You are on page 1of 3


Sec. 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions.

Basis for the institution shall be based on delict or crime.
Unless waived, reserved, or a civil action was filed before crim action.
Actual charges – may be charged regardless without claims
Counterclaim – not allowed in criminal cases. It is allowed only in civil cases.
In BP22, civil action is included.

Cruz v. Mina, GR No. 154207, April 27, 2007

Can the son of the accused for grave threat appear as agent of the court on behalf of the
father? Can the priv complainant be substituted? Yes.

Ricarze v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 160451, February 9, 2007


Heirs of Sarah Burgos v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 169711, February 8, 2010

Grant of bail has nothing to do with civil action for liability
Priv offended has no personality to question bail.

ABS- CBN v. Ombudsman, GR No.133347 October 15, 2008

Whether death extinguishes criminal liability

Hun Hyung Park v. Eun Wong Choi, GR No. 165496, February 12, 2007
Demurrer filed after dismissal
Without act or omission, extinguished
Acquittal –
Granting of demurrer results to dismissal of both crim and civil aspect – if grant is acts or
omissions does not exist

Lo Bun Tiong vs. Balboa, GR No. 158177, January 28, 2008

Actual damages – what’s in the case
(Before, bp22 allowed civil aspect to be filed separately)

Sec. 2.When separate civil action is suspended.

Crim, proof beyond reasonable doubt. Civil, preponderance of evidence
May Ext civ liability if found out that there was no criminal offense committed

Lanuzo v. Sy Bon Ping, G.R. No. 53064, September 25, 1980

Arising from quasi delict

Manliclic v. Calaunan, G.R. No. 150157, January 25, 2007

Act or omission does not exist because he isn’t the author

Aleria v. Mendoza, G.R. No. L-2336 April 27, 1949

Civil case on unpaid wages

Parker v. Panlilio, G.R. No. L-4961 March 5, 1952

Diff defendants on the criminal and civil case

Babala v. Abaño, G.R. No. L-4600 February 28, 1952

Issuance of prelim injunction may be done, as long as no going to the merits of the case

Jose-Consing v. People, G.R. No. 161075, July 15, 2013

Unicapital, filed against consing estafa

Is prejudicial question applicable? Plus builders, none. Unicapital, there is.

Civil action with fraud may go hand in hand with a criminal action

Coscolluela v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 191411, July 15, 2013

Anti graft, but suspended bed violation of speedy trial
Acquittal does not ext civil liability. Court did not acquit bec no criminal action was present

Co v. Muñoz, G.R. No. 181986, December 4, 2013

Dj attaches.

Acquittal, no dj:
1. Acquittal based on reasonabke doubt
2. civ is separate

Sec. 3.When civil action may proceed independently.

Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. v. People, GR No. 147703, April 14, 2004
Civ action on quasi delict

Sec. 4. Effect of death on civil actions.

Civil liability from delict

ABS-CBN v. Ombudsman, GR No.133347 October 15, 2008

Namatay so benedicto even before criminal action instituted
May go against ben for civil liability
Civil case may proceed
Civil liability may be ran after based on other sources of obligation

People vs. Bayotas, GR No. 102007, September 2, 1994

Is death of accused pending appeal extinguish civil liability? It depends on the civil liability
refered. If pertains to crime, extinguished. If based on other sources, liability shrives by
filing a separate civil action

People vs. Bringas Bunay y Dam-at, GR No. 171268, September 14, 2010

People vs. Jaime Ayochok, GR No.175784, August 25, 2010

Obligation to indemnify victim- bases on ex delicto

Sec. 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar.

Salta v. De Veyra, G.R. L-37733, September 30, 2982

Reservation results that the court trying the criminal case can’t rule on the civil liability

Sec. 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question.

PQ is made to avoid conflicting decisions.

San Miguel Properties v. Secretary of Justice GR No. 166836, September 4, 2013

BF did not release titles. Accdg to San min, sec 5 on specific performance
If hlurb says no obligation, can’t be a crim offense
Problem – blurb. BUT civil action matters, not the agency because you can come up with a
cause of action

Omictin v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.148004 January 22, 2007

Criminal case and SEC case (declaration of nullity of position)
Authority to demand is an element of estafa

People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162748-50, 28 March 2006

Sufficiency of allegation in the information
Absence authority, no more valid demand
If one court says validity if moa, no graft (criminal case)

Yu v. Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank, 485 SCRA 56

Do you apply prejudicial question here? No. PQ may be used as a term, but not as such
stated in Rule 111.

Reyes v. Pearlbank Security,G.R. No. 171435, July 30, 2008

There were prior cases on accounting, civil in nature.
Civil – asserting a right or status.
No PQ because issue on SEC is not determinative of the falsification case.

Coca-Cola. v. Social Security Commission, G.R. No. 159323, July 31, 2008
No prejudicial question because there is no criminal case.

Monreal v. COMELEC, GR No. 184935, December 21, 2009

No pq. Because dismissing would result to…

Sps Jose v. Suarez, G.R. No. 176795, 30 June 2008

Walay check bec unconscionable.
But SC: no. Gravamen is issuance. Validity or invalidity of interest does not matter.

Sy Thiong Siou v. Sy Chim, GR No. 174168, March 30, 2009
No PQ. WON one of the spouses mishandled the fund, it has nothing to do with the other
criminal case.

IBP vs. Atienza, GR No. 175241, February 24, 2010

You have to file the motion for suspension in the criminal case, not in the civil case.

Land Bank of the Philippines v. Jacinto, GR No. 154622 August 3, 2010


Sabandal vs. Tongco, GR No. 124498, October 5, 2001


Marbella-Bobis v. Bobis,G.R. No. 138509, 31 July 2000

No pq bec judicial dec of nullity is not determinative of the innocence of the guilt of the
husband. (bigamy)

Landicho v. Relova, GR No. L- 22579, February 23, 1968

Bigamy case.

Beltran vs. People, GR No. 137567, June 20, 2000

Said that there should be no concubinage. But…

Prado vs People, G.R. No. L-37652 December 26, 1984


Donato vs Luna, G.R. No. L-53642 April 15, 1988

Elpidio doctrine if the consent of a party is in question. (if no consent, no marriage to speak

Sec. 7. Elements of prejudicial question.

1. Pending civil action previously instituted
2. Criminal action and civil action intimately related

Magestrado v. People, GR No. 148072, July 10, 2009


Torres v. Garchitorena, GR No. 153666 December 27, 2002


Pimentel v. Pimentel, GR No. 172060, September 13, 2010


OCA CIRCULAR 1010 2017

32B8 – prohibited motion to suspend from action based on prejudicial question. There should be a PEDNING civil
case based on prejudicial question