XI.
Pre-Trial
RULE 18
Pre-Trial
Section 1. When conducted. — After the last pleading
has been served and filed, if shall be the duty of the
plaintiff to promptly move ex parte that the case be set
for pre-trial (5a, R20)
Section 2. Nature and purpose. — The pre-trial is
mandatory. The court shall consider:
The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a
submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution;
(a) The simplification of the issues;
(b) The necessity or desirability of amendments to the
pleadings;
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions
of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary
proof;
(d) The limitation of the number of witnesses;
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to
a commissioner;
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the
pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the
action should a valid ground therefor be found to
exist;
(g) The advisability or necessity of suspending the
proceedings; and
(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt
disposition of the action. (1a, R20)
Section 3. Notice of pre-trial. — The notice of pre-trial shall
be served on counsel, or on the party who has no
counsel. The counsel served with such notice is charged
with the duty of notifying the party represented by him.
(n)
Section 4. Appearance of parties. — It shall be the duty of
the parties and their counsel to appear at the pre-trial.
The non-appearance of a party may be excused only if a
valid cause is shown therefor or if a representative shall
appear in his behalf fully authorized in writing to enter into
an amicable settlement, to submit to alternative modes
of dispute resolution, and to enter into stipulations or
admissions of facts and of documents. (n)
Section 5. Effect of failure to appear. — The failure of the
plaintiff to appear when so required pursuant to the next
preceding section shall be cause for dismissal of the
action. The dismissal shall be with prejudice, unless other-
wise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the part of
the defendant shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to
present his evidence ex parte and the court to render
judgment on the basis thereof. (2a, R20)
Section 6. Pre-trial brief. — The parties shall file with the
court and serve on the adverse party, in such manner as
shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three (3) days
before the date of the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial
briefs which shall contain, among others:
(a) A statement of their willingness to enter into amicable
settlement or alternative modes of dispute resolution,
indicating the desired terms thereof;
(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed
stipulation of facts;
(c) The issues to be tried or resolved;
(d) The documents or exhibits to be presented stating
the purpose thereof;
(e) A manifestation of their having availed or their
intention to avail themselves of discovery procedures
or referral to commissioners; and
(f) The number and names of the witnesses, and the
substance of their respective testimonies.
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect
as failure to appear at the pre-trial. (n)
Section 7. Record of pre-trial. — The proceedings in the
pre-trial shall be recorded. Upon the termination thereof,
the court shall issue an order which shall recite in detail
the matters taken up in the conference, the action taken
thereon, the amendments allowed to the pleadings, and
the agreements or admissions made by the parties as to
any of the matters considered. Should the action
proceed to trial, the order shall, explicitly define and limit
the issues to be tried. The contents of the order shall
control the subsequent course of the action, unless
modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice. (5a,
R20)
A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC
GUIDELINES TO BE OBSERVED BY TRIAL COURT JUDGES AND
CLERKS OF COURT IN THE CONDUCT OF PRE-TRIAL AND USE
OF DEPOSITION-DISCOVERY MEASURES
I. PRE-TRIAL
A. Civil Cases
1. Within one day from receipt of the complaint:
1.1 Summons shall be prepared and shall contain a
reminder to defendant to observe restraint in filing a
motion to dismiss and instead allege the grounds thereof
as defenses in the Answer, in conformity with IBP-OCA
Memorandum on Policy Guidelines dated March 12,
2002. A copy of the summons is hereto attached as
Annex "A;" and
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |1

1.2 The court shall issue an order requiring the parties to
avail of interrogatories to parties under Rule 25 and
request for admission by adverse party under Rule 26 or
at their discretion make use of depositions under Rule 23
or other measures under Rules 27 and 28 within five days
from the filing of the answer.1 A copy of the order shall be
served upon the defendant together with the summons
and upon the plaintiff.
Within five (5) days from date of filing of the reply,2 the
plaintiff must promptly move ex parte that the case be
set for pre-trial conference.3 If the plaintiff fails to file said
motion within the given period, the Branch COC shall
issue a notice of pre-trial.
2. The parties shall submit, at least three (3) days before
the pre-trial, pre-trial briefs containing the following:4
a. A statement of their willingness to enter into an
amicable settlement indicating the desired terms thereof
or to submit the case to any of the alternative modes of
dispute resolution;
b. A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation
of facts;
c. The issues to be tried or resolved;
d. The documents or exhibits to be presented, stating the
purpose thereof. (No evidence shall be allowed to be
presented and offered during the trial in support of a
party's evidence-in-chief other than those that had been
earlier identified and pre-marked during the pre-trial,
except if allowed by the court for good cause shown);
e. A manifestation of their having availed or their
intention to avail themselves of discovery procedures or
referral to commissioners; and
f. The number and names of the witnesses, the substance
of their testimonies, and the approximate number of
hours that will be required by the parties for the
presentation of their respective witnesses.
A copy of the Notice of Pre-trial Conference is hereto
attached as Annex "B."
The rule on the contents of the pre-trial brief must strictly
be complied with.
The parties are bound by the representations and
statements in their respective pre-trial briefs.
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |2
3. At the start of the pre-trial conference, the judge shall
immediately refer the parties and/or their counsel if
authorized by their clients to the PMC mediation unit for
purposes of mediation if available.5 If mediation fails, the
judge will schedule the continuance of the pre-trial
conference. Before the continuance, the Judge may
refer the case to the Branch COC for a preliminary
conference to assist the parties in reaching a settlement,
to mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the
parties and copies thereof to be attached to the records
after comparison and to consider such other matters as
may aid in its prompt disposition.6
During the preliminary conference, the Branch COC shall
also ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and
admissions on the genuineness and due execution of the
documents marked as exhibits. The proceedings
during .the preliminary conference shall be recorded in
the "Minutes of Preliminary Conference" to be signed by
both parties and/or counsel, the form of which is hereto
attached as Annex. "C".
The minutes of preliminary conference and the exhibits
shall be attached by the Branch COC to the case record
before the pre-trial.
4. Before the continuation of the pre-trial conference, the
judge must study all the pleadings of the case, and
determine the issues thereof and the respective positions
of the parties thereon to enable him to intelligently steer
the parties toward a possible amicable settlement of the
case, or, at the very least, to help reduce and limit the
issues. The judge should not allow the termination of pre-
trial simply because of the manifestation of the parties
that they cannot settle the case. He should expose the
parties to the advantages of pre-trial. He must also be
mindful that there are other important aspects of the pre-
trial that ought to be taken up to expedite the disposition
of the case.7
The Judge with all tact, patience, impartiality and with
due regard to the rights of the parties shall endeavor to
persuade them to arrive at a settlement of the
dispute.8 The court shall initially ask the parties and their
lawyers if an amicable settlement of the case is possible.
If not, the judge may confer with the parties with the
opposing counsel to consider the following:
a. Given the evidence of the plaintiff presented in his pre-
trial brief to support his claim, what manner of
compromise is considered acceptable to the defendant
at the present stage?
b. Given the evidence of the defendant described in his
pre-trial brief to support his defense, what manner of
compromise is considered acceptable to the plaintiff at
the present stage?
If not successful, the court shall confer with the party and
his counsel separately.
If the manner of compromise is not acceptable, the
judge shall confer with the parties without their counsel
for the same purpose of settlement.
5. If all efforts to settle fail, the trial judge shall:
a. Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part of
the pre-trial proceedings and confirm markings of exhibits
or substituted photocopies and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of documents;
b. Inquire if there are cases arising out of the same facts
pending before other courts and order its consolidation if
warranted;
c. Inquire if the pleadings are in order. If not, order the
amendments if necessary;
d. Inquire if interlocutory issues are involved and resolve
the same;
e. Consider the adding or dropping of parties;
f. Scrutinize every single allegation of the complaint,
answer and other pleadings and attachments thereto
and the contents of documents and all other evidence
identified and pre-marked during pre-trial in determining
further admissions of facts and documents. To obtain
admissions, the Court shall ask the parties to submit the
depositions taken under Rule 23, the answers to written
interrogatories under Rule 25 and the answers to request
for admissions by the adverse party under Rule 26. It may
also require the production of documents or things
requested by a party under Rule 27 and the results of the
physical and mental examination of persons under Rule
28;
g. Define and simplify the factual and legal issues arising
from the pleadings. Uncontroverted issues and frivolous
claims or defenses should be eliminated. For each factual
issue, the parties/counsel shall state all the evidence to
support their positions thereon. For each legal issue,
parties/counsel shall state the applicable law and
jurisprudence supporting their respective positions
thereon. If only legal issues are presented, the judge shall
require the parties to submit their respective memoranda
and the court can proceed to render judgment;9
h. Determine the propriety of rendering a summary
judgment dismissing the case based on the disclosures
made at the pre-trial or a judgment based on the
pleadings, evidence identified and admissions made
during pre-trial;10
i. Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates for
continuous trial in accordance with Circular No. 1-89
dated January 19, 1989; adhere to the case flow chart
determined by the court, which shall contain the different
stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of the
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |3
decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting
the trial dates. The One-Day Examination of Witness
Rule, that is, a witness has to be fully examined in one (1)
day only, shall be strictly adhered to subject to the courts'
discretion during trial on whether or not to extend the
direct and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons. On
the last hearing day allotted for each party, he is required
to make his formal offer of evidence after the
presentation of his last witness and the opposing party is
required to immediately interpose his objection thereto.
Thereafter, the Judge shall make the ruling on the offer of
evidence in open court. However the judge has the
discretion to allow the offer of evidence in writing in
conformity with Section 35, Rule 132;
j. Determine the most important witnesses to be heard
and limit the number of witnesses (Most Important Witness
Rule). The facts to be proven by each witness and the
approximate number of hours per witness shall be fixed;
k. At his discretion, order the parties to use the affidavits
of witnesses as direct testimonies subject to the right to
object to inadmissible portions thereof and to the right of
cross-examination by the other party. The affidavits shall
be based on personal knowledge, shall set forth facts as
would be admissible in evidence, and shall show
affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the
matters stated therein. The affidavits shall be in question
and answer form, and shall comply with the rules on
admissibility of evidence;
l. Require the parties and/or counsel to submit to the
Branch COC the names, addresses and contact numbers
of the witnesses to be summoned by subpoena;
m. Order the delegation of the reception of evidence to
the Branch COC under Rule 30; and
n. Refer the case to a trial by commissioner under Rule
32.
During the pre-trial, the judge shall be the one to ask
questions on issues raised therein and all questions or
comments by counsel or parties must be directed to the
judge to avoid hostilities between the parties.
6. The trial judge shall schedule the pre-trial in the
afternoon sessions and set as many pre-trial conferences
as may be necessary.
7. All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded.
The minutes of each pre-trial conference shall contain
matters taken up therein more particularly admissions of
facts and exhibits and shall be signed by the parties and
their counsel.
8. The judge shall issue the required Pre-Trial Order within
ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial. Said
Order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not
disposed of and control the course of the action during
the trial. A sample Pre-Trial Order is hereto attached as
Annex "D."
However, the Court may opt to dictate the Pre-Trial Order
in open court in the presence of the parties and their
counsel and with the use of a computer, shall have the
same immediately finalized and printed. Once finished,
the parties and/or their counsel shall sign the same to
manifest their conformity thereto.
9. The court shall endeavor to make the parties agree to
an equitable compromise or settlement at any stage of
the proceedings before rendition of judgment.
A.M. No. 11-1-6-SC PHILJA
Consolidated and Revised Guidelines to Implement the
Expanded Coverage of Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM)
And Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR)
- See Dropbox for the copy of the file
CONCEPT OF PRE-TRIAL
Pre-Trial is a mandatory conference and personal
confrontation before the judge between the parties and
their respective counsel, called by the court after the
joinder of issues in a case or after the last pleading has
been filed and before trial, for the purpose of settling the
litigation expeditiously or simplifying the issues without
sacrificing the necessary demands of justice.
It is a procedural device by which the court is called
upon, after the filing of the last pleading, to compel the
parties and their lawyers to appear before it, and
negotiate an amicable settlement or otherwise make a
formal settlement and embody in a single document the
issues of fact and law involved in the action, and such
other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition in the
case, such as:
(1) Number of witnesses
(2) Tenor or character of their testimonies
(3) Documentary evidence; nature and purpose of each
(4) Number of trial dates
NATURE AND PURPOSE
Purpose of pre-trial is to consider: [Rule 18, Sec. 2]
(1) Possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission
to alternative modes of dispute resolution;
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |4
(2) Simplification of the issues;
(3) Necessity/desirability of amendments to the
pleadings;
(4) Possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of
facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;
(5) Limitation of the number of witnesses;
(6) Advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a
commissioner;
(7) Propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or
summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a
valid ground therefor be found to exist;
(8) Advisability/necessity of suspending the proceedings;
and
(9) Other matters that may aid in the prompt disposition
of the action.
Pre-trial is Mandatory
 Vital objective: the simplification, abbreviation, and
expedition of the trial, if not indeed its dispensation
 Mandatory nature is addressed to both court and
parties:
o Court must set the case for pre-trial and notify
the parties as well as counsel to appear
o Parties with their counsel are obliged to obey
the order of the court to that effect
Primary Objective
Pre-trial is primarily intended to make certain that all
issues necessary to the disposition of a case are properly
raised.
Thus, to obviate the element of surprise, parties are
expected to disclose at a pre-trial conference (PTC) all
issues of law and fact which they intend to raise at the
trial, except such as may involve privileged or
impeaching matters. The determination of issues at a pre-
trial conference bars the consideration of other questions
on appeal. [Caltex v. CA (1992)]
NOTICE OF PRE-TRIAL
When pre-trial conducted - After the last pleading has
been served and filed, it shall be the duty of the plaintiff
to promptly move ex parte that the case be set for pre-
trial. [Sec. 1, Rule 18]
(1) Specifically, the motion is to be filed within 5 days after
the last pleading joining the issues has been served and
filed [Admin Circ. No. 3-99, Jan 15, 1999]
(2) Within 5 days from date of filing of the reply, plaintiff
must promptly move ex-parte that the case be set for
pre-trial conference. If the plaintiff fails to file said motion
within the given period, the branch clerk shall issue a
Notice of Pre-Trial [AM No. 03-109-SC, July 13, 2004]
NOTE: The “Last Pleading” need not be literally construed
as the actual filing of the last pleading. For purpose of
pre-trial, the expiration of the period for filing the last
pleading is sufficient [Sarmiento v. Juan]
Notice of Pre-trial: The notice shall be served on:
(1) Counsel
(2) Party, only if he has no counsel [Sec. 3, Rule 18]
The sufficiency of the written notice of pre-trial is irrelevant
where evidence shows that counsel and the parties
actually knew of the pre-trial [Bembo v. CA]
APPEARANCE OF PARTIES; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO APPEAR
Duty to Appear: It is the duty of the parties and their
counsel to appear at the pre-trial. [Rule 18, Sec. 4]
 NOTE: BOTH parties AND their counsel
When non-appearance is excused: A party’s non-
appearance may be excused only if either:
(1) Valid cause is shown for it;
(2) A representative appears in his behalf, fully
authorized in writing:
(a) To enter into an amicable settlement;
(b) To submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution;
(c) To enter into stipulations/admissions of facts and
of documents.
NOTE: The written special authority must be in the form of
an SPA (Sec. 23, Rule 38). If the party is a corporation, the
SPA must be supported by a board resolution.
Effect of Failure to Appear; unexcused non-appearance:
[Rule 18, Sec. 5]
Order of Non-suit is issued to the party who failed to
appear at pre-trial.
Remedy of Party who has been non-suited:
(1) For a non-suited plaintiff:
(a) Motion to set aside the order of non-suit
(b) Affidavit of merit is not necessary in a simple motion
for reconsideration of the order of non-suit EXCEPT
as to show the cause of the failure to appear at the
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |5
pre-trial [Jonathan Landoil International Inc. v.
Mangudadatu]
(2) For a non-suited defendant:
(a) File a motion for reconsideration without need for
affidavits of merits regarding the fraud, accident,
mistake, or excusable negligence [Lucero v.
Dacayo]
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE
Rule 18, Sec. 6 makes it the MANDATORY duty of the
parties to seasonably file their pre-trial briefs under the
conditions and with the sanctions provided therein.
When to File Pre-Trial Brief: Parties shall file and serve their
respective pre-trial briefs, ensuring receipt by adverse
party at least 3 days before the date of the pre-trial.
Contents of a Pre-Trial Brief
(1) Statement of their willingness to enter into
amicable settlement or alternative modes of
dispute resolution, indicating the desired terms
thereof;
(2) Summary of admitted facts and proposed
stipulation of facts;
(3) Issues to be tried/resolved;
(4) Documents/exhibits to be presented, stating the
purpose thereof;
(5) Manifestation of their having availed or their
intention to avail themselves of discovery
procedures or referral to commissioners;
(6) Number and names of the witnesses, and the
substance of their respective testimonies. [AM
No. 03-1-09-SC]
Failure to File Pre-trial Brief: Failure to file the pre-trial brief
shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the
pre-trial.
Remedy of defendant is to file a motion for
reconsideration, showing that his failure to file a trial brief
was due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
negligence
PROCEEDINGS AFTER TERMINATION OF PRE-TRIAL
Record of Pre-Trial: The pre-trial proceedings shall be
recorded. Upon termination of such proceedings, the
court shall issue the pre-trial order.
Contents of Pre-Trial Order:
(1) Matters taken up in the conference;
(2) Action taken thereon;
(3) Amendments allowed on the pleadings;
(4) Agreements/admissions made by the parties as to any
matters considered;
(5) Should the action proceed to trial, the explicit
definition and limit of the issues to be tried.
Effect of Pre-Trial Order: The contents of the order shall
control the subsequent course of the action; UNLESS:
(1) Modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice [Rule
18, Sec. 7]
(2) Issues impliedly included therein or may be inferable
therefrom by necessary implication [Velasco v. Apostol]
(3) Amendment to conform to evidence [Rule 10, Sec. 5]
On Compromise:
 Upon manifestation of the parties of their
willingness to discuss a compromise, the TC
should order the suspension of the proceedings
to allow them reasonable time to discuss and
conclude an amicable settlement.
 If despite all efforts exerted by the TC and the
parties the settlement conference still fails, then
the action should have continued as if no
suspension had taken place. [Goldloop
Properties v. CA (1992)]
 NOTE: AM 03-1-09-SC - No termination of pre-trial
for failure to settle
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)
Special Rules of Court on ADR [AM No. 07-11-08-SC]
The parties may be submitted to ADR during pre-trial. If
ADR fails, judge will schedule the continuance of the pre-
trial conference
The Alternative Dispute Resolution System
Means any process or procedure used to resolve a
dispute or controversy, other than by adjudication of a
presiding judge of a court or an officer of a government
agency, as defined in this Act, in which a neutral third
party participates to assist in the resolution of issue [RA
9285, Sec. 3]
Policy Behind the ADR: To actively promote party
autonomy in the resolution of disputes or the freedom of
the party to make their own arrangements to resolve their
disputes [RA 9285, Sec. 2]
In Relation to Pre-Trial:
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |6
(1) At the start of the pre-trial conference, the judge
shall immediately refer the parties and/or their
counsel if authorized by their clients to the PMC
mediation unit for purposes of mediation if
available.[AM No. 03-1-09-SC]
(2) The pre-trial briefs of parties must include the
parties’ statement of their willingness to enter into
an amicable settlement indicating the desired
terms thereof or to submit the case to any of the
alternative modes of dispute resolution [AM No.
03-1-09-SC]
Exception to the Application of RA 9285:
(1) labor disputes covered by the Labor Code;
(2) the civil status of persons;
(3) validity of a marriage;
(4) any ground for legal separation;
(5) the jurisdiction of courts;
(6) future legitime;
(7) criminal liability; and
(8) those which by law cannot be compromised.
Modes of Alternative Dispute Resolutions:
(1) Arbitration [RA 9285, Sec. 1)
(a) A voluntary dispute resolution process in which
one or more arbitrators, appointed in
accordance with the agreement of the parties,
or rules promulgated pursuant to this Act, resolve
a dispute by rendering an award
(b) Different Kinds:
(2) Domestic Arbitration – an arbritration that is not
international; governed by RA 876 (Arbitration Law)
[RA 9285, Sec. 32]
(3) International Arbitration - An arbitration is
international if:
(a) the parties to an arbitration agreement have, at
the time of the conclusion of that agreement,
their places of business in different States; or
(b) one of the following places is situated outside
the State in which the parties have their places
of business [Article 3, Model Law on International
Commercial Arbritration]
(4) Mediation
(c) a voluntary process in which a mediator,
selected by the disputing parties, facilitates
communication and negotiation, and assist the
parties in reaching a voluntary agreement
regarding a dispute
(d) includes conciliation
(5) Mini-Trial
(a) A structured dispute resolution method in which
the merits of a case are argued before a panel
comprising senior decision makers with or
without the presence of a neutral third person
 after which the parties seek a negotiated
settlement
(6) Early Neutral Evaluation
(b) An ADR process wherein parties and their
lawyers are brought together early in a pre-trial
phase to present summaries of their cases and
receive a nonbinding assessment by an
experienced, neutral person, with expertise in
the subject in the substance of the dispute
(7) Combination of ADR
a. Example: Med-Arb - step dispute resolution
process involving both mediation and arbitration
Son v Son (1995) –J. Kapunan
Petitioner: Escolastica Son and heirs of Anastacio Son
Respondents: Carmelino, Teofista, Primitivo Son et al.
Concept: Pre-Trial
Brief Facts: Pedro Son’s sons sought ownership over a
parcel of land in the possession of Anastacio Son’s sons,
Pedro Son’s brother’s sons. Thus, they could be
accurately described as Pedro Son’s son’s cousins.
Anastacio Son’s sons said that their father bought the
land from Pedro Son, and Pedro Son’s sons contest the
same.
Brief Facts (For real): The plaintiffs sought to establish the
validity of a deed, but respondents argue that the same
was excluded during the delimitation of issues in pre-trial
and ought to be overlooked.
Doctrine: The delimitation of issues established in pre-trial
may be waived in favor of preventing manifest injustice.
FACTS:
When Pedro Son died, his heirs inherited a parcel of land
in Medelin Cebu containing an area of 2 Hectares and
20 Centares. The heirs later discovered that the heirs of
Anastacio Son, Pedro Son’s brother, occupied the land in
question.
As evidence of ownership, Anastacio’s heirs produced a
Deed of Absolute sale dated 1957. In pre-trial, they
agreed that this would be the issue central to litigation.
ISSUES:
WON COMELEC may validly hold Guevara in contempt
(NO)
RATIO:
 NO. Contempt powers may only be exercised by
agencies if it is in line with their Judicial and not
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |7
Ministerial functions, as the power is always incident
to judicial proceedings.
 COMELEC’s powers based on the Constitution and
Sec. 5 of the Revised Election Code, and the same
clearly includes contempt power.
o Consti, Art. X Sec. 2: "shall have exclusive charge
of the enforcement and administration of all laws
relative to the conduct of elections and shall
exercise all other functions which may be
conferred upon it by law. It shall decide, save
those involving the right to vote, all administrative
questions, affecting elections, including the
determination of the number and location of
polling places, and the appointment of election
inspectors and of other election officials"
o Revised Election Code: SEC. 5. Powers of
Commission. — The Commission on Elections or
any of the members thereof shall have the power
to summon the parties to a controversy pending
before it, issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces
tecum and otherwise take testimony in any
investigation or hearing pending before it, and
delegate such power to any officer. Any
controversy submitted to the Commission on
Elections shall be tried, heard and decided by it
within fifteen days counted from the time the
corresponding petition giving rise to said
controversy is filed. The Commission or any of the
members thereof shall have the power to punish
contempts provided for in rule sixty-four of the
Rules of Court, under the same procedure and
with the same penalties provided therein.
 COMELEC clearly enjoys quasi-judicial functions, but
now the Court must resolve which controversies this
applies to, it is clear that, to come under its
jurisdiction, the questions should be controversial in
nature and must refer to the enforcement and
administration of all laws relative to the conduct of
election. The difficulty lies in drawing the
demarcation line between a duty which inherently is
administrative in character and a function which is
justiciable and which would therefore call for judicial
action by the Commission.
o Citing a Decision of the Commission on Elections,
October 28, 1951, In Re Petition of Angel Genuino
vs. Prudente,: “In the enforcement and
administration of all laws relative to the conduct
of elections, the first duty of the Commission is to
set in motion all the multifarious preparatory
processes ranging from the purchase of election
supplies, printing of election forms and ballots,
appointments of members of the boards of
inspectors, establishment of precincts and
designation of polling places to the preparation
of the registry lists of voters, so as to put in
readiness on election day the election
machinery in order that the people who are
legally qualified to exercise the right of suffrage
may be able to cast their votes to express their
sovereign will. It is incumbent upon the
Commission to see that all these preparatory acts
will insure free, orderly and honest elections. All
provisions of the Revised Election Code contain
regulations relative to these processes
preparatory for election day… All these
 preparatory steps are administrative in nature
and all questions arising therefrom are within the
exclusive powers of the Commission to resolve.
All irregularities, anomalies and misconduct
committed by any official in these preparatory
steps are within the exclusive power of the
Commission to correct.”
o Although the negotiation conducted by the
Commission has resulted in controversy between
several dealers, that however merely refers to a
ministerial duty which the Commission has
performed in its administrative capacity in
relation to the conduct of elections ordained by
our Constitution. In proceeding on this matter, it
only discharged a ministerial duty; it did not
exercise any judicial function.
o Such being the case, it could not exercise the
power to punish for contempt as postulated in
the law, for such power is inherently judicial in
nature
 The power to punish for contempt is inherent in
all courts; its existence is essential to the
preservation of order in judicial proceedings,
and to the enforcement of judgments, orders
and mandates of courts, and, consequently, in
the administration of justice"
 The exercise of this power has always been
regarded as a necessary incident and attribute
of courts (Slade Perkins vs. Director of
Prisons, Ibid.). Its exercise by administrative
bodies has been invariably limited to making
effective the power to elicit testimony
(People vs. Swena, 296 P., 271). And the
exercise of that power by an administrative
body in furtherance of its administrative
function has been held invalid.
Dispositive: Injunction made permanent
Monarch v. CA – De Leon, Jr., J.
Petitioners: Monarch Insurance and Tabacalera
Insurance
Respondents: Court of Appeals and Aboitiz Shipping
Corp.
Concept: Pre-Trial
Doctrine: When defendant is declared in default, the only
right he waives is the right to be heard and present
evidence in his favor; it is not an admission on his part.
One may be declared in default for failing to file an
answer to the complaint/initiatory pleading in a timely
manner, or a failure to appeal in the pre-trial. However, in
the latter case, the defendant is in a better
circumstance: he is allowed to reiterate the affirmative
defenses pleaded in his answer, during appeal.
FACTS:
The M/V P. Aboitiz left from Hong Kong, headed to
Manila. On its way, it suffered a leak and water began
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |8
entering the ship. The ship eventually sank, along with its
freight. Monarch and Tabacalera paid indemnity for the
goods on M/V P. Aboitiz that was covered by its marine
insurance policies; it was subrogated into the rights of the
goods’ owners and filed suit against Aboitiz for damages.
During pre-trial, Aboitiz failed to appear and was
declared in default. It lost the right to present evidence,
while, on the other hand, Monarch and Tabacalera was
allowed to present evidence ex parte. The trial court
ruled in favor of Monarch and Tabacalera. The CA
dismissed the “motion for reconsideration and/or for new
trial to lift order of default” and affirmed the trial court. In
its recourse to the SC, Aboitiz’s petition was denied and
the judgment became final and executory. When
Monarch and Tabacalera moved for execution of
judgment, Aboitiz filed a motion to quash the writs of
execution. This time, it argued that the limited liability rule
(hypothecary nature of marine insurance) should be
applied to the case and therefore absolve Aboitiz from
liability, given that its ship had sunk. The motion being
denied, Aboitiz proceeded to the CA with a petition for
certiorari and prohibition which the CA granted. Hence
this petition.
ISSUE:
WON Aboitiz may be allowed to raise the defense of
limited liability despite having not presented any
evidence due to its being declared in default (YES)
RATIO:
Aboitiz is still entitled to raise such defense
- SC: While it was true that Aboitiz was declared in
default for its non-appearance during pre-trial…
o It does not imply a waiver of rights (except that of
being heard and presenting evidence in
defendant’s favor),
o It does not imply admission of the facts and the
causes of action raised by the plaintiff.
o Nor is it an admission by the defendant that the
plaintiff’s causes of action finds support in the law
or that the latter is entitled to the reliefs prayed for.
- SC: Above is especially true for a defendant who has
filed his answer but has been declared in default for
failure to appear at pre-trial.
o Such a defendant has a better standing than that
of a defendant that neither filed an answer nor
appeared at trial.
o Hence, he should be allowed to reiterate all
affirmative defenses pleaded in his answer before
the CA.
o The CA may also review the correctness of the
evaluation of the plaintiff’s evidence by the lower
court.
Ramnani v. CA (1993) – Cruz, J.
Petitioner: Bhagwan Ramnani
Respondent/s: CA, Hon. Buenaventura Guerrero (RTC
Makati), Sps. Cenon Dizon & Juliette Dizon
Concept: Pre-trial
Nature of Action: Pet. For review of the decision of the CA
Doctrine: Failure to appear at the pre-trial results in they
party being declared non-suited or considered as in
default. If the party has been declared in default, he has
4 remedies: 1) motion to set aside order of default; 2)
motion for new trial; 3) petition for relief; and 4) appeal. In
order for the motion to set aside order of default, there
must be a concurrence of a satisfactory showing of the
existence of fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
neglect and a meritorious defense.
FACTS: The Sps. Dizon filed a complaint against the Sps.
Ramnani for the collection of a sum of money for alleged
unremitted value of jewelry received by Josephine
Ramnani from Juliette Dizon on consignment basis.
Josephine submitted an answer with counterclaim,
alleging that Juliette also received jewelry from her, and
actually still owes her money. The trial court set the case
for pre-trial but the Ramnanis did not appear, so they
were declared in default. They filed a motion to lift the
order of default, which was denied, so the court received
evidence ex parte. Judge Guerrero rendered judgment
against the Ramnanis, holding them liable to the Dizons.
The Ramnanis filed an MR, but this was denied. Bhagwan
Ramnani filed a petition for certiorari before the CA, but
this was dismissed because the writ of certiorari was the
incorrect remedy, leading Ramnani to seek recourse to
the SC.
ISSUE:
WON there was error on the part of the CA and the RTC
for refusing to set aside the order of default and the
default judgment thereafter (NO)
RATIO: NO, both courts correctly refused to set aside the
order of default.
 Sec. 2, Rule 20: “A party who fails to appear at a pre-
trial conference may be non-suited or considered as
in default.”
 Lina v. CA: the remedies available to a defendant in
the RTC who has been declared in default are:
a. The defendant in default may, at any time after
discovery thereof and before judgment, file a
motion, under oath, to set aside the order of
default on the ground that his failure to answer
was due to fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable neglect, and that he has a meritorious
defense (Sec. 3, Rule 18);
b. If the judgment has already been rendered
when the defendant discovered the default, but
before the same has become final and
executory, he may file a motion for new trial
under Sec. 1(a) of Rule 37;
c. If the defendant discovered the default after the
judgment has become final and executory, he
may file a petition for relief under Sec. 2 of Rule
38; and
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |9
d. He may also appeal from the judgment rendered
against him as contrary to the evidence or to the
law, even if no petition to set aside the order of
default has been presented by him (Sec. 2, Rule
41)
 SC: Ramnani availed of the first remedy but the
motion to lift the order of default was denied;
according to the trial court:
o The non-appearance is inexcusable
o There was an indication of the light regard of
Josephine’s duty to appear in court and her
husband did not submit any other plausible
explanation for his absence
 Josephine said she needed to go abroad
due to her deteriorating health, but no
medical certificate was presented
 At the time of hearing, counsel admitted that
she hadn’t arrived yet from the States
 Satisfactory showing of the existence of fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable neglect is an
indispensable requirement for the setting aside of a
judgment of default or the order of default
o SC: Motion to lift order of default was properly
denied for non-compliance with this requirement
o Ramnanis were less than conscientious in
defending themselves and protecting their rights
before the trial court. They did not pay proper
attention and respect to its directive. They have
not shown that their failure to attend the pre-trial
hearing as required was due to excusable
neglect, much less to fraud, accident or mistake.
 The existence of a meritorious defense is only one of
the 2 conditions; it must concur with the satisfactory
reason for the non-appearance of the defaulted
party
o Although Ramnanis may have a meritorious
defense, they still did not have a satisfactory
reason
DISPOSITIVE: Challenged decision is AFFIRMED.
XII. Trial
Rule 30.
Sec. 1. Notice of trial. – Upon entry of a case in the trial
calendar, the clerk shall notify the parties of the date of
its trial in such manner as shall ensure his receipt of that
notice at least five (5) days before such date. (2a, R22)
Sec. 2. Adjournments and postponements. – A court may
adjourn a trial from day to day, and to any stated time,
as the expeditious and convenient transaction of business
may require, but shall have no power to adjourn a trial for
a longer period than one month for each adjournment,
nor more than three months in all, except when
authorized in writing by the Court Administrator, Supreme
Court. (3a, R22)
Distinction between venue and jurisdiction 3. If motion is grounded on illness of a party or
counsel, it must be accompanied by affidavit
Jurisdiction Venue that the presence of such party or counsel at the
trial is indispensable and that the character of his
Authority of a court to hear, Place where action must illness is such as to render his non-attendance
try and decide a case be instituted excusable.

Matter of substantive law Procedural or adjective

Conferred by law or the
constitution; cannot be
conferred by the consent
of the parties or by their
failure to object to the lack
of it
Creates a relation between
the court and the subject
matter
law  Motion for cancellation or postponement is not
one that could be granted by the court as a
May be conferred by the matter of course, and thus be granted ex parte.
act or agreement of the  It is not a matter of right.
parties  It is addressed to the sound discretion of the
court, which discretion will not be interfered with
either by mandamus or appeal.
 Postponements may be granted only upon
meritorious grounds
Creates a relation
between the parties to the
action Rule 30.

Sec. 5. Order of trial. – Subject to the provisions of section

Termination of trial
 Adm. Circ. No 1-89: continuous trial of cases; trial
shall be terminated within 90 days from the date
of initial hearing unless for meritorious reasons, an
extension is permitted.
Rule 30
Sec. 3. Requisites of motion to postpone trial for absence
of evidence. – A motion to postpone a trial on the
ground of absence of evidence can be granted only
upon affidavit showing the materiality or relevancy of
such evidence, and that due diligence has been used to
procure it. But if the adverse party admits the facts to be
given in evidence, even if he objects or reserves the right
to object to their admissibility, the trial shall not be
postponed. (4a, R22)
Sec. 4. Requisites of motion to postpone trial for illness of
party or counsel. – A motion to postpone trial on the
ground of illness of a party or counsel may be granted if it
appears upon affidavit or sworn certification that the
presence of such party or counsel at the trial is
indispensable and that the character of his illness is such
as to render his non-attendance excusable. (5a, R22)
Requisites of motion for postponement
2 of Rule 31, and unless the court for special reasons
otherwise directs, the trial shall be limited to the issues
stated in the pre-trial order and shall proceed as follows:
(a) The plaintiff shall adduce evidence in support of
his complaint;
(b) The defendant shall then adduce evidence in
support of his defense;
(c) The third-party defendant, if any, shall adduce
evidence of his defense, counterclaim, cross-
claim and fourth-party complaint;
(d) The fourth-party, and so forth, if any, shall
adduce evidence of the material facts pleaded
by them;
(e) The parties against whom any counterclaim or
cross-claim has been pleaded, shall adduce
evidence in support of their defense, in the order
to be prescribed by the court;
(f) The parties may then respectively adduce
rebutting evidence only, unless the court, for
good reasons and in the furtherance of justice,
permits them to adduce evidence upon their
original case; and
(g) Upon admission of the evidence, the case shall
be deemed submitted for decision, unless the
court directs the parties to argue or to submit
their respective memoranda or any further
pleadings.
If several defendants or third-party defendants,
and so forth, having separate defenses appear
by different counsel, the court shall determine
the relative order of presentation of their
evidence. (1a, R30)

1. Motion shall be in writing stating the grounds

upon which it is based and, if necessary, be
Distinction between order of trial and order of
accompanied by supporting affidavits and other
examination
papers;
2. It must be accompanied by notice of hearing
Order of trial Order of examination
specifying the date of hearing of such motion
and served by the applicant on all parties
Sequence when the Sequence when an
concerned at least 3 days before said hearing;
parties introduce their individual witness is

TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |10

respective evidence examined by
contending parties
Rule 30.
Sec. 6. Agreed statement of facts. – The parties to any
action may agree, in writing, upon facts involved in the
litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts
agreed upon, without the introduction of evidence.
If the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the
trial shall be held as to the disputed facts in such order as
the court shall prescribe. (2a, R30)
Sec. 7. Statement of judge. – During the hearing or trial of
a case any statement made by the judge with reference
to the case, or to any of the parties, witnesses or counsel,
shall be made of record in the stenographic notes. (3a,
R30)
Sec. 8. Suspension of actions. – The suspension of actions
shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code. (n)
When civil action shall be suspended
 If willingness to discuss a possible compromise is
expressed by one or both parties;
 If it appears that one of the parties, before the
commencement of the action or proceeding,
offered to discuss a possible compromise but the
other party refused the offer.
When action shall not be suspended
No suspension shall be granted by the trial court of the
purpose of discussing the following questions where no
compromise is allowed:
1. the civil status of persons
2. validity or a marriage or legal separation
3. any ground for legal separation
4. future support
5. jurisdiction of courts
6. future legitime
 If despite all efforts exerted by the trial court and
the parties the settlement conference still fails,
then the action should be continued as if no
suspension had taken place.
Sec. 9. Judge to receive evidence; delegation to clerk of
court. – The judge of the court where the case is pending
shall personally receive the evidence to be adduced by
the parties. However, in default or ex parte hearings, and
in any case where the parties agree in writing, the court
the may delegate the reception of evidence to its clerk of
court who is a member of the bar. The clerk of court shall
have no power to rule on objections to any question or to
the admission of exhibits, which objections shall be
resolved by the court upon submission of his report and
the transcripts within ten (10) days from termination of the
hearing. (n)
Nature of clerk of court’s power to receive evidence
 Ministerial: taking down of the testimony of
witnesses and the marking of pieces of
documentary evidence.
 Precludes the exercise of judicial discretion.
Rule 31.
Sec. 1. Consolidation. – When actions involving a
common question of law or fact are pending before the
court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the
matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions
consolidated; and it may make such orders concerning
proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary
costs or delay. (1)
Consolidation: act or process of uniting several actions
into one trial and judgment, by order of a court, where all
the actions are between the same parties, pending in the
same court, and involving substantially the same subject
matter, issues and defenses; or the court may order that
one of the actions be tried, and the others decided
without trial according to the judgment in the one
selected.
Purpose
 To avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against
oppression or abuse, prevent delay, clear
congested dockets, simplify the work of the trial
court and save unnecessary costs and expense.
Requisites
1. Two or more actions pending before a court;
2. Actions must involve common questions of fact
or law;
3. The actions must involve the same parties and
subject matter
Ways of consolidating
1. Recasting cases already instituted, conducting
only one hearing and rendering only one
decision.
2. When existing cases are consolidated, only one
hearing held and only one decision rendered.
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |11
 3. Without recasting or consolidating the cases, the
principal one is heard, the hearing on the others
suspended until judgment has been rendered in
the first case.
 No deadline beyond which consolidation may
not be effected.
Rule 31.
Sec. 2. Separate trials. – The court, in furtherance of
convenience or to avoid prejudice, may order a
separate trial of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or
third-party complaint, or of any separate issue or of any
number of claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party
complaints or issues. (2a)
Severance: action of a court in separating the claims of
multiple parties and permitting separate actions on each
claim or on fewer claims than all claims at one time.
 Divides the lawsuit into two or more independent
causes, each of which terminates in separate,
final and enforceable judgment.
Rule 32.
Sec. 1. Reference by consent. – By written consent of
both parties, the court may order any or all of the issues in
a case to be referred to a commissioner to be agreed
upon by the parties or to be appointed by the court. As
used in these Rules, the word “commissioner” includes a
referee, an auditor and an examiner. (1a, R33)
Effect of lack of written consent
 Does not invalidate the proceedings; irregularity
in the appointment of the commissioner must be
seasonably raised in the trial court where the
defect could still be remedied. Otherwise, being
a procedural point, it is waived by the consent of
the parties, express or implied.
Rule 32.
Sec. 2. Reference ordered on motion. – When the parties
do not consent, the court may, upon the application of
either or of its own motion, direct a reference to a
commissioner in the following cases:
(a) When the trial of an issue of fact requires the
examination of a long account on either side, in
which case the commissioner may be directed
to hear and report upon the whole issue or any
specific question involved therein;
(b) When the taking of an account is necessary for
the information of the court before judgment, or
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |12
for carrying a judgment or order into effect.
(c) When a question of fact, other than upon the
pleadings, arises upon motion or otherwise, in
any stage of a case, or for carrying a judgment
or order into effect. (2a, R33)
Sec. 3. Order of reference; powers of the commissioner. –
When a reference is made, the clerk shall forthwith furnish
the commissioner with a copy of the order of reference.
The order may specify or limit the powers of the
commissioner, and may direct him to report only upon
particular issues, or to do or perform particular acts, or to
receive and report evidence only and may fix the date
for beginning and closing the hearings and for the filing
of his report. Subject to other specifications and
limitations stated in the order, the commissioner has and
shall exercise the power to regulate the proceedings in
every hearing before him and to do all acts and take all
measures necessary or proper for the efficient
performance of his duties under the order. He may issue
subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum, swear
witnesses, and unless otherwise provided in the order of
reference, he may rule upon the admissibility of
evidence. The trial or hearing before him shall proceed in
all respects as it would if held before the court. (3a, R33)
Sec. 4. Oath of commissioner. – Before entering upon his
duties the commissioner shall be sworn to a faithful and
honest performance thereof. (14, R33)
Sec. 5. Proceedings before commissioner. – Upon receipt
of the order of reference and unless otherwise provided
therein, the commissioner shall forthwith set a time and
place for the first meeting of the parties or their counsel to
be held within ten (10) days after the date of the order of
reference and shall notify the parties or their counsel. (5a,
R33)
Sec. 6. Failure of parties to appear before commissioner.
– If a party fails to appear at the time and place
appointed, the commissioner may proceedex parte or, in
his discretion, adjourn the proceedings to a future day,
giving notice to the absent party or his counsel of the
adjournment. (6a, R33)
Sec. 7. Refusal of witness. – The refusal of a witness to
obey a subpoena issued by the commissioner or to give
evidence before him, shall be deemed a contempt of
the court which appointed the commissioner. (7a R33)
Sec. 8. Commissioner shall avoid delays. – It is the duty of
the commissioner to proceed with all reasonable
diligence. Either party, on notice to the parties and
commissioner, may apply to the court for an order
requiring the commissioner to expedite the proceedings
and to make his report. (8a, R33)
Sec. 9. Report of commissioner. – Upon the completion of
the trial or hearing or proceeding before the
commissioner, he shall file with the court his report in
writing upon the matters submitted to him by the order of
reference. When his powers are not specified or limited,
he shall set forth his findings of fact and conclusions of
law in his report. He shall attach thereto all exhibits,
affidavits, depositions, papers and the transcript, if any, of
the testimonial evidence presented before him. (9a, R33)
Sec. 10. Notice to parties of the filing of report. – Upon the
filing of the report, the parties shall be notified by the
clerk, and they shall be allowed ten (10) days within
which to signify grounds of objections to the findings of
the report, if they so desire. Objections to the report
based upon grounds which were available to the parties
during the proceedings before the commissioner, other
than objections to the findings and conclusions therein,
set forth, shall not be considered by the court unless they
were made before the commissioner. (10, R33)
Sec. 11. Hearing upon report. – Upon the expiration of the
period of ten (10) days referred to in the preceding
section, the report shall be set for hearing, after which the
court shall issue an order adopting, modifying, or
rejecting the report in whole or in part, or recommitting it
with instructions, or requiring the parties to present further
evidence before the commissioner or the court. (11a,
R33)
Sec. 12. Stipulations as to findings. – When the parties
stipulate that a commissioner's findings of fact shall be
final, only questions of law shall thereafter be considered.
(12a, R33)
Sec. 13. Compensation of commissioner. – The court shall
allow the commissioner such reasonable compensation
as the circumstances of the case warrant, to be taxed as
costs against the defeated party, or apportioned, as
justice requires. (13, R33)
XIII. Judgment
Rule 36.
Sec. 1. Rendition of judgments and final orders. – A
judgment or final order determining the merits of the case
shall be in writing personally and directly prepared by the
judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law
on which it is based, signed by him, and filed with the
clerk of court. (1a)
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |13
Purpose of the rule
 Judgment must state clearly and distinctly the
facts and law on which it is based to inform the
person reading the decision, especially the
parties, of how it was reached by the court.
 Does not apply to interlocutory orders or to
minute resolutions.
Judgment on the merits: one rendered after a
determination of which party is right, as distinguished from
a judgment rendered upon some preliminary or formal or
merely technical point
 Amounts to a declaration of the law to the
respective rights and duties of the parties, based
on the ultimate facts or state of facts disclosed
by the pleadings and evidence, and upon which
the right of recovery depends irrespective of
formal, technical or dilatory objectives or
contentions.
 Judgment must be based on the pleadings, the
facts proved, admitted, or taken judicial notice
by the court, and the applicable laws and
jurisprudence.
Form of judgment
 A judgment must contain clearly and distinctly
the facts and the upon which it is based.
Period for decision
 1987 Constitution: unless reduced by the
Supreme Court, all lower courts other than
collegiate must decide or resolve cases or
matters within three months from the date of
submission.
 Submission: filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the Rules of Court or
by the court itself
 It is the date of rendition that should be
considered in determining whether or not
respondent judge had resolved the case within
the allotted period.
 Period within which the trial court must render its
decision is mandatory.
Preparation of judgment
 Judgment or final order shall be personally and
directly prepared by the judge.
Amendment of judgment
 A court has plenary power to alter, modify or
even set aside, its own decisions, and even order
a new trial, at any time before decision becomes
 final, or before an appeal from that decision has
been perfected.
 Once the judgment has become final and
executor upon the lapse of the reglementary
period for appeal, the court can no longer
amend, modify, much less set aside the same.
Rendition of judgment
 The filing of the decision, judgment or order with
the clerk of court, not the date of writing of the
decision or judgment, nor the singing thereof or
even the promulgation thereof, constitutes
rendition thereof.
 Promulgation: process by which a decision is
published, officially announced, made known to
he public or delivered to the clerk of court for
filing, coupled with notice to the parties or their
counsel
Special forms of judgment
 Judgment by default – judgment rendered
against the defendant for his failure to answer to
the complaint within the time fixed by the rules
 Judgment on the pleading – judgment rendered
in favor of a party to an action, on motion
therefor, where an answer fails to tender an issue,
or otherwise admits the material allegations of
the adverse party’s pleadings
 Summary judgment – one granted by the court
upon motion by a party for an expeditious
settlement of the case, there appearing from the
pleadings, depositions, admissions, and affidavits
that there are no important questions or issues of
fact involved, and that therefore the moving
party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law
 Several judgment – judgment which a court may
render, in an action against several defendants,
against one or more of them, leaving the action
to proceed against the others
 Separate judgment – judgment which a court
may render, in an action where more than one
claim for relief is presented, disposing of a
particular claim upon a determination of the
issues material to such claim and all
counterclaims arising out of the transaction or
occurrence which is the subject matter of the
claim
 Special judgment – judgment which requires the
performance of any other act than the payment
of money, or the sale or delivery of real or
personal property
 Judgment for specific acts – judgment which
directs a party to execute a conveyance of
land, or to deliver deeds or other documents, or
to perform any other specific act
 Memorandum judgment – judgment or final
resolution of a court in an appealed case
adopting by reference the findings of fact and
conclusions of law contained in the decision or
final order appealed from
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |14
 Judgment on consent – one the provisions and
terms of which are settled and agreed upon by
the parties to the action, and which is entered in
the record by the consent and sanction of the
court
 Judgment nunc pro tunc – rendered to enter or
record such judgment as had been formerly
rendered but has not been entered as thus
rendered
 Judgment upon confession – judgment rendered
by a court based on the affirmative and
voluntary act of the defendant admitting the
claim against him, or confessing his guilt
 Judgment upon compromise – one rendered by
a court based on the agreement of the parties,
by making reciprocal concessions, to avoid a
litigation or put an end to one already
commenced
 Clarificatory judgment – one which seeks to
clarify a vague or ambiguous judgment
Rule 36.
Sec. 2. Entry of judgments and final orders. — If no appeal
or motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed within the
time provided in these Rules, the judgment or final order
shall forthwith be entered by the clerk in the book of
entries of judgments. The date of finality of the judgment
or final order shall be deemed to be the date of its entry.
The record shall contain the dispositive part of the
judgment or final order and shall be signed by the clerk,
within a certificate that such judgment or final order has
become final and executory. (2a, 10, R51)
Sec. 3. Judgment for or against one or more of several
parties. — Judgment may be given for or against one or
more of several plaintiffs and for or against one or more
of several defendants. When justice so demands, the
court may require the parties on each side to file
adversary pleadings as between themselves and
determine their ultimate rights and obligations. (3)
Sec. 4. Several judgments. — In an action against several
defendants, the court may, when a several judgment is
proper, render judgment against one or more of them,
leaving the action to proceed against the others. (4)
Sec. 5. Separate judgments. — When more than one
claim for relief is presented in an action, the court, at any
stage, upon a determination of the issues material to a
particular claim and all counterclaims arising out of the
transaction or occurrence which is the subject matter of
the claim, may render a separate judgment disposing of
such claim. The judgment shall terminate the action with
respect to the claim so disposed of and the action shall
proceed as to the remaining claims. In case a separate
judgment is rendered the court by order may stay its
enforcement until the rendition of a subsequent
judgment or judgments and may prescribe such
conditions as may be necessary to secure the benefit
thereof to the party in whose favor the judgment is
rendered. (5a)
Sec. 6. Judgment against entity without juridical
personality. — When judgment is rendered against two or
more persons sued as an entity without juridical
personality, the judgment shall set out their individual or
proper names, if known. (6a)
Appealability of separate judgment
 An order which decides an issue or issues in a
complaint is final and appealable, although the
other issue or issues have not been resolved, if
the latter issues are distinct and separate from
the others
Requisites of binding judgment
 No judgment or order, whether final or
interlocutory, has juridical existence until and
unless it is set down in writing and promulgated
Remedies against final judgment
 If a party is not satisfied with the judgment of the
trial court, he should appeal the case to the
appellate court before the judgment becomes
final and executory.
 Once it has become final and executor, the
judgment may be set aside in any of the
following ways:
o By petition for relief from judgment under
Rule 38
o By direct action to annul and enjoin the
enforcement of the judgment under Rule
47 of the ROC where the alleged defect
is not apparent on its face or from the
recitals contained in the judgment
o By direct action, as certiorari, or by
collateral attack against the challenged
judgment which is void upon its face or
where the nullity of the judgment is
apparent from its own recitals
Grounds for annulment of judgment
1. Judgment is void for want of jurisdiction or lack of
due process of law
2. Judgment was obtained by fraud
Rule 39
Sec. 48. Effect of foreign judgments or final orders. — The
effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |15
foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the
judgment or final order is as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a
specific thing, the judgment or final order, is
conclusive upon the title to the thing, and
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a
person, the judgment or final order is presumptive
evidence of a right as between the parties and
their successors in interest by a subsequent title.
In either case, the judgment or final order may be
repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of
notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
law or fact. (50a)
 The views set forth in American decisions and
authorities are not per se controlling in the
Philippines, the laws of which must necessarily be
construed in accordance with the intent may be
deduced from the language of each law and
the content of other local legislation related
thereto.
UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards
Alternative Dispute Resolution Law
Sec. 40. Confirmation of Award. - The confirmation of a
domestic arbitral award shall be governed by Section 23
of R.A. 876.
A domestic arbitral award when confirmed shall be
enforced in the same manner as final and executory
decisions of the Regional Trial Court.
The confirmation of a domestic award shall be made by
the regional trial court in accordance with the Rules of
Procedure to be promulgated by the Supreme Court.
A CIAC arbitral award need not be confirmed by the
regional trial court to be executory as provided under
E.O. No. 1008.
RA 876
Sec. 23. Confirmation of award. - At any time within one
month after the award is made, any party to the
controversy which was arbitrated may apply to the court
having jurisdiction, as provided in section twenty-eight,
for an order confirming the award; and thereupon the
court must grant such order unless the award is vacated,
modified or corrected, as prescribed herein. Notice of
such motion must be served upon the adverse party or
his attorney as prescribed by law for the service of such
notice upon an attorney in action in the same court.
De Leon v. CA (2002)
Manning v. NLRC (1991) – Narvasa, J.
Petitioners: Manning International Corporation and
Abdulasis & Mohamed A. Aljomaih Co.
Respondents: NLRC and Francisco "Lazaro" S. Benedicto,
Concept: Finality of Judgement
Doctrine: A final and executory judgment may no longer
be modified in any respect, even if the modification is
meant to correct what is perceived to be an erroneous
conclusion of fact or law. The only recognized exceptions
are the correction of clerical errors or the making of so-
called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to
any party, and where the judgment is void.
FACTS:
Benedicto was hired by a foreign firm, Abdulasis &
Mohamed A. Aljomaih Co., thru its Philippine
representative, Manning International Corporation, as a
truck driver for in Riyadh. Some months before the
expiration of his contract, Benedicto was involved in a
vehicular accident, was injured, and in consequence,
lost both his legs. From the date of the accident, he was
confined at a hospital in Saudi Arabia until his
employment was terminated. He was repatriated to the
Philippines. Benedicto filed a complaint with the POEA for
the recovery of his salary for the unexpired portion of his
contract, insurance benefits and projected cost of
medical expenses amounting to P25,000.00. Despite due
service of summons and several subsequent notices, no
appearance was entered, and no evidence presented,
in behalf of Manning and Abdulasis. Judgment was
thereafter rendered by the POEA. The judgment
dismissed Benedicto's claim for salary upon a finding that
he was legally terminated from employment because of
his disability. The judgment however ordered Manning
and Abdulasis, in accordance with their contractual
undertaking to provide workmen's compensation benefits
for service-connected illness, injuries or death, jointly and
severally, to pay Benedicto P12,000.00 as total and
permanent disability benefit and the actual medical
expenses incurred by him. The judgment having become
executory, Benedicto moved for computation of the
amounts due him. POEA directed the issuance of an alias
writ of execution to enforce payment by respondents of
P12,000 as total and permanent disability benefits and
P19,450 as hospitalization and medical expenses for one
hundred twenty (120) days, or a total of P31,450.
Benedicto protested the limitation of the award to him of
medical expenses to the period corresponding to only
120 days and filed a motion for partial reconsideration.
The NLRC set aside the POEA Order on considerations of
equity and social justice as well as the theory that
"medical treatment should not be stopped until the injury
or disability is completely healed," entered "a new
judgment approving the payment of P65,621.03 as
"reimbursement of actual medical expenses from
September 3, 1982 up to January 26, 1985." Manning
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |16
went to the SC on R65.
ISSUE: Whether the NLRC judgement is ultra vires. (YES)
RATIO: YES. When a final judgment becomes executory, it
becomes immutable and unalterable.
1. The NLRC opinion is quite frankly grounded on
considerations of equity and social justice, and
not on any explicit provision of law or regulation,
and upon such a theory, the Commission
rendered a new judgment at odds with the final
and executory judgment rendered by the POEA.
2. Nothing is more settled in the law than that when
a final judgment becomes executory, it thereby
becomes immutable and unalterable. The
judgment may no longer be modified in any
respect, even if the modification is meant to
correct what is perceived to be an erroneous
conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of
whether the modification is attempted to be
made by the Court rendering it or by the SC.
3. The only recognized exceptions are the
correction of clerical errors or the making of so-
called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party, and where the judgment
is void.
◦ The object of a judgment nunc pro tunc
is not the rendering of a new judgment
and the ascertainment and
determination of new rights, but is one
placing in proper form on the record, the
judgment that has been previously
rendered, to make it speak the truth, so
as to make it show what the judicial
action really was, not to correct judicial
errors, such as to render a judgment
which the court ought to have rendered,
in place of the one it did erroneously
render, not to supply nonaction by the
court, however erroneous the judgment
may have been.
4. The alteration made by the NLRC judgment on
the final and executory judgment of the POE
Administrator cannot in any sense be
characterized as the correction of a clerical
mistake, or a nunc pro tunc entry. Nor may the
latter judgment be considered as void in any
aspect.
DISPOSITIVE: Petition granted. NLRC decision annulled,
and POEA order reinstated.
Lichauco v. Tan Pho
St. Aviation Services Co. Pte. Ltd. v Grand International
Airways Inc. (2006) - Sandoval-Gutierrez, J.
Plaintiff: St. Aviation Services Co. Pte. Ltd.
Defendant: Grand International Airways Inc.
Concept: Enforcement of a foreign judgment.
Doctrine: A foreign judgment or order against a person is
merely presumptive evidence of a right as between the
parties. It may be repelled, among others, by want of
jurisdiction of the issuing authority or by want of notice to
the party against whom it is enforced. The party
attacking a foreign judgment has the burden of
overcoming the presumption of its validity.
FACTS: St. Aviation Services (SAS) is a foreign corporation
based in Singapore engaged in the manufacture repair
and maintenance of airplanes and aircrafts. Grand
International Airways (GTA) is a domestic corporation
engaged in airline operations. They executed an
“Agreement for the Maintenance and Modification of
Airbus A300 B4-103 Aircraft Registration No. RP-C8882”
(FIRST AGREEMENT). SAS agreed to undertake
maintenance and modification works on GTA’s aircraft.
They also agreed that the “construction, validity and
performance thereof” shall be governed by the laws of
Singapore, and that any suit arising from their agreement
be submitted to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the
Singapore courts. They they verbally agreed that SAS will
repair and undertake maintenance works on GTA’s other
aircraft, and that these will be based on a General Terms
of Agreement similar in terms to those of the FIRST
AGREEMENT. SAS performed its obligation, but despite
repeated demands, GTA failed to pay.
SAS filed with the High Court of Singapore an action for a
sum of money. The court issued a writ of summons to the
be served extraterritorially. However, despite receipt of
summons, GTA failed to answer the claim. The Singapore
High Court then rendered a judgment by default against
GTA.
SAS then riled with RTC-Pasay a Petition for Enforcement
of Judgment. GTA filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that:
(1) there was no jurisdiction over its person; and (2) the
foreign judgment is void for having been rendered in
violation of its right to due process. The RTC denied the
Motion to Dismiss. On appeal to the CA, however, the
petition was granted. The CA ruled that “the complaint
does not involve the personal status of plaintiff, nor any
property in which the defendant has a claim or interest,
or which the private respondent has attached”. The
action being personal and in personam, the CA held that
the service of summons should be personal or substituted.
ISSUES:
1. WON the judgment by default rendered by the
Singapore High Court is enforceable in the Philippines.
2. WON the Singapore High Court has acquired
jurisdiction over the person of GTA. (YES)
RATIO:
1. YES; Rule 39, Section 48 exists for this purpose.
 The conditions for the recognition and enforcement
of a foreign judgment are contained in Rule 39,
Section 48.
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |17
 Rule 39, Section 48: The effect of a judgment or
final order of a tribunal of a foreign country,
having jurisdiction to render the judgment of final
order is as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a
specific thing, the judgment or final order is
conclusive upon the title to the thing; and
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a
person, the judgment or final order is
presumptive evidence of a right as between
the parties and their successors in interest by
a subsequent title;
In either case, the judgment or final order
may be repelled by evidence of a want or
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party,
collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or
fact.
 A foreign judgment or order against a person is
merely presumptive evidence of a right as
between the parties. It may be repelled, among
others, by want of jurisdiction of the issuing
authority or by want of notice to the party
against whom it is enforced. The party attacking
a foreign judgment has the burden of
overcoming the presumption of its validity.
2. YES; the writ of summons was served upon GTA in
accordance with our Rules.
 The Philippine legal system has long ago
accepted the viability of an action for
enforcement of foreign judgment, as well as the
requisites for such valid enforcement.
 Generally, matters of remedy and procedure are
governed by the lex fori (internal law of the
forum), which in this case is the law of Singapore.
o The Singapore High Court granted “leave to
serve a copy of the writ of summons on the
defendant by a method of service
authorised by the law of the Philippine for
service of any originating process issued by
the Philippines.” This service of summons
outside Singapore is in accordance with
Order 11, r, 4(2) of the Rules of Court 1996 of
Singapore.
o The writ of summons issued by the Singapore
High Court was served upon GTA at its office.
The Sheriff’s Return shows that it was received
by the Secretary of the General Manager,
but GTA completely ignored the summons.
 The writ of summons was served upon GTA in
accordance with our Rules, as mandated in the
Singapore High Court’s order.
DISPOSITIVE: Petition GRANTED.
Mijares v Ranada (2005) - Tinga, J.
Plaintiff: Priscilla Mijares, et al. (class action suit)
Defendant: Judge Santiago Ranada and the Estate of
Ferdinand Marcos
Concept: Enforcement of a foreign judgment
Doctrine: An action to enforce a foreign judgment falls
within the jurisdiction of the RTC under Section 19(6).

FACTS: Mijares et al are prominent victims of human rights
violations during the Martial Law era. They filed a
complaint with the US District Court in Hawaii against the
Estate of Ferdinand Marcos through the Alien Tort Act.
They were certified as a class. The US District Court
rendered a FINAL JUDGMENT awarding them a total of
USD 1.964B. This was affirmed by the US Court of Appeals.
Mijares et al then filed a complaint in the RTC. They
argued that the FINAL JUDGMENT had become final and
executory and should therefore be recognised in the
4. YES; the correct filing fees were paid and so the court
Philippines. The Marcos Estate filed a Motion to Dismiss,
raising, among others, the non-payment of filing fees. It
argued that since Mijares et al sought to enforce a
monetary amount of damages of over USD 2.25B [N.B.
case did not indicate why the monetary value changed],
the paid docket fee of PHP 410 was insufficient. However,
Mijares et al claimed that an acton for the enforcement
of a foreign judgment is not capable of pecuniary
estimation, hence Rule 141 Section 7(c) was applicable.
The RTC dismissed the complaint without prejudice. It
ruled that the subject matter of the complaint was
indeed capable of pecuniary estimation. It estimated
that the proper amount of filing feed was approximately
PHP 472M.
ISSUES:
MAIN ISSUE: WON the correct filing fees were filed. (YES)
1. WON the FINAL JUDGMENT (foreign judgment) is
enforceable by Philippine courts. (YES)
2. WON the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the
case. (YES)
RATIO:
3. YES; Rule 39, Section 48 governs actions to enforce
foreign judgments.
 Rule 39, Section 48: The effect of a foreign
judgment of a tribunal of a foreign country,
having jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment is
as follows:
(c) In case of a judgment upon a specific thing,
the judgment is conclusive upon the title to
the thing;
(d) In case of a judgment against a person, the
judgment is presumptive evidence of a right
as between the parties and their successors
in interest by a subsequent title;
In either case, the judgment or final order may
be repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction,
want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or
clear mistake of law or fact.
 There is an evident distinction between a
foreign judgment in an action in rem and one
in personam.
o Action in rem: the foreign judgment is
deemed conclusive upon the tile to the
thing
o Action in personam: the foreign judgment is
presumptive, and not conclusive, of a right
as between the parties and their successors
in interest by a subsequent title
 It is usually necessary for an action to be filed
in order to enforce a judgment.
TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |18
 The party attacking a foreign judgment has
the burden of overcoming the presumption of
its validity.
o In both in rem and in personam cases, the
foreign judgment is susceptible to
impeachment in our local courts on the
rounds of want of jurisdiction or notice to
the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake
of law or fact.
had jurisdiction over the case.
A. Which court can take cognisance of the action?
(to determine which can take jurisdiction)
 A civil action is one by which a party sues
another for the enforcement or protection of a
right, and clearly an action to enforce a
foreign judgment is in essence a vindication of
a right prescinding either from a “conclusive
judgment upon title” or the “presumptive
evidence of a right.”
 There are distinctions between the cause of
action arising from the enforcement of a
foreign judgment and that arising from the
facts or allegations that occasioned the
foreign judgment. There is an essential
difference in the right-duty correlatives that
are sought to be vindicated. In an action to
enforce a foreign judgment, the matter left for
proof is the judgment itself, and not the facts
from which it prescinds.
o The actionable issues, as per Rule 39,
Section 48, are generally restricted to a
review of jurisdiction of the foreign court,
the service of personal notice, collusion,
fraud, or mistake of law or fact.
This action does not fall under any of the
enumerations in the law, except for the catch-
all of Section 19(6) in BP 129.
o Section 19(6), BP 129: Regional Trial Courts
shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:
xxx
(6) In all cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
body exercising jurisdiction or any court,
tribunal, person or body exercising judicial
or quasi-judicial functions; x x x
B. What is the action? (To determine which provision
governs filing fees)
 This is an action capable of pecuniary
estimation. In theory, such an action is primarily
for “the enforcement of a foreign judgment”,
but there is a certain obtuseness to that sort of
argument since there is no denying that the
enforcement of the foreign judgment will
necessarily result in the award of a definite sum
of money.
 The complaint to enforce the US District Court
judgment is one capable of pecuniary
estimation. But at the same time, it is also an
action based on judgment against an estate,
thus placing it beyond the ambit of Rule 141,
Section 7(a).
  It is covered by Section 7(b)(3), involving as it
does, “other actions not involving property”.
o The amount paid as docket fees by Mijares
et al on the premise that it was an action
incapable of pecuniary estimation
corresponds to the same amount required
for “other actions not involving property”.

DISPOSITIVE: Petition GRANTED.

TIMLESS REVIEWERS B2017 | CIVIL PROCEDURE | PROF. LUMBA |19