Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Rules 1 71
I.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
(3)
They shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights(Sec. 5[5], Art. VIII,
Constitution).
(4)
The power to admit attorneys to the Bar is not an arbitrary and despotic one, to be
exercised at the pleasure of the court, or from passion, prejudice or personal hostility, but is
the duty of the court to exercise and regulate it by a sound and judicial discretion. (Andres
vs. Cabrera, 127 SCRA 802)
(4)
When transcendental matters of life, liberty or state security are involved. (Mindanao
Savings Loan Asso. V. Vicenta Vda. De Flores, 469 SCRA 416).
(5)
The constitutional power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules of practice and
procedure necessarily carries with it the power to overturn judicial precedents on points of
remedial law through the amendment of the Rules of Court (Pinga vs. Heirs of Santiago, GR
170354, June 30, 2006).
What is a Court
(1)
It is an organ of government belonging to the judicial department the function of which
is the application of the laws to the controversies brought before it as well as the public
administration of justice.
(2)
It is a governmental body officially assembled under authority of law at the appropriate
time and place for the administration of justice through which the State enforces its
sovereign rights and powers (21 CJS 16).
(3)
It is a board or tribunal which decides a litigation or contest(Hidalgo v. Manglapus, 64
OG 3189).
(3)
A court is a being in imagination comparable to a corporation, whereas a judge is a
physical person ;
(4)
(5)
The circumstances of the court are not affected by the circumstances that would affect
the judge.
II. JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction the power and authority of the court to hear, try and decide a case.
Jurisdiction over the Parties
(1)
The manner by which the court acquires jurisdiction over the parties depends on
whether the party is the plaintiff or the defendant
(2)
Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by his filing of the complaint or petition. By
doing so, he submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
(3)
Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is obtained either by a valid service of
summons upon him or by his voluntary submission to the courts authority.
(4)
The mode of acquisition of jurisdiction over the plaintiff and the defendant applies to
both ordinary and special civil actions like mandamus or unlawful detainer cases.
matter of the complaint before it? Answering these questions inevitably requires looking into
the applicable laws conferring jurisdiction.
(a)
With Court of Appeals in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the
RTC, CSC, Central Board of Assessment Appeals, Quasi-judicial agencies, and writ of
kalikasan, all subject to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
(b)
With the CA and RTC in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against
lower courts and bodies and in petitions for quo warranto, and writs of habeas corpus, all
subject to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
(c)
With CA, RTC and Sandiganbayan for petitions for writs of amparo and habeas data
(d)
Concurrent original jurisdiction with the RTC in cases affecting ambassadors, public
ministers and consuls.
(3)
Appellate jurisdiction by way of petition for review on certiorari (appeal by certiorari
under Rule 45) against CA, Sandiganbayan, RTC on pure questions of law; and in cases
involving the constitutionality or validity of a law or treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or regulation,
legality of a tax, impost, assessment, toll or penalty, jurisdiction of a lower court; and CTA in
its decisions rendered en banc.
(4)
Exceptions in which factual issues may be resolved by the Supreme Court:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
When in making its findings the CA went beyond the issues of the case, or its findings
are contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee;
(g)
(h)
When the findings are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they
are based;
(i)
When the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioners main and reply
briefs are not disputed by the respondent;
(j)
When the findings of fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and
contradicted by the evidence on record; ad
(k)
When the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by
the parties, which, if properly considered, could justify a different conclusion.
(a)
With SC to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the RTC, CSC,
CBAA, other quasi-judicial agencies mentioned in Rule 43, and the NLRC, and writ of
kalikasan.
(b)
With the SC and RTC to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against
lower courts and bodies and writs of quo warranto, habeas corpus, whether or not in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction, and writ of continuing mandamus on environmental cases.
(c)
With SC, RTC and Sandiganbayan for petitions for writs of amparo and habeas data
(3)
(a)
by way of ordinary appeal from the RTC and the Family Courts.
(b)
by way of petition for review from the RTC rendered by the RTC in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction.
(c)
by way of petition for review from the decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of the
CSC, CBAA and other bodies mentioned in Rule 43 and of the Office of the Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary cases.
(d)
over decisions of MTCs in cadastral or land registration cases pursuant to its delegated
jurisdiction; this is because decisions of MTCs in these cases are appealable in the same
manner as decisions of RTCs.
Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals (under RA 9282 and Rule 5, AM 05-11-07-CTA)
(1)
Exclusive original or appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal
(a)
Decisions of CIR in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue
taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the
NIRC or other laws administered by BIR;
(b)
Inaction by CIR in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of IR taxes, fees or
other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the NIRC or other
laws administered by BIR, where the NIRC or other applicable law provides a specific period
of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed an implied denial;
(c)
Decisions, orders or resolutions of the RTCs in local taxesoriginally decided or resolved
by them in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction;
(d)
Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs (1) in cases involving liability for customs
duties, fees or other charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines,
forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or (2) other matters arising under the
Customs law or other laws, part of laws or special laws administered by BOC;
(e)
Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally
decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;
(f)
Decision of the secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him automatically
for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the
government under Sec. 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;
(g)
Decisions of Secretary of Trade and Industry in the case of non-agricultural product,
commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product,
commodity or article, involving dumping duties and counterveiling duties under Secs. 301 and
302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under RA 8800,
where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.
(2)
Exclusive original jurisdiction
(a)
Over all criminal cases arising from violation of the NIRC of the TCC and other laws,
part of laws, or special laws administered by the BIR or the BOC where the principal amount
of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is less that P1M or where there
is no specified amount claimed (the offenses or penalties shall be tried by the regular courts
and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate);
(b)
In tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments for taxes, fees,
charges and penalties where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and
penalties claimed is less than P1M tried by the proper MTC, MeTC and RTC.
(3)
(a)
In criminal offenses (1) over appeals from the judgment, resolutions or orders of the
RTC in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction, and (2)
over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC in the exercise of
their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally decided by the MeTCs, MTCs, and MCTCs
in their respective jurisdiction;
(b)
In tax collection cases (1) over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of
the RTC in tax collection cases originally decided by them in their respective territorial
jurisdiction; and (2) over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
RTC in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally decided
by the MeTCs, MTCs and MCTCs in their respective jurisdiction.
(b)
(c)
Bribery (Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII, Book II, RPC) where one or more of the principal
accused are occupying the following positions in the government, whether in permanent,
acting or interim capacity at the time of the commission of the offense
1.Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and
higher, otherwise classified as Grade 27 and higher, of the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989 (RA 6758)
2.Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as G-27 and up under RA 6758
3.Members of the Judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution
4.Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional Commissions without prejudice to the
provisions of the Constitution
5.All other national and local officials classified as Grade 27 and higher under RA
6758
(d)
Other offenses or felonies committed by the public officials and employees mentioned
in Sec. 4(a) of RA 7975 as amended by RA 8249 in relation to their office
(e)
Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14-A
(Sec. 4, RA 8249)
(2)
Concurrent original jurisdiction with SC, CA and RTC for petitions for writs of habeas
data and amparo
(b)
title to, possession of, or interest in, real property with assessed value exceeding
P20,000 (outside Metro Manila), or exceeds P50,000 in Metro Manila
(c)
probate proceedings where the gross value of the estate exceeds P300,000 outside MM
or exceeds P400,000 in MM
(d)
admiralty or maritime cases where the demand or claim exceeds P300,000 outside MM
or exceeds P400,000 in MM
(e)
other actions involving property valued at more than P300,000 outside MM or more
than P400,000 in MM
(f)
(2)
Original exclusive jurisdiction over cases not falling within the jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions
(3)
(a)
Cases involving devises or schemes employed by or any acts, of the board of directors,
business associates, its officers or partnership, amounting to fraud and misrepresentation
which may be detrimental to the interest of the public and/or of the stockholders, partners,
members of associations or organizations registered with the SEC
(b)
Controversies arising out of intra-corporate or partnership relations, between and
among stockholders, members or associates; between any or all of them and the corporation,
partnership or association of which they are stockholders, members or associates,
respectively; and between such corporation , partnership or association and the state insofar
as it concerns their individual franchise or right to exist as such entity
(c)
Controversies in the election or appointments of directors, trustees, officers or
managers of such corporations, partnerships or associations
(d)
Petitions of corporations, partnerships or associations to be declared in the state of
suspension of payments in cases where the corporation, partnership of association possesses
sufficient property to cover all its debts but foresees the impossibility of meeting them when
they respectively fall due or in cases where the corporation, partnership of association has no
sufficient assets to cover its liabilities, but is under the management of a Rehabilitation
Receiver or Management Committee.
(4)
(a)
with the Supreme Court in actions affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls
(b)
with the SC and CA in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower
courts and bodies in petitions for quo warranto, habeas corpus, and writ of continuing
mandamus on environmental cases
(c)
with the SC, CA and Sandigabayan in petitions for writs of habeas data and amparo
(5)
Appellate jurisdiction over cases decided by lower courts in their respective territorial
jurisdictions
(6)
Special jurisdiction over JDRC, agrarian and urban land reform cases not within the
exclusive jurisdiction of quasi-judicial agencies when so designated by the SC.
Petitions for guardianship, custody of children and habeas corpus involving children
(2)
(3)
Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those
relating to status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under
different status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains
(4)
(5)
Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of EO 209 (Family Code)
(6)
Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent or neglected
children, petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children, the suspension,
termination or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under PD 603, EO
56 (1986) and other related laws
(7)
(8)
In areas where there are no Family Courts, the above-enumerated cases shall be
adjudicated by the RTC (RA 8369)
offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have
exclusive original jurisdiction thereof (Sec. 2, RA 7691).
(2)
Civil actions
(a)
1.civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including the grant of
provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the personal property,
estate, or amount the demand does not exceed P200,000 outside MM or does not
exceed P400,000 in MM, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorneys
fees, litigation expenses, and costs.
2.Summary proceedings of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, violation of rental law
3.title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein where the assessed
value of the property or interest therein does not exceed P20,000 outside MM or does
not exceed P50,000 in MM
(3)
Special jurisdiction over petition for writ of habeas corpus and application for bail if the
RTC Judge in area is not available
(4)
Delegated jurisdiction to hear and decide cadastral and land registration cases where
there is no controversy provided the value of the lad to be ascertained by the claimant does
not exceed P100,000
For money owed under the contracts of lease, loan, services, sale, or mortgage;
(b)
(c)
The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving a
money claim pursuant to Sec. 417 of RA 7160 (LGC).
Criminal Cases
(a)
(b)
(c)
All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed is imprisonment not exceeding six
(6) months, or fine not exceedint P1,000, or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties,
accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom, provided, that in offenses
involving damage to property through criminal negligence, RSP shall govern where the
imposable fine does not exceed P10,000.
(3)
SRP does not apply to a civil case where the plaintiffs cause of action is pleaded in the
same complaint with another cause of action subject to the ordinary procedure; nor to a
criminal case where the offense charged is necessarily related to another criminal case
subject to the ordinary procedure.
(b)
Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the
performance of his official functions
(c)
Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding
P5,000
(d)
(e)
Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities
unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an
appropriate lupon
(f)
Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or
municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon
(g)
Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of
justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice
(h)
Any complaint by or against corporations, partnerships, or juridical entities. The reason
is that only individuals shall be parties to barangay conciliation proceedings either as
complainants or respondents
(i)
Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent injustice from being
committed or further continued, specifically:
(j)
(k)
(l)
1.A criminal case where the accused is under police custody or detention
2.A petition for habeas corpus by a person illegally detained or deprived of his liberty
or one acting in his behalf
3.Actions coupled with provisional remedies, such as preliminary injunction,
attachment, replevin and support pendente lite
4.Where the action may be barred by statute of limitations
Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relationship
Where the dispute arises from the CARL
Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which can be directly filed in court.
Totality Rule
(1)
Where there are several claims or causes of actions between the same or different
parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of
the claims in all the claims of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of
the same or different transactions (Sec. 33[1], BP 129).
III.
ACTIONS
Action (synonymous with suit) is the legal and formal demand of ones right from another
person made and insisted upon in a court of justice (Bouviers Law Dictionary). The kinds of
actions are ordinary and special, civil and criminal, ex contractu and ex delicto, penal and
remedial, real, personal, and mixed action, action in personam, in rem, and quasi in rem,
(2)
Special civil action is also one by which one party sues another to enforce or protect a
right, or to prevent or redress a wrong.
(3)
A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission
punishable by law (Sec. 3[b], Rule 1). The purpose is primarily punishment.
Nonetheless, summons must be served upon the defendant not for the purpose of vesting
the court with jurisdiction but merely for satisfying the due process requirements.
It doesnt mean that the plaintiff has no cause of action. It only means that the
plaintiffs allegations are insufficient for the court to know that the rights of the plaintiff were
violated by the defendant. Thus, even if indeed the plaintiff suffered injury, if the same is not
set forth in the complaint, the pleading will state no cause of action even if in reality the
plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant.
Test of the Sufficiency of a Cause of Action
(1)
The test is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid
verdict in accordance with the prayer of the complaint (Misamis Occidental II Cooperative,
Inc. vs. David, 468 SCRA 63; Santos v. de Leon, 470 SCRA 455).
(2)
To be taken into account are only the material allegations in the complaint; extraneous
facts and circumstances or other matter aliunde are not considered but the court may
consider in addition to the complaint the appended annexes or documents, other pleadings of
the plaintiff, or admissions in the records (Zepeda v. China Banking Corp., GR 172175, Oct. 9,
2006).
(3)
In determining whether or not a cause of action is sufficiently stated in the complaint,
the statements in the complaint may be properly considered. It is error for the court to take
cognizance of external facts or to hold preliminary hearings to determine its existence (Diaz
v. Diaz, 331 SCRA 302). The sufficiency of the statement of the COA must appear on the face
of the complaint and its existence may be determined only by the allegations of the
complaint, consideration of other facts being proscribed and any attempt to prove extraneous
circumstances not being allowed(Viewmaster Construction Corp. v. Roxas, 335 SCRA 540).
Splitting a Single Cause of Action and Its Effects
(1)
It is the act of instituting two or more suits for the same cause of action (Sec. 4, Rule
2). It is the practice of dividing one cause of action into different parts and making each part
the subject of a separate complaint (Bachrach vs. Icaringal, 68 SCRA 287). In splitting a
cause of action, the pleader divides a single cause of action, claim or demand into two or
more parts, brings a suit for one of such parts with the intent to reserve the rest for another
separate action(Quadra vs. CA, GR 147593, July 31, 2006). This practice is not allowed by
the Rules because it breeds multiplicity of suits, clogs the court dockets, leads to vexatious
litigation, operates as an instrument of harassment, and generates unnecessary expenses to
the parties.
(2)
The filing of the first may be pleaded in abatement of the other or others and a
judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a bar to, or a ground for dismissal of, the
others (Sec. 4, Rule 2; Bacolod City vs. San Miguel, Inc., L-2513, Oct. 30, 1969). The remedy
of the defendant is to file a motion to dismiss. Hence, if the first action is pending when the
second action is filed, the latter may be dismissed based on litis pendencia, there is another
action pending between the same parties for the same cause. If a final judgment had been
rendered in the first action when the second action is filed, the latter may be dismissed based
on res judicata, that the cause of action is barred by prior judgment. As to which action
should be dismissed would depend upon judicial discretion and the prevailing circumstances
of the case.
Joinder and Misjoinder of Causes of Actions (Secs. 5 and 6, Rule 2)
(1)
Joinder of causes of action is the assertion of as many causes of action as a party may
have against another in one pleading alone(Sec. 5, Rule 2). It is the process of uniting two or
more demands or rights of action in one action, subject to the following conditions:
(a)
The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties;
(b)
The joinder shall not include special civil actions governed by special rules;
(c)
Where the cause of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues
or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the causes of action
falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein; and
(d)
Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction (totality rule).
(2)
Restrictions on joinder of causes of action are: jurisdiction, venue, and joinder of
parties. The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules.
(3)
When there is a misjoinder of causes of action, the erroneously joined cause of action
can be severed or separated from the other cause of action upon motion by a party or upon
the courts own initiative. Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for the dismissal of
the case.