1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 VENUE OF ACTIONS

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

Q: Define venue. A: VENUE is the place where the action must be instituted and tried. (Ballentine s !aw Dict." #nd Ed." p. $$%#& E'A()!E: *he venue of the action is in Davao" or the venue of the action is in (anila. +f ,ou file the action in other places" that is improper or wron- venue. +n criminal cases" that is called territorial .urisdiction / the place where the crime was committed. But in civil cases" venue is not the same with .urisdiction. 0e do not call it territorial .urisdiction. 0e call it venue. *his is where it is important to determine whether the action is real or personal for the purpose of venue. *he venue of real action is stated in 1ection $ and the venue for personal action is stated in section #. VENUE 23 4EA! A5*+2N1 Section 1. Venue of real actions. Actions affecting title to or possession of real property or interest t!erein s!all "e co##ence$ an$ trie$ in t!e proper court %!ic! !as &uris$iction o'er t!e area %!erein t!e real property in'ol'e$ or a portion t!ereof is situate$. Forci"le entry an$ $etainer actions s!all "e co##ence$ an$ trie$ in t!e #unicipal trial court of t!e #unicipality or city %!erein t!e real property in'ol'e$ or a portion t!ereof is situate$. (1)a* +)a*a, 0hile it is true that the rule on venue is new however" the rule on venue even before $667 as earlier as Au-ust $" $668" 4ule 9 of the $6:9 4ules has alread, been amended b, the administrative 5ircular No. $%;68" but now it incorporated under the 4ules of $667. Now" when the action is real" we distin-uish whether it is forcible entr, and unlawful detainer or action publiciana or action reinvidicatoria. +f it is accion publiciana or reinvidicatoria" the proper venue is the one which has .urisdiction over the area wherein the real propert, involved or a portion thereof is situated. 2f course" the 4*5 is divided into areas. ever, branch has its own desi-nated area of responsibilit,. Q: 0h, does the law sa, <tried in the proper court=> A: +t is because proper court will now be the (*5 or the 4*5" dependin- on the assessed value of the propert,. +f the assessed value is )#?"??? or less" (*5 ,an. +f it is over )#?"???" it should be in the 4*5. Now in the case of forcible entr, and unlawful detainer" para-raph # will appl, / that is" (*5 / it is in the municipalit, or cit, wherein the real propert, involved or a portion thereof is situated. 1o" @un- saan i,on- real propert," doon din anvenue. Now" it is possible that for a propert, be in the boundar, of two towns. EAample: one half is part of Davao 5it, and the other half is in the municipalit, of )anabo. 1o" if ,ou would li@e to file a case for forcible entr, a-ainst somebod," ,ou have two choices. Bou can file it in the (*5 of )anabo or in the (*5 of Davao 5it,. Now" let s -o to personal actions. VENUE 23 4EA! A5*+2N1 Sec. +. Venue of personal actions. All ot!er actions #ay "e co##ence$ an$ trie$ %!ere t!e plaintiff or any of t!e principal plaintiffs resi$es or %!ere t!e $efen$ant or any of t!e principal $efen$ants resi$es or in t!e case of a non-resi$ent $efen$ant %!ere !e #ay "e foun$ at t!e election of t!e plaintiff. (+)"*a,

95

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

+,an an- tinatawa- natin na *4AN1+*24B A5*+2N . *he venue will now depend on the residence of the parties. +n the civil action" the venue is ($& the place where the plaintiff resides or (#& where the defendant resides" at the election of the plaintiff. 1o" puwede @an- pumili sa dalawa. Now" suppose" there are four (9& plaintiffs and 9 defendants and the 9 plaintiffs reside in 9 different cities or municipalities. 1o an- choice mo n- venue a, walo (C& becuae the law sa,s" <where the plaintiff or an, of the principal plaintiffs or where the defendant or an, of the principal defendants resideD> 1o" @un- maramin- defendants at iba;iba an- lu-ar at maramin- plaintiffs" the residence of each one could be the proper venue. N2*E: )4+N5+)A! )!A+N*+33" )4+N5+)A! DE3ENDAN*. Because there is such a thin- as nominal defendant and nominal plaintiff / i,un ban- formal lan-. E'A()!E of a nominal part,: 0hen a part, wants to file a case to annul an eAecution sale of to annul a lev," normall, it pleads the sheriff as part,. But the sheriff is not the principal part, but is onl, a N2(+NA! )A4*B. 1o" the residence of the sheriff is not considered the sheriff bein- a nominal part, onl,. 1o" .ust ima-ine if there are 9 plaintiffs and 9 defendants" iba;iban- cities. *here C choices of venue. *hat is the ori-inal concept of forum shoppin-. + will cite the ori-inal case which traced the histor, of forum;shoppin- na @un- saan a@o convenient" doon s@o ma-;file. *hat is the ori-inal concept / which is le-al and le-itimate. *he trouble is" the concept of forum shoppin- de-enerated into a malpractice " where a law,er" ma-;file n- case" saba,;saba,. A,anE *hat is wh, there is a 15 case which + will later discuss where Justice )an-aniban cited the histor, of forum shoppin-. (Dean is referrin- to the case of 3+41* )F+!+))+NE +N*E4NA*+2NA! BANG vs. 5A (#8# 154A #86&" Hanuar, #9" $66:& 3orum shoppin- is le-itimate and valid but the trouble is" the practice acIuired another unsavor, meanin-" where a law,er will file simultaneous cases. Ga,a n-a nasira / from a le-itimate practice to an act of malpractice. *hat is the histor, of forum shoppin-. Fowever" there are instances when it is eas, to distin-uish whether the action is real or personal and there are also instances when it is difficult. E'A()!E: An action for annulment of a contract of sale or rescission of contract of sale of real propert,. Jenerall," an action for annulment or rescission is a personal action. But suppose " + will file a complaint to annul or rescind a contract of a deed of sale over a parcel of land. + m from Davao and ,ou re from Davao. But + would li@e to annul the sale of a land which + made to ,ou one ,ear a-o which land is situated in Di-os and the purpose of m, action is to recover the ownership of that land. *hen" that is a real action because the primar, ob.ect of the suit is to recover the ownership of real propert," di ba= +t seems to be personal but in realit, it is a real action. 1o the venue is -overned b, 1ection #. But there are also actions na Gin- tin-nan mo paran- real but in realit," the, are personal actions. !i@e what happened in the case of .A TON/E0A /ISTI..ERS INC vs. 1ONFERRA/A #:9 154A 89? K$66:L 3A5*1: Hudee entered into a contract where she committed herself to sell her land to (a,in-. And Hudee even placed a lis pendens on the propert,. But later Hudee said" <Jua bo aiE> (chinese for ayoko na!& Na-;bac@ out baE 1o (a,in- will file a case a-ainst Hudee for specific performance to compel her to si-n the deed of sale. An- Iuestion di,an" ano ba ito= real or personal action= Because if it is real action" the complaint should be filed in the place where the land is situated. +f the action is personal" it can be filed in Davao 5it, where both of them are residents. 96

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

+11UE: +s this real or personal action= FE!D: +t is a )E412NA! A5*+2N because ,ou are not Iuestionin- m, ownership. Fere" the plaintiff reco-niMes that the defendant is still the owner. Ga,a n-a he is still filin- the case to compel him to sell. *hus" it should be filed in the residence of the parties. <*he complaint is one for specific performance with dama-es. )rivate respondents do not claim ownership of the lot but in fact reco-niMed title of defendants b, annotatin- a notice of lis pendens. +n one case" a similar complaint for specific performance with dama-es involvin- real propert," was held to be a personal action" which ma, be filed in the proper court where the part, resides. Not bein- an action involvin- title to or ownership of real propert," venue" in this case" was not improperl, laid before the 4*5 of Bacolod 5it,.> (Adamos vs. Tuazon #8 154A %? K$6:CL& 1o it is not reall, an action affectin- title or ownership because ,ou are still reco-niMin- the title of the owner of the propert,. +t is different when + m no lon-er reco-niMin- it" li@e recover, or reinvidicatoria. *hese are -ra, areas" or sometimes ver, hard to distin-uish whether the action is real or personal. Q: [Taken from Remedial La Revie er !y "uevas# 0here several or alternative reliefs are sou-ht in an action" and the reliefs pra,ed for are real and personal" how is venue determined= A: 0here several or alternative reliefs are pra,ed for in the complaint" the nature of the action a s real or personal is determined b, the primar, ob.ect of the suit or b, the nature of the principal claim. *hus" where the purpose is to nullif, the title to real propert," the venue of the action is in the province where the propert, lies" notwithstandin- the alternative relief sou-ht" recover, of dama-es" which is predicated upon a declaration of nullit, of the title. (Navarro vs. !ucero" $?? )hil. $9:& 0here a lessee see@s to establish his ri-ht to the hacienda" which was subseIuentl, sold" for the purpose of -atherinthe crops thereon" it is unnecessar, to decide whether the crops are real or personal propert," because the principal claim is recover, of possession of land so that he ma, -ather the fruits thereof. (!*5 vs. (acadae-" 87 2.J. %%$7& Now" -oin- bac@ to 1ection #. 4E1+DEN5E 23 *FE )A4*+E1 0e will now -o the issue of residence. 0here is the residence of the parties= Because residence in law could mean D2(+5+!E 24 !EJA! 4E1+DEN5E" it could be A5*UA! 24 )FB1+5A! 4E1+DEN5E. Alam mo" i,on- le-al domicile" ,ou ma, not be there but there is intention to -o bac@ there someda,. Alri-ht" with the eAception of onl, one case" the word Nresidence and Nvenue has been uniforml, interpreted b, the 15 to mean A5*UA! or )FB1+5A! 4E1+DEN5E not le-al domicile. Alri-ht" there are so man, case alread,: 52 vs. 5A (7? 154A #6:&O 3U!E vs. 5A ($9 154A $C6&O FE4NANDEP vs. 4U4A! BANG 23 *FE )F+! (C$ 154A 78&O 4AB(2ND vs. 5A ($:: 154A 8?&O E15UE4*E vs. 5A ($6% %54A 89&. )areho an- rulin- ni,an. E'5E)* for one case decided wa, bac@ in $68: / the case of CORRE vs. CORRE $?? )hil ##$ 3A5*1: An American who resides in 1an 3rancisco who came to the )hilippines rented an apartment in (anila to sue his wife who is a 3ilipina. *he wife is from (indanao. And then the American husband filed the case in (anila because residente man daw si,a in (anila / because he rented daw an apartment in (anila. Now" if ,ou follow the rule" tama man an- husband ba.

97

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

FE!D: Bou are not a resident of (anila. Bour residence is in 1an 3rancisco / that is ,our domicile. 1o that is to compel the American to file the case in the residence of the wife rather than the wife -oin- to (anila. 1o the case of $%RR& is the onl, eAception where the 15 said" <residence means domicile.> All the rest" ph,sicalE +n the case of $%RR&" ma,be the 15 there was .ust tr,in- to help the 3ilipina. +f we will interpret the rule on venue as ph,sical" it is the 3ilipina who will be inconvenienced. +f we sa, le-al residence is the venue" it is the American husband who would be forced to -o to the (indanao to file. And we should favor our own @ababa,an. Ban si-uro an- nan-,ari because that was the onl, eAception eh. 4E1+DEN5E 23 A 524)24A*+2N Under 4ule $" a corporation can sue and be sued. But what is the residence of a corporation= Under the corporation law" the residence of a corporation is the place where its head or main office is situated / ,un- head office ba which is usuall, stated in the articles of incorporation. Now" let s -o to some interestin- cases on this issue: C.AVECI..A RA/IO S2STE3 vs. ANTI..ON $6 154A %6 K$6:7L 3A5*1: 5lavecilla was sued in 5a-a,an de 2ro 5it,. 5lavecilla Iuestioned the venue because its head office is in (anila. *he plaintiff ar-ued that it can be sued because it has a branch in 5a-a,an. +11UE: +s a corporation a resident of an, cit, or province wherein it has an office or branch= FE!D: N2. An, person" whether natural or .uridical" can onl, have one residence. *herefore" a corporation cannot be allowed to file personal actions in a place other than its principal place of business unless such a place is also the residence of a co;plaintiff or defendant. *he rulin- in the case of A"TALL%" was reiterated in the $66% case of B2UNJ AU*2 1U))!B 52. vs. 52U4* 23 A))EA!1 (##% 154A :7?& Because the law said <where the plaintiff or an, of the principal plaintiffs..> 1o if the corporation is suin- with someone from Davao" even if m, head office is in (anila" + can file because of the residence of m, co;plaintiff or the residence of the defendant. But outside of that" a corporation cannot sue outside of its head office because its residence is there. *hat is the case of '%(") A(T% *(++L'. ,%R -" T.& $A*& %/ A "%"0R&*-1&"T 1&/&"1A"T* 2.&R& .& 3A' 4& /%("15 1uppose the defendnt is not residin- here in the )hilippines but is .ust on vacation and ,ou want to sue him. 0hat is now the point of reference= Did ,ou notice the phrase <or in the case of a non;resident defendants where he ma, be found.> Now what does that mean= +t means to sa, that the defendant is not actuall, residin- in the )hilippines but he is temporaril, around because he is found in the )hilippines. EAample is a bali@ba,an who is still on vacation. )42B!E(: 1uppose a 3ilipino who is alread, residin- abroad decided to come bac@ this 5hristmas for a vacation. 0hen he landed at the (anila Domestic Airport and ,ou are his friend and the first thin- he reIuested ,ou is" <wala pa a@on- )hilippine peso" puro pa dollars. 1o pahiramin mo muna a@o. + will pa, ,ou in one wee@ s time once + have m, dollars eAchan-ed to pesos.> Fow much do ,ou want= Fe borrowed from ,ou )$8"???.??. 2ne wee@ later" still he has not 98

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

paid ,ou and obviousl, it seems he will not pa, ,ou. 1o ,ou decided to sue him while he is around to collect the case advance of the )$8"??? that ,ou -ave him. 1o" where is the venue of the action= A: *he law sa,s" -enerall, where the plaintiff resides or where the defendant resides. *he trouble is" the defendant has no residence here because he is alread, residin- abroad. But he is temporaril, here in the )hilippines. Bou can sue him where he ma, be found. +f he decides to sta, in 5ebu" that is where the proper venue rather his permanent residence. 1o where he ma, be found is the alternative venue. *he phrase , 6ere 6e may !e found5 means where he ma, be found here in the )hilippines for a non;resident defendant but temporaril, sta,in- in the )hilippines. Q: 1uppose a defendant is a non;resident and he is not even here. !i@e for eAample" ,our nei-hbor borrowed mone, from ,ou and the nest thin- ,ou heard is that he left the countr,. Fe has alread, mi-rated to the states. 2f course ,ou @now his address there. 5an ,ou sue him in the )hilippine court" a defendant who is no loner residin- here and is not found in the )hilippines= A: N2" ,ou cannot. 5har-e it to eAperience. Q: 0h, can ,ou not sue a person not residin- here in the )hilippines and is not found here in the first place= A: *here is no wa, for )hilippine courts to acIuire .urisdiction over his person. 2therwise" he will not be bound b, the decision. But in our discussion on the element of .urisdiction: su!7ect matter8 person8 res and issues8 + told ,ou that the res or the thin- in dispute is important because sometimes it ta@es the place of .urisdiction over the person of the defendant. 1o even if the )hilippine court cannot acIuire .urisdiction over the person of the defendant but the sub.ect of the controvers, (res& is in the )hilippines" then the non;resident defendant can also be sued in the )hilippines. *he court can now acIuire .urisdiction over the res" sub.ect and since the res is here" the .ud-ment can be enforced. +t is not a useless .ud-ement an,more. E'A()!E: Fe is there but he is the owner of a piece of land here. + want to file a case to recover ownership over the land here in the )hilippines" ,aanE Q: 5an + sue the non;resident defendant= A: BE1 under 1ection %. Even if the person is abroad" the res of the propert, in dispute is here and if he loses the case the .ud-ment can be enforced / transfer the propert, to ,ou. 1o it is not a useless .ud-ment. *hat is what 1ection % is all about. Sec. 4. Venue of actions a9ainst nonresidents. - If any of t!e $efen$ants $oes not resi$e an$ is not foun$ in t!e 1!ilippines an$ t!e action affects t!e personal status of t!e plaintiff or any property of sai$ $efen$ant locate$ in t!e 1!ilippines t!e action #ay "e co##ence$ an$ trie$ in t!e court of t!e place %!ere t!e plaintiff resi$es or %!ere t!e property or any portion t!ereof is situate$ or foun$ (+)c*a, Q: 0hat is the difference between the non;resident defendant in 1ection # and the non;resident defendant in 1ection %= A: +n 1ection #" the non;resident defendant ma, be found in the )hilippines. But in 1ection %" he does not reside and is not found in the )hilippines. 1o" ph,sicall," he is not around. Q: 0hat actions can be filed a-ainst a non;resident defendant who is not even found here in the )hilippines= A: *here are two (#&: $.& *he action that affects the personal status of the plaintiffO or #.& *he action affects the propert, or an, portion thereof of said defendants is located here in the )hilippines. A$T-%" T.AT A//&$T* T.& +&R*%"AL *TAT(* %/ T.& +LA-"T-// E'A()!E: A ,oun- child was abandoned b, his ille-itimate father. *he ille-itimate father left the )hilippines for -ood. *he son wants to file a case a-ainst the father for compulsor, reco-nition" at least to improve his status. 99

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

Q: 5an the child file a case for compulsor, ac@nowled-ment here in the )hilippines a-ainst the father for compulsor, ac@nowled-ment= A: BE1 because the action involves the person status of the plaintiff. *he res is the status of the plaintiff who happens to be in the )hilippines. T.& A$T-%" A//&$T* T.& +R%+&RT' %R A"' +%RT-%" T.&R&%/ %/ *A-1 1&/&"1A"T* -* L%$AT&1 .&R& -" T.& +.-L-++-"&* EAample: *he defendant who is alread, abroad owns a piece of land located here in the )hilippines and + want to recover the ownership of the piece of land. Q: 0hat is the res: A: *he res is the land which is situated here in the )hilippines. *herefore + can sue that defendant even if he is there because the court can acIuire .urisdiction over the res. +n order to validl, sue in the )hilippine court" a defendant who is no lon-er residin- here and is no lon-er found here" the action must be: $.& action in remO or #.& at least Iuasi;in rem" because if the action iis for compulsor, reco-nition" that is actuall, an action in rem. +f the suit in involves a propert, here in the )hilippines" at least that is an action Iuasi;in rem. But if the action is purel, in personam" then there is no wa, b, which ,ou can sue him. EAample is an action to collect an unpaid loan. Q: 0here is now the proper venue of the action a-ainst the non;residents= A: *he law sa,s where the plaintiff resides / action which affects the personal status of defendants" where the propert, of the defendant located here in the )hilippines

Sec. 4. 26en rule not applica!le. - t!is rule s!all not apply a,In t!ose cases %!ere a specific rule or la% pro'i$es ot!er%ise5 or ",6!ere t!e parties !a'e 'ali$ly agree$ in %riting "efore t!e filing of t!e action on t!e e7clusi'e 'enue t!ereof. (4a 8a, A.; -" T.%*& $A*&* 2.&R& A *+&$-/-$ R(L& %R LA2 +R%V-1&* %T.&R2-*&< 1o" when there is a special rule or law on venue which applies onl, to certain t,pes of cases" then that rule will appl, rather than 4ule 9. Q: 0hat cases which provides for venue of the action which ma, be different from what 4ule 9 sa,s= A: *he followin-: $.& A civil action arisin- from !+BE! under Article %:? of the 4evised )enal 5ode. !ibel could -ive rise to a civil action for dama-es. +t is considered under the 4)5 as one of the independent civil actions. *he criminal action for libel shall be filed simultaneousl, or separatel, with the 4*5 of the: a.& province or cit, where the libelous article is printed and first publishedO or b.& where an, of the offended parties actuall, resides at the time of the commission of the offense. +f one of the offended part, is a public officer" whose office is in the 5it, of (anila at the time of the commission of the offense" the action shall be filed (a& in the 4*5 of (anila" or (b& in the 4*5 of the province where he held office at the time of the commission of the offense. 100

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

#.& *ection = >?;8 Article V---8 @ABC $onstitution / *he 15 ma, order a chan-e of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarria-e of .ustice as what happened in the case of 3ayor *anc6ez. 1o these are the eAamples on the special rules. Alri-htD 4.; 2.&R& T.& +ART-&* .AV& VAL-1L' A)R&&1 -" 2R-T-") 4&/%R& T.& /-L-") %/ T.& A$T-%" %" T.& &D$L(*-V& V&"(& T.&R&%/. 1o" it is possible that A and B will enter into contract providin- for suits involvin- the violation of the contract" the venue shall be in this particular place. *a@e note that the stipulation must be in writin- and it is there even before the filinof the action. Alri-htD E'A()!E: 5ontracts of ban@s and other financin- companies. 1ometimes it sa,s there that in case of suits arisinout of these contract" the action shall be filed in the 5it, of (a@ati or (anila which is neither the residence of the parties. Q: Now" can we a-ree to file a case other that were the parties reside= A: BE1 because the law sa,s" we can a-ree on a place where the action will be filed provided it is in writin- and it is stipulated even before the filin- of the action. 1O.2TRA/E COR1. vs. 9.ANCO %? 154A $C7 3A5*1: 5harles and Hoshua are both residin- here in Davao 5it,. Hoshua borrowed mone, from 5harles" and Hoshua eAecuted a promissor, note in favor of 5harles which sa,s" <+ promise to pa, 5harles the sum of )#??"??? one ,ear from toda,. +n case of a suit arisin- from this promissor, note" the parties a-ree to sue and be sued in the 5it, of (anila.> 0hen the note matured" Hoshua did not pa,. 5harles filed a case to collect the unpaid loan here in Davao 5it,. 5harles challen-ed the venue. Accordin- to 5harles" the venue is correct because both of us are residin- here in Davao 5it, and under 4ule 9" the venue is where + reside or ,ou reside" at m, option. Both of us are residin- here so + sued ,ou here. Defendant Hoshua sa,s" no since there is a stipulation we both a-reed upon that in cases of liti-ation" the parties a-ree to sue and be sued in the 5it, of (anila. 1o (anila is the correct venue. +11UE: 0ho is correct in this case= A the plaintiff or B the defendant= FE!D: )laintiff is correct notwithstandin- the stipulation. 0h,= 0hen the parties stipulated on the venue of the civil action" other that those found in the 4ule of 5ourt" the stipulated venue is considered merel, as an A11-T-%"AL venue in addition to where the parties reside. Unless the stipulation contains R&*TR-$T-V& words which shows the intention of the parties to limit the place stipulated as the eAclusive venue. +n other words" the parties a-ree to sue and be sued in the 5it, of (anila" even if so" the venue of the action is where the plaintiff resides or where the defendant resides in accordance with 4ule 9" and the third venue is accordin- to the stipulation of the parties. 1o" the case here has three (%& venues of action. (amili @a sa tatlon- venues because there is nothin- in the a-reement that the parties intended that (anila is the onl, eAclusive venue. *here is no restrictive word. + will chan-e the )42B!E(: 1uppose the stipulation contains this statement" <in case of suit arisin- out of this promissor, note or contract" the parties a-ree to sue and be sued eEclusively in the 5it, of (anila"> ,aanE 2r" <to sue and be sued in the 5it, of (anila only.> *he addition of the words ,eEclusively5 or ,only5 shows the intention of the parties to limit venue of the action onl, in that place. *herefore ,ou cannot appl, 4ule 9" 1ections $;%. 1o" in this case" Hoshua can move to dismiss the case because the venue is eAclusive. 101

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

1o in the second eAception where there is an a-reement in writin- on the eAclusive venue" the word eEclusive is ver, important as ta@en in the rulin- in +%L'TRA1& vs. 4LA"$%. 1o if the venue is not eAclusive" 4ule 9 still applies and the stipulated venue is .ust an additional one. 2f course" there are stipulations which ,ou can see clearl, the intention of the parties to limit the venue onl, in that place. But sometimes" there are stipulations in which it is difficult to decipher the real intention of the parties whether eAclusive or not. EAamples of clear stipulations which calls for the application of the +%L'TRA1& rulin-: in t6e $ity of 3anila only or t6e suit s6all !e filed in t6e $ity of 3anila and in no ot6er place. Fowever" there are cases in which ,ou cannot find the word eEclusive or the word only" and ,et the 15 said it seems the intention of the parties to limit the venue as eAclusive as what happened in the $669 case of :ES3UN/O vs. ;R9 REA.T2 COR1 #%9 154A $8% 3A5*1: *his involves a lease contract which contain a stipulation on venue. Fere is the lan-ua-e of the lease contract: ,venue for all suits8 6et6er for !reac6 6ereof or dama9es or any cause !et een t6e L&**%R and t6e L&**&&8 and persons claimin9 under eac68 !ein9 t6e courts of appropriate 7urisdiction in +asay $ityF5 +n other words" if there is a case" the, a-reed to file it in the court of )asa, 5it,. +11UE: +s this intention of the parties to ma@e )asa, 5it, an eAclusive venue= FE!D: )asa, 5it, is the eAclusive venue. <+t is true that in +olytrade $orporation v. 4lanco" a stipulation that N*he parties a-ree to sue and be sued in the 5it, of (anila was held to merel, provide an additional forum in the absence of an, Iualif,in- or restrictive words. But here" b, la,in- in )asa, 5it, the venue for all suits" the parties made it plain that in no other place ma, the, brin- suit a-ainst each other for breach contract or dama-es or an, other cause between them and persons claimin- under each of them.> +n other words" the intention of the parties is to ma@e )asa, 5it, the eAclusive venue. *here are some cases in the 154A where there is no restrictive word but the 15 interpreted it as restrictive. 1o it is in conflict with the +%L'TRA1& rulin- because in +%L'TRA1&" the stipulated place must be eAclusive. Amon- the cases which seems to conflict with the rulin- in )2!B*4ADE are the followin-: 9AUTISTA vs. /E 9OR;A ($C 154A 97:& <OEC<ST vs. TORRES (C% 154A #67& *his conflict was resolved in the case of )F+!. BANG+NJ vs. *EN1UAN (##C 154A %C8& where the 15 ruled that the rulin- in 4A(T-*TA vs. 1& 4%RJA and .%&$.*T +.-L*. vs. T%RR&* has been rendered obsolete b, the +%L'TRA1& rulin- and subseIuent cases reiterated it. 1o the rulin- in +%L'TRA1& is the correct rulin-. 3or-et what the 15 said in the abovementioned two cases. S6EET .INES vs. TEVES C% 154A %:$ 3A5*1: *his is a 5a-a,an de 2ro case which involves 1weet !ines" a shippin- compan, with the head office in 5ebu. *he respondent *eves is the former 5it, 3iscal of Davao 5it," former (a,or and became .ud-e of 53+ of 5a-a,an de 2ro 5it,. *here was a -roup of passen-er who rode on the 1weet !ines bound for 5ebu 5it,. Durin- the trip" the, were -iven a crude treatment b, the officers of the vessel. 0hen the, came bac@ in 5a-a,an de 2ro 5it," 102

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

the, filed a suit for dama-es a-ainst 1weet !ines. *he, file dht ecase in the former 53+" now 4*5" of 5a-a,an de 2ro 5it, because the plaintiffs are residents of 5a-a,an de 2ro 5it,. 1weet !ines filed a motion to dismiss Iuestionin- the venue of the action because in the tic@et issued b, 1weet !ines" it is stipulated that ,Fin case of a civil action arisin9 from t6e contract of carria9e8 t6e venue of t6e action s6all !e t6e $ity of $e!u %"L' and in no ot6er place.5 1o there is a restrictive word. 2bviousl, the law,ers of 1weet !ines @new about +olytrade because the, moved to dismiss the case citin- this case. Hud-e *eves denied the motion to dismiss the case despite the stipulation. Accordin- to him" it is unfair. +f + will dismiss the case based on this stipulation" the a--rieved parties will be discoura-ed in -oin- to 5ebu. +t is ver, eApensive and the, will be inconvenienced. But" if the case will -o on in 5a-a,an de 2ro" it will not inconvenienced 1weet !ines because the, have their branch office" their mana-e and their own law,er. +11UE: 0hether or not 5a-a,an de 2ro is the proper venue. FE!D: BE1. Hud-e *eves was correct in not dismissin- the case. 3irst of all" the stipulation is placed in the tic@et. *hese people never even bothered to read this. Na@ala-a, na i,an di,an eh. 1o either ,ou ta@e it or ,ou leave it. *herefore" the passen-ers did not have a hand in preparin- that stipulation. 1o the contract is a contract of adhesion. 1econd" a-ain for the sa@e of eIuit," to be fair that these poor people will be compelled to -o to 5ebu to file a case there. *he, will be discoura-ed. +t is ver, eApensive to -o bac@ and forth to 5ebu. 0hereas" 1weet !ines has the resources" the means" the law,ers here in 5a-a,an to liti-ate. *herefore" it would be ineIuitable to compel them or to appl, the stipulation there. *he rulin- in *2&&T L-"&* is an eAception to +%L'TRA1& despite the eAclusive stipulation. *he 15 said that the refusal of the court to appl, it is correct. *here is no -rave abuse of discretion on the part of Hud-e *eves. AR=UERO vs. F.O;O $:C 154A 89? 3A5*1: ArIuero here is law,er and the municipal ma,or of the municipalit, of 1ta. *eresita" 5a-a,an Valle,. Fe sent a tele-ram throu-h the 45)+ branch in 5a-a,an addressed to (anila. (eron si,an- pabor na hihin-i;in sa 5on-ressman: - ill 9o t6ere to 3anila8 - ill see you in your office on t6is particular date. 1o pinadala ni,a i,on- tele-rama. 0hen he went to the office of the con-ressman after the few da,s" na-alit pa ,un- con-ressman sa @an,a" ,*o you are 6ere to ask for a favor for your o n. -ka na an9 nan9an9ailan9an8 pati tele9rama ako pa an9 pa!ayarin mo:! $ollect pa!5 ArIuero was stunned eh because he paid the tele-ram. Fow come na-incollect= +n effect" he was embarrased. )a-bali@ ni,a sa 5a-a,an" f;in;ile;an ni,a n- dama-es an- 45)+. But in the 45)+ tele-raph form" there is a stipulation that ,venue of any action s6all !e t6e court of Guezon $ity alone and in no ot6er courts.5 1o the venue is restrictive. 0ith that" ArIuero filed an action for dama-es in the 4*5 of Aparri 5a-a,an and 45)+ moved to dismiss for improper venue" stipulation accordin- to the +%L'TRA1& case eh. *he trial court moved to dismiss the case because of this restrictive stipulation. ArIuero went to the 15 citin- the case of *2&&T L-"&* where despite the fact of a restrictive stipulation" 15 refused to appl, the +%L'TRA1& rulin-. 103

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure

Rule 4 Venue of Actions

FE!D. *he rulin- in * eet Lines vs. Teves does not appl,. Bou are bound b, the stipulation. 0h,= Bou are a law,er eh. *arantado @a" ba@it @a pumirma=E Bou are a law,er. Bou @now all these thin-s. 0h, did ,ou si-n= 1o na,ari si,a. *hat was ta@en a-ainst him haE As a matter of fact" it is there ,ou can read it. +t is in the front" pumirma @a pa sa ilalim. +n the case of Teves" ,ou cannot read it. Nasa li@od" ver, small. +n other words" ,ou a-ree to be bound. As a law,er" ,ou should @now what ,ou are si-nin-. Now" he last point to remember about venue is the difference between venue and .urisdiction. +n criminal cases" there is no distinction between .urisdiction and venue. *he place of the filin- of the case is where the crime is committed or where the essential elements were committed. *herefore" when the cases is committed in Davao 5it," ,ou cannot file a case in 5otabato 5it,. 5otabato has no territorial .urisdiction over the case. But in civil cases" if ,ou violate 4ule 9" do not sa, that the court has no .urisdiction. Bou onl, sa," venue was improperl, laid. BaanE 1o" if + will file an e.ectment case a-ainst ,ou in Davao 5it, before the (*5 but + am e.ectin- ,ou from ,our apartment in *a-um" do not ma@e the mista@e. +f + move to dismiss on the -round that the (*5 has no .urisdiction" ,ou are craM,. *he (*5 has .urisdiction over all unlawful detainer cases. An- walan- .urisdiction is the 4*5. *he correct -round is: venue is improperl, laid. But if ,ou file the unlawful detainer case in the 4*5" ,ou Iuestion the .urisdiction of the court" not the place. 1o then" what is the main distinction= Q: Distin-uish HU4+1D+5*+2N from VENUE. A: *he followin- are the distinctions: $.& HU4+1D+5*+2N refers to the authorit, the court to hear the case" 6ereas VENUE refers onl, to the place where the action is brou-ht or triedO #.& HU4+1D+5*+2N over the sub.ect matter cannot he waivedO 6ereas VENUE is waivable and can be sub.ect of a-reementO %.& HU4+1D+5*+2N is -overned b, substantive law / Hudiciar, !aw" B) $#6O 6ereas VENUE is -overned b, procedural law / 4ule 9 of the 4ules of 5ourtO 9.& HU4+1D+5*+2N refers to the relation of the parties to the courtO whereas VENUE refers to the relation between the partiesO and 8.& HU4+1D+5*+2N limits the court s authorit,O whereas VENUE limits plaintiff s ri-hts. BA4 QUE1*+2N: 1tate in what instance the .urisdiction and venue coincide. A: +n 54+(+NA! 5A1E1 because in criminal cases" venue is territorial .urisdiction. But in civil cases" .urisdiction and venue are two different thin-s. *he, do not coincide.

104