corporation itself, not the shareholders who actually instituted it to enforce a lien thereon; and actions to recover damages from an
[Lim v. Lim Yu, 2001) injury to person or property [S1, R88; Riano]
There is no class suit in an action filed by associations of sugar planters
to recover damages in behalf of individual planters for an allegedly 2) Causes of Action that do not Survive:
libelous article in an international magazine. There is no common or a) The injury complained of is to the person
general interest in reputation of a specific individual. Each of the sugar b) Property and property rights affected are incidental [Cruz vs.
planters has a separate and distinct reputation in the community not Cruz, GR 173292, 2010]
shared by the others. [Newsweek, Inc. v. Intermediate Appellate Court, c) E.g. Actions for support, annulment of marriage, legal separation
1986] [Riano]

Only general interest in the subject matter of litigation required Court may order the opposing party, within a specific time, to procure
A class suit does not require a commonality of interest in the questions the appointment of an administrator or executor of the estate in the ff.
involved in the suit. What is required by the Rules is a common or cases:
general interest in the subject matter of the litigation. [Mathay v. (1) No legal representative is named; or
Consolidated Bank &Trust Company, 1974] (2) The one so named fails to appear within the specified period [S16,
R3]
Class Suit Permissive Joinder of Parties
There is a single cause of action pertaining There are multiple causes of action Summons to the substitute not necessary
to numerous persons separately belonging to several persons
The substitute defendant need not be summoned. The order of
substitution shall be served upon the parties substituted for the court to
Class Suit Derivative Suit acquire jurisdiction over the substitute party. [Ferreria v Vda de
When the subject matter of the controversy An action brought by minority
is one of common or general interest to shareholders in the name of the Gonzales, 1986]
many persons, and the parties are so corporation to redress wrongs committed
numerous that it is impracticable to bring against it, for which the directors refuse to Rationale on Rule on Substitution
them all before the court, one or more may sue
sue or defend for the benefit of all. [R3, The purpose behind the rule on substitution is the protection of the
S12] 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
5. Suits against entities without juridical personality duly appointed legal representative of his estate
Thus, the rationale behind the rule on substitution is to apprise the heir
Requisites [R3, S15]
or the substitute that he is being brought to the jurisdiction of the court
i. There are 2 or more persons not organized as a juridical entity; in lieu of the deceased party by operation of law [Cardenas, et al. vs.
ii. They enter into a transaction; Heirs of Late Sps. Aguilar, GR 191079, 2016]
iii. A wrong is committed against a 3rd person in the course of such
transaction.
Principle Underlying the General Rule on Substitution
Effect:  A formal substitution of heirs must be effectuated for them to be
Persons associated in an entity without juridical personality may be bound by a subsequent judgment [Cardenas case, infra]
sued under the name by which they are generally or commonly known,
but they cannot sue under such name. [R3, S15] Effect of failure to order substitution
 Non-compliance with the rule on substitution would render the
 The authority to be a party under S15, R3 is confined only to being a proceedings and the judgment of the trial court infirm because the
defendant and not as a plaintiff. This is evident from the words ‘”they court acquires no jurisdiction over the persons of the legal
may be used” [Riano] representatives or of the heirs on whom the trial and the judgment
would be binding
The service of summons may be effected upon all the defendants by
serving upon any of them, or upon the person in charge of the office or Although the jurisprudential rule is that failure to make the substitution
place of business maintained under such name. [R14, S8] is a jurisdictional defect, it should be noted that the purpose of this
procedural rule is to comply with due process requirements. The resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be
original party having died, he could not continue to defend himself in found, at the election of the plaintiff [City of Lapu-Lapu vs. PEZA, GR
court despite the fact that the action survived him. For the case to 184203, November 26, 2014, Leonen, J.]
continue, the real party in interest must be substituted for the deceased.
The real party in interest is the one who would be affected by the  Venue does not equate to the jurisdiction of the court [Sps.
judgment. It could be the administrator or executor or the heirs. In the Mendiola vs. CA, GR 159746, 2012]
instant case, the heirs are the proper substitutes. Substitution gives
them the opportunity to continue the defense for the deceased.  Choosing the venue of an action is not left to a plaintiff’s caprice;
Substitution is important because such opportunity to defend is a the matter is regulated by the Rules of Court. [Ang v. Sps. Ang, GR
requirement to comply with due process [Cardenas, et al. vs. Heirs of 186993, 2012]
Late Sps. Aguilar, GR 191079, 2016]
Venue is a procedural matter, not jurisdictional, hence may be
 Failure of the court to order substitution results in the failure to waived. It is meant to provide convenience to the parties, rather than
acquire jurisdiction over the representatives or heirs of the deceased restrict their access to the courts as it relates to the place of trial [Heirs
party. Consequently, any judgment rendered against such deceased of Lopez vs. De Castro, GR 112905, 2000]
party shall be null and void for lack of jurisdiction over the persons of
the legal representative or of the heirs upon whom the trial and the On dismissal, motion to dismiss is necessary; exception
judgment would be binding [The Heirs of Vda. De Haberer vs. CA, et  A motu propio dismissal based on improper venue is patently
al., 1981] incorrect. [Dolot v. Paje]

When Substitution Not Necessary  Unless and until the defendant objects to the venue in a motion to
A formal substitution of the heirs in place of the deceased is no longer dismiss, the venue cannot truly be said to have been improperly laid
necessary if the heirs continued to appear and participated in the because the venue, although technically wrong, may be acceptable to
proceedings of the case the parties for whose convenience the rules of venue had been laid.
[Dacuycoy v. IAC, 1991]
Action on Contractual Money Claims
Shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until  However, the court may effect a motu propio dismissal for improper
entry of final judgment [R3, S20] venue, inter alia, in actions covered by the Rules on Summary
Requisites Procedure [S4], Rule of Procedure for Small Claims cases [S9], and in
1) The action must primarily be for recovery of money, debt or interest ejectment cases [S5, R70]
thereon;
2) The claim arose from contract, express or implied; Venue Jurisdiction
3) Defendant dies before the entry of final judgment in the court in Place where the action is instituted Authority of the court to hear and decide a
which the action was pending; and case
 The defendant’s death will not result in the dismissal of the action May be waived Jurisdiction over the subject matter and
over the nature of the action is conferred
Effect by law and cannot-be waived
There shall be substitution in the manner provided under Rule 3, Sec. Procedural Substantive
16, and the action will continue until the entry of final judgment. May be changed by the written agreement Fixed by law and cannot be the subject of
However, execution shall not issue in favor of the winning plaintiff. It of the parties an act or agreement of the parties
should be filed as a claim against the decedent’s estate without need of Establishes a relation between plaintiff Establishes a relation between the court
and defendant, or petitioner and and the subject matter [Nocum vs. Tan, GR
proving the claim respondent [Nocum vs. Tan, GR 145022, 145022, 2005]
2005]
 Since the action survives the decedent’s death, substitution of the Not a ground for a motu propio dismissal Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
[Rudolf Lietz Holdings, Inc. vs. RD of is a ground for a motu proprio dismissal
defendant shall be done following the procedure prescribed by S16, Paranaque City, GR 133240, 2000] [Rudolf Lietz Holdings, Inc. vs. RD of
R3. If the plaintiff obtains a favorable judgment, said judgment shall be Paranaque City, GR 133240, 2000]
enforced following the procedure provided for in the Rules of Court for Objection to an improper venue must be Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
raised either in a MTD or in the Answer in may be raised at any stage of the
prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person [S20, R3] accordance with S1, R9 (defenses and proceedings since it is conferred by law,
Because of the rule mandating compliance with rule for prosecuting objection not pleaded are deemed waived) although a party may be barred from
claims against the estate of a deceased person, the prevailing plaintiff is raising it on the ground of estoppel [La’o
vs. Republic, GR 160719, 2006]
not supposed to file a motion for the issuance of an order and writ of
execution of the judgment [Riano]
1. Venue Of Real Actions
E.VENUE
Real actions shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which
Nature of the action determines the venue
has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a
By weight of jurisprudence, the nature of an action is determined by
portion thereof is situated. [R4, S1 (1)]
the allegations in the complaint. In turn, the nature of the action
determines its proper venue. Rule 4 of the Rules of Court provides the
Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the
rules on the situs for bringing real and personal actions. What
municipal court of the municipality or city wherein the real property
determines the venue of a case is the primary objective for the filing of
involved, or a portion thereof, is situated. [R4, S1 (2)]
the case [Racpan vs. Barroga-Haigh, GR 234499, 2018]
If the property is located at the boundaries of 2 places, file the case in
 Venue is "the place of trial or geographical location in which an
either place (at the plaintiff’s option)
action or proceeding should be brought." In civil cases, venue is a
matter of procedural law. A party's objections to venue must be
If the case involves 2 properties located in 2 different places:
brought at the earliest opportunity either in a motion to dismiss or in
1) Objects of the same transaction – file it in any of the 2 places;
the answer; otherwise the objection shall be deemed waived. When the
2) Objects of distinct transactions – separate actions should be filed in
venue of a civil action is improperly laid, the court cannot motu
each place unless properly joined
proprio dismiss the case. The venue of an action depends on whether
the action is a real or personal action. Should the action affect title to or
 Where the subject matter involves various parcels of land located in
possession of real property, or interest therein, it is a real action. The
different provinces, the venue is determined by the singularity or
action should be filed in the proper court which has jurisdiction over
plurality of the transactions involving said parcels of land. Thus, where
the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is
said parcels are the objects of one and the same transaction, the venue
situated. If the action is a personal action, the action shall be filed with
is in the court of any of the provinces wherein a parcel of land is
the proper court where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs
situated [Regalado citing El Hogar Filipino vs. Seva, 1932]
resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants
 If the parcels of land are subject of separate and distinct  Quo Warranto proceeding commenced by the SolGen [S7,
transactions, there is no common venue and separate actions should be R66]
laid in the court of the province wherein each parcel of land is situated  Petition for continuing writ of mandamus [S2, R8, Rules of
[Regalado citing Mijares vs. Piccio, 1957] Procedure for Environmental Cases]
 Civil and criminal action for damages in written defamation
(libel) [Art. 360, RPC]
2. Venue Of Personal Actions
At the plaintiff’s election [R4, S2] 2) If there is a stipulation as to venue which is permitted if the
1) Where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides; agreement:
2) Where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides;  is in writing;
3) In case of a non-resident defendant, where he may be found.  was made before the filing of the action; and
 The petitioners’ complaint for collection of sum of money against  is exclusive the exclusive venue [S4, R4]
the respondents is a personal action as it primarily seeks the
enforcement of a contract. The Rules give the plaintiff the option of 5. Effects Of Stipulations On Venue
choosing where to file his complaint. He can file it in the place (1) Type of stipulations on venue
where he himself or any of them resides, or (2) where the defendant or a) Restrictive – suit may be filed only in the place agreed upon
any of the defendants resides or may be found. The plaintiff or the b) Permissive – parties may file their suit not only in the place
defendant must be residents of the place where the action has been agreed upon but also in the places fixed by law
instituted at the time the action is commenced. However, if the plaintiff
does not reside in the Philippines, the complaint in such case may only  Written stipulations as to venue may be restrictive in the sense that
be filed in the court of the place where the defendant resides [Ang v. the suit may be filed only in the place agreed upon, or merely
Sps. Ang, GR 186993, 2012] permissive in that the parties may file their suit not only in the place
agreed upon but also in the places fixed by law. As in any other
 There can be no election as to the venue of the filing of a complaint agreement, what is essential is the ascertainment of the intention of the
when the plaintiff has no residence in the Philippines. In such case, the parties respecting the matter
complaint may only be filed in the court of the place where the As regards restrictive stipulations on venue, jurisprudence instructs that
defendant resides [Cohen and Cohen v. Benguet Commercial Co., Ltd., it must be shown that such stipulation is exclusive. In the absence of
1916; Ang Case, supra] qualifying or restrictive words, such as "exclusively," "waiving for this
purpose any other venue," "shall only" preceding the designation of
 Where the action is not intended for the recovery of real property venue, "to the exclusion of the other courts," or words of similar
but solely for the annulment of a contract, it is a personal action that import, the stipulation should be deemed as merely an agreement on an
may be filed in the court where the plaintiff or the respondent resides. additional forum, not as limiting venue to the specified [Briones vs. CA
Also, well-settled is the rule that an action to annul a contract of loan and Cash Asia Credit, GR 204444, 2015]
and its accessory real estate mortgage is a personal action. In a
personal action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery of personal property, When stipulation may be disregarded
the enforcement of a contract or the recovery of damages [Racpan vs. Case law likewise provides that in cases where the complaint assails
Barroga-Haigh, supra] only the terms, conditions, and/or coverage of a written instrument and
not its validity, the exclusive venue stipulation contained therein shall
Definition of “residence” still be binding on the parties, and thus, the complaint may be properly
The residence of a person is his personal, actual and physical habitation dismissed on the ground of improper venue. Conversely, therefore, a
or his actual residence or place of abode, which may not necessarily be complaint directly assailing the validity of the written instrument itself
his legal residence or domicile provided he resides therein with should not be bound by the exclusive venue stipulation contained
continuity and consistency [Boleyley vs. Villanueva, 1999] 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
The plaintiff or the defendant must be residents of the place where the this nature to recognize the exclusive venue stipulation when it, in fact,
action has been instituted at the time the action is commenced. [Ang v. precisely assails the validity of the instrument in which such stipulation
Sps. Ang, GR 186993, 2012] is contained place [Briones Case, supra]

A corporation cannot be allowed to file personal actions in a place,

D.PLEADINGS
other than its principal place of business unless such place is also the
[As amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC (2019 Proposed Amendments
residence of a co-plaintiff or defendant. [Davao Light vs. CA, GR
to 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)]
111685, 2001]
1. Kinds Of Pleadings And When They Should Be Filed
3. Venue Of Actions Against Non-Residents Pleadings Allowed [R6, S2]
Non-resident found in the Philippines The claims of a party are asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-
1) Personal actions claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention
a) Where the plaintiff, or any of the principal plaintiffs resides;
b) Where the non-resident defendant may be found The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading
2) Real actions -- where the property is located [S1, R4] asserting a claim against him or her

Non-resident not found in the Philippines and the action affects: An answer may be responded to by a reply only if the defending party
1) Personal status of plaintiff –where plaintiff resides attaches an actionable document to the answer. (2a)
2) Property of defendant in the Philippines – where the property, or any
portion thereof, is situated or found [S3, R4]

The court of the place where any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or a) Complaint
where any of the principal defendants resides, at the election of the The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff’s or claiming
plaintiff has been added to prevent plaintiff from choosing residence of party’s cause or causes of action. The names and residences of the
minor plaintiff or defendant as venue. Thus, when there is more than plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the complaint. [R6, S3] (3a)
one defendant or plaintiff, the residences of the principal parties should
be the basis for determining proper venue (Herrera) The complaint should contain a statement of ultimate facts on which
the plaintiff relies for his claim, which is:
4. When The Rules On Venue Do Not Apply  in a methodical and logical form;
1) If a specific rule or law provides otherwise  plain, concise, and direct; and
Examples:  omits statement of mere evidentiary facts [R8, S1]
 Function to the adverse party. It is a denial pregnant with an admission of the
1) Its function is to inform the defendant clearly and definitely of substantial facts alleged in the pleading. Where a fact is alleged with
claims made against him so that he may be prepared to meet the qualifying or modifying language and the words of the allegation as so
issues at trial qualified or modified are literally denied, it has been held that the
2) It should inform the defendant of all material facts on which the qualifying circumstances alone are denied while the fact itself is
plaintiff relies to support his demand admitted [Mahilum vs. Sps. Ilano, GR 197923, 2015]
3) It should state the theory of a cause of action which forms the bases
of plaintiff’s claim of liability. [Tantuico v. Republic, 1991]  If an allegation is not specifically denied or the denial is a negative
pregnant, the allegation is deemed admitted. Where a fact is alleged
Ultimate Facts are essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of with some qualifying or modifying language, and the denial is
action. A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving conjunctive, a 'negative pregnant' exists, and only the qualification or
the statement of the cause of action insufficient. [Remitere v. modification is denied, while the fact itself is admitted. A denial in the
Montinola, 1966] form of a negative pregnant is an ambiguous pleading, since it cannot
be ascertained whether it is the fact or only the qualification that is
Not Ultimate Facts: intended to be denied. Profession of ignorance about a fact which is
1) Evidentiary or immaterial facts; patently and necessarily within the pleader's knowledge, or means of
2) Legal conclusions, conclusions or inferences of facts from facts not knowing as ineffectual, is no denial at all
stated, or incorrect inferences or conclusions from facts stated;
3) Conclusions of law alleged in the complaint are not binding on the  While it is a denial in form, its substance actually has the effect of
court; and an admission because of a too literal denial of the allegation sought to
4) Details of probative matter or particulars of evidence, statements of be denied. This arises when the pleader merely repeats the allegations
law, inferences and arguments in a negative form

A complaint only needs to state the ultimate facts constituting the  A negative pregnant does not qualify as specific denial. It is
plaintiff’s cause or causes of action. Ultimate facts has been defined as conceded to be actually an admission. It refers to a denial which
those facts which the expected evidence will support [Salita vs. Judge implies its affirmative opposite by seeming to deny only a qualification
Magtolis, 1994] or an incidental aspect of the allegation but not the main allegation
itself [Riano]
Test of sufficiency of the facts alleged in the complaint: WON upon
the averment of facts, a valid judgment may be properly rendered ii. Affirmative Defenses [S5, R6]
[Pamintan v. Costales, 1914] An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while
hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the
 In pursuing that cause, a plaintiff must first plead in the complaint a claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him or her
"concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the
cause of action." In particular, the plaintiff must show on the face of The affirmative defenses include –
the complaint that there exists a legal right on his or her part, a  fraud,
correlative obligation of the defendant to respect such right, and an act  statute of limitations,
or omission of such defendant in violation of the plaintiff’s rights  release,
Such a complaint may, however, be subjected to an immediate  payment,
challenge. Under Section 1(g), Rule 16 of the Rules of Court (Rules),  illegality,
the defendant may file a motion to dismiss "within the time for but  statute of frauds
before filing the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a claim"  estoppel,
anchored on the defense that the pleading asserting the claim stated no  former recovery,
cause of action  discharge in bankruptcy, and
In making such challenge, the defendant’s issue is not whether a  any other matter by way of confession and avoidance
plaintiff will ultimately prevail, but whether the claimant is entitled to
offer evidence to support the claims. It has nothing to do with the Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a
merits of the case. "Whether those allegations are true or not is beside complaint, specifically, that the court has no jurisdiction over the
the point, for their truth is hypothetically admitted by the motion." The subject matter, that there is another action pending between the same
inquiry is then limited only into the sufficiency, not the veracity of the parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior
material allegations. Thus, if the allegations in the complaint furnish judgment (5a)
sufficient basis on which it can be maintained, it should not be
dismissed regardless of the defense that may be presented by the  In paragraph (b), Section 5, it is briefly called a defense of
defendants. Conversely, the dismissal of the complaint is permitted if confession and avoidance because, while the defendant may admit the
the allegations stated therein fail to show that plaintiff is entitled to material allegation in the complaint, however, he will plead a new
relief matter which will prevent a recovery by the plaintiff. I admit what you
Accordingly, the survival of the complaint against a Rule 16 challenge are saying in the complaint but still you are not entitled to recover from
depends upon the sufficiency of the averments made. In determining me [USC Notes, p. 110]
whether an initiatory pleading sufficiently pleads, the test applied is
whether the court can render a valid judgment in accordance with the EXAMPLE: Defendant may say: Defendant admits the allegation in par. 2 of the Complaint,
but alleges that the action has prescribed. He confesses to having borrowed money but
prayer if the truth of the facts alleged is admitted [Magellan Aerospace avoids liability by asserting prescription. He confesses to having borrowed money but avoids
Corporation vs. Phil. Air Force, GR 216566, 2016] liability by asserting prescription

b) Answer Examples of affirmative defenses are: fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality,
statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by
An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his or her way of confession and avoidance
defenses. (4a)
Suppose you sue me for damages arising from breach of contract. I admit I entered into a
Kinds of Defenses [R6, S5] contract but I have no obligation to comply because the contract is null and void. Or, the
i. Negative Defenses contract is illegal. Or, the stipulation is contrary to public policy therefore, I am not bound. I
admit what you say but I am not liable because of the illegality of the subject matter of the
A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts contract
alleged in
the pleading of the claimant essential to his or her cause or causes of  Raising affirmative defenses does not amount to acceptance of the
action jurisdiction of the court, but praying for affirmative reliefs is
 Negative Pregnant considered voluntary appearance and acquiescence to the court’s
 A negative pregnant is a form of negative expression which carries jurisdiction [NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd. Vs. Lepanto Consolidate
with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable Mining Co., GR 175799, 2011]
Modes of Specific Denial [R8, S10] On Amounts
1) Defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of  In an original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be
which he or she does not admit considered compulsory regardless of the amount [S7, R6]
2) If pleader decides to deny only a part or a qualification of an  If a counterclaim is filed in the MTC in excess of its jurisdictional
averment, he shall specify so much of it as true and deny the limits, the excess is considered waived. [Agustin vs. Bacalan, 1985]
remainder  However, in another case, the remedy where a counterclaim is
3) If pleader is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a beyond the jurisdictional amount of the MTC is to set off the claims
belief as to the truth of a material averment, he or she shall so state and file a separate action to collect the balance. [Calo vs. Ajax,
1968] Note, however, that the counterclaim in question here was
c) Counterclaims permissive
Any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing
party [S6, R6] ii. Permissive Counterclaim
A counterclaim is permissive if it does not arise out of, nor is
Kinds of counterclaims necessarily connected with, the subject matter of the opposing party’s
Compulsory Permissive claim This is not barred even if not set up in the action.
Arises out of or is necessarily connected Neither arises out of nor is necessarily
with the transaction or occurrence that is connected with such subject matter
the subject matter of the opposing party's
 Must have independent jurisdictional ground [Herrera]. Hence, the
claim filing of a separate docket fee
Does not require for its adjudication the May require the presence of third parties
presence of third parties of whom the court over whom the court cannot acquire
cannot acquire jurisdiction jurisdiction
A compulsory counterclaim which a party Not barred even if not contained in an
has at the time the answer is filed, shall be answer to the complaint or set up in the  If the counterclaim, even if it arises out of, or is necessarily
contained in the Answer (S8, R11) action; may be set up as an independent connected with, the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim,
because if not set up, it shall be barred action
Need not be answered; no default Must be answered, otherwise, the matures or is acquired by a party after serving his pleading, i.e. the
defendant can be declared in default Answer, it is merely permissive. [S9, R11]
Not an initiatory pleading; does not require Initiatory pleading and should be
CNFS accompanied by CNFS and, whenever
required by law, also a certificate to file
Determining whether Compulsory or Permissive
action issued by Lupon Tagapamayapa If the following tests result in positive/affirmative answers, the
counterclaim is compulsory:
 Under OCA Circular No. 96-2009, citing A.M. No. 04-2-04 SC, the 1) Are the issues of fact and law raised by the claim and counterclaim
payment of filing fees for compulsory counterclaims remains largely the same?
suspended effective September 21, 2004. It clarified that the portion of 2) Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant’s claims,
the decision in Korea Technologies v. Lerma, G.R. No. 143581, which absent the compulsory counterclaim rule?
stated that docket fees are required to be paid in compulsory 3) Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff’s
counterclaims has been deleted in a revised issuance. claim as well as the counterclaim?
4) Is there any logical relation between the claim and counterclaim
 A permissive counterclaim requires the payment of docket fees. such that the conduct of separate trials of the respective claims of
[Sun Insurance v. Asuncion, 1989] the parties would entail a substantial duplication of effort and time
by the parties and the court? [Sps. Mendiola vs. CA, GR 159746,
i. Compulsory Counterclaim 2012]
A compulsory counterclaim not raised in the same action is barred,
unless otherwise allowed by these Rules. (7a)  Of the four tests, the one compelling test of compulsoriness is the
logical relation between the claim alleged in the complaint and that in
Requisites: the counterclaim. Such relationship exists when conducting separate
1) It arises out of, or is necessarily connected with the transaction or trials of the respective claims of the parties would entail substantial
occurrence, constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's duplication of time and effort by the parties and the court; when the
claim; multiple claims involve the same factual and legal issues; or when the
2) It does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties claims are offshoots of the same basic controversy between the parties
of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction [Sy-Vargas vs. Estate of Rolando Ogsos, Sr., GR 221062, 2016]
3) It must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount
or the nature, except that in an original action before the RTC, the Logical Relationship Test
counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of the There is a logical relationship where conducting separate trials of the
amount [S7, R6] respective claims would entail substantial duplication of effort and
time and involves many of the same factual and legal issues. [Meliton
General rule: A compulsory counterclaim not set up in the answer is v. CA, GR 101883, 1992]
deemed barred.
Exception: If it is a counterclaim which either matured or was acquired iii. Effect on the counterclaim when the complaint is dismissed
by a party after serving his answer. In this case, it may be pleaded by The dismissal of the complaint shall be without prejudice to the
filing a supplemental answer or pleading before judgment. [S9, R11] prosecution his counterclaim in the same or separate action of a
counterclaim pleaded in the answer in the following circumstances:
 A plaintiff who fails or chooses not to answer a compulsory 1) Dismissal under Sec. 6, Rule 16 – where the defendant does not file
counterclaim may not be declared in default, principally because the motion to dismiss but raises the ground as an affirmative defense
issues raised in the counterclaim are deemed automatically joined by 2) Dismissal under Sec. 2, Rule 17 – where the plaintiff files a motion
the allegations in the complaint. [Gojo v. Goyala, 1970] to dismiss the case, after the defendant had filed a responsive
pleading
 The filing of a motion to dismiss and the setting up of a compulsory 3) Dismissal under Sec. 3, Rule 17 – where the complaint is dismissed
counterclaim are incompatible remedies. If he files a motion to dismiss, due to the fault of the plaintiff
he will lose his counterclaim. But if he opts to set up his counterclaim,
he may still plead his ground for dismissal as an affirmative defense in In all these cases, the rules expressly provide that the dismissal shall be
his answer. [Financial Building Corp. vs. Forbes Park Association, GR without prejudice to the right of the defendant to pursue his
133119, 2000] counterclaim in the same or in a separate action

 In the event that a defending party has a ground for dismissal and a  As the rule now stands, the nature of the counterclaim
compulsory counterclaim at the same time, he must choose only one notwithstanding, the dismissal of the complaint does not ipso jure
remedy result in the dismissal of the counterclaim, and the latter may remain
for independent adjudication of the court, provided that such
counterclaim, states a sufficient cause of action and does not labor e) Third-party (4th-party) complaints
under any infirmity that may warrant its outright dismissal. The court’s The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and
authority to proceed with the disposition of the counterclaim the court shall require the defendant to institute a separate action,
independent of the main action is premised on the fact that the where:
counterclaim, on its own, raises a novel question which may be aptly  The third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant cannot be located within
adjudicated by the court based on its own merits and evidentiary thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of such leave;
support [Dio vs. Subic Bay Marine Exploratorium, Inc., GR 189532,  Matters extraneous to the issue in the principal case are raised; or
2014]  The effect would be to introduce a new and separate controversy
into the action. (11a)
 The dismissal of the counterclaim due to the fault of the plaintiff is
without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute any It is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against
pending counterclaims of whatever nature in the same or separate a person not a party to the action, for contribution, indemnity,
action. Thus: subrogation, or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim.
i. If the dismissal of the complaint somehow eliminates the cause [S11, R6]
of the counterclaim, then the counterclaim cannot survive.
ii. Conversely, if the counterclaim itself states sufficient cause of Requisites for a third-party action:
action then it should stand independently of and survive the 1) that the party to be impleaded must not yet be a party to the action; 
dismissal of the complaint [Perkin Elmer Singapore vs. Dakila 2) that the claim against the third-party defendant must belong to the
Trading, GR 172242, 2007] original defendant; 
3) the claim of the original defendant against the third-party defendant
How Raised must be based upon the plaintiffs claim against the original
1) By including it in the Answer defendant; and, 
 A compulsory counterclaim or a crossclaim that a defending 4) the defendant is attempting to transfer to the third-party defendant
party has at the time he files his answer shall be contained the liability asserted against him by the original plaintiff
therein. [S8, R11] As the foregoing indicates, the claim that the third-party complaint
2) By filing after the Answer asserts against the third-party defendant must be predicated on
i. A counterclaim may be set up, by leave of court, by substantive law [Philtranco Service Enterprises vs. Paras, GR 161909,
amendment before judgment, when: 2012]
 A pleader fails to set a counterclaim through oversight,
inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or  The purpose of Section 11, Rule 6 of the Rules of Court is to permit a defendant to assert
 Justice requires [S10, R11] an independent claim against a third-party which he, otherwise, would assert in another action,
thus preventing multiplicity of suits. All the rights of the parties concerned would then be
ii. A counterclaim, which either matured or was acquired by a adjudicated in one proceeding. This is a rule of procedure and does not create a substantial
party after serving his pleading, with permission of the court, right. Neither does it abridge, enlarge, or nullify the substantial rights of any litigant. This right
may be set up in a supplemental pleading before judgment. to file a third-party complaint against a third-party rests in the discretion of the trial court. The
third-party complaint is actually independent of, separate and distinct from the plaintiff’s
[S9, R11] complaint, such that were it not for the rule, it would have to be filed separately from the
original complaint.
d) Cross-Claims A prerequisite to the exercise of such right is that some substantive basis for a third-party claim
be found to exist, whether the basis be one of indemnity, subrogation, contribution or other
A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out substantive right. The bringing of a third-party defendant is proper if he would be liable to the
of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the plaintiff or to the defendant or both for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against the original
original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may defendant, although the third-party defendant’s liability arises out of another transaction
cover all or part of the original claim (8a) [Asian Construction Dev’t Corporation vs. CA & Monark Equipment
Corporation, GR 160242, 2005]
General Rule: A cross-claim is generally compulsory. A cross-claim
not set up shall be barred. [S2, R9]  When defendant may implead another as third-party defendant
 on an allegation of liability of the latter to the defendant for
Exceptions: (Permissive cross-claims) contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief;
a) The claim is outside the court’s jurisdiction;  on the ground of direct liability of the third-party defendant to the
b) The court cannot acquire jurisdiction over 3rd parties whose presence plaintiff; or
is necessary for the adjudication of said cross-claim.  on whether or not the third-party defendant would be liable to
c) The cross-claim matured or acquired after service of Answer both the plaintiff and the defendant for all or part of the plaintiff’s
claim against the original defendant
When proper; Requisites [S8, R6]
i. It is a claim by one party against a co-party;  There must be a causal connection between the claim of the plaintiff
ii. It must arise out of the subject matter of the complaint or of the in his complaint and a claim for contribution, indemnity or other relief
counterclaim; of the defendant against the third-party defendant
iii. The cross-claimant stands to be prejudiced by the claim against
him by the opposing party [Londres vs. CA, GR 136427, 2002]  The third-party complaint does not have to show with certainty that
there will be recovery against the third-party defendant, and it is
Improper cross-claims: sufficient that pleadings show possibility of recovery. In determining
1) Where the cross-claim is improper, the remedy is certiorari the sufficiency of the third-party complaint, the allegations in the
[Malinao vs. Luzon Surety, 1964] original complaint and the third-party complaint must be examined. A
2) The dismissal of a cross-claim is not appealable when the order third-party complaint must allege facts which prima facie show that the
dismissing the complaint becomes final and executory [Ruiz, Jr. vs. defendant is entitled to contribution, indemnity, subrogation or other
CA, 1993] relief from the third-party defendant [Asian Construction Dev’t
3) A cross-claim is not allowed after declaration of default of cross- Corporation, supra]
claimant. To allow the cross-claim to remain would be tantamount
to setting aside the order of default the cross-claimant, who had been  A third-party complaint is not proper in an action for declaratory
previously been declared in default, would re-obtain a standing in relief. [Commissioner of Customs v. Cloribel, 1977]
court as party litigant [Tan vs. Dimayuga, 1962]

Effect on Cross-Claim When Complaint is Dismissed  When the trial court has jurisdiction over the main case, it also has
The dismissal of the complaint carries with it the dismissal of a cross- jurisdiction over the third-party complaint, regardless of the amount
claim, which is purely defensive; but not a cross-claim seeking an involved as the said complaint is merely an auxiliary to and is a
affirmative relief. [Torres v. CA, 1973] continuation of the main action [Republic vs. Central Surety, 1968]

Cross-claim Counterclaim 3rd Party

 Complaint  Legal interest is present when the intervenor will either gain or lose
Against a co-party Against an opposing party Against a person not a as a direct effect of the judgment. The legal interest must be actual and
party to the action
material, direct, and immediate. In a theft case, the subject matter in
Must arise out of the May arise out of or be Must be in respect of
transaction that is the necessarily connected the opponent’s litigation is the item alleged to have been stolen [Neptune Metal Scrap
subject matter of the with the transaction or the (plaintiff’s) claim Recycling vs. Manila Electric Company, GR 204222, July 4, 2016]
original action or of a subject matter of the
counterclaim therein Opposing party’s claim
(compulsory cc) or it may How to Intervene
not (permissive cc) 1) With leave of court, the court shall consider the requisites above
No need for a leave of No need for leave of court Leave of court is 2) Motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of
court needed
3rd party is already No 3rd party involved [S6, 3rd party is not yet judgment by the trial court [S2, R19]
impleaded in the action R6 refers to “opposing impleaded, so leave of 3) Copy of the pleadings-in-intervention shall be attached to the
[Regalado] party”] court is required [S11, motion and served on the original parties
R6]

Time to Intervene [Sec. 2, Rule 19]

3rd Party Complaint Counterclaim
Need not be within the jurisdiction of the Must be within the jurisdiction of the
court trying the main case court trying the main case General Rule: The motion to intervene must be filed at any time
Diminishes/defeats the recovery sought Need not diminish/defeat the recovery before the rendition of judgment by the trial court
by the opposing party sought by the opposing party
Cannot exceed the amount stated in the May exceed in amount or be different in
original complaint kind from that sought in the original
Exceptions:
complaint 1) With respect to indispensable parties, intervention may be allowed
even on appeal [Falcasantos v. Falcasantos, 1952]
f) Complaint-In-Intervention 2) When the intervenor is the Republic [Lim v. Pacquing, 1995]
Intervention is a remedy by which a third party, not originally 3) Intervention may be allowed after judgment where necessary to
impleaded in a proceeding, becomes a litigant therein to enable him to protect some interest which cannot otherwise be protected, and for
protect or preserve a right or interest which may be affected by such the purpose of preserving the intervenor’s right to appeal [Pinlac v.
proceeding CA, 2003]
4) The court may allow intervention after rendition of judgment if the
Pleadings-in-Intervention [S3, R19] movant is an indispensable party [Neptune Metal Scrap Recycling
1) Complaint-in-intervention – If intervenor asserts a claim against vs. Manila Electric Company, supra]
either or all of the original parties
2) Answer-in-intervention – If intervenor unites with the defending Intervention is not an absolute right but may be granted by the court
party in resisting a claim against the latter when the movant shows facts which satisfy the requirements of the
statute authorizing intervention. The allowance or disallowance of a
Intervention is never an independent action, but is ancillary and motion to intervene is within the sound discretion of the court
supplemental to an existing litigation, and in subordination to the [Neptune Metal Scrap Recycling vs. Manila Electric Company, supra]
main proceeding. It may be laid down as a general rule that an
intervenor is limited to the field of litigation open to the original parties
[Saw v. CA, 1991] Remedies for Denial of Motion for Intervention
1) The movant may file a motion for reconsideration since the denial
Its purpose is "to settle in one action and by a single judgment the of a motion for intervention is an interlocutory order
whole controversy (among) the persons involved." [First Philippine 2) Alleging grave abuse of discretion, movant can also file a petition
Holdings v. Sandiganbayan, 1996] for certiorari

Complaint-In-Intervention 3rd Party Complaint  An order denying a motion for intervention is appealable. Where
Brings into the action a 3rd person who Same. Also brings into the action a 3rd the lower court’s denial of a motion for intervention amounts to a final
was not originally a party person who was not originally a party order, an appeal is the proper remedy, as when the denial leaves the
Initiative is with a non-party who seeks Initiative is with the person already a intervenor without further remedy or resort to judicial relief.
to join the action party to the action

A prospective intervenors right to appeal applies only to the denial of

Requisites for a valid intervention his intervention. Not being a party to the case, a person whose
1) There must be a valid Motion for Intervention filed before judgment intervention the court denied has no standing to question the decision
is rendered by the court of the court. Petitioner thus had no legal personality to join Gallego in
2) Movant must show in his motion assailing the decision of the trial court. Petitioner could question only
a) The he has a legal interest: the trial courts orders denying his intervention and striking off from the
 in the matter in litigation; or records his answer-in-intervention, not the decision itself.
 in the success of any of the parties; or
 against the parties The allowance or disallowance of a motion to intervene is addressed to
b) That the movant is so situated as to be adversely affected by a the sound discretion of the court hearing the case. This discretion, once
distribution or disposition of property in the custody of the court exercised, is not reviewable by certiorari or mandamus save in
or of an officer thereof. [S1, R19; Fernandez v. CA, A.M. OCA instances where such discretion is exercised in an arbitrary or
IPI No. 12-201-CA-J, 2013] capricious manner [Foster-Gallego vs. Sps. Galang, GR 130228, 2004]
c) That the intervention must not unduly delay or prejudice the
adjudication of the rights of the original parties g) Reply
d) That the intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected in a All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. If the
separate proceeding [S1, R19] plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new
matters so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an amended or
 Requisites (2) and (3) must concur supplemental complaint. However, the plaintiff may file a reply only if
the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her
Legal Interest answer
Interest must be of a direct and immediate character so that the A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or
intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation of the allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating
judgment. The interest must be actual and material, a concern which is to, said actionable document
more than mere curiosity, or academic or sentimental desire; it must
not be indirect and contingent, indirect and remote, conjectural, In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the
consequential or collateral. [Virra Mall Tenants v. Virra Mall, GR defendant may file a rejoinder if the same is based solely on an
182902, 2011] actionable document (10a)
Definition: The plaintiff’s response to the defendant's answer, 5) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any
 the function of which is to deny or allege facts in denial or in other paper;
avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in the answer 6) Memoranda;
and 7) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any
 thereby join or make issue as to such new matters. interlocutory order issued by the court;
8) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
Effect of Failure to Reply 9) Dilatory motions for postponement;
General Rule: Filing a reply is merely optional. New facts that were 10) Reply;
alleged in the answer are deemed controverted should a party fail to 11) Third-party complaints; and
reply thereto 12) Interventions

Exception: When a Reply is necessary 3. Parts And Contents Of A Pleading

i. To set up affirmative defenses on the counterclaim [Rosario v. a) Caption
Martinez, 1952] b) Signature and Address
ii. Where the answer alleges the defense of usury in which case a i. Every pleading and other written submissions to the court must
reply under oath should be made; otherwise, the allegation of be signed by the party or counsel representing him or her. The
usurious interest shall be deemed admitted [R8, S8; Sun Bros. v. address must be stated and such address must not be a post office
Caluntad, 1966] box. [S3, R7(a)]
iii. Where the defense in the answer is based on an actionable ii. The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him or her
document, a reply under oath must be made; otherwise, the that he or she has read the pleading and document; that to the best
genuineness and due execution of the document shall be deemed of his or her knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an
admitted. [S11, R8; Toribio v. Bidin, 1985] inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
 It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to
h) Extensions Of Time To File harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the
See A.M. No. 00-2-14-SC dated February 29, 2000 (Re: cost of litigation;
Computation of Time When the Last Day Falls on a Saturday,  The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are
Sunday or a Legal Holiday and a Motion for Extension on Next warranted by existing law or jurisprudence, or by a non-
Working Day is Granted) frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing
existing jurisprudence;
 Section 1, Rule 22, as clarified by the circular, is clear. Should a  The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if
party desire to file any pleading, even a motion for extension of time to specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support
file a pleading, and the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday or a legal after availment of the modes of discovery under these rules;
holiday, he may do so on the next working day and
 The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the
Based on Section 1, Rule 22 of the Rules of Court, where the last day evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based
of the period for doing any act required by law falls on a Saturday, a on belief or a lack of information
Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the court sits, the time
shall not run until the next working day. In this case, the original
period for filing the petition for review with the CA was on May 19, If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and
2007, a Saturday. Petitioner's filing of his motion for extension of time hearing, that this rule has been violated, it may impose an appropriate
to file a petition for review on May 21, 2007, the next working day sanction or refer such violation to the proper office for disciplinary
which followed the last day for filing which fell on a Saturday, was action, on any attorney, law firm or party that violated the rule, or is
therefore on time. However, petitioner prayed in his motion for responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law
extension that he be granted 15 days from May 21, 2007 or up to June firm shall be held jointly and severally liable for a violation committed
5, 2007 within which to file his petition. He then filed his petition for by its partner, associate, or employee. The sanction may include, but
review on June 5, 2007. The CA did not act on the motion for shall not be limited to, non-monetary directive or sanction; an order to
extension, but instead issued a Resolution dated September 21, 2007 pay a penalty in court; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for
dismissing the petition for review for being filed out of time. effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of part
We find that the CA correctly ruled that the petition for review was or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses directly
filed out of time based on our clarification in A.M. No. 00-2-14-SC resulting from the violation, including attorney’s fees for the filing of
that the 15-day extension period prayed for should be tacked to the the motion for sanction. The lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the
original period and commences immediately after the expiration of monetary penalty to the client (3a)
such period. Thus, counting 15 days from the expiration of the period
which was on May 19, 2007, the petition filed on June 5, 2007 was  An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court
already two days late. However, we find the circumstances obtaining in may allow such deficiency to be remedied if it appears that:
this case to merit the liberal application of the rule in the interest of 1) It was due to mere inadvertence; and
justice and fair play. [Montajes vs. PP, GR 183449, 2012] 2) It was not intended for delay [S3, R7]

2. Pleadings Allowed In Small Claims Cases And Cases Covered Effect of Signature of Counsel
By The Rules On Summary Procedure This constitutes a certificate by him that:
1) He has read the pleading
REVISED RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE 2) That to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is
The only pleadings allowed to be filed are: good ground to support it; and
1) Complaints 3) That it is not interposed for delay [S3, R7]
2) Compulsory counterclaims pleaded in the Answer
3) Cross-claims pleaded in the Answer; and c) Verification [S4, R7]
4) Answers thereto [Sec. 3[A], II] Pleadings need not be under oath or verified except when otherwise
specifically required by law or rule
RULE OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS
Prohibited Pleadings and Motions [S14] A pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to
1) Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of sign said verification. The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf
jurisdiction; of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s certificate or a special
2) Motion for a bill of particulars; power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading, and shall allege
3) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for the following attestations:
reopening of trial;  The allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on his or
4) Petition for relief from judgment; her personal knowledge, or based on authentic documents;
 The pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or 172590, 2013]
needlessly increase the cost of litigation; and
 The factual allegations therein have evidentiary support or, if  If, for justifiable reasons, the party-pleader is unable to sign, he
specifically so identified, will likewise have evidentiary support must execute a Special Power of Attorney designating his counsel of
after a reasonable opportunity for discovery record to sign on his behalf. [Vda. de Formoso v. PNB, GR 154704,
2011]
A pleading required to be verified that contains a verification based on
“information and belief,” or upon “knowledge, information and belief,”
or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading Verification/CNFS for Corporation
(4a) The certification must be executed by an officer, or member of the
board of directors, or by one who is duly authorized by a board
The signature of the affiant shall further serve as a certification of the resolution; otherwise, the complaint will have to be dismissed. [Cosco
truthfulness of the allegations in the pleading Philippines Shipping, Inc. v. Kemper Insurance, Co., G.R. No. 179488
(2012)]
However, the Court has ruled that a President of a corporation can sign
d) Certification Against Forum Shopping the verification and CNFS, without the benefit of a board resolution. It
A sworn statement in which the plaintiff or principal party certifies in a also allowed the following to sign:
complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief or in a (1) The Chairperson of the Board;
sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (2) The General Manager or acting GM;
i. That he has not commenced any action or filed any claim (3) A personnel officer; and
involving the same issues in any court or tribunal, and to the best (4) An employment specialist in a labor case
of his knowledge, no such other action is pending;
ii. That if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete However, the better procedure would be to append a board resolution
statement of the present status thereof; and to obviate questions regarding the authority of the signatory. [South
iii. That if he should learn that the same or a similar action has been Cotabato Communications Corp. vs. Sto. Tomas, GR 173326, 2010]
filed or is pending, he shall report such fact within 5 calendar Belated submission of written authority has been found to be
days to the court receiving his initiatory pleading. [S5, R7] substantial compliance with the rule, especially when the acts were
also ratified by the Board. [Swedish Match Philippines vs. Treasurer of
The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the City of Manila, GR 181277, 2013]
the form of a secretary’s certificate or a special power of attorney,
should be attached to the pleading Effect of noncompliant CNFS
Defect Effect
Failure to comply with the requirements Not curable by mere amendment

 Forum shopping is generally judicial. It exists whenever a party Cause for dismissal of the case, without
prejudice, unless otherwise provided,
"repetitively avails of several judicial remedies in different courts, upon motion and after hearing
simultaneously or successively, all substantially founded on the same False certification Constitutes indirect contempt, without
transactions and the same essential facts and circumstances, and all prejudice to administrative and criminal
Noncompliance with any undertaking actions
raising substantially the same issues either pending in, or already Willful and deliberate forum shopping Ground for summary dismissal, with
resolved adversely by, some other court." Considered a pernicious evil, prejudice
it adversely affects the efficient administration of justice since it clogs Direct contempt
Cause for Administrative sanctions
the court dockets, unduly burdens the financial and human resources of
the judiciary, and trifles with and mocks judicial processes [Malixi, et
al vs. Baltazar, GR 208224, November 24, 2017, Leonen, J.] e) Contents Of A Pleading [S6, R7]

Every pleading stating a party’s claims or defenses shall, in addition to

Test to determine whether or not forum shopping is committed those mandated by Section 2, Rule 7, state the following:
To determine whether a party violated the rule against forum shopping, a) Names of witnesses who will be presented to prove a party’s claim
the most important factor to ask is whether the element of litis or defense;
pendentia is present, or whether a final judgment in one case will b) Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, provided that the
amount to res judicata in another. In Ligtas vs. People, this Court judicial affidavits of said witnesses shall be attached to the pleading
reiterated that res judicata may also be applied to "decisions rendered and form an integral part thereof. Only witnesses whose judicial
by agencies in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings and not to purely affidavits are attached to the pleading shall be presented by the
administrative proceedings. Jurisprudence has also recognized the rule parties during trial. Except if a party presents meritorious reasons as
of administrative res judicata: "The rule which forbids the reopening basis for the admission of additional witnesses, no other witness or
of a matter once judicially determined by competent authority applies affidavit shall be heard or admitted by the court; and
as well to the judicial and quasi-judicial facts of public, executive or c) Documentary and object evidence in support of the allegations
administrative officers and boards acting within their jurisdiction as to contained in the pleading. (n)
the judgments of courts having general judicial powers. Thus, forum
shopping, in the concept of res judicata, is applicable to judgments or
decisions of administrative agencies performing judicial or quasi- 4. Allegations In A Pleading
judicial functions [Malixi vs. Baltazar, supra]
a. Manner of Making Allegations
 CNFS is not required in a compulsory counterclaim, as this is not In General
an initiatory pleading. [UST Hospital v. Surla, GR 129718, 1998] Every pleading shall contain
However, a certification is needed in permissive counterclaims [Korea 1) In a methodical and logical form
Exchange Bank v. Gonzales, GR 142286-87, 2005] 2) a plain, concise and direct statement statement of the ultimate facts
3) including the evidence on which the party pleading relies for his or
Who Executes the CNFS her claim or defense, as the case may be [S1, R8]
It is the plaintiff or principal party who executes the certification under
oath. [S5, R7]  Statement of mere evidentiary facts omitted

Rationale If a defense relied on is based on law, state in a clear and concise

 The plaintiff, not the counsel, is in the best position to know manner:
whether he or it has actually filed or caused the filing of a petition. 1) Pertinent provisions of the law
Certification signed by counsel without proper authorization is 2) Applicability of the law to him
defective, and a valid cause for dismissal. [Anderson v. Ho, GR
Facts that must be averred particularly ii. Fraud, mistake, malice, intent, knowledge and other condition
Circumstances showing fraud or mistake when averred [S5, R8] of the mind, judgments, official documents or acts

Facts that may be averred generally In all averments of fraud or mistake, the ircumstances constituting
1) Performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent [S3, R8]; fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity while malice, intent,
2) Capacity to sue or be sued; [S4, R8] knowledge or other condition of the mind of a person may be averred
3) Capacity to sue or be sued in a representative capacity; [S4, R8] generally [S5, R8]
4) Legal existence of an organized association of persons that is made
a party [S4, R8]
5) Malice, intent, knowledge or other condition of the mind of a b. Pleading An Actionable Document
person; [S5, R8] Actionable document
(6) Judgment or decision of a domestic and foreign court, judicial or Whenever an action or defense is based or founded upon a written
quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer without setting forth instrument or document, said instrument or document is deemed an
matter showing jurisdiction to render it); [S6, R8] actionable document [Riano]
(7) Official documents/acts. [S9, R8]
An actionable document is the written instrument upon which the
action or defense is based. Where a pleader relies upon a document, its
i. Condition precedent substance must be set out in the pleading either by its terms or by its
legal effects [S7, R8]
If the cause of action depends upon a condition precedent, its
fulfillment or legal excuse for nonfulfillment must be averred. Pleading the document
1) The substance of such document shall be set forth in the pleading;
A general averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions and the original or a copy shall be attached as an exhibit; or
precedent shall be sufficient [Sec. 3, Rule 8] 2) Said copy may with like effect be set forth in the pleading [S7, R8]

All valid conditions precedent to the institution of a particular action, How to contest an actionable document [S8, R8]
whether prescribed by statute, fixed by agreement of the parties, or General Rule: The party, under oath, specifically denies them, and sets
implied by law must be performed or complied with before forth what he claims to be the facts
commencing the action, unless the conduct of the adverse party has
been such as to prevent or waive performance or excuse non- Exceptions: The requirement of an oath does not apply:
performance of the condition [Anchor Savings Bank v. Furigay, GR 1) The adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument, or
191178, 2013] 2) Compliance with an order for an inspection of the original
instrument is refused [S8, R8]
Failure to comply with a condition precedent is a ground for a motion
to dismiss [S1 (j), R16] Effect of failure to deny under oath
The genuineness and due execution is deemed admitted
Examples of Conditions Precedent:
1) A tender of payment if required before making a consignation [Art.  The document need not be formally offered in evidence
1256, CC]
2) Exhaustion of administrative remedies is required in certain cases Substantial Compliance
before resorting to judicial action [Lopez vs. City of Manila, 1999; There is substantial compliance with Section 8, Rule 8 when, although
Dy vs. CA, 1999] the answer to the complaint shows that petitioners did not spell out the
3) Prior resort to barangay conciliation is necessary in certain cases words "specifically deny the genuineness and due execution of the
[Book III, Title I, Chapter 7, LGC] promissory notes." Nevertheless, when the answer is read as whole, it
4) Investigation by a fiscal is a prerequisite to annulment of marriage can be deduced that petitioners specifically denied the paragraphs of
when defendant defaults [Tolentino v. Villanueva, 1974] the complaint regarding the promissory notes. More importantly,
5) Earnest efforts toward a compromise must be undertaken when the petitioners were able to set forth what they claim to be the facts, which
suit is between members of the same family and if no efforts were in is a crucial element under Section 8 of Rule 8. Law and jurisprudence
fact made, the case must be dismissed [Art. 151, Family Code] grant to courts the prerogative to relax compliance with procedural
6) Arbitration may be a condition precedent when the contract between rules of even the most mandatory character, mindful of the duty to
the parties provides for arbitration first before recourse to judicial reconcile both the need to put an end to litigation speedily and the
remedies parties' right to an opportunity to be heard [Sps. Sy vs. Westmont Bank,
GR 201074, 2016]
Capacity c. Specific Denials
The following must be averred: The purpose of requiring the defendant to make a specific denial is to
1) Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued; or make him disclose the matters alleged in the complaint which he
2) The authority to sue or be sued in a representative capacity; succinctly intends to disprove at the trial, together with matters which
3) Or the legal existence of an organized association of persons that is he relied upon to support the denial. The parties are compelled to lay
made a party [Sec. 4, Rule 8] their cards on the table. [Philippine Bank of Communications vs. Go,
GR 175514, 2011] A denial does not become specific merely because it
 A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence or capacity is qualified by that word [Agton vs. CA, 1982]
of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity shall do so 1) Material averment in the complaint, other than those as to the
by specific denial which shall include supporting particulars within the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be deemed admitted when
pleader's knowledge not specifically denied
2) Allegations of usury in a complaint to recover usurious interest are
Judgment deemed admitted if not denied under oath [S11, R8]
In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court,
judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is Allegations Not Specifically Denied Deemed Admitted
sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth Material averments in a pleading asserting a claim or claims, other than
matter showing jurisdiction to render it. [S6, R8] those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be deemed
admitted when not specifically denied (11a)
Official documents or acts
Sufficient to aver that the document was issued, or the act done, in Modes of Specific Denial
compliance with law. [S9, R8] 1) Specific Absolute Denial – Defendant-pleader must specify each
material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit, and,
 whenever applicable, set forth the substance of matters relied upon
to support the denial  These exceptions also empower the courts to motu proprio dismiss
2) Partial Specific Denial - If defendant-pleader decides to deny only a an action where such grounds appear from the pleadings or the
part or a qualification of an averment: evidence on record [S1, R9]
 He shall specify so much of it as is true and material
 He shall deny the remainder  These exceptions can be raised at any time during or after the trial,
3) Denial by Disavowal of Knowledge – The defendant-pleader states or even for the first time on appeal. In other words, the court shall
that he is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a dismiss the claim if any of the foregoing grounds appears from the
belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint, pleadings or the evidence on record
he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial [S10, R8]

 Denial by disavowal of knowledge must be availed of with sincerity b) Failure to plead a compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim
and in good faith – certainly neither for the purpose of confusing the General Rule: A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-claim, not set up
adverse party as to what allegations of the complaint are really put in shall be barred. [S2, R9]
issue nor for the purpose of delay [Barnes vs. Reyes, 1958]
Exception: When a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or cross-
claim through oversight, inadvertence, excusable neglect, or when
i. Effect Of Failure To Make Specific Denials justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up the counterclaim or
General Rule: Allegations not specifically denied are deemed cross-claim by amendment before judgment. [S10, R11]
admitted [S11, R8]

Exceptions: 6. Default
1) Allegations as to the amount of unliquidated damages; There is default if the defending party fails to answer within the time
2) Allegations immaterial to the cause of action allowed therefor [S3, R9]
3) Allegations of merely evidentiary or immaterial facts may be
expunged from the pleading or may be stricken out on motion [S12, Dual Stages of Default
R8] 1) Declaration of Order of Default – when defendant fails to answer
4) Conclusions of law within the time specified in the rules, the court shall, upon motion of
the plaintiff and proof of such failure, declare defendant in default
2) Rendition of Judgment by Default – thereafter, on the basis of the
ii. When A Specific Denial Requires An Oath allegation of the complaint or after receiving plaintiff’s evidence,
Specific Denial requires an oath in the following cases: the court shall render judgment granting him such relief as the
1) Denial of the genuineness and due execution of an actionable complaint and the facts proven may warrant
document; [S8, Rule 8] and
2) Denial of allegations of usury. [S11, R8] Order of Default Judgment by Default
Issued by the court on plaintiff’s motion, Rendered by the court following a default
 Under CB Circular No. 905 (1982), the Usury Law of 1912 is for failure of the defendant to seasonably order or after it received ex parte
file his responsive pleading plaintiff’s evidence
currently suspended/legally inexistent [Medel vs. CA, 1998] Interlocutory – not appealable Final - appealable

d. Affirmative Defenses [S12, R8] (n)

a) A defendant shall raise his or her affirmative defenses in his or her a) When Declaration Of Default Is Proper
answer, which shall be limited to the reasons set forth under Section There is only one instance when a party defendant can properly be
5(b), Rule 6, and the following grounds: declared in default and that is when he fails to file his answer within
1) That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the the reglementary period [Rule 11], or within such extended time as he
defending party; is allowed by the court. [S11, R11]
2) That venue is improperly laid;
3) That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue; Requisites before a party may be declared in default:
4) That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; 1) The court must have acquired jurisdiction over the person of the
5) That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been defending party, either by service of summons or voluntary
complied with appearance;
b) Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at the earliest opportunity 2) The defending party must have failed to file his answer within the
shall constitute a waiver thereof reglementary period or within the period fixed by the court;
c) The court shall motu proprio resolve the above affirmative defenses 3) The claiming party must file a motion to declare the defending party
within thirty (30) calendar days from the filing the answer in default;
d) As to the other affirmative defenses under 1 st paragraph of Section5 4) The claiming party must prove that the defending party has failed to
(b), Rule 6, the court may conduct a summary hearing within fifteen answer within the period provided in the Rules; [Sablas vs. Sablas,
(15) calendar days from the filing of the answer. Such affirmative 2007]
defenses shall be resolved by the court within thirty (30) calendar 5) The defending party must be notified of the motion to declare him in
days from the termination of the summary hearing default; (S3, R9)
e) Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be subject of a motion for 6) There must be a hearing set on the motion to declare the defending
reconsideration or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, party in default [Sps. de los Santos vs. Carpio, GR 153696, 2008]
but may be among the matters to be raised on appeal after judgment
on the merits (n)
b) Effect Of An Order Of Default
5. Effect Of Failure To Plead 1) The party declared in default shall not take part in the trial.
a) Failure to plead defenses and objections However, he may still participate as a witness [Cavili v. Florendo,
General Rule: Defenses and objections not pleaded in the answer or G.R. No. 73039 (1987)] and is entitled to notices of subsequent
motion to dismiss are deemed waived. [“Omnibus Motion Rule,” S1, proceedings. [Sec. 3, Rule 9]
R9] In all, the defendant should receive the following notices:
a) Motion to declare him in default;
Exceptions: When it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on b) Order declaring him in default;
record that – c) Subsequent proceedings;
1) The court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter; d) Service of final orders and judgments
2) There is another action pending between the same parties for the
same cause (litis pendentia); 2) The court may either
3) The action is barred by a prior judgment (res judicata); a) Proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as
4) The action barred by statute of limitations (prescription) [S1, R9] his pleading may warrant; or
 b) Require the claimant to submit evidence, which need not be 1) Where a motion to lift an order of default is grounded on the very
received by the court personally but may be received by the clerk root of the proceedings [such as] where the court has not acquired
of court jurisdiction over the defendants [Ponio vs. IAC, 1984]
2) When a motion to lift an order of default contains the reasons for the
 A declaration of default is not tantamount to an admission of the failure to answer as well as the facts constituting the prospective
truth or validity of the plaintiff’s claims. [Monarch Insurance vs. CA, defense of the defendant and it is sworn to by said defendant, neither
GR 92735, 2000] a formal verification nor a separate affidavit of merit is necessary
[Tanhu vs. Judge Ramolete, 1975]
3) A defending party declared in default retains the right to appeal
from the judgment by default. However, the grounds that may be
raised in such an appeal are restricted to any of the following: d) Effect Of A Partial Default
a) The failure of the plaintiff to prove the material allegations of the When the complaint states a common cause of action against several
complaint; defendants, only some of whom answer, the court should declare
b) The decision is contrary to law; and defaulting defendants in default, and proceed to trial on answers of
c) The amount of judgment is excessive or different in kind from others.
that prayed for [Otero v. Tan, GR 200134 (2012)] If the defense is personal to the one who answered, it will not benefit
those who did not answer
c) Relief From An Order Of Default
1) After notice of the Order and before Judgment – file a motion under
oath to set aside the Order; must show: e) Extent Of Relief
a) Failure to file Answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake, 1) A judgment rendered against a party in default shall not exceed the
excusable negligence; and amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor award
b) That he has a meritorious defense (through an affidavit of merit) unliquidated damages
[S3 (b), R9] 2) If the claim is not proved, the case should be dismissed
2) After rendition of Judgment, before judgment becomes final and
executory – may file  In a judgment based on evidence presented ex parte, judgment
a) a Motion For New Trial [R37] should neither exceed the amount, nor be different in kind from that
b) an Appeal from the judgment for being contrary to the evidence prayed for. On the other hand, in a judgment where an answer was filed
or law but defendant did not appear at the hearing, the award may exceed the
3) After judgment becomes final and executory – may file amount or be different in kind from that prayed for [Datu Samad
a) a Petition For Relief From Judgment [R38] (within 60 days from Mangelen v. CA, 1992]
notice of the judgment, but within 6 months from entry thereof);
or f) Actions Where Default Are Not Allowed
b) an Annulment Of Judgment [R47]
Default is not allowed, in the following cases:
1) An action for annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage
 Remedy in case of proper order of default vs. Remedy in case of
2) For legal separation
improper order of default [Per Dean Mawis, PALS Live Lecture,
3) Special civil actions of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus where
April 20, 2020]
comment instead of an answer is required to be filed
4) Summary procedure
 Consistent with Rule 9, Section 3(b) of the 1997 Rules of Civil
5) In expropriation proceedings, whether or not a defendant has
Procedure, "the remedy against an order of default is a motion to set it
previously appeared or answered, he may present evidence as to the
aside on the ground of fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
amount of compensation to be paid for his property in the trial of the
negligence." However, it is not only the motion to lift order of default
issue of just compensation. [S3, par. 3, R67]
which a defendant must file. As this court emphasized in Agravante v.
Patriarca, “to the motion to lift order of default must "be appended an
If the defending party in an action for annulment or declaration of
affidavit showing the invoked ground, and another, denominated
nullity of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court
affidavit of merit, setting forth facts constituting the party's meritorious
shall order the Solicitor General or his or her deputized public
defense or defenses."
prosecutor, to investigate whether or not a collusion between the
The need for an affidavit of merit is consistent with Rule 8, Section 5
parties exists, and if there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in
of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that "in all
order to see to it that the evidence submitted is not fabricated. [S3 (e),
averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or
R9] (3a)
mistake must be stated with particularity [Sps. Manuel vs. Ong, GR
205249, October 15, 2014, Leonen, J.]
Flowchart of Default in Ordinary Procedure
Rule 9, Section 3(b) gives an exclusive list of only four (4) grounds
that allow for relief from orders of default. Moreover, these grounds —
Flow Chart of Remedies from Judgment by Default [USC, p. 152]
extrinsic fraud, accident, mistake, and excusable negligence — relate
Judgment by Default
to factors that are extraneous to a defendant, that is, grounds that show 
that a defendant was prevented, by reasons beyond his or her influence,
Motion For New Trial or Reconsideration
from timely filing an answer [Sps. Manuel vs. Ong, supra]
(at any time after service of judgment by default and within 15 (30) days therefrom

 These remedies presuppose that there was a valid order of default Failure to file Motion for New Trial/Reconsideration or Denial of
but the defendant may also file a petition for certiorari when he is said Motion
improperly declared in default. [Riano] 
Perfect Appeal from said judgment by default
Three (3) requisites to warrant the setting aside of an order of default (within the balance of said 15 (30) day period)
for failure to file answer: 
1) It must be made by motion under oath by one that has knowledge of Failure to Appeal without Defendant's fault
the facts; 
2) It must be shown that the failure to file answer was due to fraud, Petition For Relief from Judgment [R38]
accident, mistake or excusable negligence; and (within 60 days from notice of judgment but within 6 months from entry thereof)
3) There must be a proper showing of the existence of a meritorious 
defense [Montinola vs. Republic Planters Bank, 1988] Annulment of Judgment [R47]

7. Filing And Service Of Pleadings

a) Payment Of Docket Fees
An affidavit of merit is not necessary –
General Rule: The court acquires jurisdiction over the case only upon c) Periods of filing pleadings
payment of prescribed fees. Without payment, the case is considered d) Manner of filing
not filed. Payment of docket fees is mandatory and jurisdictional i. Personal filing
ii. Filing by registered mail
 Payment of docket fees is mandatory and jurisdictional [National iii. Filing by accredited courier
Transmission Corporation vs. Heirs of Ebesa, GR 186102, 2016] iv. Transmittal by electronic mail or other electronic means
e) Modes of service
 It is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate initiatory f) Service of judgments, final orders or resolutions; service of court-
pleading but the payment of the prescribed docket fee that vests a trial issued orders and other documents
court with jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action g) Conventional service or filing of orders, pleadings, and other
[Proton Pilipinas v. Banque National de Paris, GR 151242, 2005] documents
h) When service is deemed complete
Effect of Failure to Pay Docket Fees at Filing i) Proof of filing and service
1) The Manchester Rule: Manchester v. CA, GR 75919, 1987 8. Amendment
 Automatic Dismissal
 Any defect in the original pleading resulting in underpayment of
the docket fees cannot be cured by amendment, such as by the
reduction of the claim as, for all legal purposes, there is no
original complaint over which the court has acquired jurisdiction
2) Relaxation of the Manchester Rule, Sun Insurance vs. Asuncion, GR
79937, 1989
 Not automatic dismissal E.SUMMONS
 Court may allow payment of fees within a reasonable time but in F. MOTIONS
no case beyond the expiration of the applicable prescriptive G. DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS
period of the action filed
H. PRE-TRIAL
3) Exception to the Sun Insurance doctrine, Gochan vs. Gochan, GR
146089, 2001 I. INTERVENTION
 The Sun Insurance rule allowing payment of deficiency does not J. SUBPOENA
apply where plaintiff never demonstrated any willingness to K. COMPUTATION OF TIME
abide by the rules to pay the docket fee but stubbornly insisted L.MODES OF DISCOVERY
that the case filed was one for specific performance and damages M. TRIAL
4) Further modification, Heirs of Hinog vs. Melicor, GR 140954, 2005 N.DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
 Fees as lien O. JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS
 Where the trial court acquires jurisdiction over a claim by the
P. POST-JUDGMENT REMEDIES
filing of the pleading and the payment of the prescribed filing fee,
BUT SUBSEQUENTLY, the judgment awards a claim not Q. EXECUTION, SATISFACTION, AND EFFECT
specified in the pleading, or cannot then be estimated, or a claim OF JUDGMENTS
left for determination by the court, then the additional filing fee
shall constitute a lien on the judgment
5) Limitation on the claims covered by fees as lien, Metrobank vs.
Perez, GR 181842, 2010 III. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
 Claims not specified or claims although specified are left for A. NATURE AND PURPOSE
determination of the court are limited only to any damages that
may arise after the filing of the complaint or similar pleading for B.JURISDICTION OVER PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
then it will not be possible for the claimant to specify nor
speculate as to the amount thereof C.PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT
D.PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
E.RECEIVERSHIP
F. REPLEVIN
G.PROVISIONAL REMEDIES AND INTERIM RELIEFS
 Not all corporate disputes involve recovery of money so the filing UNDER SPECIAL LAWS AND RULES
fees should not be based on contested amounts. “Depending on the
nature of the principal, an intra-corporate controversy may involve a IV. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
subject matter which is either capable or incapable of pecuniary A.NATURE OF SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
estimation [Dee vs. Harvest All Investment Ltd., GR 224834, 2017]
B.DISTINGUISH: ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS AND
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
C.JURISDICTION AND VENUE
b) Distinguish: Filing and Service of Pleadings [S2, R13]
D.INTERPLEADER
Filing is the act of submitting the pleading or other paper to the court
E.DECLARATORY RELIEFS AND SIMILAR
Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or REMEDIES
any other court submission. If a party has appeared by counsel, service F. REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OR
upon such party shall be made upon his or her counsel, unless service RESOLUTION OF THE COMELEC AND THE
upon the party and the party’s counsel is ordered by the court. Where COMMISSION ON AUDIT
one counsel appears for several parties, such counsel shall only be G. CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND
entitled to one copy of any paper served by the opposite side MANDAMUS
H. QUO WARRANTO
Where several counsels appear for one party, such party shall be
entitled to only one copy of any pleading or paper to be served upon I. EXPROPRIATION
the lead counsel if one is designated, or upon any one of them if there J. FORECLOSURE OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
is no designation of a lead counsel (2a) K. PARTITION
L.FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER
M. CONTEMPT
V. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
A.SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED
PERSONS, VENUE AND PROCESS
B. SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES
C.PRODUCTION AND PROBATE OF WILL
D.ALLOWANCE AND DISALLOWANCE OF WILL
E. LETTER TESTAMENTARY AND OF
ADMINISTRATION
F. CLAIMS AGAINST THE ESTATE
G.ACTIONS BY AND AGAINST EXECUTORS AND
ADMINISTRATOR
H.DISTRIBUTION AND PARTITION
I. TRUSTEES
J. ESCHEAT
K.GUARDIANSHIP
L. ADOPTION
M. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
N.WRIT OF AMPARO
O.WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
P. CHANGE OF NAME
Q.ABSENTEES
R.CANCELLATION OR CORRECTION OF ENTRIES
IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY
S. APPEALS IN SPECIAL PROCEEDING