You are on page 1of 77

University of Santo Tomas

Faculty of Civil Law

Questions Asked More
Than Once
(QuAMTO 2017)
*QUAMTO is a compilation of past bar questions with answers as suggested by UPLC and
other distinct luminaries in the academe, and updated by the UST Academics Committee to
fit for the 2017 Bar Exams.

*Bar questions are arranged per topic in accordance with the bar syllabus released by the
Supreme Court and were selected based on their occurrence on past bar examinations from
1987 to 2016.







QUAMTO (1997-2016)
of fact is when the doubt or difference arises as to the truth
REMEDIAL LAW QUAMTO or falsehood of alleged facts (Ramos v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling
Co. of the Phil., G.R. No. L-22533, February 9, 1967).

Q: Goodfeather Corporation, through its President, Al
GENERAL PRINCIPLES Pakino, filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a
complaint for specific performance against Robert
White. Instead of filing an answer to the complaint,
CONCEPT OF REMEDIAL LAW Robert White filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on
the ground of lack of the appropriate board resolution
Q: How shall the Rules of Court be construed? (1998 Bar) from the Board of Directors of Good feather Corporation
to show the authority of Al Pakino to represent the
A: The Rules of Court should be liberally constructed in corporation and file the complaint in its behalf. The RTC
order to promote their objective of securing a Just, speedy granted the motion to dismiss and, accordingly it
and inexpensive disposition of every action and ordered the dismissal of the complaint. Al Pakino filed a
proceeding (Sec. 6, Rule 1). motion for reconsideration which the RTC denied. As
nothing more could be done by Al Pakino before the RTC,
Q: What is the concept of Remedial Law? Distinguish he file an appeal before the Court of Appeals (CA). Robert
between substantive law and remedial law. (2006 Bar) White moved for dismissal of the appeal in the ground
that the same involved purely a question of law and
A: The concept of Remedial Law is that it is a branch of public should have been filed with the Supreme Court (SC).
law which prescribes the procedural rules to be observed in However, Al Pakino claimed that the appeal involved
litigations, whether civil, criminal, or administrative, and in mixed questions of fact and law because there must be a
special proceedings, as well as the remedies or reliefs factual determination if, indeed, Al Pakino was duly
available in each case. authorized by Goodfeather Corporation to file the
complaint. Whose position is correct? Explain. (2014
Substantive law is that part of the law which creates, defines Bar)
and regulates rights and obligations, the violation of which
gives rise to a cause of action. On the other hand, remedial A: Al Pakino is correct in claiming that the appeal involved
law prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtaining mixed questions of fact and law. There is a question of law
redress for their invasion (cf. Bustos v. Lucero, 81 Phil. 540, when the doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on
650 [1948]). a certain state of facts. On the other hand, there is a question
of fact, when the doubt or difference arises as to the truth or
Q: How are remedial laws implemented in our system of falsehood of alleged facts. (Mirant Philippines Corporation v.
government? (2006 Bar) Sario, G.R. No. 197598, November 21, 2012). Since the
complaint was dismissed due to the alleged lack of
A: Remedial Laws are implemented in our system of appropriate board resolution from the Board of Directors of
government through the judicial system, including the Goodfeather Corporation, the appeal will necessarily involve
prosecutory service, our courts and quasi-judicial agencies. a factual determination of the authority to file the Complaint
for the said Corporation. Hence, the appeal before the Court
Doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial of Appeals is correct.
Court of Appeals
Q: In rendering a decision, should a court take into
consideration the possible effect of its verdict upon the Q: Give at least three instances where the Court of
political stability and economic welfare of the nation? Appeals may act as a trial court. (2008 Bar)
(2003 Bar)
A: No, because a court is required to take into
consideration only the legal issues and the evidence a. In annulment of judgment under Secs. 5 and 6, Rule 47.
admitted in the case. The political stability and Should the Court o£ Appeals find prima facie merit in the
economic welfare of the nation are extraneous to the petition, the same shall be given due course and
case. They can have persuasive influence but they are summons shall be served on the respondent, after which
not the main factors that should be considered i n trial will follow, where the procedure in ordinary civil
deciding a case. A decision should be based on the law, cases shall be observed.
rules of procedure, justice and equity. However, in b. When a motion for new trial is granted by the Court of
exceptional cases the court may consider the political Appeals, the procedure in the new trial shall be the same
stability and economic welfare of the nation when as that granted by a Regional Trial Court (Sec. 4, Rule 53).
these are capable of being taken into jud icial notice of c. A petition for habeas corpus shall be set for hearing (Sec.
and are relevant to the case. 12, Rule 102).
d. In a petition for the writs of amparo and habeas data, a
JURISDICTION hearing can be conducted.
e. Under Section 12, Rule 124 of the Rules of Criminal
JURISDICTION OF COURTS Procedure, the Court of Appeals has the power to try
cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and
Supreme Court perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual
issues cases which fall within its original and appellate
Q: Distinguish Questions of Law from Questions of Fact. jurisdiction.
(2004 Bar) f. The Court of Appeals can grant a new trial based on the
ground of newly discovered evidence (Sec. 14, Rule 124).
A: A question of law is when the doubt or difference arises g. The Court of Appeals, under Section 6, Rule 46,
as to what the law is on a certain set of facts, while a question whenever necessary to resolve factual issues, may
conduct hearing thereon or delegate the reception of the

Does the 3. both testate and intestate. 000. Matigas in conspiracy with Carpinter. Vestil. arguing that with Blg.00) or.00) or. His death did not extinguish the crime A: The motion should be granted. In all other cases in which the demand. appeals exclusive original jurisdiction in the following civil cases: from the Ombudsman must be taken to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 (Lanting v. 1998. Desierto. 14. No.000. a resident of Quezon City. Carpintero through counsel. Thus. September 16. RA 6770). 000. (2016 Bar) A: The Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the Ombudsman in criminal cases (Sec. property. however. there is no that the case would have been brought in the RTC longer any public officer with whom he can be charge for because the action is one that is not capable of pecuniary violation of R. In administrative and disciplinary cases. attorney’s fees. 2005. 3019. (2000 Bar) The only thing extinguished by the death of Gov. 000. The requirement before a B. Matigas and Carpintero. 2. the of R.A. G. 000.R. Matigas was killed in an litigation expenses. No. Go. The law. Further. he filed a similar complaint with the Court of and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings. Is the Motion to Quash legally tenable? (2014 Bar) the natural son of A’s father. does not require that such person must.00. 3019. or possession of. and Act (RA) No. 11 of R. The action for partition nor did it remove the basis of the charge of conspiracy depends on a determination of the hereditary rights of A and between him and Carpintero. No. or any interest therein.R. to compel the latter to execute a deed of conveyance UST BAR OPERATIONS 2 . Mark’s jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the complaint was dismissed. 000. 000. B moves to dismiss the action on the ground true that by reason of the death of Gov. a Domestic Relations Court and of the Court of Agragrian private individual.A. While it is P20. 168539. the where the gross value of the estate exceeds three CTA now has the same rank as the Court of Appeals and is no hundred thousand pesos (P300. in such other cases in Metro Manila. Fabian v. where such gross value exceeds provided in the said law that the decisions of the CTA en banc four hundred thousand pesos (P400. Q: Does the Court of Appeals have jurisdiction to review Regional Trial Courts the Decisions in criminal and administrative cases of the Q: State at least five (5) civil cases that fall under the Ombudsman? (2006 Bar) exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court (RTC). 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Matigas is his criminal liability.R. after conducting the requisite 7. for the partition of a parcel of land located in Taytay. 9282. So. The procedure is governed by Sec. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any Sandiganbayan court. 6. It is likewise matters in Metro Manila. among others. (Sec. 129 otherwise known as the “Judiciary the death of Gov. Sec. found probable cause to the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and charge Gov. damages of whatever kind. the Sandiganbayan. 14.00) or. Ombudsman. 1999). 119347. however. 000. The Motion to quash is not legally tenable. Before the information could be filed with interest. and costs or the value of the ambush. for civil actions in Q: Mark filed with the Bureau of Internal Revenue a Metro Manila where such value exceeds fifty thousand complaint for refund of taxes paid. Matigas. No. Decisions of a division of the Court of Tax Appeals must be 4. 2014). Hence. In all civil actions which involve title to.00). on the ground of lack pesos (P400. Q: A files an action in the Municipal Trial Court against B. incapable of pecuniary estimation. it does not mean. an information was filed property in controversy exceeds three hundred against Gov. In all actions involving the contract of marriage and 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.00). G. 141426. marital relations. be alleged to have acted in conspiracy with a public officer. in probate longer considered as a quasi-judicial agency. in all instances. tribunal. appealed to the Court of Tax Appeals En Banc.00) or. A: The Regional Trial Courts inter alia shall exercise RA 6770).A. notwithstanding. it is not necessary to join all alleged co-conspirators performance against B. G. 1 and 19 of Batas Pambansa of jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. where the Court of Tax Appeals assessed value of the property involved exceeds twenty thousands pesos (P20. March 25. in Metro Manila. Appeals a petition for certiorari under Rule 65. but it was not acted pesos (P50. person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. REMEDIAL LAW evidence of such issues to any of its members or to an in an indictment for conspiracy (People of the Philippines v. In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is 6. March 17. Rizal with an assessed value of A: No. appropriate agency or office. Q: The Ombudsman. Q: A filed with the MTC of Manila an action for specific Indeed. thousand pesos (P400. In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within preliminary investigation. May 1. filed abovementioned item exceeds four hundred thousand a Motion to Quash the information. which is not capable of pecuniary estimation. Resolve the motion. original Tax Appeals raffled to one of its Divisions. Gov. are congnizable by the Supreme Court under Rule 45 of the 5. is that such private person must Municipal Trial Court has no jurisdiction (Russell v. 8. 000.R. In all matters of probate. that the estimation as it involves primarily a determination of allegation of conspiracy between them can no longer be hereditary rights and not merely the bare right to real proved or that their alleged conspiracy is already expunged. Henry T. Matigas.00). even private person may be indicated for violation of Section 3(g) though the assessed value of the land is P20. where the demand exclusive of the At the Sandiganbayan.00. real property. be indicated together with the public officer. thousand pesos (P300. for violating Section 3(e) of Republic Relations as now provided by law. This. he filed with the Court of Metropolitan Trial Courts. where such demand or claim exceeds four hundred A: No. 129742. G. there is no public officer Reorganization Act of 1980) charged in the information. In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction Court of Appeals have jurisdiction over Mark’s petition? where the demand or claim exceeds three hundred (2006 Bar) thousand pesos (P300. exclusive of as amended). 000.00) except actions for forcible entry into upon.

00. 2012 Bar) b. the amount thereof shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court (Adm. The issue raised by B does not go against or impugn the genuineness and due execution of the Bill of Lading as an A: No. Copioso. Find out why A failed to appear at the deposition-taking. which is waivable. 000. the action was within the jurisdiction of RTC exclusive of interest. 000 binds A. expenses and costs: this jurisdiction includes admiralty and October 28. the cause of action is 4. 146594. 000. 2000). merely a matter of venue. within the jurisdiction of the MTC A: The Motion to Dismiss is without merit and therefore Manila. G. Family courts 3 . No. whether it should be P20.000. June 10. marine cases. April 28. 2008. Will your answer be the same if the action was for deposition). In foreclosure suit. Default. The MeTC denied the Motion in question A. A filed with the MTC a Motion to declare B in default. The assessed Take Deposition. A failed to appear at the deposition-taking." setting the deposition on July 29. for recovery of damages amounting to RTC a Petition for Certiorari praying that the said Order P167. At the pre-trial conference. action should be brought in the proper court of the province 3. 2009. If failure to appear at deposition taking was without where the land or any part thereof is situated. A. The motion was opposed by B on a. B filed with the Atlantis. the action filed by A for Specific Performance against should be denied. either in valid reason. at the office of its counsel in assessed value of the land in Bulacan. then set another date for A: No. hence. and the other in Bulacan. What is involved is not Makati. A’s contention is wrong. it is the amount of the claim. therefore. 149243. On July 21. the answer would not be the same. attorney’s fees. Vestil. not the nature of the action. 2008. because under Rep. involve title to. exclusive original jurisdiction in civil actions which effect of said stipulation.R. but of a matter despite notice. G. Inc. supra. litigation (Russel v. Only one foreclosure action need be the court where the action is pending. B received the loaded on the M/V Atlantis in Legaspi City 100. an assessed value of P19. Although the assessed value of the parcel of land involved was P19. 2002. In due time. because venue can be waived. 2003. but invokes the binding No. A contended that a. B filed a Motion to Dismiss totally damaged on August 14. violated is necessary. 2002]). Diaz v. B Lines A: The Court could declare B in default because B did not thus filed an Answer raising the defense that under obtain a writ of preliminary injunction or a temporary the Bill of Lading it issued to A. and mortgage contract. correct. one situated in A: The Contention of B is correct. owner of the M/V court denied the motion. then I would file a motion/application in Pampanga or in Bulacan.m. 000 only.00. 7691. For the court to issue appropriate Order provided under for the violation of the terms and conditions of the mortgage Rule 29 of the Rules. for non-compliance with the show- contract.00 or in Metro Manila. aside from contempt of court. Landcenter Construction. 2.R. Resolve the Motion to Declare the Defendant in 09-94. the action may not prosper. Act actionable document pleaded by A. The oath is not required of B. B proceeding in the case during the pendency of the petition Lines defined as one of the issues whether the for certiorari (Sec. A countered that this was no longer in issue as B Lines had failed to deny under oath the Bill of Lading.000 summons and a copy of the Complaint of 02 January pieces of century eggs. damages. value of the parcel of land in Pampanga is different from the 2009 at 8:30 a. its liability was restraining order from the RTC prohibiting the judge from limited to P10. case. It Pampanga. the action may prosper if proceed? (2010 Bar) jurisdiction is not in issue. 135885. B Lines served on A a "Notice to first level or with the Regional Trial Court. QUAMTO (1997-2016) covering a parcel of land situated in Quezon City having Q: On August 13. 000 in the rest of the Philippines. one foreclosure suit per mortgage contract cause order. 1994). Cabutihan v. jurisdiction over "all actions in admiralty and maritime" claims. He attached to the complaint the Bill of be set aside because the MTC has no jurisdiction over the Lading. Was the denial of the Motion to Dismiss the while the action is indeed "admiralty and maritime" Complaint correct? in nature. However. If failure was for valid reason. outside of the Manila with courts of the c. b. Courts of the first level have jurisdiction B to compel the latter to execute a Deed of Conveyance of over civil actions where the demand is for sum of money not said parcel of land was not capable of pecuniary estimation exceeding P300. The against B Super Lines. June 14. and. No. land? Why or why not? (2000 Bar) despite notice. The shipment arrived in Manila 2003. P400. how would you of jurisdiction.00. Diaz.899. As counsel for B Lines. Copioso v. (2009 Bar) is A who pleaded the Bill of Lading as an actionable document where the stipulation limits B’s liability to A to P10. 000. On 13 February 2003. or possession or real property or any interest because the issue raised by the latter does not impugn the therein is determined on the basis of the assessed value of genuiness and due execution of the Bill of Lading. for damages. that governs jurisdiction. for an Order to filed unless each parcel of land is covered by distinct show cause for his refusal to the discovery. A filed before the the Complaint on the ground that the subject matter of Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Manila a complaint the suit was incapable of pecuniary estimation. I shall proceed as follows: foreclosure of the mortgage over the two parcels of 1. Court (RTC) of Manila to recover the ownership and possession of two parcels of land. G. (B Lines). 000. On 10 January 2003. B Lines filed a Motion to Dismiss upon the ground the ground that his Petition for Certiorari was still that the Regional Trial Court has exclusive original pending. as shipper and consignee. (1997. In his Reply. the land involved. The foreclosure taking the deposition. A: As counsel for B Lines (which gave notice to take the b. Pass on the A: The denial of the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint was not Motion to Dismiss. stipulation limiting its liability to P10. May the action prosper? Explain. 7 Rule 65. And where the main cause of action is the claim No. Q: Angelina sued Armando before the Regional Trial Which of the parties is correct? Explain.R. a. Circular No.

Municipal Trial Courts. 33 of B. vested he declined to resolve the constitutionality of R. No. deny the motion or order the amendment of the pleading but not to forward the case to A: No. damages of whatever kind. attorney’s fees. jurisdiction to pass upon constitutional issues. Pampanga. Was the Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts court’s ruling concerning jurisdiction correct? Was the court’s order to forward the case correct? Explain Q: Filomeno brought an action in the Metropolitan Trial briefly.000.00 (Sec. 000 outside Metro Manila. 9262. 9262. 12. jurisdiction over specified accion publiciana with courts of 9262? (2015 Bar) the first level (Metropolitan Trial Courts. another court. with Q: Juliet invoking the provisions of the Rule on Violence damages. Against Women and their Children filed with the RTC designated as a Family Court a petition for issuance of a Q: Anabel filed a complaint against B for unlawful Temporary Protection Order (TPO) against her detainer before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of husband. No. litigation expenses and costs.000. the court may Bar) dismiss the action or claim. naturalization.R.000. The MeTC did not have jurisdiction over the case recovery of physical possession of a parcel of land because the total amount of the demand exclusive of interest. being a having jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case special court of limited jurisdiction and R. however.A. appealed from MTC should try the case on the merits as if the the law creating the Family Courts. special proceedings. Marcelino is not correct. the MTC dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction Juliet filed a motion for extension. A day before the expiration of the TPO.A. No. among others. The claim for handle Family Court cases shall be dealt with utmost damages of P500. the constitutionality of publiciana. where such assessed value childhood friend. with the fundamental law. she was surprised to see that her or in civil actions in Metro Manila.00. REMEDIAL LAW Q: How should the records of child and family cases in Pasay City where the action for recovery of physical the Family Courts or RTC designated by the Supreme possession was filed. 2004 Bar) Court (MeTC) of Pasay City against Marcelino pleading two causes of action. 000.). damages of on her property. Marcelino filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Big 29. the Supreme Court held that the “Family Courts have Q: Plaintiff filed a complaint for a sum of money against authority and jurisdiction to resolve the constitutionality of defendant with the MeTC-Makati. (2010 Bar) motion for extension of the TPO. exceed P20. admiralty or insolvency.000 for expenses. No. and costs.000. 000. In due time.A. long vacation abroad. which protection and due process clauses of the 1987 remands the case to the RTC. After the issues had been joined.000. is part of Metro Manila and therefore Court to handle Family Court cases be treated and dealt has exclusive jurisdiction over the parcel of land situated with? Under what conditions may the identity of parties therein whose assessed value is P40. Is the Family Court judge correct when dismissal of the case. is beyond forward the case to the RTC is not correct. litigation expenses and costs. Filomeno has only one cause of action which is the action for recovery of possession of the land against Marcelino. was P1 million.” and (2) ordered that the case therefore should be forwarded to the proper RTC immediately.000. the Court of appeals is correct in remanding the case judge reasoned that Family Courts are without to RTC for the latter to try the same on the merits. No. Metropolitan Trial Court and other courts of the first level have been vested with exclusive original jurisdiction in all Q: Estrella was the registered owner of a huge parcel of civil actions which involve title to.P. and not just to affirm the such jurisdiction. or possession of real land located in a remote part of their barrio in Benguet. Romeo in his after noting that the action was one for accion opposition raised. Anabel appealed the dismissal to the RTC R. Under Rep. defendant filed a motion to civil. and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts) in cases where A: No. being original jurisdiction to pass upon all kinds of cases whether P1 million. It should merely the jurisdiction of the MeTC. 9262 (The VAWC Law) arguing that the law which affirmed it and accordingly dismissed her appeal.A. No.00.000. in granting the correct? Explain. which is P540. criminal. declined to rule on the constitutionality of R. at this time should not exceed P400. The Family Court issued a 30-day TPO Candaba. In Garcia v. when she visited the property after she took a the property or interest therein does not exceed P20. G.A. authorizing the issuance of a TPO violates the equal She elevates the case to the Court of Appeals. situated in Pasay City with an assessed value of P40. property or any interest therein where the assessed value of However. After due hearing. as amended by R. The Family Court A: Yes. The first was a demand for the A: Yes.A. The claim for in child and family cases be divulged? (2001 Bar) damages of P500. litigation the second was a claim for damages of P500. John. Act No. (2000. the Family Court Judge is not correct when it declined the assessed value of the real property involved does not to resolve the constitutionality of R.A. 179267. 3 of Rule 16.00 exclusive of interest. attorney’s fees. The RTC. exclusive of interest. Is Marcelino correct? (2008 dismiss the complaint. This jurisdiction over the subject matter. R. 2013. authority is embraced in the general definition of judicial the MeTC (1) ruled that the court indeed lacked power to determine the valid and binding laws in conformity jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint. be divulged unless necessary and with authority of the judge which should not be taken separately from the land. damages of whatever remains to possess the authority as a court of general kind. Under Sec. attorney’s fees. UST BAR OPERATIONS 4 . Romeo. or in Metro Manila where such value does not exceed P50. No 7691. does not provide for case was originally filed with it. The court’s order to the total amount involved. Its jurisdictional amount Marcelino's unlawful retention of the property. No. 8369.00 for the unlawful retention of the A: The records of child and family cases in the Family Courts land involved is not determinative of the court’s jurisdiction or Regional Trial Court designated by the Supreme Court to which is based on the nature of the action. In spite of its designation as a family court. had established a vacation house does not exceed P50. 7691. June 25. (Sec. of the same barangay. against Romeo. Family Courts Act of 1997) shall not unlawful detention of the property subject of the action. land registration. the RTC demand.00 is just a consequence of the confidentiality. the total amount of the a statute. 7691). Is the appellate court Constitution. Hon. Rey Allan Drilon. (Id. The Family Court judge. Both Estrella and John were residents whatever kind. dismiss the complaint on the ground of MeTC’s lack of guardianship.

It is settled that forcible entry and unlawful detainer Here. Accordingly. B. G. jurisdiction would become complied with. all cases decided by the MTC are generally the suit. the case was within rule on joinder of causes of action because where the claims its original jurisdiction and. 000. successfully elicited an admission from the performance filed by a subdivision homeowner against latter that the two promissory notes have been paid. to file a collection of sum of money instead of foreclosure of the said mortgage.D. cases are within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila has jurisdiction over MTC. Borrower defaulted on his ownership in his pleadings and the question of possession payments when the loans matured. applying the totality rule. Otherwise. the defendant. The court did not acquire jurisdiction over Mary Rose. (Serreno v. Hence. G. an OFW vacationing in the a full-blown trial was conducted as if the case was Philippines. 000.1 of P. of action? (2015 Bar) b. The Metropolitan Trial Court was not correct in allowed in this case under Section 15. Estrella filed a complaint for December 12. Despite demand to cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership pay the P500. He further argued that lack of jurisdiction (HLURB). Cullen. The RTC reasoned that based on copy of the tabloid when she returned to Singapore. Borrower obtained a P300. the court ordered the publication of the summons for three weeks in a On appeal by Estrella to the Regional Trial Court (RTC). the MTC observed that the real issue was one of Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila against her sister ownership and not of possession. it is immaterial that one of the loans is appealable to the RTC irrespective of the amounts involved secured by a real estate mortgage because the Lender opted (Sec. the Metropolitan Trial Court is not correct in another P100. No. while cross-examining Q: What court has jurisdiction over an action for specific Lender. my kumare Anita scanned and e-mailed that page hence. Rule 14 of the Rules of dismissing the Complaint for lack of jurisdiction. November 11.P. G. Linda. service his Motion to Dismiss has nothing to do in the determination of summons by publication under said Rule has not been of jurisdiction. G.00. 16. 1344 provides that the HLURB has over the subject matter can be raised at any stage of the jurisdiction over cases involving specific performance of proceedings. At any rate. the RTC rendered a summons to Mary Rose. Eddy Ng Kok Wei. 2003.00 loan. Borrower refused to pay. 000. of Bulgar to me!" Did the court acquire jurisdiction over Mary Rose? (2008) a. entitled to the possession thereof. a subdivision developer? Explain.00 loan forcible entry and unlawful detainer (Section 33.R.R. TOTALITY RULE 181416. covered by a promissory note. local tabloid. 000. filed against Borrower jurisdiction to resolve questions of ownership whenever it is with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila. Sec. (Sec. ejectment with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC). To recover possession. Besides. the assessed value of the property.00 A: An action for specific performance by a subdivision was the amount due to Lender and which claim is within homeowner against a subdivision developer is within the the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan jurisdiction of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board Trial Court. dependent almost entirely upon the whims of the defendant (Medical Plaza Makati Condominium v. Borrower obtained Hence. Upon motion. Hence. Sec. Special Courts Q: At the trial.00 loan secured by a real estate mortgage on his ejectment cases when the defendant raises the defense of land valued at P500. v. 000.00. The Lender correctly applied the totality rule and the assessed value of the property. Was the RTC correct in ruling that based on the A: Yes. A: No. No. hence. broker or salesman (Manila Bankers Life 5 . John refuted Estrella’s claim of ownership ACQUIRED and submitted in evidence a Deed of Absolute Sale between him and Estrella. The contention of defendant in address of the same defendant has not been followed. Rule 70). Still later. Borrower's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss the case on the ground that as proven only P300. 000. Moreover. the aggregate amount of the claim shall be the test originally filed with it? Why or why not? (2014 Bar) of jurisdiction [Section 5(d). Kakilala v. the required sending of the copy of the summons and settled that jurisdiction is determined by the allegations the order of the Court by registered mail to the last known contained in the complaint. 22. thus. saw the summons in Bulgar and brought a originally filed with it. the total amount of the claim is P500. 143233. apply the totality rule and the rule on joinder of causes November 10. dealer. the promissory note. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Insurance Corp. Eventually. found in the Philippines. alleging October 18. While serving summons by publication is A: No. a necessary to decide the question of possession in an collection suit for P500. judgment declaring John as the owner of the land and. On the HOW JURISDICTION OVER THE DEFENDANT IS other hand. it was the court of Linda showed the tabloid and the page containing the proper jurisdiction. PD 1344). Was the MTC correct in dismissing the complaint for lack of jurisdiction? Why or why not? A: NO. 129). who is a resident of Singapore and is not dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.R. 2013). Relative thereto. developer. the MTC Mary Rose. 2006). Should the court dismiss the case? (2015 contractual and statutory obligations filed by buyers of Bar) subdivision lots and condominium units against the owner. 1.00. No.R. B. Spouses Gutierrez. it may conduct a in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of sum full-blown trial of the appealed case as if it was of money. there is no valid service. the inferior courts have Lender. who said. Later. (2002 Bar) Thereafter. It is well Court. the Municipal Trial Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over cases of Q: Lender extended to Borrower a P100. "Yes I know.00 loan again covered by a dismissing the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Borrower's lawyer. No. Did Lender correctly ejectment case.000. 129). After the filing of John’s Q: Lani filed an action for partition and accounting in the answer. 162366. Rule 2]. 139791. Bulgar. that she is the true owner of the land as evidenced by her certificate of title and tax declaration which showed the assessed value of the property as P21. Faraon.00. rules allow provisional determination of ownership in 000. 2004. 000.P.

ABC Cars and XYZ the annulment of a Deed of Real Estate Mortgage he Detailing both deny any liability. Hon. After securing a favorable judgment on It is a real action.R. (Paadlan v.000. 180321.. commenced suit to collect on the promissory note. (Jimmy T. Rules of Court. same court to foreclose the mortgage. When delivered to A. Union Bank of the Philippines. NCC). signed a promissory immovable property. a resident of the City of Manila. Resolve the motion with (Article 1477. even if the defendant is able to prove in the 30. Orbeta. (2012 Bar) consequent foreclosure and auction sale on his mortgaged Makati property. real property or an interest therein. X Corporation and Y Corporation to compel them to interplead. a warehouseman. Rule on the Motion.R. 2012) motion to dismiss the second action on the ground of bar by prior judgment. The court should not dismiss the case. March 20. to the property. Rule 4). the recovery of which is petitioner’s note payable thirty days after date. or where the plaintiff or any of the plaintiffs resides Teodoro A. mortgaged the same lot for the annulment or rescission of a sale of real property does to B. 30. While it is true that petitioner does not directly merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of seek the recovery of title or possession of the property in the others (Sec. under the law. ABC Cars. G. Total Office Products Q: What is the rule against splitting a cause of action and and Services. B brought another action against A before the Corporation v.000. an action for specific performance A: The motion to dismiss should be granted. G. 125078. second par.0M. Court of Appeals. 3(a). Who can A sue and on signed in favor of Galaxy Bank (Galaxy). and as a security for primary objective. Chua v. P1. Hence. be found. 2006) course of the trial that a lesser amount is due. or may be found. 112191. Rules of Court) The complaint should be his right to foreclose the mortgage. REMEDIAL LAW A: No. 1. the car’s the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila a complaint for upholstery was found to be damaged.00. before delivering to A. venue of the real action is before the court having jurisdiction over the territory in which the Splitting a single cause of action and its effects property lies. or the prevention or Q: What do you mean by a) real actions. Rule 4. the court does Since the plaintiff resides in Manila. 4.) A cause of action is action? (2006 Bar) the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another (Sec.500.00. 2004. Nov. Rule 2). 166837. or a portion thereof. 2005) its effect on the respective rights of the parties for failure to comply with the same? (1999 Bar) In Fortune Motors v. Jr. (Section 2. B not operate to efface the fundamental and prime objective commenced suit to recover form A the balance of and nature of the case which is to recover said real property. 1.000. Rule 2). No. When the note fell due and A failed to pay.R. CAUSE OF ACTION CIVIL PROCEDURE Q: Distinguish Cause of Action from Action. An action for the annulment of a real estate mortgage action pleaded as appearing from the allegations in the is a personal action. G. 179018. (1999 Bar) Being a real action. He gave a of the building which. filed a complaint against V Corporation. The prevalent doctrine is that an action the settlement of the obligation. and the what cause(s) of action? Explain. Dizon. the filing of one or a judgment upon the property. at the election of plaintiff. Under Article 1170 of the Civil Code. What ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The motion to dismiss should be determines the jurisdiction of the court is the nature of the denied.000. No. An action must be based on a cause A: Real actions are actions affecting title to or possession of of action (Sec. filed in the RTC of Makati where the mortgaged property is situated. United Coconut Planters Bank. and b) personal redress of a wrong (Sec. He alleged therein that the three UST BAR OPERATIONS 6 . (1997.R. Q: A bought a Volvo Sedan from ABC Cars for P 5. thus. A now files a June 12. (Paglaum Management & Development his claim. 156187. The averments therein and the character of the where the defendant or any of the defendants resides or may relief sought are the ones to be consulted (Navida v. is situated.R. No. the complaint was not lose jurisdiction and a dismissal of the case is not in order properly filed in RTC of Manila.R. B split his cause of action. 2011). 2005. No. Chua v. 1997. G. is considered down payment of P500. Galaxy filed a Motion to A: A can file an action for specific performance and damages Dismiss on the ground of improper venue alleging that against ABC Cars since the damage to the Volvo sedan’s the complaint should be filed with the RTC of Makati upholstery was caused before delivery of the same to A. Sept. had the car rust proofed and Q: Eduardo. the Supreme Court also held that an action A: The rule against splitting a cause of action and its effect to annul a foreclosure sale of a real estate mortgage is no are that if two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the different from an action to annula a private sale of real same cause of action. Go v. 2013). Orbeta v. which may be commenced and tried complaint.00. Rule 2). When B real property involved. it shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area where the A: The motion to dismiss should be granted. filed before tinted by XYZ Detailing. G. Sept. Dinglasan. and since the complaint involves the ownership and therefore prior to the transfer of ownership to the latter possession of Eduardo’s lot. with the mortgaged property is a real action that affects the title corresponding damages will lie against ABC Cars. Ni. 27. Q: Raphael. he waived (Section 1. Accordingly. An action for against ABC Corporation to deliver the agreed Volvo Sedan nullification of the mortgage documents and foreclosure of in the contract free form any damage or defects. All other actions are personal actions (Sec. question. 11. Rule 4. reasons (2016 Bar) those who contravene the tenor of the obligation are liable for damages. May 30. G. his action for annulment of sale and his claim for damages are closely intertwined with the issue of ownership Q: A purchased a lot from B for P1. February 7. 1999 Bar) PERSONAL ACTIONS AND REAL ACTIONS A: An action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right. Total Office Products & Services. 2. No. Nov.

with respect to the loan but not with they would fall under the jurisdiction on the Metropolitan respect to the partition which includes Marvin.000. 2.00 for storage charges and other advances for 1. plus interests and goods sold on credit. 00. January 28. the filing of one or alleged the Raphael should have incorporated in his a judgment on the merits in any one is available as a complaint for interpleader his claim for storage fees and ground for the dismissal of the others (Sec. G. the joinder shall not include special civil actions or counterclaim which. The judgment having become Q: A secured two loans from B. Rolando filed another petition. Is B obliged to file only one celebrated without a license. the where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for court rendered judgment dismissing the petition on the the recovery of money (Sec. No. Ricky filed a complaint against Q: P sued A and B in one complaint in the RTC-Manila. and declaring that X Corporation was entitled to the goods. 000. Is the second action barred complaint against A for the recovery of both loans? by the judgment in the first? Why? (2002 Bar) Explain.000. the amounts of which were obviously determinable at the time of the filing of the Q: What is the rule on joinder of causes of action? (1999 complaint. judgment was rendered by the court 1. G. August 30.000. Court of Appeals. provided that the rule on joinder of parties is complied second case (Sec. when the warehouseman asks the court to ascertain who among the defendants are entitled to A: The rule on joinder of causes of action is that a party may the goods. but Partition is a September 24. Non-joinder of a necessary party. The causes of action may be between the same Sec. (1999 Bar) A: No. The second action is not barred by the judgment in the A: No.00 and that against B being on an complaint his action against Perry for the collection of alleged balance of P300. advances that for his failure he was barred from 2.00 and final. After trial. However. if not set up. 9 & 35 [3]. (2005 Bar) waiver of the claim against such party. (2002 Bar) for Ricky to join his causes of action in his complaint for partition against Perry and Marvin in the RTC of Pasay A: No.00 on the purchase price of the latter’s P100.R. Rule 2). It is akin to a compulsory with.00 from Ricky which promised to pay on or before December 1. 1980. shall be barred (Sec. The joinder Trial Court (Flores v. is between a partition and a sum of money. second is for the declaration of nullity of the marriage in view of the absence of a basic requirement. special civil action under Rule 69. State with reasons whether it was proper jurisdiction over the case? Explain. Raphael should be without prejudice to the rights of such necessary have incorporated in his complaint for interpleader his claim party (Sec. payable on different dates. The first is loans which may be governed by the different terms and for annulment of marriage on the ground of psychological conditions. he also has the right to ask who should pay for the in one pleading assert. Splitting a single cause of action. 9. Arreza v. which is a marriage Q: Perry is a resident of Manila. Marvin. Rule 3). Perry borrowed P100. A City. L-34885. Resolve the motion order for his inclusion without justifiable cause is a with reasons. 000. No. Rule 2). One for P500. separate complaints will have to be filed and parties. The effect of splitting a single cause of action is found in the goods. which cannot be joined 7 . and the of his marriage to Carmela because of alleged aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction psychological incapacity of the latter.00. They are part of Raphael’s cause of action which Bar) he may not split. The RTC-Manila has no jurisdiction over the case. Diaz. Raphael filed a complaint against X Corporation for the payment of A: P100. X Corporation the basis of the same cause of action. After due proceedings. Perry failed to pay his loan. Joinder is only permissive since the loans are separate first because they are different causes of action. 2001). 4. The filing of the many causes of action as he may have against an opposing interpleader is available as a ground for dismissal for the party. while Ricky and Marvin license (Arts. this time on the the other for P1. 5.R. Hence. No. 2004. Rule actions governed by special rules. Rule 2).000.000. for storage fees and advances. The two loans give rise to two separate causes of incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. but may include causes of 9. They are the co-owners of action because the evidence required to prove them are not a parcel of residential land located in Pasay City with an the same (Pagsisihan v. 6). 2. L-66620. Hence. 000. The court may proceed with the action but the judgment rendered shall A: The motion to dismiss should be granted. (1998 Bar) The decision became final and executory. FC). while the action and may be the basis of two separate complaints. Ricky and Perry. as storage fees and other related expenses. (2005 Bar) and B could not be joined as defendants in one complaint because the right to relief against both defendants do not A: It was not proper for Ricky to join his causes of action arise out of the same transaction or series of transaction and against Perry in his complaint for partition against Perry and there is no common question of fact common to both (Rule 3. 1986). They are different causes of are residents of Batangas City. QUAMTO (1997-2016) corporations claimed title and right of possession over the goods deposited in his warehouse and that he was Q: Give the effects of the following: uncertain which of them was entitled to the goods. The effect of the non-joinder of a necessary party may be interposing his claim. action pertaining to different venues or jurisdictions provided one cause of action falls within the jurisdiction of a Q: Rolando filed a petition for declaration of the nullity Regional Trial Court and venue lies therein. 133113. 4.00 loan. assessed value of P100. He also incorporated in his note for P300. ground that Rolando failed to prove the psychological incapacity of his wife. X Corporation filed a motion to dismiss the the rule as follows: If two or more suits are instituted on complaint on ground of res judicata. Joinder and misjoinder of causes of action Perry also rejected Ricky and Marvin’s proposal to partition the property. Does the RTC-Manila have attorney’s fees.R. ground that his marriage to Carmela had been Both have fallen due. and other cases). Mallare-Phillips. G. in the alternative or otherwise. Rapahel replied that he could not stated as follows: The court may order the inclusion of have claimed storage fees and other advances in his an omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his complaint for interpleader because he was not yet person may be obtained. The failure to comply with the certain as to who was liable therefor. the Perry and Marvin in the RTC of Pasay City for the cause of action against A being an overdue promissory partition of the property.

Roscoe. G. 1996. before the RTC notwithstanding that his position is contrary Rule 19). The owners of property over which 5. The In Metrobank v. G. Carlo was not impleaded. the Sheriff required impracticable to join all as parties (Sec. Salvio asked Class suit Roscoe to convey the southern half to him. Salvio's cousin. Roscoe sold the northern half to Bono. Quijano. Cabresos v. (Sec. existing Torrens Certificate of Title (TCT) in which a real Padilla. 2010). September 18. Should the complaint be dismissed? petition for mandamus to compel the COMELEC to implement the contract. 170375. the OSG may represent the COMELEC Chairman impleaded as a party. Lim-Yu. 2001. He may also file a petition for annulment of to that of the majority of the Commission members in the judgment under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. COMELEC because the OSG is an independent office. 1988). minority shareholder in behalf of a corporation to redress Salvio did not amend the complaint to implead Nina. Rule 3. (2005 along the West to Carlo. 138343. R. the budget for the COMELEC’s modernization is only complaint because Grieg. 141970. its hands are not shackled to the cause of its client agency. May the OSG represent being impleaded as a party to the case. A writ of suit is filed in behalf of many persons so numerous that it is execution having been issued. Two Commissioners sided impleaded as defendant. 19. representing Chairman Go. The Office of the Solicitor A: No. (Lim v. 19. July 7. During the proceedings. 47. Roscoe refused as he even sold one-third of the southern half Q: Distinguish a derivative suit from a class suit. the contention of Carlo PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS who is such party to the action filed by Salvio. No. G. A: A derivative suit is a suit in equity that is filed by a Roscoe sold the middle third of the southern half to Nina. Rule 3). 12. indispensable parties. Salvio filed an action Bar) for the reconveyance of the southern half against Roscoe only. 2002). alternative defendants Products. (2008 Bar) pending action? (1999 Bar) UST BAR OPERATIONS 8 . Fotokina filed with the RTC a a. reconveyance is asserted are indispensable parties and must be joined in the action. Floro Alejo. Pursuant by the judgment as against Roscoe although she is not party thereto. Meanwhile. Carlo and Nina to vacate the southern half and yield possession thereof to Salvio as the prevailing party. what is his Chairman Go before the RTC notwithstanding that his remedy to protect his interest? (2015 Bar) position is contrary to that of the majority? (2002 Bar) A: If the case should proceed to trial without Grieg being A: Yes. Tero. the mortgagee is an indispensable party.R. Nina. 2001). REMEDIAL LAW with other causes of action (See 5[b]. a decision cancelling the Q: Half-brothers Roscoe and Salvio inherited from their TCT and the mortgage annotation is subject to a petition for father a vast tract of unregistered land. the of action pertain to different venues and jurisdictions. opposed the mere non-joinder of an indispensable party is not a ground petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie to for the dismissal of the action (Sec. Hon. October 24. for which the directors refuse After trial. indigent included as a party thereto (Matuguina Integrated Wood parties. No. however is a successor-in- otherwise known as the Voter’s Registration Act of 1996. Ma. 98310. she is bound providing for the computerization of elections. the Supreme Court held that it in a suit to nullify an interest of the government is upheld (COMELEC v. Hence. was not project has been set aside. If the case should proceed to trial without Grieg Banc to oppose the petition. A judgment is conclusive between the invitations to pre-qualify and bid for the project. the majority Commissioners filed a manifestation that Chairman Go was not authorized by the COMELEC En b. Wagner moved to dismiss the Act. Roscoe annulment of judgment. upon motion. 151992. No. estate mortgage is annotated. interest of Roscoe and privy to the case. 1. he may intervene in the action (Sec. enforce contractual obligations. bidder with a bid of P6 billion and was issued a Notice of Award. G. After filing his answer.R. Thereupon. February 19. 8189. Fotokina was declared the winning to the case (Sec. the real party in interest being the corporation itself Roscoe to reconvey the entire southern half to Salvio. In such suit. Inc. Upon learning of the sale. the COMELEC approved the Voter’s Registration to the case (Sec. In case of Transfer of interest pending litigation. Rule 2). Court of Appeals. He is not bound by the judgment because he became a co-owner Real parties-in-interest. Rule 39). because the non-joinder of a succeeded in gaining possession of the parcel of land in mortgagee deprived the court of jurisdiction to pass upon the its entirety and transferring the tax declaration thereon controversy. Is the contention tenable? Explain fully. contending that they are not bound by the judgment as they are not parties to the Q: What is the effect of the death of a party upon a case. Court of Appeals. directs a person to be cannot be filed in Pasay City because the plaintiff is from substituted in the action or joined with the original party Manila while Ricky and Marvin are from Batangas City (Sec. necessary parties. 2001). 11. He announced to the public that the VRIS property as duly annotated in the TCT. September primordial concern of the OSG is to see to it that the best 10. in his name. July 20. It issued October 18. After parties and their successors-in-interest by title subsequent the public bidding. G. is tenable. Q: In 1996. the causes A: Yes. 120176.R. Rule 2).R. Also. A class The judgment became final and executory. Rule 3. Congress passed Republic Act No. The complaint should not be dismissed because the General (OSG). Accordingly. Republic v. the court rendered judgment ordering to sue. wrongs committed against it. No. No. of the land before the case was filed and yet he has not been representatives as parties. G. G. Effect of death of party-litigant Carlo and Nina refused. No. v. Rule 3). to whom he mortgaged the P1 billion. with Chairman Go. but the majority voted to uphold the contract.R. Mangotara. Valentia Santana-Cruz v. Hon. No. But COMELEC Chairman Gener Go objected to the Q: Strauss filed a complaint against Wagner for award on the ground that that under the Appropriations cancellation of title. L-46843 and Identification System (VRIS) Project. The action may be continued by or against the original party case for a sum of money pertains to the municipal court and unless the court.R.

2000. However. Chong. be waived.R. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff of Prince Chong. was pending at the time of such death. 456. ST after presentation of PJ’s evidence. by consent through waiver. substitution of the deceased defendant. with his undertaking. (Ceferina De Ungria v. 20. X failed to notify A: Jurisdiction is the power of the Court to decide a case on the court of B’s death. King (Sec. hence a real action which should be filed in the place 9 . PJ died. A: Yes. you take? (1998 Bar) Q: Angela. ST in Civil Case No. action is dismissed. If the action is for recovery of money arising from conducted his hardware business. July 30. A favorable judgment obtained by real property being claimed by Atty. If the rentals accrued during the lifetime of Prince A: No. The lease contract contract. The court proceeded to hear the the merits.1. ST whereby PJ promised the ground that the RTC is without jurisdiction since to pay Atty. 2013. venue is judgment became final. 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. 456? Explain. De Gonzales.R. I would move to set aside the writ of resident of Makati City before the RTC of Quezon City for execution and the judgment for lack of jurisdiction and lack the reconveyance of two parcels of land situated in of due process in the same court because the judgment is Tarlac and Nueva Ecija. No. express or implied. Court of Appeals. July 17. G. Rule 3). PJ did not comply A: No. but venue may be waived except If you were the counsel of C. entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was 000. the party should be Q: Prince Chong entered into a lease contract with King substituted by his heirs or his executor or administrator (Sec. the of B. After the may be filed. will the action be contract. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff death during the pendency of the case. Kong filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) an action for rescission of contract with damages and payment of Q: PJ engaged the services of Atty. 175910. the court would prosper? Assuming that the action was for foreclosure have ordered the substitution of the deceased by C. 2009). (1999. sued Antonio. During the payment of accrued rentals is considered incapable of trial of Civil Case No. and the defendant dies before stipulated. it shall not be dismissed January 1. Lawas v. b. No. G. while venue refers to the place where the suit case and rendered judgment against B. 2009 Bar) Relative thereto. accordance with Sec. De Te. however. On January 1. Court of Appeals. Is the death of PJ a valid ground to dismiss the money G. express or implied. since the complaint for sum of money filed by King Kong survives the death of Prince Chong. No. 16. it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final A: No.R. An action to recover real property in any event shall not be dismissed and the Court shall merely order the survives the death of the defendant (Sec. Ibarra Vda. what course of action would in criminal cases. No. Under Sec. Rule 3). L-11567. In the course of the trial. When the action is for shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in the recovery of money arising from contract. and defendant dies Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of the before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action deceased person. but the former failed to pay the rentals shall be enforced in the manner provided in the rules for for the months of January to June 2013 despite King prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person Kong’s written demands. QUAMTO (1997-2016) A: When the claim in a pending action is purely personal.000. claim of Atty. was deprived of due process and should have been death of either of the parties extinguishes the claim and the heard before judgment (Rule 47). Vda. Fe Vda. July 25. and King Kong also filed the complaint for when the action is for recovery of money arising from sum of money during that time. a favorable judgment may be enforced in Sarsaba v. 20. 2011). 1979. among others. as the successor land. Can Kin II Chong move to dismiss the complaint on executed between PJ and Atty. I could also file an action to annul the partakes of an action to recover title to or possession of such judgment for lack of jurisdiction because C. a civil case filed by OP against him which was docketed as Civil Case No. 123. a writ of execution was issued jurisdictional. a resident of Quezon City. No. (2006 Bar) land against B who was represented by her counsel X. VENUE Q: A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of Q: Distinguish Jurisdiction from Venue. 165777. the case A: Yes.00 for a four (4) – year period commencing on pending at the time of such death. L-45809 defendant. Court of Appeals. a A: As counsel of C. acquired the property. Rule 3. 000. and there appears to be no objection from the February 28. it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until b. 20. 456? Explain. (Atty.00 a year and the amount claimed is only P300. A retainership agreement was a. 2013. G. Rule 3).R. However. Will your answer be the same with respect to the entry of final judgment. ST to represent him in accrued rentals as of June 30. An action for reconveyance of parcels of land December 12. The court acquired no jurisdiction proper venue for the action? (2008 Bar) over C upon whom trial and the judgment are not binding (Ferreria v. When the claim is not purely personal and is not thereby extinguished. a monthly rental of P50. L-41107. on July 1. Kin II Chong cannot move to dismiss the Complaint. ST filed a case against PJ An action for rescission of contract with damages and which was docketed as Civil Case No. ST in Civil Case the plaintiff shall be enforced under Rule 86 (Sec. The action may prosper because improper venue can 1958. B dies.R. Rule 87). what is the heir of B (Sec. Atty. Rogelio E. pecuniary estimation and therefore cognizable by the Regional Trial Court. the sole on the mortgage of the same parcels of land. No. ST a retainer sum of P24. De la Cruz v. Jurisdiction may not be conferred upon a court against C. and the defendant dies before dismissible upon Prince Chong’s death during the entry of final judgment in the court in which the action is pendency of the case? (2014 Bar) pending at the time of such death. Rule 3). 2013. Kong over a commercial building where the former 16. 7(b) Rule 39 against the executor or administrator or successor in interest of the deceased. Prince Chong died. In criminal actions. May her action void. a. who being B’s sole heir. If X had notified the court of B’s death. 2010. respectively. but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final Kin II Chong was appointed administrator of the estate judgment. G. 1986). Thus. The action will not be dismissible upon Prince Chong’s judgment. 456.00? to transfer the ownership of a parcel of land to Atty.

” be filed either in Tarlac or Nueva Ecija where any of the parcels of land is situated. The dismissal of the complaint on this ground is without prejudice to the prosecution of the UST BAR OPERATIONS 10 . Without filing any motion to dismiss. v. If the parties stipulated that the venue “shall be in the designated environmental court. therefore cognizable by the RTC of Province II. A: Yes. 1932). Hence. No.R. the action may sued in the City of Manila. the court determined that the G. 000. REMEDIAL LAW where the parcels of land are situated in Tarlac and Nueva Q: X. December 12. Was the court correct in motu proprio dismissing the A: A counterclaim is distinguished from a cross-claim in that petition? a cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the A: No. The Q: Assuming that the court did not dismiss the petition. the court should dismiss the petition because the (1999 Bar) proper procedure to question defect in an ECC is to follow the DENR administrative appeal process in accordance with A: No. where can A file his located in the City of Z of Province II was extremely complaint against X? damaged when it was bulldozed and leveled to the ground. 2. Rule 6). include a counterclaim. EE Industries remedies provided in the DENR Rules and Regulations. G. No. pleaded as an affirmative defense in the Answer which may G. 35125. under Section 1. case was dismissed after the trial court found that EE the RD-DENR-EMB in his Comment moved to dismiss the Industries is not a registered corporation and therefore petition on the ground that petitioners failed to appeal has no legal capacity to sue. the parties stipulate that “the parties agree to sue and be If the action was for foreclosure of mortgage. as the RD-DENR-EMB courts in Quezon City. as a result of the withdrawal and cancellation by her clients of their contracts due to the filing of the case. Green. 199199. and several trees and plants were cut down and A: If the parties did not stipulate on the venue.00 Ecija. Paje. because the stipulation in the loan agreement that Q: A law was passed declaring Mt. Inc. A can file his burned by workers of World Pleasure Resorts. who is engaged in tile installation business. Rule 9 of the Rules of Court. Karbungko as a “the parties agree to sue and be sued in the City of Manila” protected area since it was a major watershed. Suppose the parties stipulated in their loan Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) issued by agreement that “venue for all suits arising from this the DENR-EMB. No. By way of counterclaim. it set a date for the the issuance of the ECC and to exhaust administrative reception of evidence on A’s counterclaim. Maingat was shown a copy of the c. protected area covered a portion located in Municipality Rule 4). any of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies (Dolot the grounds for dismissal provided in the Rules may be v. 2013). 2015). 4. area where the alleged actionable neglect or omission subject of the petition took place in the City of Z of RULES ON PLEADINGS Province II. No. February 3.R. nonetheless. On scrutiny of the petition. 8. from A. Hon. A can file his complaint in Angels City where A of the Province I and a portion located in the City of Z he resides (Sec. a A: NO. The does not make Manila the “exclusive venue thereof” (Sec. a resident of Angeles City. L-44351 May 18.I. (1999 Bar) a.” A cannot file his complaint in Pasay negligently issued the ECC to WPRI.R. City where X resides (Id). This is what A did by filing an Answer alleging the lack of legal capacity of EE Industries to sue Effects of Stipulations on Venue because it is not a duly registered corporation with a counterclaim for damages. different marble tiles in its offices as provided in their contract. the court registered corporation. August 27. Paje v. Only one action for foreclosure a. However.” can A file Immediately. the court dismissed outright the Q: What is counterclaim? Distinguish a counterclaim petition for lack of jurisdiction. No. Torres. Answer with Counterclaim theorizing that EE Industries defenses and objections not pleaded in the answer or in the has no legal capacity to sue because it is not a duly motion to dismiss are deemed waived. and. Thus. August 27. In the loan agreement. While it appears that the alleged actionable counterclaim therein. Casiño. 199199. G. venue is not jurisdictional. 2013. Paje. 207257. Hence. Maingat and STK filed a petition for the his complaint against X in Pasay City? (1997 Bar) issuance of a writ of continuing mandamus against RD- DENR-EMB and WPRI with the RTC of Province I. G. and therefore cognizable by the RTC of Province II. Rule 4). can A file his need be filed as only one contract had been instituted (Bank complaint to collect the loan from X in Angeles City? of P. Maingat is the leader of Samahan ng Tagapag-ingat ng Karbungko (STK).R. because if no motion to dismiss has been filed. from a crossclaim. Regional Director (RD-DENR-EMB). borrowed P300.R. contract shall be the courts in Quezon City. A asked cannot motu propio dismiss the case on the ground of for moral and actual damages as her business depleted improper venue. a people's b. was in a special civil action for continuing mandamus (Dolot v. of Province II. Is the stand of EE Industries sustainable? Explain. A counterclaim is against an opposing neglect or omission took place in the City of Z of Province II party while a cross-claim is against a co-party (Sec. A: Yes. Suppose the parties did not stipulate in the loan organization. sued by EE Industries for breach of contract for installing Hon. complaint either in Angeles City where he resides or in Pasay (WPRI) for the construction of a hotel and golf course. In case of non-payment of the loan. City because the use of the word “shall” makes Quezon City the exclusive venue thereof (Hoechst Philippines v. He learned that a portion of the mountain agreement as to the venue. opposed on the ground that the counterclaim could no Should the court dismiss the petition? (2015 Bar) longer be prosecuted in view of the dismissal of the main case. The court was not correct in motu propio dismissing subject matter either of the original action or of a the petition. A filed its Besides. Upon inquiry with the project site engineer if they had a permit for the project. 1978). a resident of Pasay City. and it can be waived Q: A.

000. 2000). not an answer. Benjamin filed plaintiff in default on the counterclaim. and at a time when the defendant (Mercedes) had purchase price of the 30 units of air conditioners he sold already filed her Answer thereto and with counterclaim. In due time. He should not 16. a. Ramon filed a motion to upon the judgment obligor. On the due date of the check. Ramon in his answer set up merit: the trial court should not have dismissed her counter- counterclaims for P100. at the same time setting up judgment obligee. Was the Sheriff’s action A: The dismissal of the complaint is without prejudice to the in order? (2010 Bar) right of the defendant (Ramon) to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or in a separate action (Sec. as well as for P250. Benjamin. what will happen to his debt. Only if the his counterclaims. Heirs of Santiago. And it also dismissed the Counterclaim. Benjamin soon after moved for the dismissal of the maliciously induced PX to bring the suit against DY case. the plaintiff was not validly declared in default. who in fact had encroached on his (defendant’s) land. The RTC has jurisdiction over Ramon’s counterclaims be limited to the complaint. Was the plaintiff in January 2009 a complaint for collection of sum of validly declared in default? Why? (2002 Bar) money before the RTC of Davao. 000 damages. The Revised Rules of Court counterclaims.R.. 000 Rolex watch which was taken by 28. G. June have listened to Benjamin. Benjamin ground that it should have been set for hearing. but the court denied the motion on the cover the debt. and if so. The whether compulsory or permissive.” has to pay docket fees for his counterclaims whether counterclaim is compulsory or permissive in nature. AC filed a motion to dismiss the 11 . 000. 5[d]. 133119. to answer for the judgment. Q: Fe filed a suit for collection of P387. 000. dismissal of the Complaint should not carry with it the dismissal of the counterclaim without the conformity of the a. dismissal of the Counterclaim. defendant’s motion. not upon the dismiss on that ground. No. Does the RTC have jurisdiction over Ramon's defendant-counterclaimant. and AC. the to Fe. in 30. sufficient to suppose that instead of alleging payment as a satisfy the judgment. 000. seized Mercedes’ 17th century affirmative defenses? ivory image of the La Sagrada Familia estimated to be worth over P1. the judgment obligee/creditor. judgment obligor does not exercise the option is the Sheriff What will happen to his counterclaims? (2008 Bar) authorized to levy on personal properties if any. 170354. 000 from encroachment on his lot. 000. Rule 16). Section 2 thereof that “if a counterclaim fees therefor? has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon him of the plaintiff’s motion for dismissal. Under the same premise as paragraph (b) above. The trial court accordingly dismissed the despite AC’s knowledge of its utter lack of factual and complaint. Suppose Ramon's counterclaim for the unpaid Mercedes did not have cash to settle the judgment balance is P310. is vested by law (Rule 39. defending what she termed a "frivolous lawsuit. In his answer. therefore.R. The option to immediately choose which c. judgment became final and executory and a writ of execution was correspondingly issued. legal basis. 000. Sec. she offered her Toyota Camry model 2008 counterclaims if the court dismisses the complaint valued at P1. levying on the properties of Mercedes. alleging A: No. and then on the real properties if the personal properties are insufficient A: Since Ramon filed only a motion to dismiss. 9[b]) defense in his answer. In his answer. Accordingly.. The dismissal shall be without because they are all money claims in which the totality rule prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his applies in determining jurisdiction (Sec. The plaintiff filed an ex parte antique collector Benjamin. the dismissal of the complaint would also bring about the dismissal of his counterclaims but he can file a separate Q: The plaintiff sued the defendant in the RTC for the action for his permissive counterclaims. the Sheriff’s action was not in order. Sunga. Mercedes. Ramon counterclaim. the defendant counterclaimed against the plaintiff for damages resulting from the alleged Q: Antique dealer Mercedes borrowed P1. Rule b. 000 as damages and P30. Forbes Park Association.2 million. as such counsel. the defendant denied dismiss the complaint instead of answering the same the plaintiff’s claim and alleged that it was the plaintiff (Financial Building Corporation v. 6. the judgment obligor/debtor. Since it was the attorney's fees as a result of the baseless filing of the plaintiff (Benjamin) who moved for the dismissal of his complaint. alleging in said counterclaim. 000. does he have to pay docket provides in Rule 15. counsel for plaintiff in said suit. G. Since b. and that she incurred expenses in Q: PX filed a suit for damages against DY. As despite demands. The Sheriff." She DY incorporated a counterclaim for damages against PX accordingly prayed for P50. she and Benjamin had motion for extension of time may be filed ex parte and need entered into a dacion en pago agreement in which her not be set for hearing (Amante v.R. the court declared the Mercedes failed to make good the check. last par.000 as the balance of the Complaint. Mercedes issued a motion for extension of time to answer the defendant’s postdated check in the same amount to Benjamin to counterclaim. 1975). The compulsory damage allegedly caused by the latter’s encroachment counterclaims are deemed waived when he filed a motion to on the plaintiff’s lot. No. Rule A: No. QUAMTO (1997-2016) counterclaim in the same action because it is a compulsory Mercedes moved for a reconsideration of the counterclaim (Sec. No. On the deposited it but it was dishonored. A that before the filing of the case. 2006). Mercedes filed in February 2009 her Answer with Counterclaim. however. Benjamin for sale on commission was applied to settle her indebtedness. and judgment was payment of docket fees for counterclaims and cross-claims rendered against Mercedes for P1. inter alia. the dismissal shall A: Yes. Rule 2). in this case. Pinga v. that AC. 000 against Ramon in the RTC of Davao City. and the court grants his motion. on after holding a preliminary hearing on Ramon's request of Benjamin. May vintage P1. 6. G. Pass upon Mercedes’ motion. Aside from alleging A: Mercedes’ Motion for Reconsideration is impressed with payment as a defense. August 17. L-40491. Inc. Suppose there was no Counterclaim and Benjamin’s 141 of the Rules of Court has been amended to require complaint was not dismissed. property or part thereof may be levied upon.000 as claim despite the dismissal of the Complaint.

gave of money with damages against Y. Y files his answer C P200. that his property is not involved 134171. and that he is the sole registered owner of said property. The third-party claimant may also intervene or hearing because. by not filing a reply claimant for all or part of a claim asserted against the cross.00? executed. If you were the judge. Acuna. G. What is the effect of non- A: Yes. G. B can file a cross-claim against C for the amount of filing of a reply? Explain. since no bond was filed by B. The motion and severally liable to A for the money judgment. 1991). May 9. which will not be considered as initiatory pleading. Rule 57). the trial court in the exercise of its sound discretion. The promissory note was executed by B and C in a joint and Q: X files a complaint in the RTC for the recovery of a sum several capacity. No. G. the answer is the basis of the defense. In an action filed by A against B and C with the RTC superseded by a contract of lease executed and signed by of Quezon City. Honey’s lawyer filed A: If the real property is being attached. amount of P100. C could have loaned the money out of other funds in his possession. either Q: JK’s real property is being attached by the sheriff in a simultaneously or successively. and a copy thereof upon the attaching party (Sec. how will you resolve the grounds of his title thereto.R. After matter of the opposing party’s claim and does not require for due hearing. Rule 7). (2000 Bar) P200.R. failure file a separate action to vindicate his claim to the property to comply with the requirement of forum shopping is not involved and secure the necessary reliefs. However. C filed a third-party claim Should AC’s motion to dismiss the counterclaim be over said properties claiming that B had already granted or not? Reason. February UST BAR OPERATIONS 12 . what must JK do Q: Honey filed with the Regional Trial Court Taal. who received the money from A. (2004 Bar) transferred the same to him. the court denied the third-party claim and its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the rendered an amended decision declaring B and C jointly court cannot acquire jurisdiction (Sec. 1985). can B file a cross-claim against C for X and Y two weeks after the contract of sale was the amount of P200. Tating. such as curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other preliminary injunction. G. Is the counterclaim of DY compulsory or not? properties under B’s name. No. stating the shopping. Rule 6). not a party to the case. loaned P100. No. the judge dismissed the complaint. denying under oath the genuineness and due execution of claimant. since the contract of lease attached to against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross. JK claims that he is a favorable judgment (Executive Secretary v. the plaintiff is deemed to have admitted the genuineness and due execution thereof (Secs. 1987). 5. Here. 140889. the court issued a writ of Maritime Services Corp. 000. Aurelio v. The third-party claimant should make an amended complaint with the certification against forum affidavit of his title to the property attached. Samson. A: If I were the judge. 000. b. in turn. may choose to be liberal and consider the Q: A obtained a money judgment against B. (Sec. he being merely plaintiff’s with the said writ. Is the to dismiss of plaintiff’s counsel should not be granted ruling of the court correct? Explain. G. the execution plaintiff and his lawyer who allegedly maliciously induced may proceed where there is a finding that the claim is the plaintiff to file the suit.00 given to C. (2005 Bar) because bringing in plaintiff’s counsel as a defendant in the counterclaim is authorized by the Rules. C has not been properly impleaded as a party for the grant of complete relief in the determination of the defendant. C. No. 7. Rule 6). case. fraudulent (Tanongan v.R. However. In fact. However. Can C file a third party complaint against D for the Toribio v. Rule 8. without prejudice. If it is not filed. Where it is required A: No. Conformably a proper party to the case. 000. attaching thereto an a third-party claim.00 he received to D. v. L-57821 January 17. the remedy is to file a motion for reconsideration. Court of Appeals.00 out of the denying liability under the contract of sale and praying P200.00 from A.8.R. Rule 6) said contract.R. for the purpose of obtaining civil action for damages against LM. 000. REMEDIAL LAW counterclaim as against him on the ground that he is not execution for the enforcement thereof. 000. 140189. A: Forum-shopping is the act of filing multiple suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action. a counterclaim therein and may include a claim that the party 10. C cannot file a third-party complaint against D because the loan of P100. 000. A cross-claim is a claim filed by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or A: A reply is generally optional. Gordon. Q: B and C borrowed P400. November 18. 7 and 8. B. the new occurrence that is the subject matter of the original action or matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted (Sec. to prevent the sheriff from attaching his property? (2000 Batangas. X does not file a reply. Rule 6.00. He cannot be held liable for the judgment against counterclaim. unless otherwise provided (Sec. 000 has no connection with the opponent’s Q: What is Forum Shopping? (2006 Bar) claim. Bidin. the court shall order the defendant’s counsel A without a trial. No.R. the motion should be denied after 14. C can file a separate action (Sec. the sheriff levied upon certain counsel. in said case. G. A moved to deny the third- party claim and to hold B and C jointly and severally A: Yes. It is in that suit that B can May 6. 90742. April 15. as expressly provided in the Rules. but shall be cause for dismissal of the interference with a court of coordinate jurisdiction (Ong v. Under the Rules of Court. 000. a complaint for specific performance against Bar) Bernie. 12. for the dismissal of the complaint on the ground of lack of cause of action because the contract of sale was a. After the amendment as substantial compliance (Great Southern finality of the decision. to enforce his third-party claim. 2002). L-61042. For lack of certification against forum shopping. No. the counterclaim was against both the raise the ground of fraud against C. the to be brought in since jurisdiction over him can be obtained sheriff is liable to C for damages. The counterclaim of DY is compulsory because it is liable to him for the money judgment alleging that B had one which arises out of or is connected with the subject transferred said properties to C to defraud him (A). and serve such affidavit upon the motion? (2006 Bar) sheriff while the latter has possession of the attached property. 1998). The contract of lease was attached to the answer.00? (1997 Bar) Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping A: No.

action for certiorari. 143933. certification because it must be executed by the “plaintiff or hence. G. 2000). Malayan Insurance Company. May 5. plaintiff No. and Atty. QUAMTO (1997-2016) 28. which were complaint and ordering Ms.R. would constitute a substantial compliance with the order granting execution pending appeal. 2004.R. G. (Roberto lack of knowledge of the mortgage deed since he should have S. 149253. Rule 7). which is an actionable action for certiorari under Rule 65 from an adverse document. Is XY justified and certification against non-forum shopping were not in signing the certification? Why? (2000 Bar) signed by all petitioners. opinion in another suit other than by appeal or special civil Arman signed the same for Nelson. Wires Corporation v. principal party” himself (Sec. On the other hand. when in one forum. this time a special civil And should there exist a commonality of interest among the action for certiorari assailing said RTC order. 136100. May 5. 2010). Ms. acting as representative. there is substantial compliance with the ruels on party against whom an adverse judgment has been rendered verification and certification against forum shopping. Dumpty for damages. 141508.R. Empire filed a motion to against Z. Dumpty timely filed an appeal before not interdict substantial compliance with its provisions the Court of Appeals (CA). regarding the certificate of non-forum shopping. violation of the rule against forum shopping considering raising only one common cause of action or presenting a that two (2) actions emanating from the same case with common defense. December 4. 10. 1998) or unless he is Verification is not a jurisdictional but merely a formal authorized to sign it by his clients through a special power of requirement which the court may motu proprio direct a party attorney. 2. Manuel duly executed the mortgage deed. Nelson and shopping. only Toto Q: As counsel for A. the RTC granted Mr. defendant does not judgment thereon will not amount to res judicata in the sufficiently raise an issue of fact. while Atty. He did not even deny for lack of knowledge Empire Textile Corporation. Humpty file with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a general rule is that all the petitioners or plaintiffs in a case complaint against Ms. As ruled by the Court. No. Nelson and Yenyen filed a special civil execution of the mortgage deed. Inc. They were terminated on (Sec. Benedicto v. No. filed with the CA another case. the same will not constitute a violation of the rules on forum shopping because the resolution or a favorable A: As to plaintiffs allegation no. CC. B. since there is a A: No. Decide with reasons.R. Court of Appeals. the Supreme Court has time and after due proceedings. The verification immediately filed the complaint in court. Benedicto v. 2 sufficiently raise an issue of fact? Reason Since Ms. the ground that they failed to meet the prescribed production quota at least four (4) times. XY signed the certification and A: The motion to dismiss should be granted. Dumpty merely filed a special civil action for briefly. The RTC. February 14. To avoid further delays in the filing of the complaint. 127393. 5. The NLRC Default 13 . Before filing the complaint. the motion to dismiss should be granted. then the signature of one of the petitioners the RTC were filed by Ms. August 22. Rule 8). because he cannot allege subsequent proceedings between the same parties. G. questioning the RTC decision. In his one party may validly question a decision in a regular appeal answer. decision was assailed in a special civil action under Rule April 15. inter alia.R. 154096. do Mr. or complainants. There was no showing that Toto nor Atty. This is because the merits of the case will not be addressed Does defendant’s answer as to plaintiff’s allegation no. XY discovered that dismiss on the ground of defective verification and his clients were not available to sign the certification of certification. Manuel Lacson. Humpty. 2005. C and D. liability for plaintiffs contracting with a lawyer for a fee. The essence of forum shopping is the filing by a Yenyen. the act of filing of multiple suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action. Uy v. Humpty’s motion for signature of any of the principal petitioners or principal execution pending appeal. or where the parties filed the case as a collective. Dumpty with the CA? Explain. Chan v. RTC of Zamboanga del Norte. 2010).. Allegations in a pleading either simultaneously or successively for the purpose of obtaining a favorable judgment. No. 1. clients will be deprived of substantial justice (Ortiz v. complaint for recovery of possession of a parcel of land Arman signed for Nelson. G. the Meanwhile. Is there a parties. should sign it.000. Ms. 1 in the Petition dealing with the execution and vice versa. and (2) that to prosecute his complaint. There is no violation of the rule against forum commonality of interest among tailors Toto. unless counsel gives a good reason why he is denied. as well as no. In Philippines Nails and “A” of the complaint and made an integral part thereof. July 24. 2008) Evidently. In the verification and certification against forum shopping. counsel cannot sign the anti-forum shopping through a special power of attorney to sign on their behalf. Forum shopping exists Q: In his complaint for foreclosure of mortgage to which where the elements of litis pendentia are present or where a was duly attached a copy of the mortgage deed plaintiff final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in the PP alleged inter alia as follows: (1) that defendant DD action under consideration (Roberto S. seeking another and possibly favorable Toto signed the verification and certification. G. (Irene Marcos-Araneta v.R. Arman were duly authorized by the other petitioners A: No. that he had no and at the same time assail the execution pending appeal via knowledge of the mortgage deed and he also denied any certiorari without violating the rule against forum shopping. No. 65 before the Court of Appeals (CA). defendant did not decision of the National Labor Relations Commission properly deny liability as to plaintiffs contracting with a (NLRC) on the complaint for illegal dismissal against lawyer for a fee. personal knowledge as to whether he signed it or not and because he did not deny under oath the genuineness and due Q: Tailors Toto. under justifiable circumstances. because there is substantial compliance of the not able to secure his client’s signatures and shows that his requirements of the rules. (2016 Bar) non-forum shopping. since the rule requires personal knowledge by the party executing the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The motion to dismiss should be certification. Land Bank. as the case may be. the Supreme Court held that contracted a lawyer. the Q: Mr. copy of which is Annex Lacson. G.R. G. 141508. Dumpty to pay damages to designed to promote the orderly administration of justice. for a fee of P50. to comply with or correct. 2003. Atty. However. Upon receipt of the RTC’s parties. (2004 Bar) certiorari. Court of Appeals. Dumpty rule on verification and certification of non-forum shopping. is sufficient (2014 Bar) compliance. rendered a decision granting the again stressed that the rules on forum shopping. As to plaintiff’s allegation no. XY prepared a signed the verification and certification. the defendant alleged.

obtained before resorting to extra-territorial service of Sundiam. 1. Greece. the court should not declare Charybdis in default a. Rule 9). appeal is available default. REMEDIAL LAW Q: When may a party be declared in Default? What is the Q: Mario was declared in default but before judgment effect of an Order of Default? (1999 Bar) was rendered. 2006 Bar) Relief from an order of default UST BAR OPERATIONS 14 . The party in default cannot take part in the and that he has a meritorious defense (Sec. No. it should be granted. September 30. filed judgment (Sec. informed him of the declaration of Pluto went to the hotel and personally served Scylla the default. grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack or excess of the thus. 26751. 1978). 3[a]. he may move to reconsider. Should the court declare Charybdis in default? Default: A: No. A was declared in default in a case instituted permanently reside in Athens. 3(b) Rule9). G. Section 12. Sheriff his case pending. 2011). Sheriff his failure to answer was due to fraud and he has a Pluto requested Scylla for the email address and fax meritorious defense. he went abroad. G. co-owners of the property and co. foreclosure of real estate mortgage against siblings Scylla and Charybdis. The siblings notice. The service of summons has a meritorious defense (Sec. mistake or excusable negligence and that he (A. he Sheriff Pluto. before the expiration of the time to answer (Matute v. with more reason may it be filed a Motion to Declare Charybdis in default as Charybdis after discovery even before receipt of the order of default. A: Assuming that Charybdis was properly declared in and thereafter. because there was no proper service of summons. A: A party may be declared in default when he fails to answer within the time allowed therefor and upon motion of the a. or a motion for reconsideration on the Scylla's answer to the complaint? (2015 Bar) ground of excessive damages. he may file a motion mortgage debt. a petition for certiorari If he has been illegally declared in territorial service of summons under Section 15 of Rule 14 is default. No. 3. The motion "Summons for Scylla was served personally as shown by to set aside default was opposed by B on the ground that her signature on the receiving copy of the summons. Scylla seasonably filed her answer setting forth therein as a defense that Charybdis had paid the A: After judgment but before its finality. Thereafter. (Sec. Q: For failure to seasonably file his Answer despite due signatories to the mortgage deed. Court no showing in the problem that a prior leave of court was of Appeals. 1969.R. If the motion is denied. Circe tipped off against him by B." Circe. he decided to file a motion to set aside the order of default. 2. whichever is applicable. what is the effect of excusable negligence.g. No. In what form should such motion be? (2001 Bar) Q: Circe filed with the RTC a complaint for the A: The motion should be under oath (Id. On the same day. Rule 9). stated that received the order declaring him in default. 3[c]. and if it is by facsimile under said rule is.). sixty Although such a motion may be made after notice but before (60) days after her receipt of Sheriff Pluto's return. mistake or excusable negligence submit evidence. Rule 14 of the Rules of Court applies only to a foreign private A: Before the rendition of judgment (a) he may file a motion juridical entity that is not registered in the Philippines and under oath to set aside the order of default on the grounds of has no resident agent in the country. citing the rule that the motion to set amendment of Rule 14 by facsimile transmittal of the aside may be made at any time after notice but before summons and complaint on defendant's fax number as judgment. the court can render judgments as long as it has lower court's jurisdiction. After the finality of judgment? (1998. upon the answer filed by Scylla. Rule 9). did not file any responsive pleading. There is. sent on the date and time indicated therein. defective.R. e. 11-3-6-SC. insufficient evidence or the decision or final order being contrary to law (See. Resolve the Motion. After number of Charybdis which the latter readily gave. the court shall try the case against all the defendants under Rules 40 or 41. c. b. Rule 65) or (b) he may file jurisdiction over the res and any of the modes of extra.M. Rule 9). he may file the special civil action of certiorari for A foreclosure of real estate mortgage is a quasi in rem action. Before the rendition of judgment. A presented a motion under summons. L-42648. and if reconsideration is denied. in his return of the summons. 3[b). during the pendency of his motion to dismiss or complied with prior leave of court. unfortunately. and proof justify the setting aside of the order of default? of such failure (Sec. summons. After judgment but before its finality. denied. Rule 9). The effect of an Order of Default is that the court may proceed to render judgment A: In order to justify the setting aside of the order of default. Q: What are the available remedies of a party declared in a. b. accident. Rule 37). Acosta-Ofalia v. it was filed before A received notice of his having been Summons on Charybdis was served pursuant to the declared in default. accident. and render judgment upon the evidence presented (Sec. and not to individuals fraud. therefore. granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may warrant Mario should state in his motion that his failure to answer unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to was due to fraud. (1999 Bar) evidenced by transmission verification report automatically generated by the fax machine indicating A: Assuming that the motion to set aside complies with the that it was received by the fax number to which it was other requirements of the rule. On the premise that Charybdis was for new trial on the grounds of fraud. the service of summons is defective. 3[b]. but the latter refused to receive summons for oath to set aside the order of default on the ground that Charybdis as she was not authorized to do so. and b. accident. his return a week later. trial but shall be entitled to notice of subsequent proceedings (Sec. What should Mario state in his motion in order to claiming party with notice to the defending party. March 15. January 31. A’s mistress who is Sheriff Pluto that Scylla is on a balikbayan trip and is working as a clerk in the sala of the Judge before whom billeted at the Century Plaza Hotel in Pasay City. The following day. with the case still undecided. hence. properly declared in default. mistake.

which are: (a) a petition for relief under Q: On May 12. lack of a cause of action at the making of extrajudicial demand on defendant to pay commencement of the suit is not cured by the accrual of a P500. In June 2007. QUAMTO (1997-2016) A: After finality of the judgment. the Court. upon motion of LM. but if it is not so amended. an illegitimate child of Y. The subsequent cause of action that arose may only be subject of Effect of amended pleading a different suit but cannot be pleaded as a supplement to the complaint where no cause action exists. the plaintiff.R. The excusable negligence. Court of Appeals. G. Prudence Realty v. by changing entirely the loan and a real estate mortgage over his property the nature of the action? (2003 Bar) located in Tagaytay City. Heirs 12% per annum interest. or (c) certiorari ground that the court had no jurisdiction over the action if the Judgment Is void on Its face or by the judicial record since the claimed amount of P250. N. 1996. 2005). 2007. The complaint may be amended to accrued yet when filed. Court of Appeals. Without objection from defendant. No. Court of Appeals. 000. Should the amended complaint be allowed RTC. Rule 10). G. KJ however attached the motion in dismiss. can cure the deficiency. debt was not yet due.00. defendant some two months before suit was begun. 2005. as well reasons. of February 12.R. March 17.R. KJ filed an unverified thereby increasing his total claim to P450. no Q: X. The resolution of the motion to speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and dismiss was delayed because of the retirement of the proceeding (Valenzuela v. Y 15 . Arturo filed an amended evidence complaint alleging that Robert's debt had in the meantime become due but that Robert still refused Q: In a complaint for a sum of money filed before the MM to pay.R. a pleader may amend his pleading as a matter of Although the motion is unverified. 000. G. October 16. v. the court admitted Exh.A. Amendment March 21. there are three ways to assail the Judgment. 2. On October 1. Cititbank. Rule on the motion of the defendant with reasons for his failure to file an answer on time. Exh. mistake or RTC of Quezon City for the collection of P250.00 is within the (Balangcad v.000. stating in said answer his action. insisted on the agreement. 1997). without leave of court. judge. G. Gumabay v. May 31. (2000 Bar) A: The motion to dismiss should be denied. The present rules allow amendments substantially undertook to pay the loan within a year from its date at altering the nature of the cause of action (Sec. v. would not be acting without jurisdiction which are the reasons of the movant’s failure to answer as because allowing an amendment as a matter of right does not well as his defenses (Sec. Robert to pay ahead of time but the latter refused and 121687. claiming that the RTC had jurisdiction. the subject of the suit.R. “A” in evidence for the stated purpose of proving the answer is a matter of right. During the trial. can the plaintiff amend condition that Robert will execute a promissory note for his complaint. Before the court could resolve the motion. the plaintiff filed a complaint in the Rule 38 on the grounds of fraud. In his promissory note dated September 20.00.). over his his answer under oath. G. does not gain any standing in court conform to the evidence. No. Would your answer be different had Arturo filed “A” in evidence erroneous or not? Reason.R. it does such that no amendment. April 8. b. whether by amended or not affect the result of the trial on this issue (Sec. require the exercise of discretion (Soledad v. 1977. No. May 30 1963. Arturo filed an cause of action or defense shall serve the higher interests of action to foreclose the mortgage. G. such that an amendment demand for defendant to pay said sum of money within setting up the after-accrued cause of action is not allowed 10 days from receipt. No. plaintiff did not mention or even just hint at any considering that no answer has been filed? demand for payment made on defendant before commencing suit. supplemental pleading. Under A: Yes. (2004 Bar) instead a supplemental complaint stating that the debt became due after the filing of the original A: The court’s admission of Exhibit “A” in evidence is not complaint? (2008 Bar) erroneous. Baralin. addressed to and served on (Swagman Hotel and Travel. 1992). Was the court’s admission of Exh. declared KJ in default.R.J. Even though an amendment of complaint before Exh. amended his Q: For failure of K. Basic is the rule that a motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading. A month before her birthday. It was admitted in evidence without objection on the part of the defendant. Robert A: Yes. when the substantial change or alteration in the letter and when Robert did not comply. Simply put. celebrated her 18 th amended or supplemental complaint is allowed (Id. 2006. Rule 10). (b) annulment of Judgment under Rule defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the 47 for extrinsic fraud or lack of Jurisdiction. because a complaint whose cause of action has not raised in the pleadings. No. Quezon City. Rule 10. accident. No. a. 5. CA. Inc. Mamangun. L-17983. birthday on May 2. In due time. Arturo requested of Marcelino Pagobo v. the inclusion of an additional amount of P200. The court. Justices of the Court of Appeals. L- 30683. August 28. 3. the Rules. plaintiff duly offered A: No. amendment. with leave of court.R. there is substantial compliance with the rule. Arturo issued a demand however. “A” was a letter of cause of action subsequent thereto. No. The answer contains the motion to lift the pleading (Sec. 1999). 3[b]. Cf. pending resolution of the Amendments to conform to or authorize presentation of motion to dismiss. Rule 9. 110274. 2001). 61508.000. in allowing the order of default and the affidavit of merit should contain. 161135. G. Court of Appeals. to file an answer within the complaint to allege a new cause of action consisting in reglementary period.000. Q: Arturo lent P1 Million to his friend Robert on the Q: After an answer has been filed. Robert complied. 131175. the answer attached to the right before the other party has served his responsive motion is verified. 1994). G. Will the motion to lift the order of default prosper? Explain. No. (2005 Bar) as his defenses. exclusive jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court. “A” in evidence. The motion to lift the order of default without an affidavit of plaintiff thereafter filed his opposition to the motion to merit attached to it. It should be treated as if it had been A: No. This should only be true. Robert moved to substantial justice and prevent delay and equally promote dismiss the complaint for lack of cause of action as the the laudable objective of the rules which is to secure a just. 83888.

The trial court admitted the amended sheriff’s return or proof of service does not show that the complaint on August 22. Summons was served substituted service may be made. (2006. Amendments No. November 24. a complaint for a sum of money against Charlie would not have jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. mode of service. (1999 to personally serve the summons on the defendant before Bar) substituted service was resoted to. the substituted service to Charlie’s secretary is Q: Summons was issued by the MM RTC and actually invalid. Nos. G. 1998). The sheriff’s return or proof of UST BAR OPERATIONS 16 . The amended complaint impleading the three A: The motion to dismiss is not meritorious because the legitimate children. 2000 is still within the Explain. a recognition against Z.R. Summons must be served on an additional defendant Bar) impleaded in the action so that the court can acquire jurisdiction over him. retroacts to the wife. The complaint but if the defendant voluntarily appeared before the court. 20. though admitted on August 22. (2004 Bar) four-year prescriptive period which started to run on May 2.R. The sheriff’s of the complaint because they do not constitute a new cause negligence in not stating in his return that he first made a of action (Verzosa v.R. Court of Appeals. the service of sumoons was improper. personal service on the defendant is the preferred to appear and substitute the deceased (Sec. received the summons at Charlie’s office. The legitimate family of Y refused to recognize X as service filed with the court in sum states that the an illegitimate child of Y. G. Charlie failed to file an answer within Q: When additional defendant is impleaded in the action. 1996. G. and Alfie moved to declare Charlie is it necessary that summons be served upon him? in default and to be allowed to present evidence ex parte. Is the motion to dismiss meritorious? What is the purpose of summons and by whom may it be served? A: NO. If declared in default. X filed on April 25. by handing a copy of the summons to the defendant in person. what can Charlie do to obtain summons to her at said residence because defendant relief? was not home at the time. 1987). Rule 14). L-58036. Court of Appeals. 2000. Charlie? Q: Is summons required to be served upon a defendant A: No. After countless efforts to summons. Since there was no prior attempt to serve the summons in person. 79374 and 82986. The purpose of SUMMONS the summons is to inform the defendant of the complaint filed against him and to enable the court to acquire Q: What is the effect of absence of summons on the jurisdiction over his person. 2000. 119511-13. If defendant. A: The effect of the absence of summons on a judgment Q: Alfie Bravo filed with the Regional Trial Court of would make the judgment null and void because the court Caloocan. What is the effect of the sheriff first made a genuine attempt to serve the admission of the amended complaint? Has the action of summon on defendant personally before serving it thru X prescribed? Explain. duly executed a promissory note as evidence of the loan. G. A: No. the required period. date of the filing of the original complaint. Esther. received on time by defendant from his wife at their residence. under Philippine laws. 2000 defendant actually received the summons on time from his beyond the four-year prescriptive period. A defendant who was substituted for the deceased need not be served with summons because it is the court In an action strictly in personam like a complaint for sum of which orders him as the legal representative of the deceased money. that is. Charlie filed his verified answer. 11. 2000 an action for served on defendant at his residence thru his wife. March 16. alleges that Charlie borrowed the amount from Alfie and his appearance is equivalent to the service of summons (Sec. 167230. then substituted service can be resorted Q: A sued XX Corporation (XXC). (1999 Bar) This statement should be made in the proof of service (Galura v. and director are not valid under the present rules (Sec. Nos. There is no showing that earnest efforts were exerted who was substituted for the deceased? Explain. Otherwise stated.R. The claim is for Php1. Explain. X filed a motion for leave to file an therein. No. for excusable Substituted Service reasons. Impossibility of prompt on the corporation’s cashier and director. Defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that amended complaint and a motion to admit the said the court had no jurisdiction over his person as there amended complaint impleading the three (3) legitimate was no valid service of summons on him because the children of Y. genuine effort to serve the summons on the defendant. G. unless he makes a voluntary a. a corporation organized to (Manotoc v.R. Delta. was convince them. REMEDIAL LAW died. raising the defense of full payment with interest. Rule 3). (1999 Bar) Ten days later. Rule 14). 1992). August 14. Charlie’s office secretary. It may be served by the sheriff judgment rendered in the case? (1999 Bar) or his deputy or any person authorized by the court. (2000 Bar) his wife. wife of Y. After Z filed an answer person of suitable age and discretion then residing on August 14. for specific performance when 2006). Math-Agro Corporation. 130974. it is only when the defendant cannot the latter failed to deliver T-shirts to the former as be served personally within a reasonable time that a stipulated in their contract of sale. Service on the wife was sufficient (Boticano v.5Million. No. should not prejudice the plaintiff (Mapa v. Would you service should be shown by stating the efforts made to find consider service of summons on either officer sufficient? the defendant personally and the fact that such efforts failed. Chu. The sheriff earlier that day had delivered the b. with attached copy of the complaint. 16. The action filed on April 25. October 2. Was there proper and valid service of summons on appearance. A: Summons on a domestic corporation through its cashier 2009). It is the duty of the court to impleading new defendants retroact to the date of the filing look into the sufficiency of the service. Court of Appeals. 2013 A: Yes. cannot be served with summons within a reasonable period. Explain. August 16.

Victoriano R. No. March 26. to set aside 2.” Moreorver. (Pedro T. It must clearly show that the substituted service with summons within a reasonable time. Jr. if he discovered the default after the judgment has Imelda M. he has the following other party. Chavez. (2016 Bar) in ordering service of summons by publication? Explain. (Heirs derogation of the usual method of service. at any time after discovery of the default but different dates. contract or duty requires that should be done. file a motion. 170943. personal service on the A: Yes. Belen. Yabut. These facts must be specifically narrated in the Rule 14 of the Rules of Court. for it binds a particular individual only although it service can be resorted to. Manotoc v. (B. For the presumption of defendant is necessary for the court to validly try and decide regularity in the performance of official duty to apply.R. and Samuel Go Chan. Believing the caretaker’s story to b and that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over true. June 6. faithfully and strictly comply with the prescribed Atty. otherwise. 175334. No. Longspan Builders. et. the party where the defendant is designated as an unknown owner. in any action 1. defendant’s office or regular place of business. Impossibility of prompt personal service.. (Ma. conveniently. b. and that he has a meritorious defense. The RTC Judge is correct in ordering the service of defendant is the preferred mode of service. Reasonable time being “so much time as is newspaper of general circulation and in such places and for necessary under the circumstances for a reasonably such time as the court may order. or whenever his whereabouts are unknown and that defendant cannot be served promptly or there is cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry. Sr. G. Sheriff Matinik left a copy of the summons and defendants Arthur King and/or his estate. he was told by the caretaker the CA praying that the decision in favor of Tristan be thereof that his employer no longer resides at the house. No. under oath. account Arthur King’s residence abroad up to the September 11. he may file a petition for August 16. whether in personam. 2006) relief under Section 2 of Rule 38. or re- If defendant. Pablo R. become final and executory. 130974. or relying on substituted service or the sheriff must show the like. He claims The caretaker is a high school graduate and is the that the action filed by Tristan is an action in personam godson of Roberto. requirements and circumstances authorized by the rules. While substituted service of concerns the right to a tangible thing.R. Jr. declared null and void for lack of jurisdiction..D. service may. Substituted service effected on a person of suitable age discovered the default. i. it must be indicated therein remedies to wit: that the sheriff has made several attempts at personal service for at least three (3) times on at least two (2) a. in rem or quasi in rem. Return is flawed and the presumption cannot be availed of. et. King under TCT No. hence. G. al. i. he may also appeal from the judgment rendered against Q: Tristan filed a suit with the RTC of Pasay against him as contrary to the evidence or to the law. G. it is extraordinary in character and in is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded. he or his estate may be served with summons by NOTE: There are additional remedies to address judgments publication.R. before judgment. if judgment has already been rendered when he 3. Upon motion. then substituted personam.S. the (Spouses Domingo M. even if no Arthur King and/or Estate of Arthur King for petition to set aside the order of default has been reconveyance of a lot declared in the name of Arthur presented by him. 2009) present and the uncertainty of whether he is still alive or dead. mistake or excusable circumstances surrounding the attempted personal neglect. In an action strictly in personam. for excusable reasons. that is. of town and temporarily stayed in another city to avoid service of summons. the the case. and d. An action for declaration of nullity handing a copy of the summons to the defendant in person. v. by summons by publication. Juan engaged the service of Sheriff Jojo.. This rule applies to any prudent and diligent man to do. is not a real action but it is an action in the summons within a reasonable period. On the other complaint with the caretaker. it must of Eugenio Lopez. cannot be served with conveyance. If he cannot be personally served Return. Any judgment therein summons is permitted. Rule 14. Roberto legal owner and ordering defendants to reconvey said knew that Juan was going to file the case so he went out lot to Tristan.e. substituted service must be made in person of suitable age and discretion living may be made in accordance with Section 8 of said Rule. accident.R. the sheriff must the order of default on the ground that his failure to describe in the Return of Summons the facts and answer was due to fraud. jurisdiction over the person of the Court to acquire jurisdiction. Defendants were declared in default and judgment was rendered declaring Tristan as Q: Juan sued Roberto for specific performance. R. he may file a motion for new trial residence. what the action.” Summons was published and nobody filed by default: Motion for Reconsideration (Rule 37). 17 . v. efforts failed. 1234. v. by impossibility of prompt service within a reasonable leave of court. QUAMTO (1997-2016) regard for the rights and possibility of loss. G. Hon. No. service. 142676. therefrom. Enriquez cited in Emerita Munoz v. or on a competent person in charge of under Section 1(a) of Rule 37.e. Was there a valid hand. he may.R. 169919. be effected upon him by publication in a time. Annulment any responsive pleading within sixty (60) days of Judgment (Rule 47) and Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65). filed a petition for annulment of judgment before to the residence of Roberto. to the A: If Charlie is declared in default. having a Santos. Court of Appeals. al. Specific details in the return. if any. Tristan claims that the suit is an action in rem or substituted service of summons? Discuss the at least an action quasi in rem. (2016 Bar) A: No. of title and recovery of ownership of real property. The complaint alleged that”on Ampeloquio Realty Development. 2011) Compliance witht the rules regarding the service of summons is as important as the issue of due process for the In an action in personam. there was no valid substituted service of summons. PNOC Exploration Corporation. c. Rules of Court. Is the RTC judge correct requirements for a valid service of summons. in the dwelling or residence of defendant... No. G. Inc. the court-designated administrator of Athur King’s Matinik to serve the summons but when the latter went estate. but before the same has become and discretion residing at defendant’s house or final and executory. v. 2008) The Supreme Court laid down the requirements as follows: Under Section 14. Jurisdiction over the person of a resident defendant Sheriff’s Return must show that serious efforts or attemtps who does not voluntarily appear in court can be acquired by were exerted to personally serve the summons and that said personal service of summons as provided under Section 7.

stating that the allegations of the complaint action." can the judge proceed to resolve the motion to Rules when plaintiff fails to comply for no justifiable cause dismiss? Explain. drawing the bank to file another motion to dismiss. the judge did not gravely abuse his discretion when he of improper venue. The purpose is to set the effects of the delay because of the interest on the judgment award. A: Yes. Caes UST BAR OPERATIONS 18 . Court authorizes the court to order the striking out of the pleading affected. failed to comply with the court’s order to file and serve the otherwise. 8) which governs the bank’s motion to dismiss. hence the dismissal of the complaint. Did the judge gravely abuse his discretion in acting was a US citizen residing in Los Angeles. 2008) Clearly. Rule 12 of the Rules of waived.. of Court authorizes the court to either deny or grant said motion outright upon the clerk of court bringing such motion A: The bank’s second motion to dismiss which is grounded to the attention of the court. 2008) bill of particulars of any matter which is not averred with Accordingly. et al. If the pleading is a reply. 2010 Bar) c. a non-resident who does not voluntarily submit himself to the authority of the court. the defendant her current account which she maintained in the bank’s was surprised to find on the date set for hearing that the local branch. Under the “omnibus motion rule” (Rule 15. the motion must be filed within ten (10) days from MOTIONS service thereof (Sec. In the course of the trial. alleging that she was a resident of Lapu- Lapu City. a party may move for a R. following the defendant filed a motion for bill of particulars that he set dishonor of a check she drew in favor of Shirley against for hearing on a certain date. the judge can proceed to resolve the motion to Res judicata dismiss. because the ground raised therefor became known to the movant only during the trial. The judgment became December 4. March 26. Belen.000 in (Trinidad v. the court may order the striking out of the pleading or Omnibus motion rule the portions thereof to which the order was directed or make such other order as it deems just (Sec. The improper venue of an action is deemed waived by the bank’s filing an earlier b. Charisse admitted that she a. damages plus legal interest. the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over his particulars? (2003 Bar) person and therefor cannot validly try and decide the case against him. Rule 12). personal service of summons within Motions for bill of particulars the state is essential to the acquisition of jurisdiction over her person. to make a tender of payment to the judgment oblige and thereafter make a consignation of the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No. Office of the Ombudsman. Chavez. the Bank before the RTC of Lapu-Lapu City. The bank is of a person for a crime of which he has been previously concerned that its liability will increase with the acquitted or convicted. and more so when the bank filed an Answer without the trial judge dismiss the case if the plaintiff does raising improper venue as an issue after its first motion to not comply with the order? (2008 Bar) dismiss was denied.R. 4. such A: Yes. To b. since the action for re- conveyance is an action in personam. Pablo A: Before responding to a pleading. G. 1. same at the disposal of the court which rendered the settled that in an action in personam wherein the defendant is judgment (Arts. et al. California on the motion without waiting for the hearing set for and that she was temporarily billeted at the Pescado the motion? Hotel in Lapu-Lapu City. Suppose the judge correctly denied the second A: “Res judicata in prison grey" is the criminal concept of motion to dismiss and rendered judgment in favor of double jeopardy.R. this time on the ground A: No. what move should you take? shall not thereafter be subjected to the danger and anxiety of (2010 Bar) a second charge against him for the same offense (Joel B. Charisse opposed the motion citing the hearing set for the motion. It thus filed an Answer. If the order is not complied with. the RTC Judge is correct A: As counsel of the bank. To date. judgment obligor. 175334.. were sufficiently made. The bank filed a Motion to Dismiss the trial court had already denied the motion on the day of complaint on the ground that it failed to state a cause of its filing. Rule 17 of the rule. Q: Charisse. such that it was only then Q: What is "res judicata in prison grey"? What are the that the objection became available to him. G. Rule 12). Suppose Charisse did not raise the "omnibus motion the same end is the provision of Section 3. 166038. can issue. with any order of the court or with the Rules. No. 2007). properly to prepare his responsive pleading. I shall recommend to the bank as in ordering service of summons by publication. No. The RTC Judge is not correct amount due by filing an application therefore placing the in ordering service of summons by publication. (Spouses Domingo M. Section 2. Described as “res judicata in prison grey. Rule 12 of the Rules the "omnibus motion rule. all objections not so included shall be deemed needed bill of particulars. It is well. since Charisse is not a resident of denied the motion for bill of particulars without waiting for Lapu-Lapu City. filed a complaint for damages against Atlanta Q: Within the period for filing a responsive pleading. If the judge grants the motion and orders the motion to dismiss without raising improper venue as an plaintiff to file and serve the bill of particulars. This method of service is possible if such Q: When can a bill of particulars be availed of? What is defendant is physicially present in the country. Section 4. on improper venue should be denied. a. essential requisites of res judicata? (2000. However. 1256 and 1258." Rule on the motion.” final and executory in 2008. as “res judicata" is the doctrine of civil law Charisse. REMEDIAL LAW September 23. the trial judge can dismiss the case if the plaintiff motion should include all objections then available. the RTC Judge is not correct in ordering service sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him of summons by publication. NCC). Charisse has the right against double jeopardy prohibits the prosecution not moved to execute the judgment. but it was denied. ordering the bank to pay her P100. Sec. The motion may lack merit. v. Hon. If he is not the effect of non-compliance with the order of a bill of found therein. assuring the accused that he As counsel of the bank. first prosecution forever at rest.

AB filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the following manifestation in court that in view of the denial made by grounds: EF. has an assessed value of P19. authenticating that Mr. it would be futile to pursue the case against EF. 29 which 2. do not reside in the on a different cause of action (Sec. G. The essential requisites of res judicata are: official bodies. Brigido filed a counterclaim for damages. The nature of the action renders the assessed value City for the collection of a debt of P1 million. or is the property subject of the controversy situated therein. it must be a judgment or order on the merits. The court dismissed the case with prejudice. The required Grounds conciliation/mediation before the proper Barangay as mandated by the Local Government Code governs only when Q: Amorsolo. This was in the nature of a compromise of the the defendant resides.700. NCC. The subject property. Lipa City. administer oath in the State or foreign country. as mother and in her capacity as legal guardian of Appended to the complaint is Amorsolo’s verification her legitimate minor son. No. Mariano and Henry. there must be between the two cases identity of parties. It is enough that the the subject matter and of the parties. 127578. Baguio City.000 against shopping are fatally defective because there is no A for attorney’s fees and expenses for litigation. X did not of the land involved irrelevant. Batangas. AB agreed to move for the dismissal of the complaint. CD. Marcos. Brown is duly authorized to notarize be filed in the residence of either the plaintiff. the court rendering the same must have jurisdiction of does not cover notarial documents. a jurisdiction to which is vested by law in the Regional Trial resident of San Fernando La Union in the RTC of Quezon Courts. 1. AB and EF filed a joint motion the Philippines. Rescission of Contract. tribunals. with reasons. Henry filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of prematurity for failure to comply with the A: Bar by prior judgment is the doctrine of res judicata. identity of subject matter. Nos. filed another A: The first ground raised lacks merit because jurisdiction complaint for support against EF. G. EF filed a motion to over the person of a plaintiff is acquired by the court upon dismiss on the ground of res judicata. Esq. (2009 Bar) a. The case for a sum of money. the subject of the litigation. is incapable of pecuniary estimation the exclusive original Q: A. 47[b].00. The plaintiff’s mother agreed to the matter of the action involving real property with an dismissal of the complaint for support in view of the assessed value of P19. Subsequently. through his attorney-in-fact.R. filed with the RTC of Lipa City a Complaint municipality. Rule on the affirmative defense of improper venue. filed 1940). mandatory barangay conciliation. with the RTC of Baguio City a complaint for annulment of sale against Henry. or records of 6. EF filed his answer denying his paternity with a notary public in the State of New York. A: The second ground raised is also without merit because 1999). while Mariano resides in Davao conclusiveness of judgment. a Filipino citizen permanently residing in the parties to the dispute reside in the same city or New York City. Conclusiveness of judgment precludes the relitigation of a A: The motion to dismiss should be denied because the particular issue in another action between the same parties parties in interest. Explain your answer. The court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the subject to the condition that EF will withdraw his person of Amorsolo because he is not a resident of counterclaim for damages. represented by AB. The RTC does not have jurisdiction over the subject motion to dismiss. Resolve the motion which bars a second action when there is identity of parties. Pangasinan sued X. 2035. 1989).R. Tomas. husband. which is in San Fernando. of certification from the Philippine Consulate in New York. Rule 39). which is in the document. (1997 Bar) City. or the defendant. A filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim Brown is duly authorized to notarize the document. same city/municipality. Joseph Brown. to dismiss. notary public who notarized the verification and certification 3. Intermediate Appellate Court. Consulate in New York. for lack of jurisdiction. brought action for support and certification of non-forum shopping executed in against EF. Sto. is likewise without merit. For his part. a resident of Lingayen. minor son CD. res judicata is not a defense in an action for support even if the first case was dismissed with prejudice on a joint b. and public officers. G. Q: Mariano. Q: AB. and if involving real property. (2009 Bar) subject matter and cause of action (Sec. Rule 39). February 15. 74989-90. Cardona. November certification alluded to. He also filed a counterclaim for P80. Court of Appeals. the property must be situated also in the same city or a resident of Barangay San Miguel.. 46655. Rule 132 refers only to paragraph (a) of Sec. Residency or valid ground for dismissal of the second complaint? citizenship is not a requirement for filing a complaint. A: No. for Rescission of Contract of Sale of Land against Brigido. The verification and certification of non-forum defense. and identity of causes of action (San Diego v. the judgment or order rendered must be final. 47[c]. X moved accompanying certification issued by the Philippine for a preliminary hearing on said affirmative defense. located in Barangay Talisay. De Asis v. as in this case. duly notarized by Mr. QUAMTO (1997-2016) v. is a personal action. (2000 Bar) because plaintiff thereby submits to the jurisdiction of the court. 700. It must authenticating that Mr. file a motion to dismiss for improper venue but filed his answer raising therein improper venue as an affirmative c. pertains to official acts. right to support which is prohibited by law (Art.00. Is res judicata a the filing of plaintiff’s complaint therewith. La 19 . The required Pangasinan. whether of the Phillippines or of a foreign country: the requirement in Sec. which was filed in Quezon City. and of non-forum shopping is clothed with authority to 4.R. municipality. June 27. as father of CD and AB’s lawfully wedded New York City. A: The third ground raised questioning the validity of the verification and certification of non-forum shopping for lack A: There is improper venue. Later on. a. No. Marcos and Henry both reside in Q: Distinguish bar by prior judgment from Asin Road. 24. exclusive and original defendant’s answer denying his paternity with counterclaim jurisdiction is with the Municipal Trial Court where for damages.

P150. 3. Lawyer L. V is not guilty of forum shopping because the case the published in Parañaque City. A: The venue is properly laid. Rule 4) The fact that it was not raised in a Complaint will only be proper if the Complaint failed to allege motion to dismiss does not matter because the rule that if the residence of the complainant or the place where the improper venue is not raised in a motion to dismiss it is libelous article was printed and first published (Nocum v. Maria. Parañaque City. 360. Maria. The gorund invoked in the Motion to Dismiss is not who should be impleaded. underwent surgery to screw a metal plate to matter. (2010) Q: Co Batong. (2014 Bar) of them is correct? Explain. (Art. 3 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure authorize the separate civil action for damages arising from Are the grounds invoked in the Motion to Dismiss physical injuries to proceed independently. Motion to Dismiss on the following grounds: expressly authorize the filing such action for damages entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action. and injured V who was crossing the street. a newspaper of general circulation printed and A: No. printed and first published in Parañaque City. Forum Shopping. Street in Sta. the counterclaim may be considered compulsory Urdaneta where he resides. G. article was printed and first published.00 as moral jurisdiction of MTC. Hence. d.000. substantive law (Art. A: No. Besides. X hit Rule 16). Procedure. Under the law. separately in the Regional Trial Court where the libelous Rule 3). that Jose Penduko wrote malicious and the People of the Philippines. 11. September 23. Bulacan. Rule 6). Suppose only X was named as defendant in the a. 7. (Sec 2. the motion to dismiss base on alleged litis pendencia The venue is improperly laid because what the is without merit because there is no identity of parties and complaint alleged is Co Batong’s business address and subject matter in the two cases. Is the motion meritorious? Explain. damages. the private prosecutor. Maria. X may not move for dismissal of the civil action for damages on the contention that Y is an indispensable party A: No. Rule 111) provide for the place where the defamatory article was printed and first two actions to proceed independently of each other. whereas Batong’s business address is in Makati City. Jose Penduko filed a Moreover. Sta. Y moved for the suspension of the civil complaint alleged is Co Batong’s business address case to await the decision in the criminal case. Sec. the civil action involving written defamation shall be the NCC) and procedural law (Sec. deemed waived was removed from the 1997 Rules of Civil Tan. L. as attorney’s fees. NCC) and Sec. P50. do not obtain here. Instead of filing an Answer. the claim for damages in the amount of b. 145022. In an original action before and Y before the Regional Trial Court of Pangasinan in the RTC. A: No. X and Y move to dismiss P350. Pangasinan. Both substantive law (Art. proper? c. V. 33. X moved for the suspension of the proceedings in the criminal case to await the decision in the civil case. a Taipan. The RTC is without jurisdiction because under the complaint for damages.R. which may be beyond the Penduko be held liable to pay P200.00 fall within the exclusive original Y as an indispensable party? jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Parañaque City. 33 of the Civil not his residence address. 000. the tests of forum shopping. The complaint prayed that Jose damages caused by X and Y to V." V made no mention of the pendency of the criminal case in Sta. for attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation is compulsory did not reserve the filing of a separate civil action. Atty. is a criminal action filed in the name of among others. filed a civil action for damages with the Regional trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City a.00. On complaint of V. Under Article 360 of the RPC.000. that Co from the crime is deemed also instituted therewith. Maria. REMEDIAL LAW Union. is a civil action for libelous article was first printed and published in quasi-delict in the name of V and against both X and Y for all Parañaque City. published. the claim for damages in the amount of dismissal of the complaint for failure of V to implead P350. as exemplary damages. Which and not his residence address. 000. Art. the dismissal of the UST BAR OPERATIONS 20 . No.00 fall within the exclusive original the complaint for damages on the ground of litis jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of pendentia. The counterclaim Court (MTC) of Sta. may he move for the Totality Rule. 3.00. a news reporter of the Philippines Times. The new Rules provide that if no motion to dismiss has been filed. Is V guilty of forum shopping? against Jose Penduko. any of the grounds for dismissal may Q: X was driving the dump truck of Y along Cattleya be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer (Sec 6. (1998 Bar) his wrist bone. a criminal case for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Serious Physical A: The motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction Injuries was filed against X before the Municipal Trial over the subject matter should be denied. and which is res adjudicata or litis pendencia. the civil action for only a necessary party. 2005). Bulacan. Due to his negligence. where civil liability arising defamatory imputations against Co Batong. Rule 111. Code and Rule 111. Hence. the venue for A: Neither of them is correct. The RTC is without jurisdiction because under the Totality Rule. the venue of the action is properly laid. 33. Since the defamatory article was therefore. nonjoinder and misjoinder damages in cases of written defamation may be filed of parties is not a ground for dismissal of actions (Sec. The venue is improperly laid because what the For his part. V counterclaim because it necessary arouse out of and is subsequently filed a complaint for Damages against X connected with the complaint. RPC). The complaint alleged. b. regardless of the amount of damages being claimed. Rule on the motion to dismiss the counterclaim on who suffered physical injuries including a fractured the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject wrist bone. Y is not an indispensable party but proper. no suspension of action is authorized. who witnessed the incident. b. Besides. and that the the case filed in Urdaneta. 000. In his "Certification Against regardless of the amount (Sec. offered his legal services to V.

in contemplation of law. State and discuss the appropriate remedy/ repurchase the same. (Section 1. Despite demand. remedies of Ms. 21 . It is a policy of the Rules of Court that 1. Mr. September 16. state a cause of action is considered without prejudice and therefore an interlocutory order which cannot be a PRE-TRIAL subject of an appeal under Rule 41. Ms. L who. Rule 37). Ben is not correct. Ms. An Order denying a Motion to them. steps into the action (under Rule 33) is appealable. what will be her remedy/ remedies? A: Depending on the merit of the issue sought to be brought A: in by the amendment. Inc. 1980. shoes of the vendor and succeeds to his rights and interest 2. he can simply re-file the complaint the pre-trial order in the presence of the parties and because an Order granting a Motion to Dismiss based on their counsel. Marcos-Araneta v. L-53788. further proceedings. the filing of another Complaint (Section 5.R.R. Bright may avail of the following remedies before the finality of the decision: A: The objection should be overruled. 2009). special civil action on certiorari is the appropriate remedy. The subject on which the 1. what will be the remedy/ remedies possession of the property. 2008). consistent with substantial justice. the latter. the motion to amend may be granted upon due hearing. Q: Mr. title was consolidated in favor of remedies under each of the following situations: Del. Rule 37). Lawyer-client privilege is not involved here. When Ben failed to dismiss. Bright’s motion to dismiss. Mr. With this end in Dismiss is interlocutory because it does not finally view. Atty. No. and affidavit he offered and thus. same is denied. Should the motion be therein. In this action by the 1. QUAMTO (1997-2016) e. A motion for new trial (Sec. amendment to include a fourth (4th) triable issue G. Mr. Avenger? A: No. she could file a special civil action for about a complete determination of the controversy between certiorari under Rule 65. under Rule 65 because a dismissal based on failure to 121719. If. Rule 41. objected on the ground of lawyer-client privilege. b. L offered in the criminal case his affidavit are conducted until the RTC renders a decision in respecting what he witnessed during the incident. a judicious discretion of the trial court. 1. Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47). If the (Pharma Industries. Bright for annulment of deed of sale and other documents. Ms. Bright can avail of the during the incident and not to the communication made by following: the client to him or the advice he gave thereon in his professional capacity. reciting what had transpired and defining failure to state a cause of action is without prejudice to three (3) issues to be tried. Rule 16). the 2. favor of Mr. Bright may file a Motion for Reconsideration. Ben refused to vacate the land. 43 and 45). If the parties should be afforded reasonable opportunity to bring same is denied. Should the b. Rule on the objection. he could file a Petition for Certiorari October 17. No. Avenger may file a Motion for Reconsideration.R. directs the case to manifest injustice. no longer privileged. Avenger filed with Regional Trial Court (RTC) a DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS complaint against Ms. Petition for relief (Rule 38). 3. the judge dictated same is denied. in effect. Marmo v. Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65). Bright’s motion to dismiss and. Ben remained in action. which he allegedly inadvertently failed to mention when the judge dictated the order. 41. Avenger. Mr. (2010 Bar) A: Ms. November 27. 1999). Mr. Bright? (2014 Bar) however. plaintiff’s second witness had testified. 2. Bright’s motion to dismiss and detainer. The matter is addressed to the sound and proceed until final adjudication by the court. Is Ben correct? (2008 Bar) of Mr. he could file an appeal to the Court of Appeals the property even after title has been consolidated in the under Rule 41 since a dismissal based on lack of cause of vendee. the amendment before trial may be granted to prevent dispose of the case. what will be the remedy/ X’s lawyer wanted to cross-examine Atty. plaintiff’s counsel should move for its pleading. immediately upon receipt of his copy of the pre- right. aside from 3. No. A motion for reconsideration (Sec. 1. Maninang v. Anacay. 4. Court of Appeals. the fact that it is in respect of what the counsel witnessed After the finality of the Decision. motion to amend be granted? Reasons.R. counsel would be examined has been made public in the 2. Suppose trial had already commenced and after the 182585. G. Court of Appeals. August 22. If vendee a retro against a vendor a retro who refused to vacate denied. Rule 16) granted over the objection of plaintiff’s counsel? Reasons. 42. Avenger filed an opposition to the motion to possession of the property. No. If the RTC grants Ms. Ben averred that the case dismisses the complaint on the ground of lack of should be dismissed because Del had never been in cause of action. since a Motion to Dismiss is not a responsive trial order. as a matter of a. Avenger may file a Motion for Reconsideration if the Q: Upon termination of the pre-trial. G. 1. If the RTC denies Ms. Avenger may file a Motion for reconsideration. Avenger can choose any of the following remedies: it is not required that the plaintiff be in prior physical possession of a land subject of the action. 154096. In his defense. (Irene R. Avenger may amend his Complaint. and Remedies 3. G. Appeal (Rules 40. Hon. Ms. A: Mr. (2009 Bar) c. Hence. Pajarillaga. If the RTC denies Ms. In an action for unlawful detainer. (Section 4 and 6. v. and raise affirmative defenses vital to his client’s defense. including trial on the merits. and. Bright may file an Answer within the balance of the defendant’s counsel moves for the amendment of the period from the filing of his Motion to Dismiss but not pre-trial order to include a fifth (5th) triable issue less than five (5) days. Bright filed a motion to Q: Ben sold a parcel of land to Del with right to dismiss the complaint on the ground of lack of cause of repurchase within one (1) year. constraining Del to file a complaint for unlawful a.

Sec. Admission by adverse party. 1. The amendment would simply render nugatory matter of fact (Sec. the court in which the action is and a pre-trial in a civil case are as follows: pending may in its discretion order him to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician (Sec.” There is no provision to the contrary that a. d. a pre-trial agreement is required to interrogatories to the administrator preparatory to be reduced to writing and signed by the accused and his presenting the latter as a witness. Section 2. a party may file and serve upon any had already commenced. Rule 19). other vessel for damages to the tug. 1995. SPS engaged Atty. 2. Legal interest in the matter in controversy. the rules provided for in ordinary civil actions A: The requisites for Intervention are: shall be. REMEDIAL LAW A: The motion may be denied since trial had already specified in section 1 of Rule 23. or order any party to permit Distinction between pre-trial in civil case and pre-trial entry upon designated land or property for inspecting. insisting that the modes of discovery apply agreement may be contained in the pre-trial order (Sec. Rule on the matter. e. or Rules. memoranda. the accused and counsel agree" (Rule 118. sank in Manila Bay while helping tow another vessel. any party shall file and commenced and two witnesses for the plaintiff had already serve upon any adverse party written interrogatories testified. Rule 27). and UST BAR OPERATIONS 22 . inspection and copying or photographing of any designated documents. to allow an amendment would latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant be unfair to the party who had already presented his document or of the truth of any material and relevant witnesses. bringing about the statement he obtained from witnesses 2. criminal case and a pre-trial in a civil case. modification of the pre-trial order “before” trial begins to a court may order any party to produce and permit the prevent manifest injustice. (2008 Bar) INTERVENTION A: The administrator’s contention that the modes of discovery apply only to ordinary civil action and not to Q: What are the requisites for an intervention by a non. in criminal case measuring. The pre-trial in a criminal case is conducted only “where Rule 28). He also interviewed MODES OF DISCOVERY other persons. 1. or photographing the property or any designated relevant object or operation thereon Q: Give three distinctions between a pre-trial in a (Sec. 1. Courts are required to issue pre-trial order after the regarding material and relevant facts to be answered by pre-trial conference has been terminated and before trial the party served (Sec. Court of Appeals. copies were to be A: Five modes of discovery under the Rules of Court are: furnished. 1. On his part the heir/oppositor served written 3. Production or inspection of documents or things. precisely because the reason for such order is to 3. (1997 Bar) 5. the four (4) survivors f. The heirs of the five (5) victims filed an action for Q: Describe briefly at least five (5) modes of discovery damages against SPS. Sec. Legal interest In the success of either of the parties. while in a civil case. Deposition. 2 of new Rule 18). applicable in special proceedings. Ely refused to comply. The notes. Interrogatories to parties. Inc. which is one important motion to remove the administrator on the grounds of aspect of the pre-trial in a civil case (Sec. Legal interest against both. at the instance of A: Yes. Ely to defend it against separate proceeding (Acenas II v. (SPS) court or of an officer thereof. In an action in which the mental or physical condition of a A: Three distinctions between a pre-trial in a criminal case party is in controversy. the exact provisions were to be set forth in detail. only to ordinary civil actions. if oral. So situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the Q: A tugboat owned by Speedy Port Service. or without such leave after an (2008 Bar) answer has been served. 18 on pre-trial in civil action is explicit in allowing a Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor. August 29. Is the contention tenable? Explain. Plaintiffs' counsel sent written under the Rules of Court. more so the adverse party had other party a written request for the admission by the already presented witnesses. Sec. may be taken. Where trial have been joined. etc. the testimony of any person. the subject of the action. the reason for or purpose for the pre-trial order. or would preclude the application of the modes of discovery. as far as practicable. to probate proceedings. At any time after issues define the course of the action during the trial. or specifically Interrogatories to Parties under Rule 25 of the c. if written. the objected. in some instance making memoranda. By leave of court after jurisdiction has been documents and information asked are privileged obtained over any defendant or over property which is communication. 107762. 1 of new Rule 18). begins. asking whether statements of witnesses were obtained. 4 of former Rule 20. Rule 4. See 7 of new Rule 78). the contention of counsel for SPS is tenable any party. 4). country. Ely obtained signed statements from the survivors.R. 1. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected In a testified. At the maritime board inquiry. whether a party or not. Sec. 1. Under the same conditions and the memoranda he made. 1. Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the drowning five (5) of the crew in the resulting shipwreck. Rule 25). Physical and mental examination of persons. (2000 Bar) interrogatories to Ely. special proceedings is not correct. 1 of former Rule neglect of duties as administrator and absence from the 20. adjudication of the rights of original parties. not special proceedings. 1): while the pre-trial in a civil case is mandatory (Sec. Rule 72 of the party in an action pending in court? (2000 Bar) Rules of Court provides that: “In the absence of special provisions. In a criminal case. surveying. b. The administrator counsel (See: Rule 118. Rule 23). potential claims and to sue the company owning the No. G. 7. by deposition upon oral examination or considering that he was acting in his professional capacity in written interrogatories (Sec. Sec. 1 of former Written interrogatories to adverse party Rule 20. Sec. The pre-trial in a criminal case does not consider the Q: An heir/oppositor in a probate proceeding filed a possibility of a compromise. Rule 26). arguing that the 1.

QUAMTO (1997-2016) writings made by counsel in pursuance of his pursuance of to give deposition pending appeal. 185145. Davao City. which shall be at as early a time as is practicable. Should a party fail to file and serve written components of CCC’s products are trade secrets within the interrogatories on an adverse party. Rules of Court) Q: Continental Chemical Corporation (CCC) filed a 2.R. Procedure: Lines (whose principal offices are in Manila) in the RTC. BTC filed cause shown. invoking confidentiality of thereof. Rule 26. which Q: resolution shall be made as early as practicable. the party to whim the request directed kilometrage allowed by the rules. (Section 1. He may the period for and prior to the filing of his sworn also file a motion for the production or inspection of statement as contemplated in the preceding documents (Rule 27). and the information sought by BTC. Briefly explain the procedure on “Admission by other purpose nor may the same be used against Adverse Party” under Rule 26 and the effect of him in any other proceeding. December 13. Rule 26. by any officer thereof competent to testify in its behalf. 2007). Any party desiring to elicit material and relevant the personal knowledge of the latter. Rules of Court) A: I will deny the motion. (Section upon the latter written interrogatories to be 5. form part of his private and the court for good cause shown and to prevent confidential files in the cases handled by him. Procedure: admission on the adverse party of material and relevant facts at issue which are or ought to be. a party directing Y. within former Rule 23. Rule 25. (Sec. he cannot contemplation of the law. unless the court on motion and for good existing products. ground that the documents are not relevant and there was or within such further time as the court may allow no tender of fees for one day’s attendance and the on motion. Objections to any interrogatories may be presented on the right to avail of the modes of discovery allowed to the court within ten (10) days after service under Rule 27. (Section 1. G. failure to file and serve the request. paragraph and his compliance therewith shall be deferred until such obligations are resolved. relying 3. v. The party upon whom the purchases of industrial chemicals. (Section 3. No. No. new Rule 23). On what valid ground can Y refuse to comply with material and relevant matter of fact set forth in the the subpoena duces tecum? request. Trade secrets may not be the compel the latter to give testimony in open court or subject of compulsory disclosure by reason of their 23 . (2009 Bar) resolved. (Sec. hence failure of justice. and shall not constitute an admission by him for any b. Sec. The ingredients and chemical 4. Copies of the documents shall be delivered with the request unless copies have already been A: Y can refuse to comply with the subpoena duces tecum on furnished. 10 of New Rule 21). (Section 2. Rules of Court) a. if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or Production or inspection of documents or things association. (2016 Bar) Rules of Court) 5. At any time after issues have been joined. (Section 6. unless allowed by his professional duty. to may file and serve upon any party a written request appear and testify at the trial and to bring with him for the admission by the latter of the genuineness of several documents. Rule 25. the president of the shipping company. Any admission made by a party pursuant to such Parties” under Rule 25 and state the effect of failure request is for the purpose of the pending action only to serven written interrogatories. Rules of Court) the ground that he resides more than 50 (now 100) 2. 3. extends or shortens the time. Rule 26. CCC objected. privileged (Air Philippines Corp. February 5. when in fact they were identical with CCC’s thereof. Rule 26. BTC interrogatories have been served shall file and serve contended that it refused to pay because CCC a copy of the answers on the party submitting the misrepresented that the products it sold belonged to a interrogatories within fifteen (15) days after service new line. Rules of Court) answered by the party served or. with notice as in case of a motion. shall not be facts from any adverse parties shall file and serve permitted to present evidence on such facts. 172835. Rule 25. In its answer. the court issued a subpoena duces tecum 1. G. 2014) Q: In an admiralty case filed by A against Y Shipping b. Resolve BTC’s motion answers shall be deferred until the objections are with reasons. The interrogatories shall be answered fully in complaint for a sum of money against Barstow Trading writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the Corporation (BTC) for the latter’s failure to pay for its person making them. Briefly explain the procedure in “Interrogatories to 4. Unless otherwise allowed by the court for good A: cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice a party who fails to file and serve a request for a. Inc. Rules of Court) products’ ingredients and chemical components. To substantiate its defense.. 9 of requested shall be deemed admitted unless. A: A can take the testimony of Y and present the documents 3. Spouses Vicente Afulugencia and Leticia Afulugencia. Objections to any request for admission shall be as exhibits by taking his deposition through oral examination submitted to the court by the party requested within or written interrogatories (Rule 24. which shall not refuse to comply with the subpoena duces tecum on the be less than fifteen (15) days after service thereof. Rule 25. The witness can also a period designated in the request. How can A take the testimony of Y and present the specifically the matters of which an admission is documents as exhibits other than through the requested or setting forth in detail the reasons why subpoena from the RTC? (1997 Bar) he cannot truthfylly either admit or deny those matters. within 1. files and serves upon the party requesting the admission a sworn statement either denying b. Rules of Court. any material and relevant document described in and exhibited with the request or of the truth of any a. (Section a motion to compel CCC to give a detailed list of the 2.R. Pennswell. Each of the matters of which an admission is kilometres from the place where he is to testify.

(2004 Bar) on a promissory note. No. December 13. Pedro could intelligently prepare his answer. died instantly on board the bus on account of present evidence and the case is decided on the basis of the the fatal head wounds he sustained as a result of the evidence for the prosecution. he shall be deemed to have waived notice of hearing. Inc. Carlos comply with it. Rule 29). v. Pedro’s motion should be denied. Should the judge grant the defendant’s motion for 1968. he is acquitted and the prosecution cannot appeal. Ernesto's lawyer filed a evidence in a criminal case. in TY’s action against the privileged. Ernie. a Makati-bound paying passenger of PBU. Batangas Transportation Co. The foregoing facts. PAL.R. sole heir of AX. 1952. After TY had rested his case. Airlines. 3[d]. G. before the hearing of the petition. Carlos objected to the because of the refusal of the plaintiff to obey the order of the presentation of evidence by Pedro. Upon receipt of the of dismissal is reversed. If the accused does not obtain leave of court and his Q: AX. the court cannot validly order his arrest file a demurrer to evidence. If his If Ernesto defies the court's order directing him to demurrer is granted and on appeal by the plaintiff. 3(c). among with others who may imitate and market the same kinds of others. Otherwise. Proof that the defendant was negligent and that produce the original of the note so that the defendant such negligence was the proximate cause of the collision is could inspect it and verify his signature and the not required (Arts. a public demurrer to evidence is denied. Ernesto filed an opposition to the the right to present evidence (Sec.R. and after Carlos has and verify the original of the promissory note so that he completed the presentation of his evidence. Assuming that an order for production and to the case. (2001 Bar) Physical and mental examination of persons A: No. The defendant has the right to inspect After the pre-trial and actual trial. If his demurrer to evidence DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE is granted. The Court should not grant defendant’s demurrer to complaint as an annex. (2003 Bar) demurrer to evidence. the submit to physical and mental examinations. production and inspection of the original of the promissory note? Why? Waiver of right to present evidence A: Yes. NCC. the common under Rule 27. contending that information an exception from its coverage (Air Philippines plaintiff’s evidence is insufficient because it did not Corporation v. can the appellate court reverses the order and renders judgment for court order his arrest? (2015 Bar) the plaintiff. Carlos is not entitled to the ownership of the inspection was issued but the plaintiff failed to car. 1170 and 2201. No. party to produce and permit the inspection of designated Pedro filed his answer within the reglementary period. the defendant evidence because the case is for breach of contract of filed a motion for an order directing the plaintiff to carriage. Before answering. the accused has to obtain leave of court to defies the said order. Thereafter. he has the right to present evidence in his defense. Section 1 which expressly makes privileged carrier filed a demurrer to evidence. Phil handwritten entries of the dates and amounts. 172835.R. the court in which the action is pending may order any Ozamis City for the recovery of the ownership of a car. REMEDIAL LAW confidential and privileged character. Caguimbal. demurrer to evidence without leave of court. filed a motion to order Ernesto to submit himself for mental Demurrer to evidence in a civil case versus demurrer to and physical examination which the court granted. He can no longer present evidence. negligence was the proximate cause of the collision. The Rules provide that if the motion for Q: Ernie filed a petition for guardianship over the person dismissal is granted by the trial court but on appeal the order and properties of his father. July 30. Ernie's lawyer objected on the ground that a demurrer to evidence is not proper in a A: In a civil case. Rule 29). because upon motion of any party showing good Q: Carlos filed a complaint against Pedro in the RTC of cause. Being the plaintiff TY. If his demurrer is denied. Inc. he waives his right to utility bus. No. moved for the dismissal of the complaint on the ground that under the facts proven and under the law applicable b. L-3678. Abeto v.. Ernesto. Rule 33). 1982). Pedro filed a motion with the RTC asking the latter to allow him A: The defendant may file a motion to dismiss the complaint to present his evidence. G. L-22985. L-28692. petition. the defendant has the right to file a special proceeding. CCC would dump truck that happened while the bus was travelling eventually be exposed to unwarranted business competition on EDSA towards Makati. the terms of which were stated in the complaint and a photocopy attached to the A: No. he has the right to present evidence.R. his demurrer to evidence is denied. The court may also dismiss the strong impact of the collision between the bus and a action on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence on its UST BAR OPERATIONS 24 . were duly established on evidence-in-chief by products in violation of CCC’s proprietary rights. A: If the order for the conduct of physical and mental examination is issued as a mode of discovery and Ernesto In a criminal case. show (1) that defendant was negligent and (2) that such 2007). Mendoza v. Pennswell. If he obtains leave of court and (Sec. G. No. documents (Rule 27). a. 1. Should the RTC grant court for the production and inspection of the promissory Pedro’s motion to present evidence his evidence? Why? note (Sec. The RTC granted the motion for dismissal. February 29. the defendant loses his right to present evidence (Rule 33). the detailed list of ingredients and chemical subject common carrier for breach of contract of components may not be the subject of mode of discovery carriage. January 24. how should the defendant plead to appealed the order of dismissal and the appellate court the alleged execution of the note? (2002 Bar) reversed the order of the trial court. G. Should the court grant or deny defendant’s demurrer to Q: The plaintiff sued the defendant in the RTC to collect evidence? Reason briefly. evidence in a criminal case After Ernie's lawyer completed the presentation of Q: Compare the effects of denial of demurrer to evidence evidence in support of the petition and the court's ruling in a civil case with those of a denial of demurrer to on the formal offer of evidence..

Sec. Ernie's lawyer objected on the without trial? Explain (2005 Bar) ground that a demurrer to evidence is not proper in a special proceeding. 30. to intervene for the State 1. Revilla. as well After Ernie's lawyer completed the presentation of as the appended deed of sale. 23. before the hearing of the petition. The complaint the material allegations of the adverse party’s pleading (Sec. 10. L-31869. to 8). for lack of knowledge or evidence in support of the petition and the court's ruling information sufficient to form a belied as to the truth on the formal offer of evidence. request for admission results to an implied admission of all the matters which an admission is requested. Defendant specifically denies the allegation in in order to see to it that the evidence submitted is not paragraphs 1 and 2 of the complaint. The Rule on demurrer to evidence is applicable in defendant must aver or state positively how it is that he is Special Proceedings (Matute v. No. to be heard (Sec. August 8. May A move for judgment on the pleadings? Signed Explain. Moreover. G. in his verified answer. Evidence must have to be defendant did not execute any promissory note in presented in accordance with the requirements set down by favor of plaintiff. 1969). No. 1973. and if there is no collusion. The A: No. G. 26751. Rule 34). (1999 Bar) "Makati. 2014 Rule 34). Rule 34). that he is the owner of notice of hearing. v. 108763. or (b) otherwise admits based on the latter's promissory note. 1. Rule 119). The answer amounts to an admission. Ernesto. Rule 72 of the Rules of Court. Defendant borrowed lil 1 million from plaintiff as Q: A’s answer admits the material allegations of B’s evidenced by a duly executed promissory note. G. or 25 . alleges. court without need of a trial. Ernie. defendant promises to pay plaintiff Ill Q: A brought an action against her husband B for million. Court of Appeals and Molina. 1. Copy of the deed of sale was motion to order Ernesto to submit himself for mental appended to the complaint as Annex “A” thereof. the rules provided for in failure to do so is also an admission of the deed (Sec. Complaint. Q: Ernie filed a petition for guardianship over the person Q: In a complaint for recovery of real property. The court shall order the prosecutor Defendant. Hence. a Judgment on the pleadings motion for judgment on the pleadings is the appropriate remedy where the defendant is deemed to have admitted Q: What are the grounds for judgment on the pleadings? matters contained in the request for admission by the (1999 Bar) plaintiff (Rule 34 in connection with Sec. because even if B’s answer to A’s complaint annulment of their marriage admits all the allegations therein contained. unverified answer. under Section 2. in sale can only be denied by the defendant under oath and the absence of special rules. 1. The promissory note reads: on the pleadings? Explain. Complaint admitting all the allegations therein contained. 3[e]. Advertising Counselors. while the opinion of the court is contained in the body of the A: The plaintiff should file a Motion for Judgment on the decision that serves as a guide or enlightenment to Pleadings because the failure of the defendant to answer a determine the ratio decidendi of the decision. JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDERS Q: Plaintiff files a request for admission and serves the same on Defendant who fails. 8. May the court motu proprio render judgment 2. A copy of the promissory note is attached as Annex “A. Upon receipt of the plaintiff averred. The court cannot motu proprio render judgment on the pleadings. the genuineness and due execution of the deed of Moreover. twelve (12) months from the annulment of their marriage on the ground of above indicated date without necessity of psychological incapacity. a motion must be filed by the adverse party (Sec. the defendant denied the allegation concerning the sale of the property in question. For value received from plaintiff. B filed his Answer to the demand. In his and physical examination which the court granted. Ernesto filed an opposition to the the said property by virtue of a deed of sale executed by petition. QUAMTO (1997-2016) own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity the Supreme Court in Republic v. February 13. A: The grounds for judgment on the pleadings are: (a) where Q: Plaintiff sued defendant for collection of P 1 million an answer fails to tender an issue.R.” the material facts alleged in the complaint must always be proved (Sec. filed a the defendant in his favour. as far as practicable. among others. Inc. 1997. within the time prescribed Q: What is the difference between a judgment and an by the rules. Dec. Rule ordinary actions shall be applicable.R. ignorant of the facts alleged (Phil. Court of Appeals. Hence. alleged among others: to investigate whether or not a collusion between the parties exists. among others: 1. a judgment in the pleadings can be rendered by the special proceedings.R. Suppose the request opinion of the court? (2006 Bar) for admission asked for the admission of the entire material allegations stated in the complaint. Philippines A: No. Rule 9). the and properties of his father. Rule 26). (1999 Bar) Defendant A: No. Ernesto's lawyer filed a thereof. No. Rule 8). to answer the request. Was Ernie's counsel's objection A: Defendant cannot deny the sale of the property for lack of proper? (2015 Bar) knowledge or information sufficient to form a belied as to the truth thereof. Is it proper for the court to render judgment demurrer to evidence. January 31. the truth being fabricated (Sec. what A: The judgment or fallo is the final disposition of the court should plaintiff do? (2012 Bar) which is reflected in the dispositive portion of the decision. 2.

007 fac which calls for the presentation of evidence. judgment on the pleadings is available to the rendered (Philippine National bank v. Is judgment on the pleadings proper? (2015 Bar) opposed the motion on the ground that the PN’s maturity is an issue that must be threshed out during trial. that not all the material A: allegations of the complaint were admitted in the answer. G. would have the effect of which is sham. as UST BAR OPERATIONS 26 . the court should not grant the motion for summary affirmative defences. aliunde. hence. issue as the allegations therein on his defenses are sham and that the loan has not yet matured as the maturity for being inconsistent. if proven. or raised the deny the material allegations in the complaint or admits affirmative of payment. without consideration of any evidence as to any material fact. Royal with his spouse signing as witness. Ervin obtained a loan from Royal in the amount of raised is not genuine. A: No. Defendant has paid the Ill million claimed in the (PN) signed by Ervin. the movant must appearing in the pleadings of the parties and the establish two requisites: (a) there must be no genuine issue annexes. Aznar. affirmative defenses. that is. when the facts pleaded by the parties are Bank v. judgment on the pleadings cannot be First. As issues obviuously arise from these A: No. while the defendants’ Answer to the Complaint issues of facts. summary judgment is proper provided that the issue 2010. Second. Judgment on the pleading is proper only when the answer fails to a. REMEDIAL LAW 2. the judgment on the pleadings is not proper. judgment on the pleadings cannot be rendered. plaintiff and not to the defendant. Distinguish “Summary Judgment” and “Judgment on of the adverse party’s pleading (Sec. as evidenced by Promissory Note No.R. if it does not deny the material (Smart Communications v. the Pleadings. Jude signed a Surety Agreement promissory note (Annex "A" of the Complaint) as binding herself as surety for the loan. motion for summary judgment? (2015 Bar) it nevertheless asserts the affirmative defences that the laon is not yet due. allegations of the adverse party’s pleading by admitting the truthfulness thereof and/or omitting to deal with Summary judgment v. Should the court grant defendant's practically admitted all the material allegations therein. May 30. No. and the defendant has set up certain special presentation of evidence as distinguished from an issue defences which. by admitting the truthfulness thereof and/or omitting to deal with them at all. if it does not denied the execution of the promissory note. Merelo B. Q: Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that there are no longer any triable genuine Here. or in other words raises an issue. The evidence on record must be b. A copy of the "Acknowledgment Receipt" is attached as Annex "1" hereof. Aznar. proven. 171805. allegations in the complaint or admits said material September 11. if denied.R. Besides. since the defendant’s verified Answer specifically the Answer fails to tender any issue.R. 2015 in Manila (defendants) to pay. Royal made a final evidenced by an "Acknowledgment Receipt" duly demand on February 14. Defendants filed a Motion for a Judgment on tendered an issue. because some of them were either denied or disputed. judgment on the pleadings is proper only when Clearly. would have the effect of nullifying plaintiff’s main cause of action. except for the amount of damages. a judgment on the pleadings is judgment because the defense of payment is a genuine issue clearly improper in this case. tender an issue. Resolve the motion with reasons. the answer for some of them were either denied or A genuine issue is an issue of fact which requires the disputed. Jude also admitted that Plaintiff filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on she signed the Surety Agreement.” When it appears. however. What distinguishes a judgment on the pleadings from a viewed in light most favourable to the party opposing the summary judgment is the presence of issues in the motion who must be given the benefit of all favourable Answer to the Complaint. The motion for judgment on the pleadings should be the defendant has set up certain special defenses which. Defendants pointed the ground that defendant's answer failed to tender an out that the PN did not provide the due date for payment. May 30. when it appears that not all the and (b) the party presenting the motion for summary material allegations of the complaint were admitted in judgment must be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. In their answer. a judgement on the pleadings is appropriate. 166330. judgment on the pleading is not said material allegations of the adverse party’s pleadings proper. date was left blank to be agreed upon by the parties at a Defendant filed an opposition claiming his answer later date. Ervin admitted that he obtained the loan from Royal and signed the PN. no defense at all. When the Answer failes to inferences as can reasonably be drawn from the evidence tender any issue. Judgment on the Pleadings them at all. Aldecoa. No. a The initiatory pleading averred that on February 14. 17105. or otherwise admits the material allegations b. proceedings for a summary judgment cannot take place of a trial. 2011) disputed or contested. prayed that defendants Ervin and Jude be ordered to pay the amount of P1 million plus interests. No. the Pleadings on the ground that there is no genuine issue presented by the parties’ submissions. 2013). G. contrived or false claim. that is. nullifyinf plaintiff’s main cause of action. 2011). and a. G. fictitious. On the other hand. but the latter failed to pay. Henceforth. Royal a. if any. (Philippine National Relative thereto. it should be emphasized that judgement on the pleadings is based exclusively upon the allegations For a summary judgment to be proper. 1. as to material fact that must be resolved by the court upon presentation of evidence. A genuine issue means an issue of P1 million. when the Answer specifically denies Q: Royal Bank (Royal) filed a complaint for a sum of the material averments of the complaint or asserts money against Ervin and Jude before the RTC of Manila. Rule 34). 2015 for Ervin and Jude executed by plaintiff on January 30.

to be ascertained by trial on October 7. May Q: Defendant X received an adverse Decision of the RTC defendant properly take an appeal from said order? Or. at 8:30 o’clock in the morning. order because PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENTS are defendant X filed a Motion withdrawing his notice of interlocutory orders.R. Plaintiff A received the 1993. within 15 days from notice of judgment After due hearing. 2004. On 13 January 2003. L-49017 and L. No. 142030. appeals to the Court of reconsideration was March 15 if February had 28 days or Appeals shall be ordinary appeal by filing written notice of March 16 if February had 29 days. The full amount of the appellate It leaves something to be done by the court before the case court docket fee and other lawful fees required must also be is finally decided on the merits (Metropolitan Bank &. No. specifying the motion for reconsideration was defective because it lacked a judgment/final order or part thereof appealed from. Court of Appeals. which rendered the judgment appealed from and copy thereof shall be served upon the adverse party within 15 Matters not appealable days from notice of judgment or final order appealed from. in which case A: An interlocutory order is an order which decides some the period for appeal and notice upon the adverse party is point or matter between the commencement and end of the not only 15 days but 30 days from notice of judgment or suit but it is not the final decision on the whole controversy. because the last day of filing a motion for exercise of their original jurisdiction. But the defendant may properly February 2003 and filed his Notice of Appeal on 05 challenge said order thru a special civil action for certiorari February 2003. the docket fee and other lawful fees required with material fact and thus concluded that plaintiff is entitled the deposit for cost should be paid. But if the case admits of multiple appeals or is a special Q: What is an interlocutory order? (2006 Bar) proceeding. 2000. G. 172660. 4 and 5.. final order appealed from. 2005). April 17. 2011) A: The modes of appeal to the Supreme Court are: (a) appeal by certiorari on pure questions of law under POST-JUDGMENT REMEDIES Rule 45 through a petition for review on certiorari. August 24. Convictions imposing the death penalty are Clerk of Court submitting the motion for the elevated through automatic review. 2000. Within the same period for that the court has found no genuine issue as to any appeal. 4. ST’s counsel Q: Distinguish the two (2) modes of appeal from the filed a supplemental pleading. through counsel. (Eugenio Basbas v. consideration of the court. Court of Appeals. and (b) ordinary appeal in criminal cases through a Motion for new trial or reconsideration notice of appeal from convictions imposing reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment or where a lesser penalty Q: The RTC rendered judgment against ST. August 30. On January 2003. No. with copy thereof. ST. v. and (2) accordingly compelling reasons. The court denied due course to A’s (Sec. appeal to the Court of Appeals affidavits) for a summary judgment in his favour upon shall be by filing a verified petition for review with the Court all of his claims. the defect was cured on time by its filing on specifying the court to which the appeal is being taken. Rule 41).R. April 21. March 31. 1983). Q: After defendant has served and filed his answer to plaintiff’s complaint for damages before the proper RTC. Rule for reconsideration of the decision with notice to the 122). Rule 41). filed a motion that gave rise to the more serious offense (Sec. Modes of Appeal a. the court issued an order (1) stating or final order appealed from. the court denied A’s Motion of Pangasinan v. Although the original appeal indicating the parties to the appeal. G. 1 [c] and last par. occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence On March 10. the court which rendered the judgment or final order Gallardo v. notice of hearing. 3. (2009 Bar) Explain. On March 15. a record on appeal is required aside from the written notice of appeal to perfect the appeal. Rule 15). realizing that the Motion lacked a notice of hearing. G. plaintiff may not properly take an appeal from said Reconsideration of the Decision. The periods of 15 or 30 days above-stated are non-extendible. The 15-day period to judgment in his favour as a matter of law except as to maybe extended for 15 days and another 15 days for the amount of damages recoverable. Is the court’s denial of X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal proper? 27 . Court of Appeals. a copy of is involved but for offenses committed on the same which was received by his counsel on February 28. to Withdraw Notice of Appeal. 2001. Guevarra v.R. (2004 Bar) plaintiff A received the same Decision on 06 January 2003 and. 110147. on 19 January 2003. to the clerk of Co. No. No.R. People. special civil action for certiorari? Reason. On the other hand. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the RTC three (3) days before the date of hearing (Sec. He filed a may defendant properly challenge said order thru a Notice of Appeal on 10 January 2003. and March 15 of a supplemental hearing. G. (2000 Bar) A: In cases decided by the Regional Trial Courts in the A: Yes. In cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise plaintiff served and filed a motion (with supporting of its appellate jurisdiction. 104266. Trust paid within the period for taking an appeal. Notice of Appeal on the ground that the period to appeal already lapsed. Was the Motion for judgment of the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Reconsideration filed within the reglementary period? Appeals. ordering that plaintiff shall have judgment summarily against defendant for such amount as may be found due Period of appeal plaintiff for damages. provided that motion stating the material dates showing the timeliness of the was set for hearing and served on the adverse party at least appeal. in an ordinary civil case on 02 January 2003. appealed from (Secs. 2000.R. G. appeal in order to file a Motion for New Trial which he which is the trial for the adjudication of damages (Province attached. filed a Motion for A: No. QUAMTO (1997-2016) distinguished from an issue which is fictitious or Q: What are the modes of appeal to the Supreme Court? contrived or which does not constitute a genuine issue (2002 Bar) for trial. Order denying his Motion for Reconsideration on 03 49024. Defendant served and filed his of Appeals and furnishing the RTC and the adverse party opposition (with supporting affidavits) to the motion. Beata Sayson and Roberto Sayson Jr. There is still something to be done.

Rule on the Writ of Amparo. 1998. A decision of the Court of Tax Appeal's First Division. 121524. only No. Appeals deemed perfected? (1999 Bar) 122839.19. Judgment of MTC on a land registration case based Motion for Reconsideration within which to appeal. June 10. 2003 when X received a A: A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 before the Court of copy of the adverse decision up to January 13. awards were reduced in the amended decision and in effect the amended decision superseded the original decision. Caluag. when and where should he pursue the Appeal from judgments or final orders of the RTC. Magdalena Estates. 07-9-12-SC. counted from receipt of the order dismissing a motion for a d. Appeal is not proper. On June 13. filed with the RTC a decision of the CTA en banc may in turn be directly appealed motion for approval of the Compromise Agreement. the court may. Is the court’s denial of due course to A’s appeal A: Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order to correct? (2003 Bar) the Supreme Court by way of a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. among others. October 2. filed his withdrawal of appeal and Motion for New Trial. motion assuming that the records have not yet been forwarded to the CA. L-16250. 129. he filed motions for by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to the appellant reconsideration which were denied. R. YYY. because the period of appeal of X has not yet expired. XXX to the Supreme Court by way of a petition for review on changed his mind and opposed the motion on the ground certiorari under Rule 45 on questions of law (Section 11. appeal. and the appeal may raise questions 6. his notice of appeal February 5. G. Court (2012 Bar) of Appeals. November 20. He received the with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval notices of denial of the motions for reconsideration on of the record on appeal filed in due time (Sec. 2003 when A received a copy of the decision up to January of fact or law or both (Sec. approve was made to the original decision when the monetary compromises (Sec. No. Rule 41). that the RTC has no more jurisdiction. the court’s denial of due course to A’s appeal is not appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice correct because the appeal was taken on time. YYY received it on the next day. Is it necessary for Atty. division of the CTA may be appealed to the CTA en banc. June 30. 2003. On July 29. The RTC instead rendered an the period of appeal of YYY had not yet expired. 34. September 14. He filed on its delegated jurisdiction. XXX Tax Appeals are no longer appealable to the Court of Appeals. A: An appeal from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals is deemed perfected as to the appellant upon the Q: On July 15. From January of the adverse judgment. G. 19. REMEDIAL LAW A: No. filed a Notice of Appeal on June 15. twelve (12) days had lapsed. 2007). An appeal orders. A Perfection of appeal new notice of appeal is required to comply with the required contents thereof in respect of the amended decision (Pacific Q: When is an appeal from the RTC to the Court of Life Assurance Corporation v. 7691. Batas Rules and to afford litigants fair opportunity to appeal their Pambansa Blg. 1999. or the Judiciary Reorganization Act of cases. The period of A: No.R. Rule on the 9282. as amended by Republic Act No.M. Inc. 2004). fifth par. 2009. the court’s denial of X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of a. For his part.. the Court deems it practical to allow a Fresh Period of 1980. From January Judgment of RTC denying a petition for Writ of so. 1994) 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal in the RTC. No. March 30. a Friday. Sikat to file a second notice of Rule 41). 9. No. Sikat duly filed a notice of A: The contention of XXX that the RTC has no more appeal. A. 9. 2005). it is necessary for Atty. The decisions of the Court of 1999. A: The appeal should be filed with the Court of Appeals by filing a Notice of Appeal within 15 days from notice of NOTE: To standardized the appeal periods provided in the judgment or final order appealed from (Sec. third par. who did not appeal. 9. March 25. the defendant. The rules also provide that prior to the transmittal appeal to the amended decision because a substantial change of the record. the decision of a entered into a compromise on June 16. The 1999. He immediately informed his clients who. (1999 Bar) Q: After receiving the adverse decision rendered against his client. 2009. damages awarded. appropriate remedy for each of the following: Appeal from judgments or final orders of the CTA Q: Where and how will you appeal the following: UST BAR OPERATIONS 28 . v. 2003 when he Appeals.R.R. A: Yes. Atty. The parties Under the modified appeal procedure. An order of execution issued by the RTC. the plaintiff timely filed a motion for jurisdiction over the case is not correct because at the time partial new trial to seek an increase in the monetary that the motion to approve the compromise had been filed. b.A. Sikat to file a second Appeals. v. new trial or motion for reconsideration (Neypes et. Rule 4). Manananggol was served filing of a notice of appeal in the Regional Trial Court in due copies of numerous unfavorable judgments and time or within the reglementary period of appeal. uniformly instructed him to Appeal from judgments or final orders of the MTC. appealed to the CTA en banc. A: The decision of the Court of Tax Appeals Division may be Q: XXX received a copy of the RTC decision on June 9. How. 1999. G. 2009. Amparo. only ten (10) days had elapsed and he had fifteen (15) days to do b. 2003 when he filed a Motion for Reconsideration. or only two (2) days later. 1999. September 25. in turn. Atty. the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the (2008 Bar) perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties (Sec. Sison. the records amended decision further reducing the monetary of the case had not yet been forwarded to the Court of awards. 1964). The rules provide that in appeals by notice of notice of appeal after receiving the amended decision? appeal.. Consequently. he had three (3) days from receipt on February 2003 of the Order denying his c.

plus assessment and taxes paid by the purchaser. L-56587 files a sufficient supersedeas bond to pay the rents. within 15 days from notice of the final Order. After hearing. of the property levied upon. Is the CA had relieved the plaintiff's attachment bond from all correct? Reasons. QUAMTO (1997-2016) a. with the modification that appellant may raise questions of Q: Having obtained favorable judgment in his suit for a fact or law or both. the RTC dismissed D’s petition. within 15 days from notice of from the leased premises. R. and a date was set for the execution sale. 1981). with interest thereon. because the execution of the RTC judgment is only in respect of the eviction of the defendant A: By notice of appeal. The Municipal judgment. No. Leonidas. unless Mike (a) perfects his appeal to the RTC. 8369 in relation to Sec 3. July 31. The MTC issued the writ. Trial Court (MTC) rendered judgment in favor of whereupon P immediately moved for the execution of Jonathan. People. defendant Porfirio pendency of the appeal the amount of rent due from time to filed a sufficient counterbond. 2007). 21. When Mike failed to pay six months’ preliminary injunction staying the enforcement of the rent. to the Court of Appeals (Magestrado v. Should P’s motion be writ of execution. posting a bond equivalent to the value No. thus rendering the motion. claiming that the filing of the counterbond the appeal moot and academic. Jonathan filed an ejectment suit. In the end. at the same rate. Santiago. damages August 31. issuance of a writ of execution. within 48 hours from notice of A: Patricio may file a Petition for Relief with preliminary judgment or final order to the Court of Appeals (Sec. No.R. or assail the levy as invalid if ground exists. Orencio sought the the judgment or final order to the Supreme Court (Sec. Judgment of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) denying defendant shall be immediately executory.M. 131237. granted? Why? (2002 Bar) a. “without his client’s petition for a Writ of Habeas Data? prejudice to a further appeal” that may be taken therefrom (Uy v. Rule 9.A. 9[b]. the trial court rendered a which affirmed the MTC decision. No. Porfirio moved to charge the plaintiff's sheriff had already executed the MTC decision and attachment bond. G. to the Court of has no effect on the merits of the ejectment suit which still Appeals. How may Patricio prevent the sale of the property on child? execution? A: By notice of appeal. If Orencio is the purchaser of the property at the criminal proceedings? execution sale. (b) dismissal is not yet final (Golez v. The judgment became final. 08-1-16SC). the judgment creditor should pay only the excess 148072. who then filed a motion for the issuance of a the judgment in his favour. has to be resolved in the pending appeal. 19. Rule 70). A: By verified petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. G. The trial court discharged time (Sec. e. the attachment. G. Sec. When the writ was A. favor should be granted because the dismissal of D’s petition for relief also dissolves the writ of preliminary injunction A: Writ of Execution shall be issue if immediately upon staying the enforcement of the judgment. Judgment of a Municipal Trial Court (MTC) pursuant to its delegated jurisdiction dismissing his client’s A: No. Q: Mike was renting an apartment unit in the building but D filed a petition for relief and obtained a writ of owned by Jonathan. July 7. what can Patricio do to recover the Revenue Code? (2009 Bar) property? Explain. How can Mike stay the execution of the MTC A: P’s immediate motion for execution of the judgment in his judgment? Explain. within 5 work days from date of notice of sum of money against Patricio. pay damages because the plaintiff was not entitled to the The CA dismissed the petition on the ground that the attachment.R. (2009 Bar) 29 . Mike then filed a judgment in Porfirio's favor by ordering the plaintiff to petition for review with the Court of Appeals (CA). A: By notice of appeal.R. and costs accruing up to the time of the judgment appealed from. monthly. injunction (Rule 38). amount of the bid over the amount of the judgment. Order of the RTC denying his client’s Petition for required by the writ and the costs incurred therewith. Revised Rules of Court of paying the amount of the purchase price with interest of 1% Tax Appeals). the Court of Appeals is not correct. 2000). No. the sheriff levied upon a parcel of land that Patricio owns. Mike appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC). 14. c. attachment. Such execution pending appeal judgment or final order appealed from. Patricio may also simply pay the amount d. Rule 70 of the Rules provides that the RTC judgment against the b. The plaintiff and his sureties opposed had ejected Mike from the premises. Rule 41). Relief from judgments. Order of a Family Court denying his client’s petition for Habeas Corpus in relation to custody of a minor a. A: Orencio. (2009 Bar) A: By petition for review filed with the Court of Tax Appeals A: Patricio can exercise his right of legal redemption within (CTA) en banc. If the property is sold to a third party at the his client for violation of the National Internal execution sale. within 30 days from receipt of the decision or 1 year from date of registration of the certificate of sale by ruling in question (Sec. issued. Nonetheless. orders and other proceedings Preliminary injunction pending proceedings Q: A default judgment was rendered by the RTC ordering D to pay P a sum of money. 19. how much does he have to pay? Explain. The dismissal of application for land registration? the appeal is wrong. if the bid exceeds the amount of the judgment. Judgment of the First Division of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) affirming the RTC decision convicting c. and (c) deposits monthly with the RTC during the Q: After his properties were attached. even if the motion. Certiorari questioning the Metropolitan Trial Court’s (MeTC’s) denial of a motion to suspend b. Porfirio suffered substantial prejudice due to the unwarranted b.

a motion may be filed hold of a copy thereof and wanted to have the RTC for a court order requiring the proper bank officer to appear judgment reversed and set aside. a Petition for Certiorari under An ACTION FOR ANNULMENT may also be filed on the Rule 65 of the Rules of Court could have been an appropriate ground of extrinsic fraud within four (4) years from its remedy within the reglementary period allowed by the discovery. 2 and 3.R. 173589. Moreover. Readycon Trading and Court. January 29. Thus. Asi. necessitates the Q: May an order denying the probate of a will still be annulment of judgment of the Regional Trial Court. Tom Wallis had told issuance. (2008 Bar) January 7. deliberately not alleged and instead. Wallis in deliberately keeping Debi Wallis away from the D. Rule 47 ). The purpose of such proper and can be granted. overturned after the period to appeal therefrom has there is denial of the right to due process when Debi Wallis lapsed? Why? (2002 Bar) was not given an opportunity to be heard in the case. G. 1 and 3. At any rate. If you are the 2. Debi Wallis got obligor but under an assumed name. An action for annulment of judgment is a remedy in law independent of the case where the judgment A: Porfirio’s motion to charge plaintiff’s attachment bond is sought to be annulled was rendered. Debi certain that the deposit belongs to the judgment Wallis was declared in default and Tom Wallis presented obligor under an assumed name. 4. It is resorted to right to proceed against the attachment bond for the in cases where the ordinary remedies of new trial. after such judgment or final order was entered (Secs. It is not correct to contend that action is to have the final and executory judgment set aside Porfirio’s filing of a counterbond constitutes a waiver of his so that there will be a renewal of litigation. Three (3) years A: To reach the bank deposit belonging to the judgment after the RTC judgment was rendered. Rule on Porfirio's motion. If the bank denies holding the deposit in the name of served by served by substituted service at the address the judgment obligor but your client's informant is stated in the petition. and adverse party and all damages which the latter may sustain lack of jurisdiction (Aleban v. Inc. the judgment rendered by the RTC may be annulled by the A: Yes. on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. appeal. correct residential address of Debi Wallis was 40. SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF Annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions JUDGMENTS Grounds of annulment Q: Q: What are the grounds for the annulment of a judgment of the RTC? (1998 Bar) a. overturned after the period to appeal therefrom has lapsed. the resident address of their married son was stated. G. it is evident that the ordinary remedies of new A PETITION FOR RELIEF may be filed on the grounds of trial.. Rule 39). 2004). (2014 Bar) judgment obligor’s deposit/interest therein and to forbid a transfer or other disposition of such deposit/interest within A: Debi Wallis may file a Petition for Annulment of Judgment 120 days from notice of the order (Secs. process (Leticia Diona v. For failure to file an answer. However. Wenceslao and Associates. counsel of the judgment obligee. or other appropriate a condition inter alia of the applicant’s attachment bond that remedies are no longer available through no fault of the he will pay all the costs which may be adjudged to the appellant and is base on the grounds of extrinsic fraud. 37 and 43. Rule 47). Soriano v. The judgment obligee subsequently received A: The grounds for annulment of judgment of the Regional information that a bank holds a substantial deposit Trial Court are extrinsic fraud and lack of juris diction (Sec. Summons was b. complaint constitutes extrinsic fraud. before it is Rules. September 23.R. belonging to the judgment obligor. if the court shall finally adjudge 156021. in the creditor move for a court order directing the application of petition for declaration of nullity of marriage. EXECUTION. The RTC rendered judgment remedy to reach the deposit? (2008 Bar) declaring the marriage null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity of Debi Wallis. and if based on lack of jurisdiction. petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no fraud. Rule 9). Rule 57. Then the judgment irrational and eccentric behaviour. barred by laches or estoppel (Secs. Court of Appeals. G. what steps would you take to reach the deposit to satisfy the Q: Tom Wallis filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a judgment? petition for Declaration of Nullity of his marriage with Debi Wallis on the ground of psychological incapacity of A: Since a writ of execution is valid for five years from its the latter. Moreover. No. what judicial remedy or remedies will you and subsequently move for a court order authorizing the take? Discuss and specify the ground or grounds for said filing of an action against such bank for the recovery of the remedy or remedies. REMEDIAL LAW liability for the damages. Rule 39). mistake or excusable negligence within a longer available through no fault of Debi Wallis because she period of sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the was able to obtain a copy of the Decision only three (3) years judgment or final order and not more than six (6) months after the same was rendered by the Trial Court. the act of Tom that the applicant was not entitled thereto (Sec. Romeo Balange. It is petition for relief from judgment. The writ of execution was returned unsatisfied. 3. what is your evidence ex-parte. v. 2013). 9[c]. Hence. under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. Before filing the petition. 154106. the Court erred in declaring the defendant in default because Rule 38. by intentionally alleging a wrong address in the Construction Corp. G. Relative thereto. Debi Wallis. L-9633. No. an order denying the probate of a will may be Court of Appeals under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. Rule 39). June 29. there is no default in a Petition for declaration of nullity of marriage (Sec. 1957). 2005). accident. the such bank deposit to the satisfaction of the judgment (Sec. damages he suffered from the unwarranted attachment. No. being an indispensable party.M. the failure Time to file the petition of the Court to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent. the sheriff should be informed and requested to Debi Wallis that he wanted the annulment of their garnish or levy on execution the bank deposits belonging to marriage because he was already fed up with her the judgment obligor (Sec.R. If you are the lawyer of in court for examination under oath as to such bank deposit. No. by reason of the attachment. extrinsic fraud and denial of the right to due UST BAR OPERATIONS 30 .R. Likewise.

the sheriff was told that the Q: Aldrin entered into a contract to sell with Neil over a defendant had gone to Manila for business and would parcel of land. who paid the down payment and had paid three (3) monthly was a college student. with leave of court. G.00. act when so done shall have like effect as if done by the party. and damages. cannot be the subject of execution pending appeal. or to defendant to pay the plaintiff moral and exemplary perform. Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. Yuri. G. The petition alleged. 5. entered on 15 June 1991. had not as yet been executed. After trial. 36. 2001. the cancellation of a. if a judgment directs a party to execute a conveyance of land or personal Q: The trial court rendered judgment ordering the property. the court October 1. the former obstinately refused to execute the deed. Neil filed a required to appear before a court. The judgment. Rule 7. June 29. because awards for moral and exemplary damages shall have the effect of having been done by Neil himself. Neil to execute the deed of sale in favor of Aldrin. among others. judgment because it can no longer be enforced by motion as the five-year period within which a judgment may be Q: Despite the issuance of the writ of execution directing enforced by motion has already expired (Sec. Court of sum of money. Liabilities for unsatisfied moral and exemplary damages. What is the procedure to be v. the trial court. Since a followed by A in enforcing the judgment? petition for the issuance of the writ of execution is not an initiatory pleading. the trial court with the RTC. After the judgment had become final. a Manila resident. A decided to enforce the judgment of complaint or other initiatory pleading (Sec. and their acts when done under such authority A: No. Rule 39). but the following day. On October 8. may direct the act to be done at the cost of the disobedient 2001. No. v. A: No. summons with a copy of the complaint on the defendant at his Bulacan residence. June 8. How should the court resolve the motion? Execution" with proper notice of hearing. from the MTC of Manila. it does not require a certification against A: A can enforce the Judgment by another action reviving the forum shopping. the plaintiff filed a motion for Aldrin paid Neil all the installments but the latter an order requiring the defendant to appear before it refused to execute the deed of sale in favor of the former. returned unsatisfied. a resident of (2015 Bar) Quezon City. As the writ was Aldrin. In this shopping. the sheriff down payment upon signing and the balance payable in served the summons. in the RTC – Manila for a 59311. 1985. 2001 and on the defendant on October 5. With what court should A institute the proceedings? Aldrin's remedy? (2015 Bar) (1997 Bar) A: Aldrin may move for the issuance of a court order A: A may institute the proceedings in the Regional Trial directing the execution of the Deed of Sale by some other Court in accordance with the rules of venue because the person appointed by it. International School. that the decision had become A: The RTC-Manila should deny the motion because it is in final and executory and he is entitled to the issuance of violation of the rule that no judgment obligor shall be the writ of execution as a matter of right. In July 1996. So. Under Section 10. sued the defendant.R. 2005). 31 . 1999). outside lacked the required certification against forum the province or city in which such obligor resides. and Neil to execute a deed of sale in favor of execution was issued by the court. Should the court grant Neil's Motion to Dismiss? judgment in an ejectment case against X. rendered judgment holding the defendant liable for the in-intervention as he had already obtained a TCT in his entire amount prayed for in the complaint. G. filed an answer. The contract stipulated a P500. Arquiza the MTC of Manila. Is the order of execution pending appeal The phrase “some other person appointed by the court” may correct? Why? (2002 Bar) refer to the branch clerk of court. the defendant filed a notice of party by some other person appointed by the court and the appeal from the judgment. as well as the exact amounts remain uncertain and indefinite pending resolution by the Q: The plaintiff. any other specific act in connection therewith. 131109. the judgment pending appeal. same property to Yuri for Pl. The execution of any award for moral and exemplary damages is Examination of judgment obligor when judgment is dependent on the outcome of the main case. a writ of Yuri's title.5 million paid in cash. other documents. Inc. 6.R. on motion of the plaintiff. the plaintiff moved for the execution of If real or personal property is situated within the Philippines. together with a copy of the twelve (12) monthly installments of Pl00. resident of Malolos Bulacan. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Q: A.00 not be back until the evening of that day. Lantin. reason for its order the imminent insolvency of the defendant. October 9. for the purpose of motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that it examination concerning his property and income. Court of Appeals. sheriff or even the Register of Deeds. declared the Aldrin sued Neil for specific performance with damages defendant in default. and to be examined regarding his property and Aldrin filed a "Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of income. A month later. a Court of Appeals or Supreme Court (RCPI v. the court rendered judgment ordering Aldrin to pay all the instalments due. enforcement of the judgment is a personal action incapable of pecuniary estimation.000. When the judgment became final and executory. case the judgment obligor resides in Bulacan (Sec. January 31. No. The court gave as a special due form of law. L.R. Aldrin complaint. which indemnify the defendant for damages it may suffer as a shall have the force and effect of a conveyance executed in result of the execution. What is b. The motion to dismiss should be denied because the certification against forum shopping is only required in a a. The trial court granted the the court in lieu of directing a conveyance thereof may by an motion upon the posting by the plaintiff of a bond to order divest the title of any party and vest it in others. The judgment was served on the plaintiff on the party fails to comply within the time specified. or to deliver deeds. No. a resident of Dagupan City. Rule 39). 160479. secured a favorable a. 2001. on the defendant’s 18 year-old daughter.000. name. When the sheriff tried to serve the Appeals. For the defendant’s failure to installments when he found out that Neil had sold the answer the complaint within the reglementary period.

but it was discharged of preliminary attachment.5 million as actual damages. The UST BAR OPERATIONS 32 . (ii) the writ was improperly the point of view of procedure. Rule 57). with an ex-parte PROVISIONAL REMEDIES application for a writ of preliminary attachment. Serving a notice attachment shall be filed with the proper court and notice of of garnishment..5 million following grounds: (i) the court did not acquire as moral damages and P0.5 million as exemplary jurisdiction over his person because the writ was served damages. A local judgment may be enforced by motion reason is that a preliminary injunction may cause grave and within five years and by action within the next five years irreparable injury to the party enjoined. The writ was notice of garnishment on the bank to implement the writ levied on the defendant’s property. Plaza Enterprises Inc. order cause of action against the defendant and that he had of attachment. The following day. G. and a notice that the bank deposits are attached pursuant to Q: May damages be claimed by a party prejudiced by a the writ (Sec. 7. O. Rule 57) However.R.R. Rule 57). 1997). writ of preliminary attachment and sued out the writ of attachment maliciously. While we can say that where the parte. the court granted the Preliminary attachment application and issued a writ of preliminary attachment. Bar) Enforcement and effect of foreign judgments or final A: YES. Within fifteen (15) days from service Accordingly. Evaluate the soundness of the judgment from ahead of the summons. (1999 Bar) over his person.R. Is this provision party to abscond or dispose of his property before a writ of applicable to an action filed in the Philippines to enforce attachment issues (Mindanao Savings and Loan Association. This is authorized by the Rules. Court of Appeals. it is provided that in such case. 5. The judgments. As provided in the Rules. The reason why the order may be issued ex parte is that requiring Q: Under Article 1144 of the New Civil Code. the court dismissed the complaint and of the summons. (1999 Bar) shown that the obligation was already fully paid. attachment that should be served on the defendant. No. the sheriff upon the posting by the defendant of a counterbond in proceeded to Tyrone’s house and served him the the same amount of P1 million. unenforceable. A: No. March 30.R. Can it be attached? the summons did not affect the jurisdiction of the court Explain. all that is needed to be done is to re- A: Although the property of an incompetent under serve the writ (Onate v. Javellana v. preliminary attachment should be denied. (2005 Bar) was not given to him of the applicant for damages (Sec 20. 20. attachment bond. 1985). No. The writ was improperly implemented. April 18. REMEDIAL LAW b. Seven years after the entry of judgment. Moreover. and (iii) said writ was improvidently issued because the obligation in question was already A: The judgment against the surety is not sound if due notice fully paid. L-28297. 84481. (2002 Bar) implemented. Abrogar. because the sheriff did not exert sufficient effort to D. Apprehensive that Tyrone might withdraw his savings Q: The plaintiff obtained a writ of preliminary deposit with the bank. Q: Katy filed an action against Tyrone for collection of the sum of P1 million in the RTC. a foreign judgment? Explain. Rule 57). is not proper. (2005 Bar) Inc. April 18. It should be a copy of the writ of (Sec. no preliminary injunction law does not distinguish. Rule 57). serve summons personally on the defendant within a reasonable time and hence the RTC-Manila did not acquire Q: May a writ of preliminary attachment be issued ex jurisdiction over his person (Secs. No. Tyrone filed a motion to dismiss and to ordered the plaintiff and its surety to pay jointly to the dissolve the writ of preliminary attachment on the defendant P1. It makes the writ. 120941. Upon posting of an attachment bond. The fact that the writ of attachment was served ahead of guardianship was in custodia legis. G. the property of an incompetent under 1. the judgment against the surety cannot A: The motion to dismiss and to dissolve the writ of exceed the amount of its counterbond of P1 million. does not apply to an action filed in the Philippines to A: No. Q: In a case. v. the sheriff immediately served a attachment upon a bond of P1 million. After trial. That is not the case with respect to foreign judgments which cannot be enforced by mere motion. a copy of the writ of 2. 5. 6 and 7. P0. 7[d]. A: Yes. Rule 58). last par. Katy’s affidavit. still the shall be granted without hearing and prior notice to the law does not evidently contemplate the inclusion of foreign party or person sought to be enjoined (Sec. guardianship is in custodia legis. A claim for damages may be Manila did not acquire jurisdiction over his person? made on account of improper. which shall be heard with notice to the adverse party and his surety or sureties (Sec. particularly before the summons is the attachment served upon the custodian of such property served. with copies of the complaint containing the rendered judgment finding that the plaintiff had no application for writ of attachment. we should not distinguish. The writ was improvidently issued if indeed it can be him? Explain. an action notice to the adverse party and a hearing would defeat the upon a judgment must be brought within 10 years from purpose of the provisional remedy and enable the adverse the time the right of action accrues. Court of Appeals. (Sec. wrongful attachment even if the judgment is adverse to 3. damages may be claimed by a party prejudiced by a successfully oppose the revival of the judgment by wrongful attachment even if the judgment is adverse to him. the plaintiff filed an action for its revival. 1989). No. contending that it is null and void because the RTC. (Rule 39). G. it may be attached as in fact February 23. 1970). Rule 57. G.. Rule 14. Resolve the motion with reasons. the court summons. Article 1144 of the Civil Code which requires that an Q: May a preliminary injunction be issued ex parte? action upon a judgment (though without distinction) must be Why? (2001 Bar) brought within 10 years from the time the right of action accrues. De parte? Briefly state the reason(s) for your answer. 2. an order of attachment may be issued ex parte or orders upon motion with notice and hearing (Sec. (2001 Guzman v. Can the defendant A: Yes. a writ of preliminary injunction may not be issued ex enforce a foreign judgment. 197393. irregular or excessive Why? (2002 Bar) attachment.

Notice shall be served on third parties. Agente was able to sell the property but where he has intent to defraud or has committed fraud. Agente failed to return the amount as he had used it for the construction of his own house. The Court issues royalties and other personal property not capable of manual the preliminary attachment after A files a bond. Garnishment is a manner of satisfying or executing judgment Thus. The court possession of third persons and are due the judgment granted the ex-parte motion and issued a writ of obligor. charge or penalty due him. Agente filed an judgment where the sheriff may sell property of the Answer with Motion to Discharge the Writ if Attachment judgment obligor if he is unable to pay all or part of the alleging that at the time the writ of preliminary obligation in cash. in criminal cases. The warrant of seizure must pending. 13. or any executed? (2014 Bar) court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced. he has not been served with acceptable to the obligee. G. effects a levy on property of a party as security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered. house and lot. ground for resolving the improvident issuance of the writ. Agente is not correct. any court within the judicial region where the crime was committed if b. Levy is the issuance of Bar) a certification by the proper officer showing the name of the taxpayer and the tax. 9 [b]. (2012 Bar) pursuant to the writ shall be enforced unless it is preceded or contemporaneously accompanied by service of summons. Rule 39). Rule 57). a special power of attorney to sell his this adverse party is about to depart from the Philippines. however. levy on execution. royalties. If not. However. An affidavit and a bond is On his return to the Philippines. among his property may be sold. preliminary attachment with the court. and real estate taxes. On November 22. Rule on this. Alleging garnishment is a levy on debts due the judgment obligor or fraud in the contracting of the loan. Is Agente correct? sufficient to satisfy judgment and other lawful fees (Sec. yet the description is required to be issuance of a writ of attachment. 2009). allow. therefore. where favor of Agente. He must sell only so much of the personal or real property as is a. or is failed to remit the proceeds to Bayani. (1999 be sold in an authorized auction sale. by way of a required before the preliminary attachment issues. the application shall only be made in the court where The alleged payment of the account cannot serve as a the criminal action is pending. November 25. Was the writ of preliminary attachment properly the place of the commission of the crime is known. governments and the BIR in tax cases to satisfy deficiencies serves as a ground for a motion to dismiss. issued in attached as security for satisfaction of any judgment. the sheriff shall sell (2014) personal property first and then real property second. or delinquencies in inheritance and estate taxes. because this matter delves into the merits of the Warrant of distraint and levy is remedy available to local case. It may be sought at the summons with the writ of attachment (Sec. the Sheriff served state how much funds or credits the garnishee holds for the upon Agente the writ of attachment and Agente levied on judgment obligor (Section 9[c]. Nicanor specific only insofar as the circumstances will ordinarily Satsatin. QUAMTO (1997-2016) writ is only ancillary to the main action (Sec. 2013. an overseas worker based in Dubai. 166759. as agreed upon. the latter’s house and lot. the Sheriff served upon Agente summons and a copy of the Levy on execution is a manner of satisfying or executing complaint. the amount due him. not found in the Philippines. certified bank check or any other manner attachment was issued. Distraint is the seizure of personal property to Q: Distinguish attachment from garnishment. Rule 57). the applicant of the writ is only particularly describe the things to be seized. (Sofia Torres v. the sheriff attached B's properties. Q: Briefly discuss/differentiate the following kinds of B moves to lift the attachment. While it is true required to (i) submit an affidavit and (ii) post a bond before that the property to be seized under a warrant must be the court can validly issue the writ of attachment. (2012 Bar) Attachment: preliminary attachment. 5. If the obligor does not chose which summons and. credits. Section 2. It is demand letter duly received by Agente sought to recover discharged upon payment of a counter bond. Accordingly. if the criminal action has already been 33 . Bayani subsequently filed an ex- commissions. An application for search and seizure warrant shall be the issuance of the writ of attachment is valid filed with the following: (a) Any court within whose notwithstanding the absence of a prior service of summons territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed. The Rules particularly described therein and no other property can be do not require prior service of summons for the proper taken thereunder. filed. Afterwards. compelling reasons stated in the application.R. While delivery under a writ of execution or a writ of attachment. Bayani prayed that the court’s sheriff be not the judgment obligor has sufficient funds or credits to deputized to serve and implement the writ of satisfy the amount of the judgment. Levy is A: Attachment and garnishment are distinguished from each made by writing upon said certificate the description of the other as follows: Attachment is a provisional remedy that property upon which levy is made. (b) For to Agnete. Rule 57 provides that a writ of attachment may be issued ex parte or upon motion Warrant of seizure is normally applied for with a search with notice and hearing by the Court in which the action is warrant. A: Preliminary attachment is a provisional remedy under There must the prior or contemporaneous service of Rule 57 of the Rules of Court. bank deposits and other personal property not parte motion for the issuance of a writ of preliminary capable of manual delivery that are in the control or attachment duly supported by an affidavit. The third preliminary attachment upon Bayani’s posting of the party garnishee must make a written report on whether or required bond. including bank deposits. On November 20. warrant of seizure and warrant of A: I will grant the motion since no levy on attachment distraint and levy. summons was duly served on B. 2013. A applies for defendant and other credits. Rule 39). it was improperly issued. commencement of an action or at any time before entry of judgment where property of an adverse party may be Q: Bayani. and requires full-blown trial. garnishment. No. Bayani filed an action against Agente for sum of where the sheriff may levy debts. On November 19. while Q: A sues B for collection of a sum of money. Payment. A: No. the report shall attachment. money with damages. Under the Rules. 2013. summons on B was yet unserved. Bayani. fee.

2008 and she is immediately arrested. (Madarang v. a preliminary injunction may not be issued remedy and injunction as a main action. v. No. Rule 58). a written request with the Commissioner of the jurisdiction over his person is obtained (Davao Light and Bureau of Immigration for a Watch List Order pending the Power Co. Court of Appeals. November 25. 2001). The writ of preliminary attachment was not properly A: The filing of an appropriate criminal action cognizable by executed. The President of the Philippines is immune from suit. credit card company of his loss.R. G. 3 and 4. 4 [b]. Lacson..R. (2) a violation of that right. a Justice of a Division of the Court of Appeals may UST BAR OPERATIONS 34 . Q: Distinguish between injunction as an ancillary however. since it neither directs the printout of: 1)the online ticket purchase using his credit doing or undoing of acts as in the case of prohibitory or card. 2) the phone call log to show that he already alerted the mandatory injunctive relief (Garcia v. What pieces of electronic evidence will Dante have Q: Define a temporary restraining order (TRO). the writ of preliminary attachment must then. (2006 Bar) transaction? (2010 Bar) A: A temporary restraining order is issued upon application A: He will have to present (a) his report to the bank that he of a party and upon the posting of the required bond. Mojica. the Executive Judge. statement-bearing the online ticket transaction. 2009). Thus. No other Judge has the matter to the credit card company. and (b) a final writ of Supreme Court to stop the president of the Philippines injunction? (2006 Bar) from entering into a peace agreement with the National Democratic Front? (2003 Bar) A: A: The requisites for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction are: (1) a right in esse or a clear and unmistakable A: A suit for injunction cannot aptly be filed with the right to be protected. G. Suppose an Information is filed against Dina on Preliminary Injunction August 12. a status quo order maybe issued motu proprio on the report of the lost add. No. 55336. b. No. Court of Appeals. No. (2006 Bar) without the posting of a bond. a. he learned that a the right or power to issue a temporary restraining order ex one-way airplane ticket was purchased online using his parte. may not bind and affect the defendant until thereafter. Unlike a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction. G. March 25. 117964. a status quo order is more in the Dante should bring an original (or an equivalent copy) nature of a cease and desist order. an injunction as the main action is raffled the case in the presence of the judges of Branches brought specifically to obtain a judgment perpetually 2. May 4. G. conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the Upon extensive inquiry with the airline company. (2001. 2. and does not require the posting of ticket. Q: What are the requisites for the issuance of (a) a writ Q: Can a suit for injunction be aptly filed with the of preliminary injunction. A: Yes. Nicanor Satsatin. G. one Dina Meril. The Judge to whom the case is assigned will then credit card for a flight to Milan in mid. September 10. (b) that the ticket was purchased after other hand. Two days later. and 3) his credit card billing 139043. Its main function is with a prayer for a temporary restraining order is to preserve the status quo until the merits can be heard and included in a complaint and filed in a multi-sala RTC resolved (Urbanes v. A: No. nature. (3) 29. No. Democratic Front. December 11. to secure in order to prove the fraudulent online Differentiate a TRO from a status quo order. PAGCOR.R. the same. L-13316. Court Q: An application for a writ of preliminary injunction of Appeals. Motion for the issuance of a Hold Departure Order. which is a purely political question No.R. (2) however. Dante lost his organizer including his credit card immediately a temporary restraining order effective only for and billing statement. 138298. unless exempted by the trial court (Sec. and (c) the purchase of one-way equitable considerations. it appears that the applicant is entitled to have the Q: May the RTC issue injunction without bond? (2006 act or acts complained of permanently enjoined (Sec. 5. order. the airline company should be requested to cancel the only be served simultaneous or at least after the service of ticket issued to Dina. 1989). G. including the original 72-hour period (Sec. Dante temporary restraining order shall be extended. 1991). upon the filing of the aforesaid application immediately On the other hand. Rule 58) or otherwise provided for by law. who was sitting in Branch 1. Rule Bar) 58). It is only the Executive Judge who can issue 2008. upon reporting seventy-two (72) hours from issuance. Being urgent in 28. No. A: Injunction as an ancillary remedy presupposes the existence of a principal or a main action (Vallangca v. 93262 December issuance of the Hold Departure Order should be filed. Although a writ of attachment may issue even the RTC against Dina and the filing in said criminal action a before summons is served upon the defendant. 2006 Bar) Q: While window-shopping at the mall on August 4. 134971. On the lost his credit card. 166759. a bond. Is the temporary restraining order valid? Why? 2000). G. 1999). Inc. summons to the defendant (Sofia Torres v. REMEDIAL LAW A: No. March consisting of Branches 1. if the injunction issued is a final injunction. 3 and 4.R. (3) that Supreme Court to stop the President of the Philippines from there is an urgent and permanent act and urgent necessity entering into a peace agreement with the National for the writ to prevent serious damage (Tayag v. but in no case discovered that the plane ticket was under the name of beyond 20 days. What is the proper procedure to prevent Dina from Q: May a justice of a Division of the Court of Appeals issue leaving the Philippines? a TRO? (2006 Bar) A: Yes. The case was raffled to Branch 4 and judge restraining or commanding the performance of an act after thereof immediately issued a temporary restraining trial (Del Mar v.R. Santamaria. Dante approaches you for legal advice. Generally. G. 2004). November 29. No.R.August 2008. A final writ of injunction may be granted if after trial of the action. 9. 1917).R.

1 and 4. v. and equipment are left with Jose. (2000 Bar) support pendente lite to the child born to the offended party allegedly because of the crime. A: To preserve whatever remaining machinery and The petition is filed under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. the certiorari (Sec. During the pendency of the case. 131457. Q: AB mortgaged his property to CD. April 24. the certiorari jurisdiction of the judgment was rendered by the court in favor of Joaquin Supreme Court provides for its expanded jurisdiction power but the same is not yet final. Corona. she asked the accused to support thereafter. AB tendered the full the child. Rules of Court) A: Yes.R. pendency of the foreclosure suit.R. the date of receipt of the Order. February 6. the ground that the Order does not comply with the 2001) provisions of Section 2. being wasted or dissipated or materially injured and that its value is probably insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt But under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The court erred in issuing an Order granting CD’s prayer for foreclosure of mortgage and ordering AB to pay SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS CD the full amount of the mortgage and ordering AB to pay CD the full amount of the mortgage debt including interest Certiorari. Artistica Ceramica. AB received the Order on daughter gave birth to a child allegedly as a consequence August 10. No. Fortich v. AB failed to pay his Roldan. G. modification or recall (Heirs of the late in the exercise of its jurisdiction. L-252. 1998. Reyes v. insists that he cannot be made to give such tendered beyond the 120-day period granted by the support arguing that there is as yet no finding as to his court. No. Would you agree with the trial court if it denied the CD be directed to receive the amount tendered by him on application for support pendent lite? Explain. deprive the court of jurisdiction and is correctible only by 135425-26. the accused may be ordered to provide certiorari prosper? Explain. whereas an error of jurisdiction is one which the court acts without or in excess of its jurisdiction. Nos. Rule 61. March 30. No. Such an Receivership error renders an order or judgment void or voidable and is correctible by the special civil action of certiorari (Dela Cruz Q: Joaquin filed a complaint against Jose for the v. Cochingyan v. The court denied his be granted by the RTC in the criminal action for rape. QUAMTO (1997-2016) issue a TRO. Moir. A: Replevin or delivery of personal property consists in the order or resolution in question (Secs. In the meantime. what action would instrumentalities of the government where there is a grave you take to preserve whatever remaining machinery abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of and equipment are left with Jose? Why? (2001 Bar) jurisdiction. (1999. delivery. Will the petition for prior to its filing. G. foreclosure of a mortgage of a furniture factory with a Cloribel. The Rules provide that receivership is fixed for availing of the remedy is within 30 days from proper in an action by the mortgagee for the foreclosure of a receipt of the copy of the decision. 1987 Constitution). 1999. refused to accept it on the ground that the money was however. 2010). No. April 22. board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial Q: What is replevin? (1999 Bar) functions only. prohibition and mandamus and other charges not later than 120 days from receipt of the Order. Knowing what Jose has been of judicial power over [governs] all branches or doing. obligation and CD filed an action for foreclosure of mortgage. 1917. AB files a petition for aspect thereof has not been waived. Court of Appeals. (2008 Bar) with Jose were no longer sufficient to answer for the latter’s mortgage indebtedness. The court should have rendered a judgment which is 35 . Such an error does not Justice Jose B. 1977. reliable sources that Jose was quietly and gradually 167583-84. A: Under the Constitution. board or officer verified application for the appointment by the court of one exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions and the period or more receivers.L. G.R. 7. (2012 Bar) additionally requires that the action shall be submitted on the next working day to the absent members of the division A: An error of judgment is one which the court may commit for their ratification. disposing of some of his machinery and equipment to a businessman friend who was also engaged in furniture Q: Compare the certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme manufacturing such that from confirmed reports Court under the Constitution with that under Rule 65 of Joaquin gathered. June 16.. as authorized under Rule 58 and by Section 5. Aggrieved. and when he refused. 1 [b]. No other proceeding took place of the rape. August 16. Rule 65). jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is limited to acts done without or in excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of Replevin discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Joaquin's lawyer should file a the writ is directed not only to tribunal. Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution. A was charged with rape of his 16. by a tribunal. second par. During the G.R. Rule 68 of the Rules of Court which give AB 120 day from entry of judgment. The accused. 135180-81. interest and other charges not later than 120 days from year old daughter. Art. IX. If you were Joaquin’s lawyer. upon the filing of a bond (Calo v. Thereafter. as [agencies and instrumentalities] provided in Section 1. reserved or instituted certiorari against the Court and CD. And the period fixed for availing of the remedy is not later than 60 days from notice of judgment. Q: Distinguish error of jurisdiction from error of Rule VI of the Internal Rules of Court of Appeals which judgment. Inc. 1999. On December 20. (Sec. Inc. G. of personal property by the defendant to the plaintiff. and not A: No. appeal. AB filed a motion in the same court praying that guilt. by order of the court. Joaquin learned from Ciudad Del Carmen Homeowner's Association. the machinery and equipment left the Rules of Civil Procedure. large number of machinery and equipment.R. After trial.. 2000). G. The provisional remedy of support pendente lite may from date of receipt of the Order. 27070-71. the court issued an Order granting Support pendente lite CD’s prayer for foreclosure of mortgage and ordering AB to pay CD the full amount of the mortgage debt including Q: Before the RTC. Rule 68. Rule 59). Nos. order ruling in question mortgage when it appears that the property is in danger of (Sec. the former filed a amount adjudged by the court to CD but the latter petition for support pendente lite.R. 6. 1946). In motion on the ground that Order had already become criminal actions where the civil liability includes support for final and can no longer be amended to conform with the offspring as a consequence of the crine and the civil Section 2. L-12256.

1999 Bar) Why? A: Certiorari as an original action and certiorari as a mode A: YES. Rule 68). a. motion. discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Did the trial court abuse its discretion or act without tantamount to lack or excess of jurisdiction. 5. while under the second. however. Decisions of the Civil court denied the defendant’s motion because it was not Service Commission. Mago v. As a mode of review of the decisions of the National Q: The defendant was declared in default in the RTC for Labor Relations Commission and the Constitutional his failure to file an answer to a complaint for a sum of Commissions. 1999. the lower court is impleaded as a party would instruct his lawyer to withdraw the complaint. G. The first is a special civil action under Rule 65. The petition for certiorari under Rule 65 filed by the of appeal may be distinguished as follows: defendant is the proper remedy because appeal is not a plain. appeal by petition for review or original action from the Regional Trial Court or the Court of ordinary appeal. On the basis of the plaintiff’s ex parte presentation of evidence. judgment by default was A: The mode of review of the decision of the NLRC is via a rendered against the defendant. A long line of Supreme Court decisions. c. 2001. Rule 36). 2. d. The default judgment special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65. the judgment became Appeals to the Supreme Court against any tribunal. The Court of Appeals. As a mode of appeal from the Regional Trial Court or 2005 Bar) the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. REMEDIAL LAW appealable. G. Under the first. No. Rule of 45). while the In appeal. 1999). 42. AB had up to December 24.R. or defendant’s motion because it was not accompanied by a of the denial of the petitioner’s motion for new trial or separate affidavit of merit. the defendant judgment (Sec. defendant’s motion to lift the order of default c. immediately upon receipt of the summons. Civil Procedure. Court of Appeals. the issue of lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of 1999 within which to pay the amount due (Sec. the defendant alleged that. the defendant in default can only question the second is an appeal to the Supreme Court from the decision in the light of the evidence of the plaintiff. Rule 65). Hence. too numerous to mention. February 25. In his 16. alleged that immediately upon the receipt of the summons. order or resolution sought to be assailed (Sec. obligation to the plaintiff. 4. Rule 65). Is certiorari under Rule 65 the proper remedy? certiorari as a mode of appeal. however. Rule 65 except under very exceptional circumstances. In cases when the Court of Appeals imposes UST BAR OPERATIONS 36 . the the good defense of the defendant was already incorporated lower court is not impleaded (Sec. speedy and adequate remedy excess of jurisdiction in denying AB’s motion praying that CD in the ordinary course of law. As special civil action from the Regional Trial Court holds that certiorari is not a substitute for a lost appeal. Court of Appeals. speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. 2. October 10. which is the date of entry of officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions raising judgment (Sec. Q: Differentiate certiorari as an original action from a. 4. the Supreme Court under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of 115624. On to the hierarchy of the courts enunciated in the case of St. but pursuant was served on the defendant on October 1. challenging the denial order. the trial court gravely abused its discretion or acted filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the without or in excess of jurisdiction in denying the judgment or final order or resolution appealed from. board or final on August 25. Q: May the aggrieved party file a petition for certiorari in June 27.R. In his verified motion to lift the reconsideration filed in due time after notice of the order of default and to set aside the judgment. 1994. instead of filing a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 thereof for the nullification of a Q: Explain each mode of Certiorari: decision of the Court of Appeals in the exercise either of its original or appellate jurisdiction? Explain. A: To NULLIFY A DECISION of the Court of Appeals the A: A petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 is a mode aggrieved party should file a PETITION FOR REVIEW ON of appeal on pure questions law from a judgment or final CERTIORARI in the Supreme Court under Rule 45 of the order or resolution of the Regional Court or the Court of Rules of Court instead of filing a petition for certiorari under Appeals to the Supreme Court. G. are reviewable by petition accompanied by an affidavit of merit. 1998. a. 2. he files a verified motion to lift the Martin’s Funeral Homes v. No.R. he saw the plaintiff and The mode of review of the decisions of two Constitutional confronted him with his receipt evidencing his payment Commissions. as provided under Rule 64 is a special instruct his lawyer to withdraw the complaint. The first should be filed within sixty (60) days from judgement? Why? (2002 Bar) notice of the judgment. 112795. The first can be filed only on the grounds of lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion b. in the verified motion. when the Court of Appeals imposes the death penalty. Sandiganbayan and the Regional Trial defendant cannot invoke the receipt to prove payment of his Court under Rule 45. the Commission on Elections and the and the at the plaintiff assured him that he would Commission on Audit. (2006 Bar) money. Since no appeal was taken. b. The first cannot generally be availed of as a substitute he saw the plaintiff and confronted him with his receipt for a lost appeal under Rules 40. there The court gravely abused its discretion amounting to lack or being no appeal or any plain. while the or in excess of its jurisdiction in denying the second is based on the errors of law of the lower court. NLRC. (1998. The trial civil action for certiorari under Rule 65. 2001. Since respondent (Sec. It or the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. showing payment and that the plaintiff assured him that he e. September order of default and to set aside the judgment. Rule 45). b. (1999. the same should be filed in the Court of Appeals. No. 130866. there was no need for a separate affidavit of merit (Capuz v. while the second should be A: Yes. be directed to receive the amount tendered. The defendant for review to be filed with the Court of Appeals under Rule filed a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 43. or a lesser penalty for offenses A: A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65. 43 and 45. should be noted. is an committed on such occasion. 41.

2015. life imprisonment or a lesser penalty. hence. with the costs taxed against him. the remedy taken by the Governor is not correct. the ordinary course of law. the petition when the trial court is confronted with a motion to withdraw for certiorari should be filed before the Court of Appeals an Information (on the ground of lack of probable cause to within sixty (60) days from receipt of the copy of the order hold the accused for trial based on a resolution of the DOJ of denial of the public prosecutor’s motion for Secretary). as required by Section 14. 1. G. appeal the Ombudsman claiming there was grave abuse of is not available. The court must remedy. Title III. the authority to represent against the accused." already removed in the enumeration of matters that cannot be a subject of an appeal under Section 1. Chapter 12 thereof. (2004 Bar) the treasurer who was granted immunity when he agreed to cooperate with the Ombudsman in the A: The order or decision is void because it does not state prosecution of the case. the judge acted with grave the people is vested solely in the Solicitor General. budget officer. Was the remedy taken by the governor correct? Court of Davao City in a decision promulgated on September 30. de Castro. therefore. GR No. The court issued an Order dated the treasurer who agreed to cooperate in the prosecution of October 16. speedy and "Based on the review by the DOJ Secretary of adequate remedy under the course of law. Article with the Sandiganbayan a petition for certiorari against VIII of the Constitution and Sec. June 1. 2008). On October 7. On October 5. RTC. motion for reconsideration. the public prosecutor filed a motion committed grave abuse of discretion in granting immunity to for reconsideration. April 30. Reliance alone on the resolution of the Secretary would be an abdication of the trial court’s duty and A: The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) should pursue the jurisdiction to determine a prima facie case. On October 9. The order of the judge stated certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. Otherwise. It is well-settled that A: Following the principle of judicial hierarchy. it may be argued that appeal is the Court agrees that there is no sufficient appropriate remedy from an order denying a motion for evidence against the accused to sustain the reconsideration of an order granting a motion for new trial allegation in the information. Information for plunder was filed with the It is so ordered. the OSG is the appellate defendant without prior leave of court moved for counsel of the People of the Philippines in all criminal cases dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint for insufficiency of (Cariño v. with the conformity of the public filed a Motion for Reconsideration. vice governor. acting on the accused's petition for from the court's order granting Jaime's motion for review. what should you do? of Court. the Be that as it may. Q: Jaime was convicted for murder by the Regional Trial a. 2015. motion to dismiss and accordingly orders the dismissal treasurer. and accountant. No. 2011). 177727. 2010). the court granted Jaime's motion. Under abuse of discretion if he grants the Motion to Withdraw Presidential decree No. (2003.” Is the order of dismissal valid? May Sandiganbayan against the provincial officials except for plaintiff properly take an appeal? Reason. speedy and adequate remedy under the committed during his trial.R. In what court and within what period should a A: If I were the private prosecutor. Jaime filed a A: No. After due hearing of the motion and the opposition thereto. Upon order of the DOJ Secretary. An of plaintiff’s complaint. Explain. functions of the OSG is to “represent the government in the Romulo Awingan et. 4478 among the specific powers and Information by the trial prosecutor (Harold Tamargo v. Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals in all criminal proceedings. Rule 36. 2012 Bar) b. It may either agree or disagree with the recommendation of the c. No. independent assessment of the merits of the motion.185230. People. January 19. Information. filed an Opposition to Jaime's motion. G. or on October 20. QUAMTO (1997-2016) reclusion perpetua. 2015. granted.” This provision has been carried over to the Q: After plaintiff in an ordinary civil action before the Revised Administrative Code particularly in Book IV. In criminal proceedings on appeal in the Court of itself be convinced that there is indeed no sufficient evidence Appeals or in the Supreme Court. the trial court has the duty to make an reconsideration. The proper remedy is certiorari under Rule discretion in excluding the treasurer from the 65. plaintiff’s evidence. Who should pursue the remedy? (2015 Bar) Secretary. al. 2015. October 26.R. 2015. Being void. Q: After an information for rape was filed in the RTC. the governor filed findings of fact and of law. On Besides. the trial prosecutor filed a Motion to Withdraw Information A: The remedy of the prosecution is to file a petition for which the judge granted. 176084. The public prosecutor received his copy of the order of denial on October 20. Rule 41 of the Rules If you were the private prosecutor. the findings of the investigating prosecutor during the preliminary investigation. 37 . the court issued an order. The motion to because an order denying a motion for reconsideration was withdraw Information is. the Governor should have private prosecutor. 2015 while the private prosecutor received his copy on appeal is by notice of appeal filed with the Court of Appeals. ZZ has completed presentation of his evidence. Immediately. Q: The Ombudsman found probable cause to charge with reading as follows: “The Court hereby grants defendant’s plunder the provincial governor. the a. because the only the following: denial of a motion for reconsideration is merely an interlocutory order and there is no plain. I would file a petition for remedy be availed of? certiorari under Rule 65 with the Court of Appeals (Cerezo v. 2015 denying the public prosecutor's the case. 2015. prosecutor. reversed the investigating prosecutor's finding new trial? of probable cause. 2015. Without doubt. there is no showing that the Ombudsman October 12. The Motion for New Trial on the ground that errors of law petition for certiorari is a remedy that is only available when and irregularities prejudicial to his rights were there is no plain. What is the remedy available to the prosecution DOJ Secretary.

exercise of judgment and discretion. as in fact he continued to occupy his aforesaid did it have any government permit or license to conduct position and exercise his functions thereto. the COMELEC approved the Voter’s Registration its 5-hectare lot in Sta. Laguna originally intended and Identification System (VRIS) Project. Petitioner its business as such. Will the writ of mandamus lie to compel the Ombudsman to include the treasurer in the A: No." A files a Petition for Mandamus against the judge. Manila Railroad Co.R. Fotokina was declared the winning bidder with a bid of P6 billion and was issued a Notice of A: Yes. No. 157783. Mandamus will not Is the contention of Cars Co. He announced to the public that the VRIS project Reyes v. not mandamus (Garces v. Chairman Go was not authorized by the COMELEC En Banc to oppose the petition. board. But COMELEC Chairman Gener Go objected to the provided that it is for public use and with just compensation. The Office of the Solicitor legislative departments can prevail over the court’s findings General (OSG). June 29. award on the ground that under the appropriations Act. the Ombudsman’s act of granting the treasurer office. officer or person to take action. Danilo Mora. Rule 66). Onorio. The dismissal of the case based on Mandamus improper venue is not a ministerial duty.R. A: No. mandamus may only be 2002. not when it is doubtful. Secs. petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie to April 29. The proper remedy is a extraordinary writ of mandamus. 8189. Alleging that the RTC Judge G. when the Solicitor transferred without his consent which is tantamount to General commences the action for quo warranto. January 22. 2005). the City of Manila shall deliver thereto. compensation enforce contractual obligations. 00-4-166- the majority Commissioners filed a manifestation that RTC. Rosa. AM No. This remedy applies only where petitioner’s right is founded clearly in law. The latter filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the court correct in its ruling? Why? (2001 Bar) the ground of improper venue claiming that its main office and operation are in Cebu City and not in Manila. 1996). the petition for mandamus is not an appropriate Information? (2015 Bar) remedy because it is not available to enforce a contractual obligation. billion. of a park in honor of former City Mayor Arsenio Lacson? providing for computerization of elections. 197291. No. Meanwhile. must be paid in money (Esteban v. G. resorted to in order to compel respondent tribunal. It did not incorporate itself under the law nor registrar. Is a petition for mandamus Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage an appropriate remedy to enforce contractual obligations? (1999. v.R. No. 1921. A: Yes. (2012 Bar) conditions as it may determine (Sec. Court of Appeals. reversal of an action already taken in the exercise of The RTC Pasig Judge denies B's Motion to Dismiss. Secretary De Lima. September 7. G. Mandamus does not lie to compel the performance of a discretionary duty (Nilo Q: Petitioner Fabian was appointed Election Registrar of Paloma v. No. Pursuant As compensation to UST. be expropriated for the construction otherwise known as the Voter’s Registration Act of 1996. Pedro continued to occupy the disputed position and exercised his functions therein.R. the Municipality of Sevilla supposedly to replace the Quo Warranto respondent Election Registrar Pablo who was transferred to another municipality without his consent Q: A group of businessmen formed an association in and who refused to accept his aforesaid transfer. As expressly provided in the Rules. representing Chairman Go.R. petition for prohibition (Serena v. is not legally tenable as the Chairman Go. The planned has been set aside. 3. but it Q: A files a Complaint against B for recovery of title and cannot be used to direct the manner or particular way possession of land situated in Makati with the RTC of discretion is to be exercised. Congress passed Republic Act No. Mandamus is directed only to ministerial acts. September 23. but the majority voted to uphold the determination of just compensation is a judicial function. Considering that Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court (Sec. No. No. correct? Why? (2001 Bar) lie. 2006 Bar) Q: UST BAR OPERATIONS 38 . it may be removal without cause. In addition. G. Explain (2006 Bar) the public bidding. which judgment or discretion (Ampatuan. 15915. G. Is Co. After employees. No contract. April 3. No. Quijano-Padilla. however.R. in the guarantee on non-removal except for cause. "unlawfully neglected the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an Evidently. 152992. Dulay. or to compel the retraction or Pasig. the construction of a park is for public use (See: the budget for the COMELEC’s modernization is only P1 Sena v. 7. G. Sandiganbayan G. L-59603. Sampaloc Manila. mandamus will not lie. Pablo was A: No. 17. 1987. 2013). No. In this case. 2001). NHA. Q: May Congress enact a law providing that a 5. opposed the (Export Processing Zone Authority v. immunity from prosecution under such terms and Will Mandamus lie? Reasons. 2003). 114795. Congress may enact a law expropriating property Award. decree or executive order can mandate that the petition for mandamus to compel the COMELEC to determination of just compensation by the executive or implement the contract. G. REMEDIAL LAW b. Two Commissioners sided with compensation. 2008). much Cebu City calling itself Cars C to distribute/ sell cars in less to vacate his position in Bogo Town as election said city. Fotokina filed with the RTC a statute. Sec. The Solicitor General filed before a Fabian then filed a petition for mandamus against Pablo RTC in Manila a verified petition for quo warranto but the trial court dismissed Fabian’s petition questioning and seeking to stop the operations of Cars contending that quo warranto is the proper remedy. During the proceedings. the proper remedy is quo Expropriation warranto. 147511. R. Mandamus will not lie to compel the Ombudsman to directing or commanding a person to do a legal duty include the treasurer in the Information. 6770) is a discretionary duty that may not be compelled by the A: No. In matters involving (COMELEC v. Jr. 162059. a part of the UST compound in Q: In 1996. the court is correct in its ruling.A. Rule 65). obviously was incorrect. corporation.R. September 18. B files a Motion to Dismiss for improper venue. July 17. 5 to 8 Rule 67).000 square meter lot. March 24. as in this case. contrary to the fundamental brought in a RTC in the city of Manila. It issued as a residential subdivision for the Manila City Hall invitations to pre-qualify and bid for the project.R.

QUAMTO (1997-2016)
Velasquez, G.R. No. 203949, Apr. 6, 2016) Ergo, it is a
a. Is the buyer in the auction sale arising from an extra- ministerial duty of the court to issue a writ of possession
judicial foreclosure entitled to a writ of possession in favour of the transferee of the auction buyer.
even before the expiration of the redemption
period? If so, what is the action to be taken? Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer
b. After the period of redemption has lapsed and the
title to the lot is consolidated in the name of the Q: A borrowed from the Development Bank of the
auction buyer, is he entitled to the writ of possession Philippines (DBP) the amount of P1 million secured by
as a matter of right? If so, what is the action to be the titled land of his friend B who, however, did not
take? assume personal liability for the loan. A defaulted and
c. Suppose that after the title to the lot has been DBP filed an action for judicial foreclosure of the real
consolidated in the name of the acution buyer, said estate mortgage impleading A and B as defendants. In
buyer sold the lot to a third party without first due course, the court rendered judgment directing A to
getting a writ of possession. Can the transferee pay the outstanding account of P1.5 million (principal
exercise the right of the auction buyer and claim that plus interest) to the bank. No appeal was taken by A on
it is a ministerial duty of the court to issue a writ of the Decision within the reglementary period. A failed to
possession in his favour? Briefly explain. (2016 Bar) pay the judgment debt within the period specified in the
decision. Consequently, the court ordered the
A: foreclosure sale of the mortgaged land. In that
foreclosure sale, the land was sold to the DPB for P1.2
a. Yes, the buyer in the auction sale is entitled to a writ of million. The sale was subsequently confirmed by the
possession even before the expiration of the redemption court, and the confirmation of the sale was registered
period upon the filing of the ex parte petition for with the Registry of Deeds on 05 January 2002. On 10
issuance of a writ of possession and posting of the January 2003, the bank filed an ex parte motion with the
appropriate bond. Under section 7 of Act No. 3135, as court for the issuance of a writ of possession to oust B
amended, the writ of possession may be issued to the from the land. It also filed a deficiency claim for P800,
purchaser in a foreclosure sale either within the one- 000.00 against A and B. The deficiency claim was
year redemption period upon the filing of a bond, or opposed by A and B.
after the lapse of the redemption period, without need of
a bond. (LZK Holdings and Development Corporation v. a. Resolve the motion for the issuance of a writ of
Planters Development Bank, G.R. No. 167998, April 27, possession.
2007) Stated otherwise, Section 7 of Act No. 3135, as
amended, also refers to a situation wherein the A: In judicial foreclosure of banks such as DBP, the
purchaser seeks possession of the foreclosed property mortgagor of debtor whose real property has been sold on
during the 12-month period for redemption. Hence, foreclosure has the right to redeem the property sold within
upon the purchaser’s filing of the ex parte petition and one year after the date (or registration of the sale). However,
posting of the appropriate bond, the RTC shall, as a the purchaser at the auction sale has the right to obtain a writ
matter of course, order the issuance of the writ of of possession after the finality of the order confirming the
possession in favour of the purchaser. (Spouses Nicasio sale (Sec. 3, Rule 68; Sec. 47, RA 8791 The General Banking
C. Marquez and Anita J. Marquez v. Spouses Carlito Law of 2000). The motion for writ of possession, however,
Alindog and Carmen Alindog, G.R. No. 184045, January 22, cannot be filed ex parte. There must be a notice of hearing.
2014; Spouses Jose Gatuslao and Ermila Gatuslao v. Leo
Ray Yanson, G.R. No. 191540, January 21, 2015) b. Resolve the deficiency claim of the bank. (2003 Bar)
b. Yes, the auction buyer is entitled to a writ of possession
as a matter of right. It is settled that the buyer in a A: The deficiency claim of the bank may be enforced against
foreclosure sale becomes the absolute owner of the the mortgage debtor A, but it cannot be enforced against B,
property purchased if it is not redeemed within a period the owner of the mortgaged property, who did not assume
of one year after the registration of the certificate of sale. personal liability for the loan.
He is, therefore, entitled to the possession of the
property and can demand it at any time following the Ejectment
consolidation of ownership in his name and the issuane
to him of a new transfer certificate of title. In such a case, Q: On 10 January 1990, X leased the warehouse of A
the bond required in Section 7 of Act No. 3135 is no under a lease contract with a period of 5 years. On 08
longer necessary. Possession of the land then becomes June 1996, A filed an unlawful detainer case against X
an absolute right of the purchases as confirmed owner. without a prior demand for X to vacate the premises.
Upon proper application and proof of title, the issuance
of the writ of possession becomes a ministerial duty of a. Can X contest his ejectment on the ground that there
the court. (LZK Holdings and Development Corporation v. was no prior demand for him to vacate the
Planters Development Bank, G.R. No. 167998, April 27, premises?
2007; Sps. Marquez v. Sps. Alindog, G.R. No. 184045,
January 22, 2014; Sps. Gatuslao v. Leo Ray Yanson, G.R. No. A: Yes. X can contest his ejectment on the ground that there
191540, January 21, 2015) was no prior demand to vacate the premise (Sec. 2, Rule 70;
c. Yes, the transferee can exercise the right of the auction Casilan v. Tomassi, G.R. No. L-16574, February 28, 1964;
buyer. A transferee or successor-in-interest of the Lesaca v. Cuevas, G.R. No. L-48419, October 27, 1983).
auction buyer by virtue of the contract of sale between
them, is considered to have stepped into the shoes of the b. In case the Municipal Trial Court renders judgment
auction buyer. As such, the transferee is necessarily in favor of A, is the judgment immediately
entitled to avail of the provisions of Sec. 7 of Act 3135, as executory? (1997 Bar)
amended, as if he is the auction buyer. (Sps. Gatuslao v.
Yanson, ibid.) When the lot purchased at a foreclosure A: Yes, because the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court
slae is in turn sold or transferred, the right to the against the defendant X is immediately executory upon
possession thereof, along with all other rights of motion unless an appeal has been perfected, a supersedeas
ownership, transfers to its new owner. (Sps. Gallent v. bond has been filed and the periodic deposits of current

rentals, if any, as determined by the judgment will be made the defendant deprived him of such possession by means of
with the appellate court (Sec 19 ,Rule 70). force, intimidation, threats, strategy, or stealth.

Unlawful Detainer However, before instituting the said action, I will first
endeavor to amicably settle the controversy with the
Q: In an action for unlawful detainer in the Municipal informal settlers before the appropriate Lupon or Barangay
Trial Court (MTC), defendant X raised in his Answer the Chairman. If there is no agreement reached after mediation
defense that plaintiff A is not the real owner of the house and conciliation under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law,
subject of the suit. X filed a counterclaim against A for I will secure a certificate to file action and file the complaint
the collection of a debt of P80, 000 plus accrued interest for ejectment before the MTC of Tagaytay City where the
of P15,000 and attorney’s fees of P20,000. property is located since ejectment suit is a real action
regardless of the value of the property to be recovered or
a. Is X’s defense tenable claim for unpaid rentals (BP 129 and Sec. 1, Rule 4).

A: NO. X’s defense is not tenable if the action is filed by a In the aforementioned complaint, I will allege that Spouses
lessor against a lessee. However, if the right of possession of Juan had prior physical possession and that the
the plaintiff depends on his ownership then the defense is dispossession was due to force, intimidation and stealth. The
tenable. complaint will likewise show that the action was commenced
within a period of one (1) year from unlawful deprivation of
b. Does the MTC have jurisdiction over the possession, and that Spouses Juan is entitled to restitution of
counterclaim? (1998 Bar) possession together with damages and costs.

A: The counterclaim is within the jurisdiction of the Q: BB files a complaint for ejectment in the MTC on the
Municipal Trial Court which does not exceed P100,000, ground of non-payment of rentals against JJ. After two
because the principal demand is P80,000, exclusive of days, JJ files in the RTC a complaint against BB for
interest and attorney’s fees (Sec 33, B.P. Blg. 129, as specific performance to enforce the option to purchases
amended). However, inasmuch as all actions of forcible entry the land subject of the ejectment case. What is the effect
and unlawful detainer are subject to summary procedure of JJ’s action on BB’s complaint? Explain. (2000 Bar)
and since the counterclaim is only permissive, it cannot be
entertained by the Municipal Trial Court (Sec. 1, Revised Rule A: There is no effect. The ejectment case involves possession
on Summary Procedure). de facto only. The action to enforce the option to purchase
will not suspend the action of ejectment for non-payment or
Q: The spouses Juan reside in Quezon City. With their rentals (Willmon Auto Supply Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
lottery winnings, they purchased a parcel of land in No. 97637, April 10, 1992).
Tagaytay City for P100, 000.00. In a recent trip to their
Tagaytay property, they were surprised to see hastily Q: Landlord, a resident of Quezon City, entered into a
assembled shelters of light materials occupied by lease contract with Tenant, a resident of Marikina City,
several families of informal settlers who were not there over a residential house in Las Pinas City. The lease
when they last visited the property three (3) months contract provided, among others, for a monthly rental of
ago. P25, 000.00, plus ten percent (10%) interest rate in case
of non-payment on its due date. Subsequently, Landlord
To rid the spouses’ Tagaytay property of these informal migrated to the United States of America (USA) but
settlers, briefly discuss the legal remedy you, as their granted in favor of his sister Maria, a special power of
counsel, would use; the steps you would take; the court attorney to manage the property and file and defend
where you would file your remedy if the need arises; and suits over the property rented out to Tenant. Tenant
the reason/s for your actions. (2013 Bar) failed to pay the rentals due for five (5) months. Maria
asks your legal advice on how she can expeditiously
A: As counsel of spouses Juan, I will file a special civil action collect from Tenant the unpaid rentals plus interests
for Forcible Entry. The Rules of Court provides that a person due.
deprived of the possession of any land or building by force,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth may at any time a. What judicial remedy would you recommend to
within (one) 1 year after such withholding of possession Maria?
bring an action in the proper Municipal Trial Court where the
property is located. This action which is summary in nature A: I will advise Maria to immediately send a letter to the
seeks to recover the possession of the property from the tenant demanding the immediate payment of the unpaid
defendant which was illegally withheld by the latter (Sec. 1, rentals plus interests due. If the tenant refuses, Maria can
Rule 70). avail any of the following remedies:

An ejectment case is designed to restore, through summary 1. A complaint under A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC or the Rules of
proceedings, the physical possession of any land or building Procedure for Small claims cases. Maria should
to one who has been illegally deprived of such possession, nonetheless waive the amount in excess of P100,000 in
without prejudice to the settlement of the parties’ opposing order for her to avail of the remedy under the said Rules.
claims of juridical possession in appropriate proceedings 2. A complaint for collection of sum of money under the
(Heirs of Agapatio T. Olarte and Angela A. Olarte et al. v. Office Rules on Summary Procedure, since Maria is only
of the President of the Philippines et al., G.R. No. 177995, June claiming the unpaid rentals and interest due from
15, 2011). tenant.
3. If the tenant refuses or is unable to pay the rentals within
In Abad v. Farrales, G.R. No. 178635, April 11, 2011, the 1 year from the last demand to vacate and pay, I would
Supreme Court held that two allegations are indispensable in advise Maria to file an action for Unlawful Detainer.
actions for forcible entry to enable first level courts to
acquire jurisdiction over them: first, that the plaintiff had b. Where is the proper venue of the judicial remedy
prior physical possession of the property; and, second, that which you recommended?

QUAMTO (1997-2016)
Q: Roxanne, a widow, filed a petition for habeas corpus
A: with the Court of Appeals against Major Amor who is
allegedly detaining her 18 year old son Bong without
1. If Maria decides to file a complaint for collection of sum authority of law. After Amor had filed a return alleging
of money under the Rules of Summary Procedure or the cause of detention of Bong, the Court of Appeals
Small Claims, the venue is the residence of the plaintiff promulgated a resolution remanding the case to the RTC
or defendant, at the election if the plaintiff (Sec. 2, Rule for a full blown trial due to the conflicting facts
4). Hence it may be in Quezon City or Marikina City, at presented by the parties in their pleadings. In directing
the option of Maria. the remand, the Court of Appeals relied on Sec. 9(1) in
2. If Maria files an action for Unlawful detainer, the same relation to Sec. 21 of BP 129 conferring upon said Court
shall be commenced and tried in the Municipal Trial the authority to try and decide habeas corpus cases
Court of the municipality or city wherein the real concurrently with the RTCs. Did the Court of Appeals act
property involved, or a portion thereof is situated (Sec. correctly in remanding the petition to the RTC? Why?
1, Rule 4). Therefore, the venue is Las Pinas City. (1993 Bar)

c. If Maria insists on filing an ejectment suit against A: No, because while the CA has original jurisdiction over
Tenant, when do you reckon the one (1)-year period habeas corpus concurrent with the RTCs, it has no authority
within which to file the action? (2014 Bar) for remanding to the latter original actions filed with the
former. On the contrary, the CA is specifically given the
A: The reckoning point for determining the one-year period power to receive evidence and perform any and all acts
within which to file the action is the receipt if the last demand necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling
to vacate and pay (Sec. 2, Rule 70). within its original jurisdiction.

Q: Mr. Sheriff attempts to enforce a Writ of Execution When not proper/ applicable
against X, a tenant in a condominium unit, who lost in an
ejectment case. X does not want to budge and refuses to Q: A was arrested on the strength of a warrant of arrest
leave. Y, the winning party, moves that X be declared in issued by the RTC in connection with an Information for
contempt and after hearing, the court held X guilty of Homicide. W, the live-in partner of A filed a petition for
indirect contempt. If you were X’s lawyer, what would habeas corpus against A’s jailer and police investigators
you do? Why? (2012 Bar) with the Court of Appeals.

A: If I were X’s lawyer, I would file a petition for certiorari a. Does W have the personality to file the petition for
under Rule 65. The judge should not have acted on Y’s habeas corpus?
motion to declare X in contempt. The charge of indirect
contempt is intiated through a verified petition (Sec. 4, Rule A: YES. W, the live in partner of A, has the personality to file
71). The writ was not directed to X but to the sheriff which the petition for habeas corpus because it may be filed by
was directed to deliver the property to Y. As the writ did not “some person in his behalf” (Sec 3, Rule 102).
command the judgment debtor to do anything, he cannot be
guilty of the facts described in Rule 71 which is b. Is the petition tenable? (1998 Bar)
“disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process,
order, judgment, or command of any court.” The proper A: No, the petition is not tenable because the warrant of
procedure is for the sheriff to oust X availing of the assistance arrest was issued by a court which had jurisdiction to issue
of peace officers pursuant to Section 10(c) of Rule 39 (Lipa v. it (Sec. 4 Rule 102).
Tutaan, L-16643, September 29, 1983; Medina v. Garces, L-
25923, July 15, 1980; Pascua v. Heirs of Segundo Simeon, G.R. Q: Widow A and her two children, both girls, aged 8 and
No. L-47717, May 2, 1988; Patagan et. al. v. Panis, G.R. No. 12 years old, reside in Angeles City, Pampanga. A leaves
55630, April 8, 1988). her two daughters in their house at night because she
works in a brothel as a prostitute. Realizing the danger
Contempt to the morals of these two girls, B the father of the
deceased husband of A, files a petition for habeas corpus
Q: A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of against A for the custody of the girls in the Family Court
land against B who was represented by her counsel X. in in Angeles City. In said petition, B alleges that he is
the course of the trial, B died. However, X failed to notify entitled to the custody of the two girls in the Family
the court of B’s death. The court proceeded to hear the Court in Angeles City. In said petition, B alleges that he is
case and rendered judgment against B. After the entitled to the custody of the two girls because their
Judgment became final, a writ of execution was issued mother is living a disgraceful life. The court issues the
against C, who being B’s sole heir, acquired the property. writ of habeas corpus. When A learns of the petition and
Did the failure of counsel X to inform the court of B’s the writ, she brings her two children to Cebu City. At the
death constitute direct contempt? (1998 Bar) expense of B the sheriff of the said Family Court goes to
Cebu City and serves the writ on A. A files her comment
A: No. It is not direct contempt under Sec. 1 of Rule 71, but it on the petition raising the following defenses:
is an indirect contempt within the purview of Sec. 3 of Rule
71. The lawyer can also be subject of disciplinary action (Sec. a. The enforcement of the writ of habeas corpus in Cebu
16, Rule 3). City is illegal; and

A: The writ of habeas corpus issued by the Family Court in
SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS Angeles City may not be legally enforced in Cebu City,
because the writ is enforceable only within the judicial
region to which the Family Court belongs, unlike the writ
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS granted by the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals which is
enforceable anywhere in the Philippines (Sec. 20 of Rule of
Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to


Atty. Tagitis. a civilian volunteer Baguio City. Ahohoy.Alyansa information regarding the person. station. Marietta (2003 Bar) replied that under Rule 102 of the Rules of Court. Appeals in Manila to compel him to produce their son. hampering its operations. Marinella A: The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to alleges that as a result of her exposé. Rule 102). the Writ of Amparo. No. NO. What is petition may likewise be filed with the Supreme Court. may problema po ba?" Instead of replying. collecting or storing of data or formed a nongovernmental organization . (2010 Bar) unlawful confinement or detention by which any person is deprived of his liberty. 03-04-04 [2003] provides: "the locked up Hercules inside the police station jail. under Republic Act No. The writ of habeas corpus shall extend to all cases of on the merits. v. the complaint of the mining engineer of Oro Negro that her estranged husband Carlo barged into her house in one of their trucks was destroyed by ALMA members. because the grandparent has the right of contention is correct? Explain. learned from Maingay. among others. Marietta. 8369. counsel for the Chief of Staff.M. REMEDIAL LAW Custody of Minors [AM No. 154598. Jr." illegal confinement or detention by which any person is deprived of liberty (Sec. A: Marietta's contention is correct. The Court of Appeals has concurrent jurisdiction with the family courts and the Q: Hercules was walking near a police station when a Supreme Court in petitions for habeas corpus where the police officer signalled for him to approach. 03-04-04-SC]. Hercules to get inside the police station. No. Mapusok is the leader of the Association of Peace Percival. par. 1. Paranaque City. see also: Sec 4 Rule no longer locate her son. liberty or security is 182498. WRIT OF AMPARO (A. 2 and 13. through counsel. B has no personality to institute the petition. moves for the dismissal of the Petition for failure to allege that his The writ of amparo differs from a writ of habeas corpus in client issued any order to kill or harm Marinella. Rule on that the latter writ is availed of as a remedy against cases of Atty. notwithstanding the provision Hercules came near. The writ shall cover extra-legal killings and enforced alleging that the latter ordered that she be killed.M. that the petition was erroneously filed in the Court of Appeals as the same should have been filed in the Family b. or of a private individual or entity Q: The residents of Mt. Thornton. Daro’s motion.R. but all before the court and for her to regain custody. and brought the child to his hometown in Keepers of Ahohoy (APKA). if so granted. or with any of its members and. said Rule does not require the petition therefor to allege a complete detail of the actual or Q: What is the writ of habeas data? (2009 Bar) threatened violation of the victim’s rights. Razon. ALMA members picketed daily at the entrance of the Rules on Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in mining site blocking the ingress and egress of trucks and relation to Custody of Minors (A. during UST BAR OPERATIONS 42 . she could ALMA. It is sufficient that there be an allegation of real threat against petitioner’s life. the writ of habeas corpus shall be personality to institute the petition for habeas corpus of the enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. has exclusive jurisdiction. the immediate release from detention? (2015 Bar) writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee. there are any person whose right to life. Rule 102). Daro. In his comment. Hercules asked the police officer. 03-04-04-SC) equipment of Oro Negro. Inside the police G. a member of APKA. Moreover. Subsequently. Masigasig had an altercation with Mapusok arising from Q: While Marietta was in her place of work in Makati City. a member of alleged in the petition that despite her efforts. Rules of Court). the police officer Sec. Despite Marietta’s pleas. the petition in the light of the above defenses of A. Whose two minor girls. A: The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any liberty and/or security (Gen. engaged in the gathering. has the Appeals and if granted. (2005 Bar) custody as against the mother A who is a prostitute (Sec. 6 of SC AM No. The police officer told exclusive jurisdiction in such cases (Thornton v. the wife of Masigasig. Carlo refused to organization serving as auxiliary force of the local police return their child. the petition may be filed in the Court of A: B. Mayumi. disappearances or threats thereof. 07-9-12-SC) Distinguish from writ of amparo and habeas data Q: Marinella is a junior officer of the Armed Forces of the Q: What is the writ of amparo? How is it distinguished Philippines who claims to have personally witnessed the from the writ of habeas corpus? (2009 Bar) malversation of funds given by US authorities in connection with the Balikatan exercises. filed a to maintain peace and order in the area. family. the father of the deceased husband of A. "Sir. G. or cases by which rightful custody of A: The motion to dismiss must be denied on the ground that any person is withheld from another who is lawfully entitled it is a prohibited pleading under Section 11(a) of the Rule on thereto (Sec 1. Explain. petition for habeas corpus against Carlo in the Court of Masigasig disappeared. home and Laban sa Minahan sa Ahohoy (ALMA) to protest the correspondence of the aggrieved party. The writ may be made returnable to a Family Court or to any A: The remedy available to Hercules is to file a petition for regular court within the region where the petitioner resides habeas corpus questioning the illegality of his warrantless or where the minor may be found for hearing and decision arrest. December 03. Court the remedy available to Hercules to secure his of Appeals. or of a private individual or against. No. Mapagmatyag. August 16. the police officer frisked him but in the Family Courts Act (RA 8369) that family courts have the latter found no contraband. or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission She files a petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo of a public official or employee. Id). 2004). Carlo alleged 102. abducted their six-year old son.R. A. as amended. She their efforts proved futile. headed by Masigasig. Resolve Court of Baguio City which. liberty and security is violated operatives within the military who are out to kill her. 20. As soon as custody of minors is at issue. mining operations of Oro Negro Mining in the mountain. and the members of ALMA searched for Masigasig. person whose right to privacy in life. 2009). over the petition. the Chief of Staff but without entity.

opts to (2014 Bar) transfer Azenith to its Palawan Office. 2008). family. Relative thereto. but they refused to extend their privacy. Thus. collecting nor. The Rules use the word “custody” to signify that A: When a criminal action and separate civil action are filed bail is only available for someone who is under the custody subsequent to a petition for a writ of amparo. Resolve the petition.). Inc. G. Sesinando Villon. the Sandiganbayan may grant the Motion (A. bail is the security the amparo petition she earlier filed? (2015 Bar) for the release of the person in the custody of the law (Sec. Mayumi refusal to provide her with a copy of the investigation and ALMA sought the assistance of the local police to results compromises her right to life. Neither was the company APKA. who thereupon conducts b. No. 1. be consolidated with the criminal action. 158763. If the Sandiganbayan denies the motion. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA On the other hand. One morning. A motion to fix bail is c. arguing that the allegations in should be agents of the State in order to be impleaded as the information did not charge the crime of plunder but respondents in an amparo petition (Secretary of National a crime of malversation. After consolidation. The respondents are correct in raising the defense. G. The accused’s defense that the petition should be dismissed on the lawyer counter. G. Tuliao.M. an accused can invoke the processes of the court even she extends cash advances or "sales" to her colleagues custody of the law (Jose C. (2010 Bar) cooperation. 180906. for the issuance of a writ of habeas data before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to enjoin Temptation. already issued a warrant for his arrest. jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. denied the motion on the ground that it had not yet acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused and b. 1. G. Sandiganbayan may grant anonymous letter inserted under the door of her office the Motion to quash the warrant of arrest. liberty and search for Masigasig. Explain. Respondents Mapusok and an unlawful act or omission. cannot be impleaded as respondents in an and correspondence of the aggrieved party (Sec. It is well settled that adjudication of a motion to quash a warrant of arrest Q: Azenith. 08-1-16-SC) to quash the warrant of arrest. there was no need for the accused to be under the custody of the court because A: Yes. The writ covers extra. Q: A was charge before the Sandiganbayan with a crime legal killings. of data or information regarding the person. the latter shall of the law (Peter Paul Dimatulac v. jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. 43 . Id. NO. Inc. The writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life. actions against Mapusok. Inc. liberty or security is violated or threatened by against Mapusok and APKA. the Bail not a Petition for Bail. If the its investigation. Respondents Mapusok and APKA. enforced disappearances or threats thereof of plunder. Rule 114). a. the motion? Hence. Immediately.R. ALMA cannot file the petition because of earlier petition by Mayumi with the RTC. requires neither jurisdiction over the person of the accused (Temptation. judicial remedy should the accused undertake? Claiming that the threat is real. Virgilio M. Azenith promptly reports the matter to her superior Joshua. Hon. Azenith discovers an No. his lawyer filed a Motion to Quash Arrest Moreover. 1998). storing their defenses that they are not agents of the State. the cashier of Temptation Investments. No. liberty and security has been violated or is threatened with violation GENERAL MATTERS by an unlawful act or omission of a public officer or employee or of a private individual or entity. Are respondents correct in raising their defense? According to said lawyer.R. Is their defense tenable? CRIMINAL PROCEDURE A: No. a move she resists in view of the company’s refusal to disclose the results of A: The accused may file a Motion for Reconsideration. If you are the Sandiganbayan. ALMA also filed a petition for the must be dismissed as there is no showing that her right to issuance of the writ of amparo with the Court of Appeals privacy in life.M. 2009). filing of a petition by Mayumi who is an immediate member of the family of the aggrieved party already suspends the a.argued that the court can rule on the ground that ALMA cannot file the petition because of motion even if the accused was at-large because it had the earlier petition filed by Mayumi with the RTC. Rule on amparo petition. 127107. whom she likes. QUAMTO (1997-2016) their binge drinking that Masigasig was abducted by from transferring her on the ground that the company’s other members of APKA. The Rule on the Writ of Amparo. 1. The court Defense v. Decrying the move as a virtual same is denied. Mayumi filed with the RTC.R. raised as their since the crime charged was non-bailable. a petition for the issuance of the writ of amparo against A: Azenith petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data Mapusok and APKA. A cannot seek any the procedure under Rules shall continue to apply to the judicial relief if he does not submit his person to the disposition of the reliefs in the petition (Sec.) with principal offices in Cebu City. the Writ of Habeas Data). October 7. on order of Mapusok. A: I will grant the Motion to quash the warrant of arrest but I will deny the Motion to fix bail. is nor custody of law over the body of the accused. how will you rule on right of all other authorized parties to file similar petitions. October 2. A. Manalo. a non-bailable offense. Without A being arrested. the accused may resort to a Petition for deprivation of her employment. Miranda v. 07-9-12-SC). a bailable offense. How will the cases affect 176933. what an internal investigation to verify the said threat. threatening to kill her. 2006). Otherwise equally hated and loved by her co-employees because stated. No. 1. March 31.R. Hence. the rules do not require that the respondents Warrant and to Fix Bail. Temptation. what was filed was a Motion to Quash Arrest and to Fix Under section 2(c) of the Rules on the Writ of Amparo. No. October 12. Inc. in their Return that the accused should be under the custody of the court filed with the Court of Appeals. raised among shown to be engaged in the gathering. where the court had (Sec. The defense is not tenable. Bucalon. home hence. in their Return filed with the RTC. Azenith files a petition Certiorari under Rule 65 directly to the Supreme Court. Mayumi later filed separate criminal and civil essentially an application for bail (People v.

with an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court (Sec. found the same to be valid and ordered appropriate for these purposes (Echegaray v. Jr. He was bumped from behind by a claim that under Republic Act No. his counsel should file: (a) a petition for habeas corpus for the illegal A: Yes.R.R. as well as the penalty imposed on him. a. Mariano filed a motion in vehicular mishap along that portion of EDSA within the said court for his release from the penitentiary on his City of Mandaluyong. or (b) a motion in court automatic (Sec. G. 8353. (1999 Bar) Q: Jose. Q: Mariano was convicted by the RTC for raping Victoria and meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 1996 and Brocka v. 3. Tuliao. after going over to that extent. a. pre-suspension hearing (Segovia v. On the date set for hearing of their motion. 1950) despite the finality of the 124067. collision. As counsel for Gary. However. The Sandiganbayan. Mario’s suspension is mandatory although not confinement of Mariano (Rule 102). his marriage to Ford Expedition SUV driven by Horace who was Victoria extinguished the criminal action against him for observed using his cellular phone at the time of the rape.R. The latter contested the Justice. March 27. G. No. December 10. and 5. Gary suffered physical become final and executory.). Q: Distinguish a Complaint from Information (1999 Bar) Q: In complex crimes. It is mandatory or the order of his commitment on the ground that a after the determination of the validity of the information in a supervening development had occurred (Melo v People. information is an accusation in writing charging a person Garcia. describe the process you need A: NO. without raising the issue G. may issue such orders necessary and the information. No. 1998). G. a complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense. 2006). arrest. Their filing the motion is Enrile. the three accused jointly filed a motion for 1. REMEDIAL LAW Q: Governor Pedro Mario of Tarlac was charged with Finality of a judgment cannot operate to divest a court of its indirect bribery before the Sandiganbayan for accepting jurisdiction. (2005 Bar) contention stating that Mario’s suspension under the circumstances is mandatory. the court’s authority over the case. suspension claiming that under the law (Sec. L-46934 April 15. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated movants. 13 of RA 3019 Mariano take to secure his proper and most is in conflict with Sec. and medical supplies. Id. No. Court of Appeals. the court acquired jurisdiction over the person of the accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been accused when they filed the aforesaid motion and invoked denied (See: cases cited in Roberts. March 31. Q: Will the injunction lie to restrain the commencement JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS of a criminal action? Explain. Learning of the issuance of the warrants. RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the 4. Mariano Quezon City from his work in Makati. 69863-65. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent. Ponce of jurisdiction over their person. to nullify the execution of his sentence Decentralization Act of 1967 or RA No. A: As a general rule. tantamount to voluntary submission to the court’s jurisdiction and contributes voluntary appearance (Miranda PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES v. 158763. arrested. while an on an offense forming part of the complex crime (Cuyos v. 1990). No. No. UST BAR OPERATIONS 44 . The RTC judge denied their motion because the 3. 000. The court can never lose jurisdiction so long as its to undertake starting from the point of the incident decision has not yet been fully implement and satisfied. G. Did the RTC rule correctly? (2008 Bar) by the lust for vengeance. prevent the accused public officer from frustrating or hampering his prosecution by intimidating or influencing When injunction may be issued to restrain criminal witnesses or tampering with evidence or from committing prosecution further acts if malfeasance while in office. When necessary for the orderly administration of of the accused showed up in court for fear of being justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions. March 22. 13 of RA No 3019 in relation to Sec. March 5. v. 5185). To afford adequate protection to the constitutional reinvestigation and for the recall of the warrants of rights of the accused. January 19. 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure). none 2. 13205. 1999). 5 of which convicted him.R. the RTC judge issued the criminal prosecution except: warrants for their arrest. What remedy/remedies should the counsel of information and his suspension under Sec. Is the court’s ruling A: To secure the proper and most expeditious release of correct? Why? (2001 Bar) Mariano from the National Penitentiary. The Sandiganbayan overruled Mario’s Explain.R. Sandiganbayan.. any peace officer or other peace officer crime must be lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction charged with the enforcement of the law violated (Sec. G.R. injunction will not lie to restrain a Upon filing of the information. No. 13 of RA 3019) his suspension is not automatic upon filing the b. injuries while his Nissan Patrol sustained damage in excess of Php500.more than 5 years old – no the court denied the motion on the ground that it had longer carried insurance other than the compulsory lost jurisdiction over the case after its decision had third party liability insurance. Is the filing of the court correct? Explain. subscribed by A: In a complex crime. 113930. L-3580. G. No. 1988). The court retains an interest in seeing the a car in exchange of the award of a series of contracts for proper execution and implementation of its judgments. how is the jurisdiction of a court determined? (2003 Bar) A: In criminal procedure. The purpose of suspension is to judgment. Both vehicles . Secretary of the suspension of Mario. jurisdiction over the whole complex the offended party. to impose the maximum and most serious penalty imposable Rule 110. While Q: While in his Nissan Patrol and hurrying home to serving sentence at the National Penitentiary. 4. Where there is clearly no prima facie case against the A: No. Alberto and Romeo were charged with murder. Gary figured in a and Victoria were married. 5 of the Decentralization Act of expeditious release from the National Penitentiary? 1967 (RA 5185).R.

1990). defendant can also invoke contributory negligence as partial defense. as follows: particularly exhilarating session with his girlfriend. where an offense is committed in a public vehicle damages. the heirs may impugn the filiation either by a litigation twice. Yvonne 1. Since the offended sustained by Gary. File the independent civil action without filing the adultery and they hire your law firm to handle the case. Irate relatives of criminal case separately. 3. Although Article 33 and 2176 of the New Civil Code. Moreover. discovered another handgun tucked in his waist. to Makati where the bus actually a police report relative to the mishap. File the independent civil action and prosecute the gives birth in Manila to a baby boy. the criminal action shall be basis. He seized both handguns 45 . to bring? Aside from the testimony of Gary. Where should Police Inspector Masigasig bring the examined in order to ascertain the gravity and extent of the felon for criminal processing? To Silang. I will secure where he is bound. Ysip. under Article 171 of the Family Code. direct action to impugn such filiation or raise the same in a special proceeding for settlement of the estate of the Q: On his way to the PNP Academy in Silang. and if so. If the husband should die before the expiration of the Horace liable is only preponderance of evidence. Dario contemplate criminally charging Yvonne for 2. including defenses you could expect. without The types of defenses that may be raised against this action having desisted therefrom. his defenses that the: (a) plaintiff will be entitled to double heirs have the right to impugn the filiation of the child. Third. G. or back to execute his Sinumpaang Salaysay. and (b) defendant will be constrained to litigate twice and therefore suffer the cost of Consequently. the heirs of the suffered. period fixed for bringing his action. the different approaches in pursuing this type instituted and tried in the court of any Municipality or of action. actually was when the felonies took place. Percy. Intermediate Appellate Court. I will use his Valenzuela where he is stationed? Which court has Sinumpaang Salaysay or prepare a complaint affidavit and jurisdiction over the criminal cases? (2013 Bar) file the same in the Office of the City Prosecutor and later on to the appropriate MTC of Mandaluyong City for the crime of A: Police Inspector Masigasig should bring the felon to the Reckless Imprudence resulting to physical injuries and nearest police station or jailn in Makati City where the bus damage to property (Sec. 1 and 15. et al.. her foreign posting still left her husband Dario lonely so that The different approaches that the plaintiff can pursue in this he also engaged in his own extramarital activities. compensation or recovery. If the child was born after the death of the husband. The evidence required to hold defendant 1. and as a result of the injuries he A: Yes. Such civil Makati City or on any of the places of departure or arrival of action shall proceed independently of the criminal the bus. and the malefactor was later charged with the separate and identify the court with jurisdiction over the case. Section 3 of Rule 111 allows the filing of an Q: Yvonne. Section 5 of Rule 110 provides that the crimes of would be required in an independent civil action are the adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except medical report and certificate regarding the injuries upon complaint by the offended spouse. or are fortuitous event. Within 180 days from Dario’s death. In one type of action are. witnesses who saw Horace using his cellular phone at the time the incident happened. No. 75773. In the said proceeding. I husband may impugn the filiation of the child in the will also present the attending Doctor of Gary to corroborate following cases: and authenticate the contents of the medical report and abstract thereof. G. Rule 110). criminal case. Thereafter. he was not able to earn his usual income thereof. then the criminal action for adultery as receipt of payments made. force majeure or acts of God. If he should die after the filing of the complaint. the evidence you would need. explain briefly this type of action: its legal while in the course of its trip. an on-going armed robbery while the bus was traversing Jimenez v. and the affidavit of viable. QUAMTO (1997-2016) if Gary would proceed criminally against Horace. I will first make him medically a. Yvonne comes home to Manila every six months. File the criminal case without need of reserving the a. robbery and to subdue the malefactor. 1955. Is a civil action to impugn the paternity of the baby boy feasible. Cavite on decedent.R. b. No. His alertness and training enabled him to foil the 17. crimes of robbery and illegal possession of firearm. the criminal case for robbery and illegal A: An independent civil action is an action which is entirely possession of firearms can be filed in Regional Trial Court of distinct and separate from the criminal action. had an intimate independent civil action by the offended party based on relationship abroad with a friend. (2013 Bar the place of its departure and arrival (Sec. the Probate court has the board a public transport bus as a passenger. 15[b]. prosecution and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. Police power to determine questions as to who are the heirs of the Inspector Masigasig of the Valenzuela Police witnessed decedent (Reyes v. and types of territory where such vehicle passed during its trip. Second. in what proceeding may such I will also present proof of employment of Gary such as his issue be determined? (2013 Bar) pay slip in order to prove that he was gainfully employed at the time of the mishap. Is the contemplated criminal action a viable option independent civil action. police report and proof of the contemplated by offended party’s relatives is no longer extent of damage sustained by his car. the defendant can raise the usual Since Dario is already dead when the baby boy was born. hospital and medical bills including party is already dead. b. Dario died. If Gary chooses to file an independent civil action for Moreover. 2. May 12.R. Cavite injuries he sustained from the accident. A: As counsel for Gary. a young and lonely OFW. The 3. Rule 110). L-7516. the pieces of evidence that A: No. April Makati. Consequently. He disarmed the felon and while frisking him. I will ask him to was when the felonies took place.

can initiate the complaint against ZZ. L-49162. in flagrante. Thereafter. that when she told her A: Yes. if the driver is insolvent. 8. could A be convicted of XX to initiate the complaint against ZZ. YY was prevailed upon by her marriage is not a supervening fact arising from the act grandparents not to file charges. 1. but unfortunately no inquest rights of due process and to be informed of the nature and prosecutor was available. A can be convicted only of homicide not of parricide an investigation. Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. The aggravating circumstance of unlawful entry in the breach of contract against the taxicab owner cannot be complainant’s abode has to be specified in the information. Rule 110). I would advise on the part of the defense. Rule of the mother and alleged father does not conclusively prove 110). for breach of contract. her uncle. barred by the criminal action against the taxicab driver. the civil action for quasi-delict against the driver is an Amendment or substitution of complaint or information independent civil action under Article 33 of the Civil Code and Sec. Lourdes and Mans filed a motion to dismiss Q: The prosecution filed an information against Jose for the civil action on the ground of litis pendentia. Can the public prosecutor move for the amendment because she Is not Incompetent or Incapable of doing so of the information to charge A with the crime of upon grounds other than her minority (Sec. No. that is. prosecution moved to amend the information to exclude E therefrom. the blood-test in order to determine paternity and filiation. 114046 October 24. Before they could be arraigned. 1987. No. an orphan. their son. Rule 12). which can be filed Q: separately and can proceed independently of the criminal UST BAR OPERATIONS 46 . 8. parricide? (1997 Bar) Q: X was arrested. the complaint may be filed by the offended party hit an electric post. what document should be filed? (2012 Bar) PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION A: Yes. she asks you how her uncle ZZ can be made to Court of Appeals. After A: No. Firstly. Feeling very much because no double jeopardy has a yet attached (Galvez v. instead of filing a motion to amend. slight physical injuries alleging the acts constituting the the pendency of the civil action impliedly instituted in offense but without any more alleging that it was the criminal action for reckless imprudence resulting in committed after Jose’s unlawful enter in the serious physical injuries. but. legal advice.R. although the taxicab owner can be held subsidiarily liable in Rule 110). the But this time. What would your advice be? Explain. offense charged from homicide to parricide. Can the court grant the motion In Jao v. A. May the bank directly file the the cause of the accusation against him (Sec. 5. the prosecution can re-file the information for grandparents. subjected her to acts of lasciviousness. Would your answer be the same? Explain. the Designation of offense owner of the taxicab. 2002 Bar) Supreme Court held that blood grouping tests are conclusive as to non-paternity. a taxicab driven by Mans prosecutor. 16 years old. the to amend? Why? (2001. XX asks you if she constituting the charge of homicide (Sec. Was the information correctly reasons. 3. or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis Jovy. he was brought before the office of the which is a graver offense. G. 1994). suffered serious injuries. the bank may directly file the complaint with the proper court. answer for his crime.R. the public prosecutor presented in A: Since rape is now classified as a Crime Against Persons evidence the marriage certificate without objection under the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353). A: I would advise the minor. 1987 Constitution). Jovy filed a civil action against Lourdes. they told her to just keep quiet and not to murder in substitution of the information for homicide file charges against ZZ. seeks your information although this time for murder? Explain. July 28. In the absence or unavailability of an inquest Q: While cruising on a highway. that the child is born by such parents. Mans was subsequently of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or charged before the Municipal Trial Court with reckless person (Sec. She tells you that ZZ. provided notice is given to the offended party and the The fact that the blood type of the child is a possible product court states its reasons for granting the same (Sec. Art. The information cannot be amended to change the uncle ZZ is rape. 6-11-5-SC) or even Information. The accused has the constitutional prosecutor for inquest. A: Yes. aggrieved.M. and Mans for quasi-delict. The action for A: No. moved to then the child cannot possibly be that of the alleged father. an orphan of 16 years of age. a. it cannot be considered as aggravating (Sec. Q: A was accused of homicide for the killing of B. REMEDIAL LAW Incidentally. 14. the public prosecutor received a copy of the marriage certificate of A and B. D and E were charged with homicide in one testing (Rules on DNA Evidence. the heirs can also submit the baby boy for DNA a. although inconclusive as to paternity. As a result thereof. if the blood type of the child is not the possible blood type when the blood of b. (2005 Bar) prepared by the prosecution? Why? (2001 Bar) A: The motion to dismiss should be denied. its passenger. Suppose instead of moving for the amendment of the information. suppose the prosecution. On the facts above stated. Suppose the crime committed against YY by her A: No. the trial. the criminal case. to file the complaint herself Independently of her grandparents. the mother and that of the alleged father are cross matched. 6. Can the prosecution re-file the Q: Your friend YY. witnessed by your mutual friend XX. parricide? b. During a. No. III. imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries. On the other hand. otherwise. withdraw the information altogether and its motion was granted. 14[1] and [2] complaint with the proper court? If in the affirmative. Rule 110). Resolve the motion with complainant’s abode. for robbing a bank. (2000 Bar) b. G. Court of Appeals.

B brought a civil action for nullification of the be preventively suspended for a period not exceeding second sale and asked that the sale made by A in his six months on its finding that the evidence of guilt is favour be declared valid.R. The order of preventive suspension need not wait for the and Hope. Janiola. investigation of the criminal case but it participated in the investigation together with the Deputy Ombudsman Q: Solomon and Faith got married in 2005. The subsistence of a previously contracted marriage runs the risk ground that the demurrer to evidence applied only to the of being prosecuted for bigamy. July 21. which he filed without leave of court. and c) he was career executive service officer action in order? Explain. The 3. Daway. Where the civil liability is not derived from or based on elements of prejudicial question are: (1) the previous the criminal act of which the accused is acquitted instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately (Remedios Nota Sapiera v. however. Rasul. When not limited to the military. for the Military who can handle cases of civilians and is Solomon contracted a second marriage with Hope. In order for Q: In an action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 23. 22. At any rate. 2009). b) The order for his preventive suspension was the criminal case. 22 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION included the corresponding civil action (Sec. he was entitled to adduce Works and Highways was charged with violation of controverting evidence on the civil liability. (2014 Bar) 2. No. action. Faith found out about the second marriage of Solomon 2. Solomon filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his first marriage with Faith in 2012. investigators from the office of the Special Prosecutor and from the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Prejudicial question Military to conduct a joint investigation of the criminal case and the administrative case. he who contracts marriage during the A: The Motion for Reconsideration should be denied. The accused filed a Motion of question. it will have the effect of exculpating him from the crime 1. An administrative charge for gross misconduct arising from the transaction subject matter A: The accused was not entitled to adduce controverting of said criminal case was filed against him in the same evidence on the civil liability. Since the acquitted of the crime charged. contending that the resolution of the premature because he has yet to file his answer to the issue in civil case would necessarily be determinative of administrative complaint and submit countervailing his guilt or innocence. 2004). The Ombudsman assigned a team composed of to evidence without leave of court (Sec. the civil action must precede the court granted the accused’s demurrer to evidence the filing of the criminal action (Dreamwork Construction. and without the first marriage having being declared null and void. If the first sale is null and void. 1999). 3019 in the Office of the the Motion for Reconsideration (2003 Bar) Ombudsman. A filed a “Motion for suspension of Action” in case. June 30.R. 2010 Subsequently. reconsider the order on the following grounds: a) The Thereafter. (2002. 160054-55. v. No. is a prejudicial question the A: The motion should be denied for the following reasons: resolution of which is determinative of his guilt or innocence. In 2010. his preventive suspension shall be for a maximum A: Yes. liability is not extinguished the criminal case should be suspended because if his despite acquittal of the accused are: first marriage with Faith will be declared null and void. Although he was Inc. Where the court expressly declares that the liability of the accused is not criminal but only civil in nature. she filed a criminal case for bigamy before the answer to the administrative complaint and the 47 . of bigamy. an Information for estafa was filed against A office of the Special Prosecutor had exclusive authority based on the same double sale that was the subject of the to conduct a preliminary investigation of the criminal civil action. AG moved to appearing in the first deed of sale were forgeries. Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila sometime in 2011. Decide. 1980). there would be no double sale 1. at the very least. was criminal case for bigamy was filed ahead of the civil action required by the court to pay the private complainant the for declaration of nullity of marriage. Where the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt. 2000 Bar) and under Presidential Decree No. Is the suspension of the criminal evidence. there is no prejudicial face value of the check. A theorized that he never sold strong. Rule 119). (2005 Bar) property to B and that his purported signatures in the first deed of sale were forgeries. exclusive authority to conduct a preliminary G. Nos. 184861. G. he. criminal aspect of the case was not correct because the criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. Q: Regional Director AG of the Department of Public b. the demurrer to evidence applied only to the crime of bigamy when he contracted the second marriage criminal aspect of the case (2001 Bar).R. (1999. QUAMTO (1997-2016) action and regardless of the result of the latter (Samson v. the outcome of the civil case for Reconsideration regarding the order to pay the face annulment has no bearing upon the determination of the value of the check on the following grounds: guilt or innocence of the accused in the criminal case for bigamy because the accused has already committed the a. a prejudicial question to exist. Otherwise stated. Rule 111). L-50441-42 September 18. G. 807 (Civil Service Law).R. The office of the Special Prosecutor does not have and A would be innocent of the offense of estafa (Ras v. G. Solomon filed a motion to suspend the Bar) proceedings in the bigamy case on the ground of prejudicial question. Resolve with reasons the motion because the defense of A in civil action. He asserts that the proceedings in A: The instances where the civil. The suspension of the criminal action is in order period of three months. Nos. September 14. The team of Q: A allegedly sold to B a parcel of land which A later also investigators recommended to the Ombudsman that AG sold to X. and A: The motion filed by Solomon should be denied. 1[b]. while the Q: Name two instances where the trial court can hold the case for bigamy before the RTC of Manila is ongoing. and (2) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. accused civilly liable even if he is acquitted. Resolve Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. The Ombudsman issued the said order as the property to B and his purported signatures recommend by the investigators. that he never sold the of respondent AG. related to the issue determines the subsequent criminal 128927. because he filed his demurrer office. Court of Appeals. Meanwhile.

The court shall resolve the matter as early as practicable as but A: There is no necessity for the court to conduct pre. July 30. 13903. Sensing that the occupants of the vehicle were up to no good. an inquest proceeding should be conducted and thereafter a case may be filed in court even Q: You are the defense counsel of Angela Bituin who has without the requisite preliminary investigation. The Honorable Sandiganbayan. X opposed the motion the same right to adduce evidence in his defense.R. the complaint or information may any offense and that it was only when police officers be filed by a prosecutorwithout the need of such showed up at her residence with a warrant of arrest that investigation provided an inquest has been conducted in she learned of the pending case against her. 1999). A: I will file first a motion for leave to file a demurrer within Thus. What "before-trial" remedy would you invoke in party or arresting officer or person. Section 26. 23. In the facts given. from office. What is indispensable is that the trial court duly prosecution rested its case (Sec. After arraignment. L-32950. and thereafter hand down its ruling. there is no more possibility that he can Procedure provides that an application for or admission to intimidate witnesses and hamper the prosecution. This remedy would allow the evaluation of the sufficiency of Settled is the rule that where the accused files a motion to prosecution’s evidence without the need of presenting quash the information or challenges the validity thereof. arguing that he was now occupying a position different from that which the Information charged him and Moreover. He disarmed the heard on his possible defenses against the mandatory felon and while frisking him. Mariano. She wonders accordance with existing rules. could apply to any Bar) office. Angela without a warrant involving an offense which requires revealed to you that she has not been investigated for preliminary investigation. G. No. or the validity of the Information and the Sandiganbayan from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of a denies the same. Inspector Masigasig of the Valenzuela Police witnessed G. The occupants UST BAR OPERATIONS 48 . Suppose X files a Motion to Quash challenging his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefor. the complaint may when she is not in government service. from which the public officer when and how can you avail of this remedy? (2013 charged shall be preventively suspended. and appropriate court without a preliminary inestigation? yet. Rule 119).A. What "during-trial" remedy can you use to allow an prosecution under a valid information for graft-related crime early evaluation of the prosecution evidence such as malversation is pending in court. Cavite on issuing the corresponding order of suspension should it board a public transport bus as a passenger. after filing of Sandiganbayan for malversation of public funds the complaint or information in court without a preliminary allegedly committed when he was still the Mayor of a investigation. Under Section 13 of RA No. which he might currently be holding and not necessarily the particular office under which he was charged. Since the offender was arrested in flagrante delicto for purpose of preventively suspending the accused. an undersecretary of DENR. without a warrant of arrest. the DENR undersecretary can be preventively five (5) days from the time the prosecution rested its case. If suspended even though he was a mayor. the Sandiganbayan sustained its validity. 2012). In the absence or why she has been charged before the Sandiganbayan unavailability of an inquest prosecutor. REMEDIAL LAW submission of countervailing evidence (Garcia v. then I will now file a demurrer to committed malversation. bail shall not bar the accused from challenging the validity of Decide. No. and how would you avail of ARREST this remedy? Q: As Cicero was walking down a dark alley one A: I will file a motion for the conduct of preliminary midnight. pre-suspension hearing? Explain. The word “office”. suspension hearing. he saw an "owner-type jeepney" approaching investigation or reinvestigation and the quashal or recall of him. There is no (2013 Bar) necessity for the court to conduct pre-suspension hearing to determine for the second time the validity of the information A: Yes. September 10. Rule 112 of the Rules of Court. Since a pre-suspension an on-going armed robbery while the bus was traversing hearing is basically a due process requirement. hear the parties at a hearing held for determining the validity of the information. not later than the start of the trial of the case.R. he darted into a corner and ran. a defense evidence. will there still be a need to conduct a preliminary investigation of the charge against him. His alertness and training enabled him to foil the accused public official is given an adequate opportunity to be robbery and to subdue the malefactor. been charged under RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) before the Sandiganbayan. He seized both handguns no reason to complain that no actual hearing was conducted and the malefactor was later charged with the separate (Miguel v. (2012 Bar) provided that he raises them before entering his plea. was charged before the Under Section 6. discovered another suspension under R. 3019.R. Rule 119). It may be done through the court’s show-cause order of the trial court would no longer be initiative or upon motion of the accused and after the necessary. the DENR Undersecretary the charges of robbery and illegal prosecution of firearm was already given opportunity to question the validity of the be filed directly by the investigating prosecutor with the Information for malversation by filing a motion to quash. While Angela Under Section 7. Mojica the warrant of arrest in the Court where the case is pending G. 23. Q: X. Rule 114 of the Rules of Criminal therefore. an incumbent public officer against whom any criminal b. evidence within ten (10) days (Sec. then an accused would have handgun tucked in his waist. Rule 112. 3019. the prosecution moved he learns of its filing ask for a preliminary investigation with that X be preventively suspended. the accused may within five days from the time town in Rizal. No. when an Makati. shall be suspended without the need of presenting defense evidence. Police uphold the validity of the information (Luciano v. Angela’s behalf to address the fact that she had not been investigated at all. with an additional prayer to suspend the arraignment. when he allegedly the same is granted. No. Q: On his way to the PNP Academy in Silang. 1971). 172035. she has yet to be arraigned. when a person is lawfully arrested has posted bail. crimes of robbery and illegal possession of firearm. May July 04. be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended a.

and without securing a warrant. as amended. that the person to be arrested has committed it. No preliminary investigation was conducted either a. Is he entitled to a preliminary investigation before the filing of the information? Explain. 12 and 13. The arrest and the body-search were not legal. the corresponding information was filed in the RTC. After the A: Yes.09 gram of shabu tucked in his waist and a Swiss knife c. No. He can move for a reinvestigation. Rule 113 of the “Dangerous Drug Act”. the crime has not just two (2) hours after the killing and a certain Max was been committed since a period of two days had already allegedly the killer per information given by a witness. G. b. prosecutor filed the requisite information with the MM RTC. 101837. the replevin. If you were the Solicitor complaint of the widow of A. Is the arrest of B legal? his personal knowledge of facts and circumstances. the accused moved to seized in the course of a valid arrest in a buy-bust operation quash the information on the ground that the prosecutor (Secs. and the police arresting has no such personal He asks you to clarify the following: knowledge because he was not present when the incident 49 . The police arrested AX. Was the seizure of the firearm valid? before or after the filing of the information and the accused at no time asked for such an investigation. The gun seized during the search of the house of B rendered against the accused (People v. without a search warrant is not admissible in evidence (Sec. Forthwith the police officer filed with the officers moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground City Prosecutor of Manila a complaint for estafa that the subject firearm was in custodia legis. Trial on the merits ensued. Rule 113). a warrantless arrest is 13. 7. On Rule 112). the search was not an incident to a lawful arrest of a person under Sec. lapsed. No. A warrantless arrest requires that the crime has in fact approaches your for advice and asks you how he will just been committed and the police arresting has personal execute a warrantless arrest against a murderer who knowledge of facts that the person to be arrested has escaped after killing a person. The gun is not indispensable in the conviction of A A: No. Cicero’s act of running does not show any reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed or is about to be Q: In a buy-bust operation. 5. The court supported by RY’s sworn statement and other denied the motion and instead issued the writ of documentary evidence. Here.000 sometime in against the police officers with an application for the mid-2003. and another for Rules of Criminal Procedure. 1992). (2004 Bar) Q: FG was arrested without a warrant by policemen while he was walking in a busy street. 112035. he was charged with rape and he was not lawfully arrested without a warrant (See: Sec. The warrantless arrest is not valid because the alleged The court had no authority to issue the writ of replevin offense has not just been committed. Hence. January 16. The police 11. The denial of the motion to dismiss was not proper. No. The motion committed one year before the arrest (Sec. 98060. the police officer written authority to carry said firearm. 1987 Constitution). and detained him thereafter. On the strength of the sworn statement given issuance of a writ of replevin. before arraignment. the police arrested B General. G.R.R. A search warrant was not suffered from a want of authority to file the information necessary (People v. because the court may rely on testimonial or other evidence. He alleged in his complaint by RY personally to SPO1 Juan Ramos sometime in mid. he is entitled to a preliminary investigation because preliminary investigation. the arrest was illegal as it does shabu and an unlicensed firearm. Is the warrantless arrest of AX valid? A: NO. illegal possession of firearms. based on b. Rule 126). Rule 113). G. apprehended Cicero. A: Yes. A: Any objection to the illegality of the arrest of the accused a. the police operatives committed for the police officers to apprehend him and arrested the accused and seized from him a sachet of conduct body search. to recover the firearm should be filed in the court where the criminal action is pending. The seizure of the firearm was valid because it was However. Q: A was killed by B during a quarrel over a hostess in a On appeal. The accused was not fall under any of the circumstances for a valid charged in two Informations. one for violation of the warrantless arrest provided in Section 5. be guilty at the arraignment without raising the question. January 27. 2 and 3[2]. and upon he was illegally arrested. The court rendered judgment convicting him. counsel. can B be convicted of in his secret pocket. The accused filed an action for recovery of the firearm in another court Q: AX swindled RY in the amount P10. A policeman A: No. Rule 126. that he was a military informer who had been issued a 2004. Rule 113. Salazar. 1998).R. The policeman arrived committed it (Sec. as required by the Rules of Court. Is the homicide? (1997 Bar) arrest and body-search legal? (2010 Bar) A: Yes. III. Can the gun used by B in shooting A. QUAMTO (1997-2016) of the vehicle − elements from the Western Police happened (Go v. Cabiles. investigation before filing the information. arraignment. frisked him and found a sachet of 0. The crime was allegedly whether the firearm was in custodia legis or not. he pleaded not guilty. FG claims that the judgment is void because nightclub. February District − gave chase and apprehended him. Moreover. because of his failure to conduct a preliminary 1997). Art. allowed when an offense has just been committed and the peace officer has probable cause to believe. Court of Appeals. Was the denial of the motion to dismiss proper? (2003 Bar) a. which was without a warrant is deemed waived when he pleaded not seized during the search of the house of B. It is admitted in evidence? too late to complain about a warrantless arrest after trial is commenced and completed and a judgment of conviction A: No. Under the circumstances. for the People of the Philippines. 5 (b). b. A: No. how without a warrant of arrest and searched his house would you refute said claim? (2000 Bar) without a search warrant. Q: Under Section 5. After due inquest. Two days after the incident.

Sec. Rapido's lawyer must be a large measure of immediacy between the time examined the rollo of the case and found that it only the offense was committed and the time of the arrest. 182601. still exeute the warrantless arrest? Moreno Generoso. a warrant of arrest must be secured. documents and parties' 113. In the issuance of warrant the Supreme Court held that the warrantless arrest of arrest. The phrase “personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested committed What the law requires as personal determination on the part it” means that matters in relation to the supposed of a judge is that he should not rely solely on the report of the commission of the crime were within the actual investigating prosecutor. personal evaluation of the circumstances at the scene of the crime. Jr. of having committed an offense not punishable by death. the Supreme Court also declared Supreme Court in Soliven v. 10109. G. the trial court allowed Alma to post bail and supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in then ordered her release. 1988. he could determine the existence of probable At any rate. She prayed arrested has committed the crime.R. or an actual belief or reasonable groun of a. after personally evaluating the a.R. 2014) If there was an appreciable lapse of Immediately. 82585. invalid a warrantless arrest effected six (6) days after November 14. No. G. Makasiar. words “personal determination. In your opinion. The probable cause to justify warrantless arrest he may be admitted to bail in the discretion of the court. she filed a The arresting officer’s determination of probable cause petition for writ of habeas corpus. A reasonable suspicion therefore pursuant to Rule 102. In Go v. March 10. A: No.. How long after the commission of the crime can he suspicion. Moreno Generoso. Del Rosario. No. Supreme Court ruled that a warrantless arrest was validly executed upon the accused three (3) hours after May the warrant of arrest be quashed on the grounds the commission of the crime. prosecution witnesses in violation of his client's constitutionally-mandated rights. personal examination of the perception. there is no law or rule that requires the Judge to cause that the person sought to be arrested has issue a prior Order finding probable cause before the committed the crime. Thus. citing as grounds: crime. the mandate of the Constitution is for the judge to effected a day after the commission of the crime is personally determine the existence of probable cause. In People 2. July 26. the determination of issuance of a warrant of arrest. the warrant of arrest may not be quashed based on the However. grounds cited by Rapido’s counsel. 292 (1999). citing Vaca v. however. as the exclusive and personal the commission of the crime. In Peoplev v. In executing a warrantless arrest under Section 5. Rapido's counsel filed a motion to quash time between the arrest and the commission of the the arrest warrant for being void. Rule 113 of the Revised Rules of where the sentence of imprisonment of a party found Criminal Procedure is based on his personal knowledge guilty of violation of BP 22 was reduced to a fine equal to of the facts or circumstances that the person sought to be double the amount of the check involved. 95847-48. 1993). No. responsibility of the issuing judge to satisfy himself as to the existence of probable cause. 94533. Court of Appeals.R. In the alternative. These facts or that her sentence be similarly modified and that she be circumstances pertain to actual facts or raw evidence. the submissions (Joey M. issuance of a warrant of arrest (People v. No. based on actual facts. of the prosecutor and a copy of the warrant of arrest. (Joey M.R. found probable an offense has just been committed means that there cause and issued a warrant of arrest. Joseph “Jojo” Grey. i. There was no prior order finding probable cause v. the before the judge issued the arrest warrant. 22 (BP 22). even though indispensable in the determination of probable cause for the the police officer has not seen someone actually.R. personal knowledge by the arresting officer is an 1. Gerente. REMEDIAL LAW a. 2014) b. February 4. 1992.. 2010).” was interpreted by the February 11. she be allowed to post bail person to be arrested. No.14. not mandatory and police officer at the scene of the crime. supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in she prayed that pending determination on whether the themselves to create the probable cause of guilt on the Vaca ruling applies to her. (2015 Bar) upheld the valid warrantless arrest which was executed on the same day as the commission of the crime. No. Rule prosecutor's resolution. November 10. In any case. G. coupled with good person is lawfully imprisoned or restrained on a charge faith on the part of the peace officers making the arrest. The RTC judge. Pestilos v. contained the copy of the information. CA under Section 5(b). G. Under Rule 102? UST BAR OPERATIONS 50 . probable cause and the gathering of facts or circumstances should be made immediately after the BAIL commission of the crime in order to comply with the element of immediacy. What does “personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested Determination of probable cause and issuance of committed it” mean? (2016 Bar) warrant of arrest A: Q: An information for murder was filed against Rapido. 365 Phil. which provides that if a must be founded on probable cause. is the order of themselves to warrant a cautious man to believe that the the trial court correct? person accused is guilty of the offense with which he is charged. personal evaluation or observation of the complainant and his witnesses is. Thus. 1992. Tonog. the Supreme Court likewise ground. 101837. immediately released from detention. b. The judge before issuing the warrant did not indispensable requirement to the validity of a vaid personally conduct a searching examination of the warrantless arrest. November 10. Pestilos v. cited by Rapido's counsel? State your reason for each No. 182601. thus. in People v.R.R. fleeing. the Supreme Court held that the requirement that affidavits submitted by the prosecutor.e. ordinarily signifies a reasonable ground of suspicion Accordingly. based on his G. The invalid. G. he could still make a warrantless arrest if. Q: After Alma had started serving her sentence for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. G. The exact period varies on a case to case basis.

January filed from the denial of the Petition for Bail. the accused should be allowed to post A: Bail is a matter of right: (a) before or after conviction by bail because the evidence of his guilt is no strong (Sec. Under Section 5. an offense not punishable by death. G. chosen remedy and outline the appropriate steps to policemen A. The trial court’s order releasing Alma on bail even after judgment against her has become final and in fact she A: If I were the Judge. a capital offense. is a brazen disregard of the Bail. If you are the Judge. the Court of Appeals rendered a decision acquitting A on the A: Yes. Although A was Petition for Bail was denied after a summary hearing on convicted of homicide only. Under Section 7. or life imprisonment (Sec. July 8. Besides. the presumption of abscond or escape? Explain. he entitled to bail? (2014 Bar) Bail is a matter of discretion upon conviction by the Regional A: Yes. October 27. 189122. B and C were convicted of Homicide. he applied for bail. QUAMTO (1997-2016) A: No. 5. on appeal he could be convicted of the capital evidence of guilt. An application for bail is an appropriate remedy to ground that the evidence pointed to the NPA as the secure provisional remedy of the 14-year old boy. the bail. Rule 114. ground that there exists a high degree of probability that the accused will abscond or escape. March 17. No. the Court of Appeals properly denied A’s application Q: A was charged with murder in the lower court. Court of Appeals. may the court refuse to grant him bail on the ground denial of bail pending appeal is a matter of wise discretion that there exists a high degree of probability the he will since after conviction by the trial court. an indigent mother seeks assistance for her 14-year old son who has A: No. Rule 114. G. Rule 102 of the Rules of Court (Habeas that it had already ruled that: (i) the evidence of guilt is Courpus) does not authorize a court to discharge by writ of strong. b. shall be admitted to commenced to serve sentence” (People v. how will you resolve the incident? A: No. 114350. 7. III. A: YES. The accused is entitled to bail subject to the Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death. I would grant the second Petition for has started serving sentence. the appellate Court may allow him to post bail because the Trial Court in convicting him. filed from the denial of the Petition for Bail. 1997). G. 141805. Rules of perpetua. 8. G. as shown by the Q: When is bail a matter of right and when is it a matter prosecution’s failure to prove the circumstance that will of discretion? (1999. it is settled that an Order Municipal Trial Court in Cities. Under the killers of the victim. bail can for bail proper? be posted as a matter of right. bail is a matter of right before or even after conviction before the MTC which has jurisdiction over the crime of a. no person mandate in Section 24. Rule 114). or is there another remedy available? Justify your Q: In an information charging them of Murder. No Motion for Reconsideration was offense (Obosa v. the Metropolitan Trial Court. 4. Consequently. No. or Municipal Circuit Trial granting bail is merely interlocutory which cannot attain Court. 1987 Constitution). After probability of the accused appearing in trial (Sec 9[g].R. Can B and C be benefited by the decision of the Court witnesses so far presented by the accused had shown of Appeals? (1998 Bar) that no qualifying aggravating circumstance attended the killing. Rule 114). 2006 Bar) qualify the crime to. In one other case. Court of Appeals. Art. murder. changed the nature of the Q: When the accused is entitled as a matter of right to offense from non-bailable to bailable. Fitzgerald. R. The court denied the petition on the grounds 51 . Suppose the accused is convicted of the crime of involves a capital offense and the evidence of guilt is not homicide and the accused filed a Notice of Appeal. Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure charge with a capital offense. the prosecution is only required to present as much been arrested and detained for malicious mischief. What the court can do is to Hearing application for bail in capital offenses increase the amount of the bail. the constitutional right to bail ends. A take. it cannot be denied on the No. (Jose Antonio Leviste v. regardless of the stage 149723. (1999 Bar) innocence terminates and. No. Accordingly. reception of the evidence of the accused. accordingly. reclusion discretion of the Court. (2013 Bar) appealed from the decision but was denied. reclusion perpetua.R. evidence as is necessary to determine whether the evidence Would an application for bail be the appropriate remedy of D’s guilt is strong for purposes of bail (Sec. The trial court ordered 114. your work requires you to act as public for purposes of bail. the accused reiterated his petition for bail on the ground that the b. and consequently convict the accused of. 2006). and (c) if the charge b. Rule 114). bail when evidence of guilt is strong. 13. Municipal Trial Court. 12-94. Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure? (2008 Bar) a. Rule 114). One of the guidelines that the judge may use in fixing a reasonable amount of bail is the Q: D was charged with murder. His for bail. 2010). as amended by Circular No. (b) before conviction by the Regional Trial Court of finality (Pobre v. Rules. (ii) the resolution for the Petition for Bail is habeas corpus a person charged with or convicted of an solely based on the evidence presented by the offense in the Philippines. 4. Finally. Section 4. The court had the discretion to do so. or an offense punishable by that: “In no case shall bail be allowed after the accused has reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. In this case. Rule arraignment. of the criminal prosecution. Be that as it may.R. People.) the prosecution to present its evidence in full on the ground that only on the basis of such presentation could Q: At the Public Attorney's Office station in Taguig where it determine whether the evidence of D’s guilt was strong you are assigned. Court. or of a person suffering prosecution. A: If bail is a matter of right. Rules of Court. since he was charged with a the ground that the prosecution had established a strong capital offense. Rule 114). Is the ruling correct? Why? (2002 defender at the local Regional Trial Court and to handle Bar) cases involving indigents. and (iii) no Motion for Reconsideration was imprisonment under lawful judgment. the evidence of guilt for the crime of murder is not strong. or life imprisonment (Sec. During the 16. 2015). Was the Court of Appeal’s denial of A’s application malicious mischief (Sec. is strong (Sec.

Court of Appeals. that a material witness will not him (Sec. who did not appeal. No. a. in sum praying (1) bleeding and face swollen. Sandiganbayan. P02 Romulus detained April 2007. At the time when the warrant of arrest was issued.R. RTC of Manila. order the witness to post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper. The court did not properly impose that bail condition. the police officers saw a young lady with her nose Juan filed before it an urgent motion. The rules provide that when the court is the Court of appeals which is favourable and applicable to satisfied. 149116.a. The man readily identified interim. (1999 Bar) bail because until his motion to quash can be resolved. his arraignment cannot be held. The Court took cognizance of for Violation of R. Hon. No. in testimony is taken (Sec. The higher value now being given to human rights. The growing importance of the individual person in Jung's lawyer filed a motion to be admitted to bail but public international. He filed a petition for bail saying was arrested. The court may require a witness to post bail if he is motion to quash (the Information) so that he can be a material witness and bail is needed to secure his UST BAR OPERATIONS 52 . Alarmed. 7610 (The Child Abuse Law). A person is allowed to file a In light of the recent developments in international law. petition for bail as soon as he is deprived of his liberty by where emphasis is given to the worth of the individual and virtue of his arrest or voluntary surrender. 2003). be made only after arraignment would place the accused in a position where he has to choose between: (1) filing a motion Q: May the Court require a witness to post bail? Explain to quash (the Information) and thus delay his released on your answer. and The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure do not require the the law on extradition. PO1 Remus and P02 Romulus with a criminal case for tax evasion and fraud before his proceeded to the condo unit identified by Paz. 9262 (The VAWC Law) for the following trends in international law: physical violence and five separate informations for violation of R. can be benefited by the decision of appearance. that previous to A: In this case. the condition that the approval of bail bonds shall 2007). The police officers arrested Oasis Jung and event the court would issue an arrest warrant. Inside. what court or courts may he apply for bail? Explain. on the other. The accused who is confined property bond. that the constitutional provision on bail does not Oasis Jung at the station's jail.R. G. he was confined A: D may apply for bail in the RTC-Manila where the in the hospital and could not obtain a valid clearance to information was filed or in the RTC-Quezon City where he leave the hospital. she had sexual intercourse with Oasis Jung in Government of United States of America v. PO1 Remus took the young lady's statement who Bar) identified herself as AA. Petitioner prays that Juan Remus knocked at the door and when a man opened the be extradited and delivered to the proper authorities of door. August 28. (2002 Bar) Q: A was charged with a non-bailable offense. thereof is available. 153675. Branch 42. with any therein that he be considered as having placed himself metropolitan trial judge. Jimenez. 11[a]. An accused need the sanctity of human rights.00 each time and it was the first time that Mark B. the lady responded that she was beaten up by hearing and (2) that Juan be allowed to post bail in the Oasis Jung. (2004 station. entertain his petition? Why or why not? (2012 Bar) Q: In what forms may bail be given? (1999 Bar) A: Yes. she called up the by the proper criminal court of State XX in connection nearby police station. the Court departed from the not wait for his arraignment before filing the bail petition ruling in Purganan. G. Rule 122). Moreover. Hon. January 2.A. Before the RTC could act on the petition for extradition.k. Did the court properly impose that bail condition? obligations. and that to prevent Juan’s flight in the themselves as police officers. the Court reviewed what was held the incident. Oasis Jung physically hurt her. upon proof or oath. Asked by P02 Romulus what that SoJ’s application for an arrest warrant be set for happened. She narrated that she is a sixteen-year-old high school student. Rule in a hospital may be deemed to be in the custody of the law if 114). Rule 119). or through a to the jurisdiction of the court. the public prosecutor filed an information only in criminal proceedings. After the inquest apply to extradition proceedings. Mario Batacan Crespo. the same being available proceeding. The duty of this Court to balance the rights of the A: No.000. April 19. shall be made only after his arraignment. and 4. PO1 Remus and his companions introduced State XX for trial. upon motion of either party. cash deposit or recognizance (Sec. on one hand. 1995). May the court circuit trial judge therein (Sec. 153675. individual under our fundamental law. Oasis 1. No. Upon refusal to post bail. a warrant for his immediate arrest be issued. even if his appeal is dismissed because of his escape. himself as Oasis Jung and gestured to them to come in.R. he clearly communicates his submission to the court while he is confined in a hospital (Paderanga v. municipal trial judge or municipal under the jurisdiction of the court. and held that an extraditee may be (Serapio v. The corresponding duty of countries to observe these universal human rights in fulfilling their treaty a. or if no judge. the court issued an order that approval of his bail bond 2. REMEDIAL LAW A: B. Guillermo G. and (2) foregoing the filing of a A: Yes. Pursuant thereto RP’s Secretary of Justice (SOJ) filed a Petition for Extradition before the MM RTC alleging that Q: Paz was awakened by a commotion coming from a Juan Kwan is the subject of an arrest warrant duly issued condo unit next to hers. No. G. allowed to post bail (Gov’t of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region v. G. Olalia. PO 1 return to RP as a balikbayan. Q: RP and State XX have a subsisting Extradition Treaty. and paid P5. 115407. Rule 114). The benefit will also apply to C testify when required. the court shall commit him Q: If an information was filed in the RTC-Manila charging to prison until he complies or is legally discharged after his D with homicide and he was arrested in Quezon City.R. at least five times on different occasions and she was Purganan. a person is deemed to be under the custody of the law either when he has been arrested or has surrendered himself A: Bail may be given by a corporate surety. 3. arraignment of the accused as prerequisite to the conduct of hearings in the bail petition. Should brought him and the young lady back to the police the court grant or deny Juan’s prayer? Reason. No. 1.A. 17. Presiding Judge. No. it may. 6.

8353. the Information for qualified rape. No. Manchetti. can Oasis appeal. Under Section 17(a) of said date. grounded on his recurring illness. 1998). L-48883.A. Sec. an application for or A: The assignment of error invoked by X’s counsel is admission to bail shall not bar the accused from challenging impressed with merit since there has been no express waiver the validity of his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued of X’s Miranda rights. the testimony of a witness given on direct examination (Sec. interpreting X’s answer as an admission of guilt. The common basic principle lad. Before the is transmitted to the victim. and A: The motion is meritorious. it is a right guaranteed by the fundamental law as part of due A: No. Where a emanated from spurious origins. 14(2) of the 1987 Constitution to a blood test to determine whether he has HIV under Sec. with and found guilty of qualified rape if he knew on or testified and completed his testimony on direct before the commission of the crime that he is afflicted examination in 2015. 1980. 6. to privacy. No. 123872. however. The conduct of a party which may be construed as an implied waiver of the right to cross-examine Q: X was arrested for the alleged murder of a 6-year old may take various forms. Oasis Jung can still question the validity of his arrest assignment of error. was not adequate opportunity for cross-examination.” and Ruel 115. 2002) and the prosecution offers such result in evidence to prove the qualifying circumstance under the In People v. not a mere privilege. If the result of such test shows that he is HIV positive. expressly or impliedly. examination should be stricken off the record where there in 2004). Pedro died. as in case of the illness and death of a withness after direct examination. 8054. as it does not right to cross-examine and the testimony given on direct contemplate a search within the meaning of the law (People examination of the witness will be received or allowed to v. 1. G. (2005. 129670. arguing that X Bar) invoked his Miranda rights when he remained quiet for the first two hours of questioning. 2004) 53 . Due to several postponements by with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired the accused. Montilla." The trial court. No. (2002. After his release from detention on bail.R. specifically mandates that “the accused shall enjoy the right 17(a) of R. Since the accused was deprived of compulsory testing is authorized by the law. His rights to be presumed innocent of to meet the witnesses face to face. Aug. b. 8504 the court may compel the accused Pedro’s testimony on the ground that it violates his right to submit himself to a blood test where blood samples of confrontation and the right to cross-examine the would be extracted from his veins to determine whether witness. 8353. 2010 Bar) Pedro’s testimony on direct examination be admitted as evidence. In an action in criminal prosecutions the accused shall be entitled to which the physical condition of a party is in controversy. July 7. In the course of his detention. Rule 28. tree and can be offered in evidence to prove the qualifying circumstance under the information for qualified rape under ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The motion is not meritorious. as well as any information derived RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED therefrom. remain in the record. which Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other were all granted by the judge. Is the motion meritorious? (2016 Bar) a. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine refers The right of a party to confront and cross-examine opposing to that rule of evidence that excludes any evidence which witnesses in a judicial litigation is a personal one which may may have been derived or acquired from a tainted or be waived. Court of Appeals. The uncounselled extrajudicial him. Rule on the A: Yes. G. (People v. The cross-examination of a against self-incrimination violated by such witness is an absolute right.R. Such evidence is inadmissible for having a renunciation of the right of cross examination. should the court Supreme Court also held that if a party is deprived of the reject such result on the ground that it is the fruit of opportunity of cross examination without fault on his part. Q: Under Republic Act No. The doctrine.A. the cross-examination of sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease Pedro was finally set on October 15. but failed to avail himself of it. On b. January 30. Are the rights of the accused to be presumed innocent of the crime charged. Abatayao.R. party has had the opportunity to cross-examine a witness does not apply to the results obtained pursuant to Sec. 2010 Bar) even after his release from detention on bail. provided that he raises them before entering his plea. G. he necessarily forfeits the Rule 28. the result of the his opportunity to cross examine the witness without fauly testing cannot be considered to be the fruit of a poisonous on his part. by conduct amounting to polluted source. one may be charged Q: Pedro. X was that the party was given the opportunity to confront and subjected to three hours of non-stop interrogation. Under Section 26. No. on the 3rd hour. R. G. The court may compel the accused to submit himself process. Sec. 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. 2016. 2000). The prosecution opposed the motion and asked he has HIV. a poisonous tree? Explain. shooting down the boy. he is entitled to have the direct testimony A: Since the rights of the accused are not violated because the stricken from the records. The accused moved to expunge Republic Act No. the motion to expunge is meritorious. No. to privacy and against self-incrimination the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure enjoins that in all are not violated by such compulsory testing. He was read his Miranda rights immediately upon underlying the application of the rule on implied waiver is being apprehended. September 27. or from assailing the regularity or questioning the Miranda rights. against whom he is called. No. Rule 114 of the Rules of Court. He cross-examine an opposing witness but failed to take remained quiet until. 139456. G. 1. Look for citation of latest cases. Accordingly. the confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the court may order the accused to submit to a physical trial. (People v. In order to have a valid waiver of the therefor. 1(f) of the crime charged. February 1. Article III. the principal witness in a criminal case. is inadmissible. With regard to the accused. confession of X being without a valid waiver of his Miranda rights. he answered "yes" advantage of it for reasons attributable to himself alone. 146689.R. QUAMTO (1997-2016) arraigned at once and thereafter be released on bail (Lavides to the question of whether "he prayed for forgiveness for v. No. X’s counsel faulted the trial court in its Jung still question the validity of his arrest? (2015 interpretation of his client’s answer. the same must be in writing and made in the absence of a preliminary investigation of a charge against presence of his counsel. Fernando Monjey Rosario. of the party compulsory testing? Explain.R. convicted him.

Will the motion be firearms in an Information filed in the RTC. Q: Pedrito and Tomas. What ground or grounds should you invoke? Explain. It was granted? Why or why not? (2009 Bar) alleged therein that Rodolfo was in possession of two unlicensed firearms: a . punishable by units of computer through personal canvass instead of a prision correctional in its maximum period and a fine of not public bidding. The accused should instead file a motion for possession of an unlicensed . which the court imprisonment not exceeding six year (Sec 2. 50 Hun 47. but with an additional allegation Bar) that the accused gave unwarranted benefits to SB Enterprises owned by Samuel. Under the Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony. on his failure to appear for cross-examination where a good Desierto. this ground is not waived if not raised in a motion to quash and Q: A criminal information is filed in court charging could be raised at the pre-trial (Sec.45 calibre and a . he moved to quash the amended information 1. he asked the court to allow him to change Information is defective because the officer signing it his plea of not guilty to a plea of guilty but only to estafa lacked the authority to do so. 1099. Rule 117) Corrupt Practices Act). BC found out that the Provincial Prosecutor had no authority to sign the Q: D was charged with theft of an article worth P15. 696) and that cases before the Sandiganbayan and perform such other a referee has no power to strike the examination of a witness duties assigned to him by the Ombudsman (Calingin v. Rule 116). 6770. It is the MTC that has exclusive and municipality. are charged before the Sandiganbayan for violation of A: The ground for the motion to quash is that more than one Section 3 (e). After reinvestigation. you intend to file a motion to quash the Information. affirmed 24 N. No. January 16. information as it was the City Prosecutor who has such 000. the direct testimony of a witness who dies before 166062. 145743-89. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA After arraignment but before pre-trial. 2006).P. Rule 117). Alberto V. Q: BC is charged with illegal possession of firearms under an Information signed by a Provincial Prosecutor. Blg. and on the ground that the officer who filed the same had no authority to do so. amended). 3(f). the Special Prosecutor has the power and authority. of the Municipality of San Miguel. before trial against him be dismissed on the ground that the commenced. August 10. Samuel was also indicted A: Two grounds to quash an Information are: under the amended information. therefore. Before Samuel was arraigned. 1980) Special Prosecutor to file the information. causing undue injury to the less than P15. That the facts charged do not constitute an offense. the latter would have no authority to file the same. possession of an preliminary investigation is not a ground for a motion to unlicensed . UST BAR OPERATIONS 54 . If you are counsel for BC. G. R. Upon being arraigned.E.00 A: I would argue that since the Provincial Prosecutor had no is not necessarily included in theft of an article worth authority to file the information.00.000. alleging the Q: Give two (2) grounds to quash an Information. Office of the Ombudsman (Perez v.00. The lack of Under Republic Act No. clear delegation of authority from the Ombudsman to the 48883. Republic Act No.Y. (People v. Prosecutor filed an amended information duly signed and approved by the Special Prosecutor. the accused moved original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable by for reinvestigation of the charge. what is your argument to refute A: No. Hence. Court of MOTION TO QUASH Appeals. BC moves that the case the offense charged. cross examination can be stricken only insofar as not under the supervision and control of the Ombudsman. A: No.45 calibre gun is punishable by prison mayor quash. the direct Under R. 000. Anselmo with homicide.000. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over reasons.00 jurisdiction over the person of the accused and over the subject matter of the offense charged (Cudia v. the conclusion of the cross-examination should not be expunged from the records. Can the court allow D to change his opposes the motion on the ground of estoppel as BC did plea? Why? (2002 Bar) not move to quash the Information before arraignment. No. September 26. 2 NYS conduct preliminary investigation and prosecute criminal 507.32 calibre gun is punishable reinvestigation within five (5) days after he learn of the filing by prison correctional in its maximum period and a fine in Court of the case against him (Sec. L. 121 N. Anselmo files a motion to quash the information on the ground that no preliminary Q: Rodolfo is charged with possession of unlicensed investigation was conducted.00. as of not less than P15. Hon. the motion to quash will not be granted. 8294. (Curtice v. Rule 112.R. West.32 calibre. No. As counsel of the accused.00.000. 1998). to covered by the cross-examination. During the pre-trial. Estafa involving P5. Leyte. Nos. Absent a excuse is given. Thereafter. 6. the RTC has no jurisdiction over the second offense others. among Likewise.32 calibre gun. The information alleges. G. because a plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be the opposition of the Provincial Prosecutor? (2000 Bar) allowed if the lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged (Sec. 2. REMEDIAL LAW A: The motion to quash filed Samuel should be granted. 129). Preliminary investigation is only a statutory right and in its minimum period and a fine of P30. 000.R. the Office of the Special amending B. Before arraignment. Mayor and Treasurer. Resolve the motion to quash with 2. No. August 6. 3019 (Anti-Graft and offense is charged in the information (Sec. 7691 granted.000. that the two conspired in the purchase of several of possession of an unlicensed . The Provincial Prosecutor involving P5. also known as the Ombudsman Act of testimony of a witness who dies before conclusion of the 1989. G. (1998 same delictual facts.00. 2007). the accused may be deemed to have waived his cannot be considered an alter ego of the Ombudsman as the right to confront and cross-examine the witness when he doctrine of qualified political agency does not apply to the asked the postponements of the hearing for several times. he pleaded not guilty to authority. (2005 Bar) respectively.A. the court did not acquire P15. No. while can be waived.R. 110315.R. 9. G. (2009 Bar) the offense charged or the person of the accused. Seneris. Sandiganbayan. The Special Prosecutor At any rate.A.

physical injuries. After the and consent to her damage and prosecution had presented its evidence. the Judge granted his Rules of Criminal Procedure. Is the Information void? (1998 Bar) the same RGR. 4. Acceding to this motion. Soon 8. and not facts. the that its filing had placed him in double jeopardy. as required by said Rule. The court he believes that the charge is confusing and the reconsidered its order and directed D to present his information is defective. a minor of 11 years old. Was the dismissal of the complaint for slight physical injuries proper? Q: The Information against Roger Alindogan for the crime of acts of lasciviousness under Art. jeopardy and after due hearing. RGR moved to quash the information on the ground of double A: No. the grant of the motion to quash the attempted intimidation. That the officer who filed the Information had no authority to do so. In due time. through force and A: No.R. dismissed the case. If true. No. That It does not conform substantially to the prescribed form. Cavite and within the b. Before the next date of trial came. offense of slight physical injuries allegedly inflicted on 6. What ground or grounds can he evidence. Rule 117. That It contains averments which. (b) That it does not conform based on the same facts alleged in the information for substantially to the prescribed form. Dela Cruz. Donato. Revised Rule on Summary Procedure). The prosecutor then filed an any of the following grounds: (a) That the facts charged do Information in the RTC. That the criminal action or liability has been SPS (an actual resident of Quezon City). the information (People v. How Supreme Court ruled that the phrase “by either raping her or should D’s motion to quash be resolved? (2002 Bar) committing acts of lasciviousness” does not constitute an offense since it does not cite which among the numerous A: D’s motion to quash should be granted on the ground of sections or subsections of R. either by raping her or committing acts Q: D was charged with slight physical injuries in the MTC. 7610 has been violated by double jeopardy because the first offense charged is accused-appellant. Was the grant of the motion to quash the attempted jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. of lasciviousness on her. he entered a plea of guilty to said the accusation against him and therefore should be quashed crime. the court again A: The accused may move to quash the information based on dismissed the case. The certification which is provided in Sec. would an order declaring that the case shall be governed by the constitute a legal excuse or Justification.” appear. A few minutes later. That the accused has been previously convicted or In thereafter. charging D with direct assault not constitute an offense. homicide information on the ground of double jeopardy was wilfully. it does not state the acts and necessarily included in the second offense charged (Draculan omissions constituting the offense. L-44079. March 15. No. the City Prosecutor filed with the same certification that a preliminary investigation has been MeTC-QC an information for attempted homicide against conducted. 2010 at Barangay Matalaba. evening of February 1. and (c) That more that slight physical injuries but with the added allegation one offense is charged except when a single punishment for that D inflicted the injuries out of resentment for what various offenses is prescribed by law. however. as required under the rules of criminal procedure. because there was no valid prosecution for slight commit sexual abuse on his daughter. branch to which the case was raffled thereupon issued 7. the prosecutor failed to ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW. the prosecutor arrived and The accused wants to have the case dismissed because opposed the dismissal of the case. the trial court prejudice. the information violated accused’s Noel was charged with frustrated homicide in the RTC. is not an indispensable part of motion. Rule 112. 3. set the continuation of the hearing on another date. 2002. a. before arraignment. 11. On the date scheduled for hearing. Nos. These are conclusions Q: For the multiple stab wounds sustained by the victim.R. did then and there. 135554-56. No. aggravating circumstances attending the same. D moved to quash the second information on the ground In People v. The judge of the extinguished. and Rule on Summary Procedure in Criminal cases. Lapura. Rule 117). Rose Domingo. of law. Imus. Double Jeopardy 4. the Judge ordered the dismissal of the case Jeopardy of being convicted. D raise in moving for the quashal of the information? moved that the last order be set aside on the ground that Explain. constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of Upon arraignment. G. 1985). 336 of the A: Yes. G. information. 94494. cases in which existing laws prescribe a single charging RGR (an actual resident of Cebu City) with the punishment for various offenses. (2016 Bar) the reinstatement of the case had placed him twice in jeopardy. 1996). on motion of D. the complainant had done in the performance of his Rules of Criminal Procedure) duties as chairman of the board of election inspectors. Sometime later. Thus. Moreover. or any special or v. against her will He pleaded not guilty and went to trial. the dismissal of the complaint for slight physical Revised Penal Code avers: injuries is proper because in Metropolitan Manila and in chartered cities. December 19. whereupon the court. Q: SPO1 CNC filed with the MTC in Quezon City (MeTC- 5.R. the case has to be commenced only by “That on or about 10:30 o’ clock in the information (Sec. That more than one offense Is charged except In those QC) a sworn written statement duly subscribed by him. Neither the court nor the prosecution was aware 55 . QUAMTO (1997-2016) NOTE: The other grounds are: on the ground that the information charges acts that do not constitute an offense. with lewd and unchaste design. (Section 3. the homicide information correct? (2004 Bar) above-named accused. based on the same facts giving rise to the slight physical Q: If the Information is not accompanied by a injuries case.A. 3. unlawfully and feloniously not correct. or acquitted of the offense for the reason that it was not commenced by charged (Sec. G. June 21.

and two. 7610 (The Child Abuse Law). G.A. P02 Romulus detained offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the Oasis Jung at the station's jail. Oasis Jung's lawyer moved to quash brushes with the law. PO 1 convicted of frustrated homicide and meted the Remus knocked at the door and when a man opened the corresponding penalty. The said rule applies in theft cases. Modesto-San Pedro.R. Hon. immediately pleaded guilty. regardless of its various resulting acts (Ivler v. After the inquest same act or omission constituting the former charge. She narrated that she is a double jeopardy. Oasis homicide was made. Rule 117). when the new recovery of a sum of money against Juan. Noel was proceeded to the condo unit identified by Paz. No. the police officers saw a young lady with her nose Noel opposed the motion claiming that the admission of bleeding and face swollen. No. she called up the UST BAR OPERATIONS 56 . alleging that he his answer to the complaint serving a copy thereof on could not locate his witnesses. Because of his guilty plea. always getting into Before arraignment. Rule 18). (2005 Bar) Oasis Jung.A. several things. Inside. means that two or more violations of the same penal offense by itself and not merely a means to commit other provisions are united in one and same instant or resolution crimes. the Supreme Court explained that the “Single Larceny for arraignment. from frustrated homicide to consummated homicide. No. Resolve the motion with reasons. PO1 Remus and his companions introduced the victim’s death. Instead of pleading. for Reckless because the “single larceny rule” does not find application Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to where the charges involve violations of R. Resolve. A month later. When the prosecution learned of door. Here. whose duty is of the case. it filed within 15 days therefrom a themselves as police officers. The reason is that it is the plaintiff notice to the offended party (Sec. the public prosecutor filed an information the facts constituting the graver charge became known or for Violation of R. at the same time and place constitutes but one Provisional dismissal larceny (Id). shall be made only after his arraignment. Single Larceny Rule Pre-trial agreement Q: Paz was awakened by a commotion coming from a condo unit next to hers.00 each time and it was the first time that the former complaint or information when: a) the graver Oasis Jung physically hurt her. Q: In a prosecution for robbery against D. 1. sixteen-year-old high school student. Two (2) Informations A: No. 172716. He was meted out the penalty of public censure. The police officers arrested Oasis Jung and brought him and the young lady back to the police A: The amended information to consummated homicide station. 9262 (The VAWC Law) for were discovered only after a plea was entered in the former physical violence and five separate informations for complain or information. The man readily identified motion to amend the information to upgrade the charge himself as Oasis Jung and gestured to them to come in. whether belonging to the same or different owners. November 17. Alarmed. Rule 117.A. 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure. 9262 (The Property. the case for In Santiago v. the PLAINTIFF has A: No. such that conviction or acquittal of such quasi. the conviction the incident. may the court it to have the case set for pre-trial? Why? (2001 Bar) grant the motion of the prosecutor? Why? (2002 Bar) A: After the filing of the answer of Juan. Reckless imprudence under Article 365 is a quasi. Garchitorena. were then filed against McJolly. (2014 Bar) continuado. In one incident. PO1 Remus took the young lady's statement who from frustrated homicide does not place the accused in identified herself as AA. G. which jeopardy. quasi-offense. the prosecutor PRE-TRIAL moved for the postponement of the first scheduled hearing on the ground that he had lost his records of the Q: Lilio filed a complaint in the MTC of Lanuza for the case. because a case cannot be provisionally dismissed the duty to promptly move ex parte that the case be set for except upon the express consent of the accused and with pre-trial (Sec. PO1 Remus and P02 Romulus his stab wounds. As provided in the second paragraph of Sec. while two (2) of the passenger suffered slight physical injuries. No. 8. or b) proceeding.000. Asked by P02 Romulus what the amended information would place him in double happened. that previous to 7. which exists if there should be plurality of acts performed during a period of time. REMEDIAL LAW that the victim had died two days earlier on account of nearby police station. McJolly interposed doctrine” applies only to criminal crimes committed delicto the defense of double jeopardy. leading to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or offense already bars subsequent prosecution for the same aim.A. 7610 (The Child Abuse Law). when the plea to frustrated violation of R. neither the court nor the prosecution Jung's lawyer filed a motion to be admitted to bail but was aware that the victim had died two days earlier on the court issued an order that approval of his bail bond account of his stab wounds. The court should not grant the motion to quash. The latter filed date of trial arrived. Slight Physical Injures. The the motion to quash be granted? (2015 Bar) pedicab driver died. moved for the dismissal Lilio. reckless imprudence resulting on homicide was also set 1993. she had sexual intercourse with Oasis Jung of the accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution for at least five times on different occasions and she was an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in paid P5. he drove his the other four separate informations for violation of the Humvee recklessly. Q: McJolly is a trouble-maker of sorts. where the taking of 2010). the prosecutor. The court granted the motion but. the lady responded that she was beaten up by jeopardy. After the filing of the answer of Juan. Should driver and passengers in different directions. for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in VAWC Law) and R. One. 109266. If D’s counsel does not object. hitting a pedicab which sent its child abuse law invoking the single larceny rule.R. who knows when the last pleading has been filed and it is the plaintiff who has the duty to prosecute. on which occasion McJolly criminal impulse and intent. unity of penal provision A: McJolly correctly interposed the defense of double violated. and unity of criminal intent or purpose. December 2. The latter case was scheduled for considering that each criminal act is based on a different arraignment earlier.

before trial and if granted will result to an acquittal. either because he is order but after some delay caused by Atty. This remedy can be invoked. People v. Rule 119). at any time.R. In one criminal action for qualified theft where you are the defense attorney. 1 (g). demands such trial. with the court admitting all of the 57 . Accused failed to appear on the scheduled date of b. he was charged with bailable crime but has no means to post bail. In another case. also for qualified theft. inter alia. Rule 116 provides. 2007). person of the accused. [Sec. and (3) his days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the unjustifiable failure to appear during trial (Bemardo v. 1998. Atty QR is charge with a non-bailable crime.” which was presented to the assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows that Sandiganbayan. 2002). speedy disposition of cases (Sec. 16. Rule 119 provides. 9. arraignment. the arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) arraignment. raffled and its records transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled within three (3) days from the filing of the TRIAL information or complaint. 173637. Art. G. The pre-trial Q: Enumerate the requisites of a "trial in absentia " and conference of his case shall be held within ten (10) days after a "promulgation of judgment in absentia" (1997. G. a. so in case he disobeys same. No. You find that the reason for this is the continued absence of the employer-complainant Q: If an accused who was sentenced to death escapes. No. Moreover. 14. 9. 2) Upon receipt of that notice. the detained promulgation of judgment despite due notice.R. or. but the prosecution e. If at anytime accused admits the documentary evidence of the thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he prosecution. August 20. or substituted by Atty. is serving a term of forthwith filed a motion to withdraw the “Joint imprisonment in any penal institution. 2009). Nos. Assisted by Atty. The admission of such Moreover. Section 1 (e). 1996).R. his case shall be 118. 143689-91. III. 2010 Bar) On the other hand. 3(e) and 10. The accused shall be arraigned within ten (10) days from the date of the raffle. or thru counsel. 166980.” alleging that it is prejudicial to the accused do the following: because it contains. Rule 119) or to a a. What remedy is there still a legal necessity for the Supreme Court to appropriate and before which forum would you review the decision of conviction? (1998 Bar) invoke this relief? (2013 Bar) A: Yes. it shall be his duty to Stipulation. November 12. Sandiganbayan. on the person having custody of the prisoner incrimination. your work requires you to act as public may be cited in contempt. Rule116] People. Rule accused is under preventive detention. A valid notice of promulgation of judgment. I may request the court to issue Subpoena Duces Tecum and Ad Q: At the Public Attorney's Office station in Taguig where Testificandum to the witness.R. People. G. G. Esparas. What remedy would you undertake to offer of evidence. Since the accused has not been brought for arraignment The requisites for a valid promulgation of judgment in within the limit required in the aforementioned Rule. (2004 Bar) his right to demand trial. Should the court grant or deny QR’s requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of motion? Reason. No. appearance in court (Sec. because he is entitled to an automatic review of the accused right to speedy trial (Sec. you learned that the Demurrer to Evidence woman accused has been in detention for six months. death sentence (Secs. July 30. and five times in the last six months. 2. Said notice was duly furnished to the accused. the custodian of the A: The court should deny QR’s motion. the latter shall cause notice to incrimination. QR as defense counsel. and violating his right against self. April 4. Copy of said judgment had been duly served upon the has yet to commence the presentation of its accused or his counsel evidence. Before the court could issue a pre-trial the latter is preventively detained. I can also move for provisional dismissal of the case (Sec. Hernandez. Tan v. personally Constitution). he signed together with Ombudsman Prosecutor TG a “Joint Stipulation of A: Section 7. (2) his due notification of the trial. it is clear that prescribed period her right to a Speedy Trial has been violated. the statement that the “Defense admitted all the documentary evidence of the 1) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of Prosecution. that effect to send promptly to the public attorney. I may also file a motion to order defender at the local Regional Trial Court and to handle the witness employer-complainant to post bail to secure his cases involving indigents. young domestic helper has been brought to court d. If in the pre-trial prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the agreement signed by the accused and his counsel. There is still a legal necessity for the Supreme Court A: I will file a motion to dismiss the information in the court to review the decision of conviction sentencing the accused where the case is pending on the ground of denial of the to death. A pre-trial order is not needed (Bayas v. if the public attorney Facts and Documents. No. the charge and of his right to demand trial. he you are assigned. 108028. Rule 122. April 21. G. 8. when the documentary evidence is allowed by the rule (Sec. yet she has not been to a courtroom nor Q: After the prosecution had rested and made its formal seen a judge. Such judgment be recorded in the criminal docket. OP. 120034. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Q: Mayor TM was charged of malversation through address the situation and what forum would you use falsification of official documents. is who is working overseas. His lawyer cannot file a motion to withdraw. it does not violate his right against self. if the accused is not under preventive A: The requisites of a valid trial in absentia are: (1) accused's detention. 1996). Since the accused has been brought to Court five Remedy when accused is not brought to trial within the times and in each instance it was postponed. c. Rule 117). OP as to invoke this relief? counsel de parte during pre-trial. Rule 119.R. People v.” thus leaving the accused little or no room the prisoner for trial or cause a notice to be served to defend himself. the absentia are: Information may be dismissed upon motion of the accused invoking his right to speedy trial (Sec. 1987 b.

the court rendered allowed to comment thereon. the prosecutor called to the witness stand AA as his first witness and manifested that he be allowed to b.P. 1997). The manifested that it was not adducing additional evidence Information for rape filed against BB states: and that it was resting its case. While it was A: Yes. because although the evidence presented by twelve (12) years old against the latter's the prosecution at the hearing for bail was not strong. will and consent. Because he filed the demurrer to the evidence without examination on the witness. March 3. a twelve-year-old girl. the evidence. Otherwise the Constitutional protection against has a permit to own or possess the firearm. in sum contending that the prosecution evidence has not established the guilt of the A: As a general rule. 2004 Bar) with the law and jurisprudence. the accused.R. fifteen (15) years old with lewd demurrer to evidence under the circumstances design and by means of force. The accused did not ask for leave to file the demurrer to evidence. inquire as to why the accused filed the demurrer without xxx leave and whether his lawyer knew that the effect of filing it After the prosecution had rested its case. 1997). the conviction of the accused (Mallari v. Without any evidence from the accused. 1996). The judgment of the trial court is valid. Fores. the court should not grant the demurrer. while the pistol was tucked at his waist in plain view. G. The prosecution on such evidence rested its case and within Q: When a criminal case is dismissed on nolle prosequi. a teenage boy who befriended her. If the answer to the preceding question is in the ask leading questions in conducting his direct affirmative can X adduce evidence in his defense examination pursuant to the Rule on the Examination of after the denial of his demurrer to evidence? a Child Witness. a period of five days therefrom. it could be sufficient for conviction. The petition was opposed by the prosecution but after Q: AA. finding that the accused could not charged beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly have committed the offense charged. the Court should not consider minority in mentioned therein. a requirement before the leave (Sec. the prima alleged in the information that BB was a minor at the time of facie evidence of the prosecution has been converted to the commission of the offense." without any evidence for the defense. The prosecution was prosecution evidence. On the first BB. against the accused specifically alleged that he had no license or permit to possess the calibre . If the prosecution imposing on him the penalty prescribed therefore. Rule 119). the accused filed a demurrer to and submitted the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence with leave of court. dismissal of the case on the ground that the prosecutor failed to present any evidence on BB' s minority as c. without the accused being able to JUDGMENT present any license or permit to possess the firearm. the accused that is. willfully. BB's counsel without leave is to waive the presentation of the evidence for filed with leave a demurrer to evidence. Court of Appeals. which is fatal to double jeopardy would be violated. the court judgment finding the accused guilty of the offense granted the demurrer. 110569. the failure of the prosecutor proof beyond reasonable doubt. 106581. City of S. the prosecution AA to a nearby shanty where he raped her. violence mentioned above? and intimidation. in the court. Should the court grant the the evidence of the prosecution. REMEDIAL LAW prosecution evidence. People v. Flores. The trial court he is called on to plead. Thereafter. the motion will not prosper. seeking the the accused (People v. 15. No. Q: Facing a charge of Murder. this is not equivalent to an acquittal denied the demurrer to evidence and deemed the and does not bar a subsequent prosecution for the same accused as having waived his right to present evidence UST BAR OPERATIONS 58 . G. March 3. the trial court should rule cited can be applied in the case. because minority of the Q: The information for illegal possession of firearm filed accused is not an element of the crime of rape. December 9. Did the court have the discretion to deny the minor. At the trial. In due time. the acquittal of the accused. demurrer. He is A: No. X filed a petition for bail. However. a minor. unlawfully and feloniously had A: YES. Without further proceeding and on the sole basis of alleged in the Information. BB brought scheduled hearing the merits.45 pistol Be that as it may. 2015. will the motion prosper? Explain your answer. (2009 Bar) A: Yes.R. In its evidence-in-chief. the accused filed a can it later be refilled? (2003 Bar) demurrer to evidence. can the court legally demurrer? (2015 Bar) convict X for Murder? (1998 Bar) A: No. BB's counsel objected on the ground that the prosecutor has not conducted a competency A: No. to present evidence to prove his minority is not a basis for the granting of the demurrer. 106581. the case shall be dismissed and the legal effect is Rule 119. G. Later. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. did then and there. the failure of the prosecutor prosecution established the fact that the subject firearm to prove the minority of AA may only affect the imposable was lawfully seized by the police from the possession of penalty but may not absolve him from criminal liability. Is the files a motion for reconsideration on the ground that the judgment of the trial court valid and proper? Reason court order granting the demurrer was not in accord (2001. when a criminal case is dismissed on accused beyond reasonable doubt and so prayed that he nolle prosequi before the accused is placed on trial and before be acquitted of the offense charged. the rendering the decision. A judgment of acquittal is However. X filed a demurrer to evidence without leave of court but it was denied by the "On or about October 30. With the granting of the deemed to have waived his right to present evidence (Sec. 23.R. a a. while walking alone met hearing the court granted bail to X. The Court had the discretion to deny the demurrer to sexual intercourse with AA. After all. the judgment is not proper or is erroneous because immediately executory and no appeal can be made there was no showing from the proper office that the accused therefrom.

the judgment was grossly and blatantly 59 . On promulgation a. (2003 Bar) period of Joint Motion for Reconsideration. A: No. The Court should have merely considered A: No. Rule who killed her husband. the trial court cannot order the arrest of X if the the joint motion as a motion for reconsideration that was judgment is one of acquittal and. 2009). 19. b. was personally notified of the Rules of Court provides that if the judgment is for conviction promulgation of judgment in his case set for 10 and the failure of the accused to appear was without December 1996. while the provisional dismissal had already become motion as regards Balatong and Labong. Can Balatong and Labong appeal their conviction in Q: AX was charged before the YY RTC with theft of case Ludong accepts his conviction for homicide? jewelry valued at P20. The judgment of conviction is reviewable by certiorari Motion to Quash the Information on the ground that with even if no appeal had been taken. The court favorably granted the motion of Ludong downgrading A: The motion to quash the information should be denied his conviction from murder to homicide but denied the because. they may be allowed to avail of said remedies within reviewable thru a special civil action for certiorari? fifteen (15) days from notice thereof (People v. With the mistake in charging the dismissal of the case. the court without further proceedings granted the and in violating due process and his right to be informed of motion and provisionally dismissed the case. A: Yes. Resolve the Motion to Quash. 77429 January 29. in any event. Rule 117). The lawyers of Balatong and Labong appeared but without their clients A: The provisional dismissal of the case was proper because and failed to satisfactorily explain their absence when the accused gave his express consent thereto and the queried by the court. Joint Motion for Reconsideration. Subsequently. And they have proven that their said judgment of conviction became final. Balatong. he shall lose the remedies available against had to attend to the trial of another criminal case against the judgment and the court shall order his arrest. Was the court correct in taking cognizance of the because the first case was dismissed before the accused had Joint Motion for Reconsideration? pleaded to the charge (Sec. he was convicted of A: No. him in Tarlac. G. punishable with (2014 Bar) imprisonment of up to 10 years of prison mayor under the Revised Penal Code. permanent. Court of Appeals.R. promulgation of judgment. The Q: Before the arraignment for the crime of murder. his failure to solely filed by Ludong. 1990).000. G. Rule 117). punishable by surrendered and filed a Motion for Leave to avail of their post imprisonment of up to eight years of prison mayor under judgment remedies within fifteen (15) days from the said Code. June 5. The the nature and the cause of the accusation against him. prosecutor to re-file the murder charge because the accused failed to pay the consideration which he had Promulgation of judgment. the Q: Ludong. No. The variance between the evidence and the 24. the private complainant urged the public information (Sec. The offended party was notified of proper offense.R. absentia The public prosecutor obliged and refiled the murder charge against the accused on 01 February 2003. After trial. Be that as it may. 5. No. the prescriptive period for filing the murder charge had not prescribed. Was the provisional dismissal of the case proper? day. because the judge private complainant’s desistance. However. the court announced that the case ground that the provisional dismissal of the case had was considered submitted for decision. De Grano. QUAMTO (1997-2016) offense (Galvez v. (2004 Bar) No. G. It was not necessary for the judgment be entered in the criminal docket and copies offended party to give her consent thereto (Sec. private complainant executed an Affidavit of Desistance People. the proper information and thereafter dismissed the original Subsequently. 167710. 8. 114046. the judge ordered that the offended party was notified. Balatong. Reason. Thus. already become permanent. and Labong were charged with accused filed a Motion to Quash the Information on the murder. 167710. 2009). De Grano. 1994). the Clerk of Court issued the notices of promulgation of judgment which were duly received. another criminal case against him. be furnished their lawyers. Can the Motion for Reconsideration with respect to accused Balatong trial court also order the arrest of X? (1997 Bar) and Labong who were not present during the promulgation of the judgment. if they offense committed was estafa. G. he did not have committed a grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack or evidence sufficient to convict the accused. (People v. the accused in a homicide case before the RTC. appear was with justifiable cause since he had to attend to June 5. On 02 January excess of his jurisdiction in convicting the accused of theft 2001. Balatong and Labong cannot appeal their conviction the offense charged. instances of judgment in promised for the execution of the Affidavit of Desistance. the judgment of conviction for theft upon Information SEARCH AND SEIZURE for theft is valid because the court had jurisdiction to render judgment. Is the absence at the scheduled promulgation was for a justifiable judgment of conviction valid? Is the said judgment cause. The public prosecutor filed a 120). The court is not correct in taking cognizance of the Q: X. notwithstanding that the material because they lost their right to appeal during the facts duly established during the trial showed that the promulgation of judgment. No appeal having been taken therefrom. the Court erred when it entertained the Joint of the counsel of X to postpone the promulgation. Section 6. The lawyers of Ludong.R. X was not present as he justifiable cause. Rule 119).00. Rule 120 of the Dagupan City. October erroneous.R. No. Tarlac. the judge should have directed the filing of the dismissal but she refused to give her consent. which accused gave his express consent to the provisional make the judgment void. After trial. and Labong filed within the reglementary b. The trial court denied the motion Henceforth. the elements of the two crimes are not the same (Lauro Santos v. 7. judgment of conviction is substantial since the evidence is one for estafa while the judgment is one for theft. On said date. Ludong and his lawyer appeared. One offense does stating that she was not sure if the accused was the man not necessarily include or is included in the other (Sec. There was no double jeopardy a.

" During the service of Director Shabunot that there is probable cause the search warrant. Laguna. their plan might leak out.. PEOPLE OF THE Thereafter. R. a judge on the application. PDEA Director Shabunot Witness my hand this 1st day of March. in writing and under oath. I would file a Suppose the judge issues the search warrant worded in Motion to Quash the search warrant for having been served this way: beyond its period of validity (Sec. Sta. 2. Sta. 196390. 5. The search warrant failed to particularly describe the place to be searched and the things to be seized (Sec. it shall be void (Sec. 4.. CFI of Tayabas.. January 29. L-45358. Cruz. A: No. how would you rule on the motion to suppress? (2008 Bar) You are hereby commanded to make an immediate search. Rule 126). search warrant may be made at night when it is positively asserted in the affidavit that the property is on A: The judge must. The State gate located at Jupiter St. and bring the person or things to be seized (Sec.A. for Violation of R. Rule 126). REMEDIAL LAW Q: A PDEA asset/informant tipped the PDEA Director said property to the undersigned to be dealt Shabunot that a shabu laboratory was operating in a with as the law directs. Rule 126). he shall issue the warrant. Cruz.. Criminal Case No. 3. What documents should he prepare in his Rule 126).. justified the seizure of the marijuana leaves under the undetermined amount of "shabu" and drug "plain view" doctrine. 2011). Ho Pia and Sio Pao. The Accused. If you are undersigned.. There was no indication of manufacturing implements and paraphernalia whether the marijuana leaves were discovered and which should be seized and brought to the seized before or after the seizure of the shabu. 9165 have been committed and that there The accused moved to suppress the marijuana leaves as are good and sufficient reasons to believe that evidence for the violation of Section 11 of the Ho Pia and Sio Pao have in their possession or Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 since they control. at any time in the day or night. in a two (2) door apartment with an iron were not covered by the search warrant. Rule 126)... G. at any time in the day or A: The motion to suppress filed by the accused should be night. of the search warrant.. Art. A search warrant shall be valid only for ten days from its date.14. the Court should not order the return of the 9165 unlicensed armalite because it is contraband or illegal per se Ho Pia and Sio Pao. 8. application for search warrant? 2. Judge XYZ a. By way of exception. wants to apply for a search warrant.. The search warrant commanded the immediate search. Cruz. TO ANY PEACE OFFICER Particularity of place to be searched and things to be seized. Rule 126). Plain view situation Greetings: It appearing to the satisfaction of the Q: The search warrant authorized the seizure of undersigned after examining under oath PDEA "undetermined quantity of shabu. or that portion of the twenty-four hours in which a man’s person and countenance are c. 2[b]. rented by two (2) Chinese nationals. should the court order the return of the same to the 007 Chinese nationals? (2012 Bar) -versus. Where can he file an application for search warrant? Cite/enumerate the defects.. September 28. the affidavits submitted (Sec. A: PDEA Director may file an application for search warrant in any court within the judicial region where the crime was A: committed (Sec.R..-x mala prohibita. which must be substantially what will you do? in the form prescribed by the Rules (Sec. exist.R.. 1987 UST BAR OPERATIONS 60 . house at Sta. The same be kept in custodia legis. examine the person or in the place ordered to be searched personally in the form of searching questions and answers.. PHILIPPINES Plaintiff Suppose an unlicensed armalite was found in plain view by the searchers and the warrant was ordered quashed. Rule 126).A. is based or that there is probable cause to believe that they Laguna and you are the lawyer of Sio Pao and Ho Pia. together with Suppose the search warrant was served on March 15. The general rule is that a A: He should prepare a petition for issuance of a search search warrant must be served in the day time (Sec. There is no showing that the exception applies. warrant and attach therein sworn statements and affidavits.. Bodett. but he is worried that if he applies for a search warrant in any Laguna (signed) court. 1134). (Alvares v.J. of the premises above described and granted.... No. before issuing the warrant. b. he may produce on facts personally known to them and attach to the record their sworn statements. the judge. G. (PDEA v.. 6. Laguna. possession of an unlicensed armalite found in plain view is x. No. Describe the procedure that should be taken by the distinguishable (17 C. The search warrant violates the constitutional and forthwith seize and take possession of the statutory requirement that it should particularly describe abovementioned personal property. A: If I were the lawyer of Sio Pao and Ho Pia.. 1. 10. if any.. the raiding team also recovered a to believe that violations of Section 18 and 16 of kilo of dried marijuana leaves wrapped in newsprint. If the judge is 2012 and the search yielded the described contraband satisfied of the existence of facts upon which the application and a case was filed against the accused in RTC. the complainant and the witnesses 1937). 2012.

R. evidence claiming that it was illegally seized.R. It is not even referred to as Terry searches) are necessary for law necessary that a particular person be implicated (Mantaring enforcement. People of the in a court decision. which meters away from the house of Ass-asin. more certain and accurate than that which rests on fleeting 61 . so long as arsenal to prevent the commission of the offenses. Is the Casimiro. the same following rules of evidence: cannot be considered validly seized in plain view (Abraham Miclat v. G. in the RTC for the search of the house of Juan Santos and the seizure of an undetermined amount of shabu. A. what defense will you raise for the dismissal the subject of the search warrant. the Constitution (People of the Philippines v. Sec. RTJ-93-904. officer. 170180.R. If Hercules filed with the Ombudsman a complaint cannot be invoked because the marijuana leaves were for warrantless search. 2. Dead Man Rule 2011). objection of Ass-asin valid? (2014 Bar) A: The objection is valid. February 28. it can be Q: Legislative facts and adjudicative facts. Ass-asin objected to the introduction of such Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated (Galvante v. 200334. Philippines. a Barangay provides that a police officer may be liable for damages when tanod came upon a kilo of marijuana that was wrapped the right to be secure in one’s person. 140546-47. Hercules has a cause of action to file civil action tanods who were assigned to look at other portions of against the police officer under Article 32(4) in relation to the premises around the house. As soon as lips of the party. If Hercules opts to file a civil action against the police looking for unlicensed firearms in the house of Ass-asin. law enforcers should be given the legal v. When the police served the warrant.M. the presentation of which as an evidence is a violation of A: Legislative facts refer to facts mentioned in a statue or in petitioner’s constitutional guaranty against unreasonable an explanatory note. the police officer been reduced to writing. Hercules came near. The I can also raise the defense that the police officer has the duty team arrived at the house of Santos but failed to find him to search Hercules under the “Stop-and-Frisk” rule. G. Moreover. (2004 Bar) considered as fruits of an invalid warrantless search. to warrant Before his arraignment. Since the confiscated items were found in a place other than the one described in the search warrant. 176077. house. No. 1996). Besides. of the complaint? Q: Police operatives of Western Police District. Incidentally. applied for a search warrant presumption of regularity in the performance of duty. presence of Roberto Co and barangay official and found be limited to the person’s outer clothing. Besides the marijuana leaves are not officer.R. August 31. because written evidence is much locked up Hercules inside the police station jail. the police officer frisked him but the latter found no contraband. The “plain view” doctrine a. Parol Evidence Rule Hercules to get inside the police station. He took it and this was later used by the effects against unreasonable searches and seizures is authorities to charge Ass-asin with illegal possession of impaired. January 20. Victor Cogaed. a. may It is designed to give certainty to a transaction which has problema po ba?" Instead of replying. This the search is conducted in the place where the search should be balanced. G. 1986).” “Stop-and-frisk” searches (sometimes person in the search warrant is not important. Resolve the motion with The “stop-and-frisk” search should be used “when dealing reasons. G. If death has closed the lips of one party. Rule 126). July 30. Nos. Roman. No. The name of the a search warrant. officers experience and surrounding conditions. This is to prevent the Q: Hercules was walking near a police station when a temptation to perjury because death has already sealed the police officer signalled for him to approach. April 22. L- 77434. In a nipa hut thirty (30) Article 2219(6) and (10) of the New Civil code. 2012). No. papers and in newsprint. People. as counsel for the police wrapped in newsprint. A: As counsel of policeman. not the accused named in the search warrant and (b) the 2007). 185128. Therefore. marijuana. January 30.R. describing the shabu in an privacy of citizens in accordance with Article III. Roberto Co was charged in grounded upon a genuine reason. that is. 2014). Court of Appeals. The police officer told b. Hercules asked the police officer. Section 2 of undetermined amount is sufficiently particular (People v. November 23. the team found Roberto Co. the marijuana was seized by the Barangay Tanods thirty (30) meters away from the house of the GENERAL PRINCIPLES accused. "Sir. and should be ten (10) grams of shabu. No. the policy of the law Remedies from unlawful search and seizure is to close the lips of the other (Goni v. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Constitution. I will raise the defense of Philippine National Police. 162808. the search is also illegal because the marijuana confiscated in the Q: Give the reasons underlying the adoption of the nipa hut was wrapped in a newsprint. G. there. in the light of the police court with illegal possession of ten grams of shabu. 2003).R. 2008). (2005 Bar) with rapidly unfolding and potentially criminal situation in the city streets where unarguably there is no time to secure A: The motion to quash should be denied. will he have a cause of action? (2015 Bar) a notorious gun for hire. with the need to protect the warrant will be served. People of the Philippines. while adjudicative facts are facts found searches and seizure (Ruben Del Castillo v. The team conducted a search in the house of Santos in the A stop-and-frisk situation must precede a warrantless arrest. The indemnity includes moral damages. however. No. Roberto Co filed a motion to the belief that the person detained has weapons concealed quash the warrant on the following grounds (a) it was about him (Valdez v. warrant does not prescribe the article to be seized with sufficient particularity. they also sought the assistance of barangay A: Yes. Inside the police station. Tee. Q: A search warrant was issued for the purpose of b. Instead. The search warrant specifically EVIDENCE designates or describes the house as the place to be searched. No. September 23. G.

Vol. 1997). G. 2029. hence. (2010 Bar) evidence and withholds it. VII. pursuant to the relief prayed for. Brix admitted his role in the robbery and his possession Q: The barangay captain reported to the police that X of a dagger. VII. because the affiant was only to identify the affidavit which is not yet being offered in evidence. the presentation of the affidavit intrinsic validity of the confession and renders it unreliable cannot be objected to by the defense counsel on the ground as evidence of the truth (Moran. Encicada G. Photocopies of official receipts and A: The sworn statement is not admissible in evidence original copies of affidavits were presented in court. his possession of a pistol and his Admissibility of evidence ownership of the packet of shabu found in his pocket. Thereafter they signed their sworn statements the possibility of an amicable settlement (Sec. 101817. not be admitted in evidence. But they denied being NPA hit men. against both arrestees before the MM RTC. It is the that it is a fruit of the poisonous tree because the same is fruit of a poisonous tree. 2[a]. the defense counsel objected on the ground declared to be essential to the pure administration of justice that the affidavit is a fruit of a poisonous tree. 5. he voluntarily signed a Sworn Statement that he was possessing said rifle without license or A: No. pp. NCC). the RTC rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. because it was taken without informing him of his custodial identified by plaintiff on the witness stand and marked rights and without the assistance of counsel which should be as exhibits. p. The police raiders seized the be admitted by the trial court as evidence for the rifle and brought X to the police station. (2000 Bar) choice (People v. 98252. GR of WPD arrested two NPA suspects. A: The claim of defendant is valid. (2008 Bar) and Plaintiff was allowed to present evidence in support of his complaint. Part I. Part inadmissible as evidence. February 7. As he was about to identify This Rule is adopted for the prevention of fraud and is the affidavit. e.122). On the strength of that information. p. 116720. Upon receipt of judgment. 154) for torture against those who deprived him of sleep and subjected him to water torture. Max and compromise in civil cases (1997 Bar) Brix. There was time to secure a search 2. 257). Max admitted his part in the robbery. Revised Rules of Court. As he handcuffed them he noted a pistol tucked The reason for the rule against the admission of an offer of in Max’s waist and a dagger hidden under Brix’s shirt. No. (1998 Bar) claiming that the judgment is not valid because the RTC based its judgment on mere photocopies and affidavits A: The waiver of his right to counsel is not admissible of persons not presented in court. He later allegedly confessed his guilt via an affidavit. Can the (Moran. nor can he be a. p. In due was illegally keeping in his house in the barangay an course. G. Dominique was asked to c. 122485. warrant (People v. If a party is in possession of such objection be sustained? Explain. identify his above- said affidavit of confession. People v. he was acquitted on the ground Burden of proof and burden of evidence that his confession was obtained through torture. a lawyer. because the court received Q: Dominique was accused of committing a violation of evidence which it can order in its own discretion. seized without a proper search warrant. compromise in civil case as an admission of any liability is which he promptly confiscated. In a subsequent criminal case I. No.R. Q: Defendant was declared in default by the RTC. Rifle. Waiver of Right to Counsel of X. case to agree upon some fair compromise (Art. in the act of robbing a grocery in Ermita. October 2. before the police captain. water torture. February search is not justified. In the instant case. The doctrine of the d. even if the police captain before whom they signed the statements was a lawyer. No. 1997).R. A warrantless February 1. Then under oath. Best Evidence Rule testify and to. 128287. Rule 18). No. the presumption naturally arises that the better evidence is withheld for fraudulent purposes A: No. G. 121. 1997). REMEDIAL LAW memory only (Francisco. proper charges were filed by the City Prosecutor Armalite M16 rifle. No. both aged 22. courts should direct the parties to consider officer. and subjected to requirements of admissibility. Mahinay. The sworn written statements of Max and Brix may authority to possess. 1999). Vol. they freely answered questions asked by the police desk During pre-trial. G. Januario. Is the claim valid? because it was made without the assistance of counsel of his Explain. Said documents were offered by plaintiff and independent and competent and preferably of the choice of admitted in evidence by the court on the basis of which the accused (People v. The rule against the admission of an offer of Q: Sgt. and a Waiver of Right to Counsel. Revised Rules of Court Vol. used in Domingo’s favour. May the the police conducted a search of the house of X and written statements signed and sworn to by Max and Brix indeed found said rifle. deprived of sleep. in which the Human Security Act. among other things. (2004 Bar) investigation. stated. After trial. At the police that parties are encouraged to enter into compromises. Sworn Statement. UST BAR OPERATIONS 62 . Espiritu. He was detained case the evidence of the plaintiff must pass the basic incommunicado.R. The rule against the admission of illegally obtained fruit of the poisonous tree can only be invoked by Domingo extrajudicial confession. Gomez. as his defense in the crime of violation of Human Security Act filed against him but not by the accused in a torture case filed An illegally obtained extrajudicial confession nullifies the by him. 1999. defendant appeals to the Court of Appeals c. b. because they were not assisted individually rule on the admissibility in evidence of the: by counsel. considered as an independent counsel. Max and Brix orally waived their Courts should endeavor to persuade the litigants in a civil right to counsel and to remain silent. Waiver of the right to a lawyer must be done in writing and in the presence of A: The rifle is not admissible in evidence because it was independent counsel (People v.R. investigation room. During the prosecution? Reason.R. March 26. 12). Volume 5. the objection may not be sustained on the ground (Francisco.

1993). prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the original. the photocopy is admissible in evidence. photocopy on the ground that the Best Evidence Rule Sarmiento. non-compliance with the procedure shall not publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having render void and invalid the seizure and custody of the drugs the legal custody of the record. Moran. the existence of the court takes judicial notice of the fact that the writer thereof dangerous drug is a condition sine qua non for conviction is recognized in his profession or calling as expert on the (People v. No. the testing methodology 1917). A: The three instances when a Philippine court can take The chain of custody requirement is essential to ensure that judicial notice of a foreign law are: (1) when the Philippine doubts regarding the identity of the evidence are removed courts are evidently familiar with the foreign law (Moran. the scientific standard observed. through convincing proof. I shall try to discredit the results of A: The presumption is that the wordings of the foreign law the DNA test by questioning and possibly impugning the are the same as the local law (Northwest Orient Airlines v. January 12. Q: In a prosecution for rape. L-11759.). Ace objects to the introduction of the evidence established against him (See: Bautista v. any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed 177222. Rule 133. As private prosecutor. and (2) the integrity and the evidentiary value of a certificate that such officer has the custody. De Guzman y Danzil. periodical or pamphlet on the subject of law if the No. while burden of evidence is the duty of a party to the marked P100. 178202. October 29. G. This is known as the PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION. Dela Cruz. L-45137 September 23. vice-consul. the substance itself constitutes part of the corpus judicial notice of a foreign law. Rule on DNA Evidence (A. administrative or quasi-judicial bodies (Sec. No. 112573. 06-11-5-SC) Zalamea v. and finally to the court (People v. No. the prosecution offers in evidence a photocopy of Rule 131). Tandoy. 2010). 4[5]. law of nations and Bar) municipal ordinance A: In prosecutions involving narcotics and other illegal Q: Give three instances when a Philippine Court can take substances. Rule 133). or by his deputy. March 16.R. in the foreign country in which the record is kept. 104235 November 18. 0505. (2012 Judicial notice of foreign laws. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. b. Sitco. what is the presumption how will you dispute the veracity and accuracy of the to be taken by the court as to the wordings of said law? results of the DNA evidence? (2010 Bar) (1997 Bar) A: As private prosecutor. (2003 Bar) A: The photocopy of the marked bills is real (object) evidence A: Preponderance of evidence means that the evidence as a not documentary evidence. employed. G. Act. evidence This is applicable in civil cases (Sec. and authenticated by the seal of his office (Sec. G. or in the chain of custody of 1980. the forensic DNA laboratory which conducted the test. Court of Appeals.R. G. March 26. the biological sample obtained. 1. Cajuigan. No. Ergo. if the record is not kept in the Philippines.R.R. G. Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or Q: Distinguish preponderance of the evidence from documentary evidence? substantial evidence. and the OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE 63 . L-7048. No. in relation to Section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 A: Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or Q: At the trial of Ace for violation of the Dangerous Drugs defense by the amount of evidence required by law (Sec. No.M. Q: Discuss the “chain of custody” principle with respect JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS to evidence seized under R. 24. Municipality of Moncada v. that the integrity of the seized items has been adequately Q: How do you prove a written foreign law? (1997 Bar) preserved through an unbroken chain of custody is enough to engender reasonable doubt on the guilt of an accused (Id. or consular agent or by within the scope of the proviso (People v. consul. and when: (1) such non-compliance is attended by justifiable accompanied. A: A written foreign law may be evidenced by an official Nonetheless. treatise. Collector of Customs.R. (3) when it refers to a published forensic chemist. to the (Sec.00 bills used in the “buy-bust” go forward with the evidence to overthrow prima facie operation. 1985). subject (Sec. February 9. G. No. 1912). 5. 186498. (2004 Bar) Chain of custody. Lim v. were met before such non-compliance may be said to fall consul general.A. This is applicable in cases filed before (People v. the certificate team. Quantum of proof a. (1997 Bar) delicti of the offense and the fact of its existence is vital to sustain a judgment of conviction beyond reasonable doubt.R. Rule 129) and.R.R. the defense relied on Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) evidence showing that the Q: Suppose a foreign law was pleaded as part of the semen found in the private part of the victim was not defense of defendant but no evidence was presented to identical with that of the accused. G.R. obtaining the biological sample. 1990). May 14. G. to the police. with grounds. 1. prove the existence of said law. Rule 132. because the which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify best evidence rule does not apply to object or real evidence a conclusion. 1995. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Q: Distinguish Burden of proof and burden of evidence. through the monitoring and tracking of the movements of 1980): (2) when the foreign law refers to the law of nations the seized drugs from the accused. 2010). There must be proof that these two (2) requirements may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation. 2008). because the marked bills are real whole adduced by one side is superior to that of the other. Is the photocopy admissible in evidence? (1994 Bar) Substantial evidence is that amount of relevant evidence A: Yes. No. No. 1. December 4. if the office in the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending which the record is kept is in a foreign country. integrity of the DNA profile by showing a flaw/error in Court of Appeals. Rule 130). G. The failure to establish.

3. 1989). custody requirement is essential to ensure that doubts The rules provide that when the original document is lost or regarding the identity of the evidence are removed through destroyed. 2010. the substance itself constitute part Appeals. document. As counsel for A. then it is object evidence. Q: May a private document be offered. (Sec. If the same is granted. such term shall be addressed to the senses of the court (Sec. Rule 3. G. or by a recital of its contents in some authentic document. Best Evidence Rule Q: At the Public Attorney's Office station in Taguig where Q: If the photocopies of official receipts and photocopies you are assigned. (2013 Bar) Summary Procedure). Still in another case. 1. 01-7-01-SC) evidence both as documentary evidence and as object evidence? Explain (2005 Bar) Q: State the rule on the admissibility of an electronic evidence. 1. G. 5. other modes of written expressions. No. or by the testimony of witnesses in the DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE order stated (Sec. A tombstone may be offered in An electronic document is admissible in evidence if it evidence to prove what is written on it and if the same complies with the rules on admissibility prescribed by tombstone is found on a tomb. because although been the subject of any stipulation. A the ground of insufficiency of evidence of the prosecution made two photo (xeroxed) copies of the promissory (Sec. Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be unwavering exactitude. Jr. Objects as evidence are those or any other form of writing. The chain of evidence through the xeroxed copies of the promissory note. No. The identity of the is deemed to be the “original” copy for the purpose prohibited drug must be established with moral certainty. A entrusted the typewritten copy to his counsel for In People v. may prove its and finally to the court. Rule 130). the safekeeping. which is the very corpus delicti of the crime. Rule 130) deemed to include an electronic document as defined Documentary evidence consists of writings or any material in the Rules (Sec. of the “Best Evidence Rule”? Apart from the showing that the elements of possession or sale are present. 2. Rule 130) is vital to sustain a judgment of conviction beyond reasonable doubt. (2000 prosecution has rested but you saw from the records Bar) that the illegal substance allegedly involved has not been identified by any of the prosecution witnesses nor has it A: The claim of defendant is valid. A typed a single demurrer to evidence within ten (10) days from notice on copy of the promissory note. They constitute of the corpus delicti of the offense and the fact of its existence secondary evidence (Sec. this time filed with Municipal Trial Court on which basis the court for illegal possession of dangerous drugs. then I will file a Q: When A loaned a sum of money to B. words. A private document may be offered and admitted in evidence both as documentary evidence and as object A: Whenever a rule of evidence refers to the term evidence. record. offered as proof of their contents (Sec. the existence of the dangerous drug is a condition sine qua non for conviction. Rules on Electronic containing letters. June 30.R.). Of chief concern in drug cases then is the c. Court of other illegal substances. in People v. how will you prove the loan given requirement that the prosecution prove that what was to A and B? (1997 Bar) seized by police officers is the same item presented in court. Revised Rule of remedial steps you propose to undertake. The corpus delicti should be identified with b. The dangerous drug a. No.R. L-17970. A document can also be considered as an object for writing. Rule offered in court as exhibit must likewise be established with 130). unavailability without bad faith on his part. It the Rules of Court and related laws and is can be considered as both documentary and object evidence authenticated in the manner prescribed by thee Rules (See: Gupit. 9. 1966). REMEDIAL LAW qualification.R. evidence within five (5) days from the time the prosecution rested its case. to the forensic chemist. and admitted in Rules on Electronic Evidence (A. the fact that the substance illegally A: The copy that was signed and lost is the only “original” possessed and sold in the first place is the same substance copy for purposes of the Best Evidence Rule (Sec. symbols or Evidence). the rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff? Explain. Photocopies of official receipts and affidavits are not admissible without proof of loss of the A: I will first file a motion for leave to file demurrer to original (Sec. Rule 130). 186498. The copy with A’s counsel was destroyed Supreme Court held that in prosecution for violation of the when the law office was burned. training and experience of the forensic laboratory personnel who conducted the DNA testing. dangerous Drugs Act. 23. note. De Guzman. G. the A: NO. No. the evidence submitted with the position evidence or consider some other remedy? Explain the paper must be admissible in evidence (Sec. This identification must be established with moral certainty A: The loan given by A to B may be proved by secondary and is a function of the rule of chain of custody. 2010.M. 5. Rule 3. the offerer. In an action to collect on the promissory note. numbers.. Sitco. instrument. memorandum purposes of the case. 2. Should you now summary procedure requires merely the submission of proceed post haste to the presentation of defense position papers. upon the monitoring and tracking of the movements of the seized proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its drugs from the accused. figures. the same degree of certitude as that needed to sustain a guilty verdict. March 26. giving one copy to B and retaining the other copy. or cannot be produced in court. 4 [b]. Id. May 14. contents by a copy. to the police. Rule 130). The authenticity of any private UST BAR OPERATIONS 64 . your work requires you to act as public of affidavits were attached to the position paper defender at the local Regional Trial Court and to handle submitted by plaintiff in an action for unlawful detainer cases involving indigents. considered “duplicate original copies?” Similarly. Rule 119). 178202. which they both signed. (2003 Bar) A: Yes. They are not duplicate original copies because there High Court held that in prosecutions involving narcotics and are photocopies which were not signed (Mahilum v.

Dr. as requirement under the Rules before secondary or treatment given by him to Walter. Nenita and her sister were caught inside the equivalent of an original document under the Best house but Nenita survived as she fled in time. Walter was charged with arson after 90 days but that if Pedro is willing. Fr. also Q: Pedro filed a complaint against Lucio for the recovery saw Walter in the vicinity some minutes before the fire. Walter’s evidence rule (Sec. psychiatrist. Clearly. Id. Nenita may not be allowed to testify against Walter. The Priest can testify over the objection of Walter. The privileged communication contemplated under evidence in his favor? Why? (2001 Bar) Sec. also encountered him not too far away days. promissory note does not express the true intent and agreement of the parties. Q: For over a year. it must have been written or recorded and must be confidential and penitential in character. Platino. 6 Rule 130). When c. One day. the parish priest who by Lucio. because Pedro has alleged in his complaint that the ascendant or descendant for her to fall within the exception. In his complaint. Carlos is limited only to what he Authentication and proof of documents perceived at the vicinity of the fire and at about the time of the fire. the same time as the original and with identical except in a civil case by one against the other. or any information he evidence may be presented (Sec. Carlos. be allowed over Walter’s objection? facts are correctly stated. As she was running away accurately (Sec.g. 24 (d) Rule 130). from the burning house. Q: X states on direct examination that he once knew the facts being asked but he cannot recall them now. (1996 Bar) The disqualification requires that the same were made pursuant to a religious duty enjoined in the course of A: No. Id. in his professional character. acquired in attending to Walter in a professional capacity. but that he has never seen the writing before. Rule 130). 4[b] Rule 130). Also. or immediately thereafter. Rule 5. the prosecution moved to introduce the request of Lucio give the latter up to 120 days to pay the testimonies of Nenita. 2. Carlos. since the original note was with Lucio and the latter a. Nenita lived Evidence Rule? (2003 Bar) in the meantime with her sister in Makati. during their receipt of such notice. while her Evidence Rule if it is a printout or output readable by sister tried to save belongings and was caught inside sight or other means. Rule 4. Over the objection of Lucio. privileged communication applies only in civil cases and not Moreover. Nenita had been estranged from her husband Walter because of the latter’s suspicion that Q: When is an electronic evidence regarded as being the she was having an affair with Vladimir. It does not include a Psychiatrist. by X or under his direction at the time when the fact under the seal of confession (Sec. 16. of a sum of money based on a promissory note executed Coincidentally. Platino. The testimony of Walter’s psychiatrist may be of promissory note and have it admitted as valid allowed. QUAMTO (1997-2016) electronic document must be proved by evidence that it had been digitally signed and other appropriate TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE security measures have been applied (Sec. shown to reflect the data when the house collapsed. May the testimony of Dr. the doctor and the priest- note. neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or presented a copy of such the note which was executed at against the other without the consent of the affected spouse. May the testimony of Fr. a. 2013 Bar) latter to pay immediately after ninety day’s time. During the hearing. This is an exception to the parol b. who all saw Walter at the vicinity of the fire at that the agreement between him and Lucio is for the about the time of the fire. 22. the truth is that the note is payable immediately from the burned house. the failure of Lucio to produce the original of the in a criminal case for arson. Nenita was surprised to see her husband also running away from the scene. a barangay equivalent of an original document under the Best kagawad who lived in nearby Mandaluyong. can Pedro present a copy A: Yes. surgery or A: Yes. 9[b] Rule 130). recollection recorded? Explain. be allowed over Walter’s objection? b. Pedro testified that the truth is confessor. 24 (c) Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence involves only persons authorized to practice medicine. Besides. The testimony was merely 65 . he may upon and at his trial. (2006. Carlos was not in connection with the advice notice. 1. will Pedro be allowed to The foregoing exceptions cannot apply since it only extends testify as to the true agreement or contents of the to a criminal case of one spouse against the other or the promissory note? Why? latter’s direct ascendants or descendants. Moreover.. X has never seen the writing before. Is the writing admissible as past A: Yes. Platino was not previously subject same was correctly written or recorded (Sec. Nenita is not the offended party and her sister is not her direct A: Yes. of a confession of Walter or an advice given by him to Walter But in this case. such notice to produce the same within six hours from Under the Marital Disqualification Rule. May the testimony of Nenita be allowed over the would not surrender to Pedro the original note which objection of Walter? Lucio kept in a place about one day’s trip from where he received the notice to produce the note and in spite of A: No.). the original and with identical contents (Sec. Pedro alleged that although regularly hears Walter’s confession and who heard it the promissory note says that it is payable within 120 after the fire. Lucio failed to do so.). the copy in the possession of Pedro is a duplicate obstetrics. Pedro marriage. occurred. e. Over the objection of Lucio. Parol Evidence Rule Walter’s psychiatrist who lived near the burned house and whom Walter medically consulted after the fire. or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and he knew that the Here. case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. the subject of the note is excusable because he was not given reasonable testimony of Dr. because for the written record to be admissible as past discipline of the sect or denomination to which they belong recollection recorded. The testimony of Dr. the house of Nenita’s sister inexplicably burned almost to A: An electronic document shall be regarded as the the ground. Rule 132). the testimony of Fr. or in a criminal contents. the priest- handed a written record of the facts he testifies that the confessor.

2004 Bar) electronic evidence. The privilege covering a lawyer-client relation under Sec. be allowed to testify. Si Mabini ang may gawa ni2.pa2tayin u ni subpoena be quashed on the ground of privileged Mabini. which found that Edgardo had visited his lawyer twice. or in a criminal administrative proceeding. Rule on the complaint made immediately after the estafa was committed. 24(b). Mabini objected committed the crime of swindling on August 15. Rule Graciana is not covered by the said marital disqualification 21 of the Rules of Court. reading: "Honey. Resolve. The trial court ruled in favor of under consciousness of an impending death. 22. before he committed the swindling. However.” Hence. the text message is admissible as a dying declaration husband. Petronilo consent (Lezama v. REMEDIAL LAW limited to what Fr. only to civil actions. The testimony of quashal of a subpoena ad testificandum under Section 4. Ody insisted and contended that after all. Court of Appeals et al. June 27. 2009 a text message. is evidently Ody. Besides. At the trial. cellphone messages are regarded as (1998. Competency versus credibility of a witness can he object to the presentation of the text message on the ground that it is hearsay? Q: Distinguish Competency of the witness and credibility of the witness. 2008. Since the case was filed by Ody against the spouses Cesar and Baby. Mtgal n nyang plano i2. 182835. 2008. D na me makahinga. can make known his perception to text message is not to prove the truth of the fact alleged others (Sec. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES d. Platino may not the messages therein which to her are hearsay. the Supreme A: No. and that both visits for fatally stabbing Emilio. hence not in the course of the exceptions to the disqualification by reason of marriage. the prosecution Edgardo. may not be invoked." Is this text message Q: Ody sued spouses Cesar and Baby for a sum of money admissible as a dying declaration? Explain. Ody called Baby as his first Bar) witness. quasi-judicial proceedings and except in civil cases by one against the other. If Mabini’s objection in question B was overruled. (2010 and damages. a matter which is not The decisive factor that the message was made and sent confidential in nature. fire and at about the time of the fire. The prosecution thereupon announced day (August 16. Suppose that shortly before he expired. Baby objected.R. 2008 and the Q: On March 12. L-25643. which Edgardo's lawyer for him to testify on the conversations Mabini’s estranged wife Gregoria had sent to Emilio on during their first and second meetings. because the crime had not been committed yet and it is no 24. 2000. with the barangay captain. Rodriguez. Rule 130. on the ground that she may not be compelled to testify against her A: Yes. Investigation. Under the Rules on Evidence. Fr. No. During the trial of circumstance of evident premeditation. A subpoena ad testificandum was served on Gregoria allegation that the testimony to be elicited constitutes for her to be presented for the purpose of identifying privileged communication. Gregoria’s text message in Emilio’s cellphone is not covered by the hearsay rule because it is regarded in the A: Competency of the witness refers to a witness who can rules of evidence as independently relevant statement: the perceive and perceiving. No. Mg ingat u bka ma tsugi communication? Explain fully. the first time on August 14. Graciana UST BAR OPERATIONS 66 . the subpoena may not be simply quashed on the a. brought his complaint to the National Bureau of 1968). 2008. Emilio was able to send a text message to his wife Graciana By reason of marriage reading "Nasaksak ako. It may be noted that the accused her cellphone and the text message. c. G. (2004 Bar) A: No. 2008. Rule 130). Q: On August 15. premeditation exists. joined by Cesar. G. Clearly the conversations the accused had with his lawyer during such A: The objection should be sustained on the ground of the first visit. objection. a wife cannot be Court ruled that the Rules on Electronic Evidence applies examined for or against her husband without his consent. before he committed the swindling cannot be marital disqualification rule (Sec. May the the eve of his death. April 20.. 20. case for a crime committed by one against the other. while credibility of the witness therein but only as to the circumstances of whether or not refers to a witness whose testimony is believable. Was the ruling proper? Will you answer be the same attendant from the victim’s statement: “D na me if the matters to be testified on were known to Baby or makakahinga” and the fact that he died shortly after he sent acquired by her prior to her marriage to Cesar? Explain the message. Mabini was charged with Murder second on August 16. b. rule because she is not the wife of Mabini. 2010). Rule 130).R. 2008 or privilege. Mabini objected again. and in a recent case (Ang v. she since the same came from the victim who “shortly” expired would just be questioned about a conference they had and it is in respect of the cause and circumstance of his death. Rule 130). the RTC issued a subpoena ad testificandum to introduced on December 11. Edgardo committed estafa Baby cannot be compelled to testify against Cesar without his against Petronilo in the amount of P3 Million. (2008 Bar) k. professional employment. The marriage between Mabini and Georgia is part of the lawyer’s professional duty to assist or aid in the still subsisting and the situation at bar does not come under commission of the crime. to her presentation on the ground of marital whereas he first visited his lawyers on August 14. To prove the qualifying concerned the swindling of Petronilo." A: No. Platino perceived “at the vicinity of the will identify only the cellphone as that of her husband Emilio. not on the protected by the privilege between attorney and client ground of the “marital privilege” communication rule (Sec. Suppose Mabini’s objection in question A was The second visit by accused Edgardo to his lawyer the next sustained. 2008) after the swindling was committed that it would be presenting Emilio’s wife Graciana to may also suffer from the same infirmity as the conversations identify Emilio’s cellphone bearing Gregoria’s text had during their first meeting inasmuch as there could not be message. as it is not a ground for A: The objection should be overruled. not to criminal actions.

H cannot testify against her because of the rule on A: Yes. or in a criminal case for a crime Q: Vida and Romeo are legally married. Romeo is committed by one agaisnst the other or the latter’s direct charged in court with the crime of serious physical descendants or ascendants. one exception is if the testimony of the spouse is in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other Q: What are the contents of a judicial affidavit? (2016 or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. May the court admit testified over the objection of W: C. D cannot testify against her because of the doctrine testify on the said report without offending the rule on of privileged communication between patient and privileged communication? (2016 Bar) physician (1998). H and D. Rule 130. A crime by the husband against the daughter is a crime against the wife and directly attacks or vitally impairs the b. against her medicine who used to treat W. No. ABC. ABC. cannot be examined without the consent of the given by him or any information which he may have acquired other as to any communication received in confidence by one in his professional capacity (Sec. 1975). 12-8-8-SC) spouse. Rule on W’s objections husband. the wife against her husband in the criminal case where it involves child prostitution of the wife's daughter. Can he c. consecutively numbered. XYZ. Will your answer be the same if Vida’s testimony is accompanied by a translation in English or Filipino. a doctor of the testimony and affidavits of the wife. son of Vida. incapacity under Art. Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding against him was his Filipina wife. (2004 Bar) a. In the trial. 130). ABC had filed for legal Article 36 of the Family Code. C may marriage to Anne on the ground of psychological not be compelled to testify but free to testify against her (Sec. Romeo. exception provided by the rules is in a civil case by one b. 22. as doctor who used to treat W. [Rule 130. Daquigan. if not in English or Filipino. hence. The name. and shall offered in a civil case for recovery of personal contain the following: property filed by Selmo against Romeo? (2000 Bar) a. One exception thereof annulment case under Article 36 of the Family Code because is where the crime is committed by one against the other or it is a civil case filed by one against the other (Sec. is disqualified to testify communication. Counsel for Romeo objected on the ground not apply. The occupation of the witness. Sec. The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or spouse against the other. the the witness stand and offered her testimony as an rule on privileged communication between the spouses does eyewitness. the husband or the wife. Vida witnessed the infliction of the injuries on against her since the petition for declaration of nullity is a Selmo by Romeo. 7610. John can testify. Anne cannot prevent John from testifying of Romeo. step-son Court] In this cae. A: The doctrine of parental privilege cannot likewise be Q: John filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his invoked by W as against the testimony of C. violation of espousal confidentiality and marital privilege rule.” It can be invoked at the trial but of the affidavits she executed against her husband as a not quash the subpoena. b. No. spouse. H sued his wife of ABC by her first husband who was a Filipino. QUAMTO (1997-2016) Although the subpoena ad testificandum may not be quashed counsel for XYZ objected to the testimony of ABC at the the. a. G. Q: XYZ. a copy of the confidential psychiatric evaluation report on his wife from the secretary of the psychiatrist. 36 of the Family Code. 24[c]. Rule 130). The case here involves a case by supervises the examination of the witness and the place Selmo for the recovery of personal property against Vida’s where the examination is being held. A: A judicial affidavit shall be prepared in the language known to the witness and. The principal witness d. during or after the against W over her objection as to any advice or treatment marriage. Act No. she had answers. c. It turned out that DEF. 22. an alien. without offending the rule on privileged communication. The court may admit the testimony and affidavits of marital privilege. 215 FC). He obtained 25. Earlier. Under the rule on privileged A: D. Rule the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. fully conscious that he does so under oath. The defense 67 . privilege covers conversations “with a view to trial of the child prostitution case and the introduction professional employment. While neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected Judicial Affidavit (A. abuses under Rep. C cannot testify against her because of the doctrine conjugal relation (Ordono v. the minor daughter Q: C is the child of the spouses H and W. their child. Rules of injuries committed against Selmo. The public prosecutor called Vida to civil case filed by one spouse against the other. A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him. 22.R. It is not A: The rule of marital privilege cannot be invoked in the covered by the marital privilege rule. was criminally charged of promoting and that he mayface criminal liability for false testimony and facilitating child prostitution and other sexual or perjury. was W for judicial declaration of nullity of marriage under molested by XYZ earlier. from the other during the marriage except in a civil case filed by one against the other. Art. Rule Bar) 130). 24(a). A: Yes. The case falls under this exception because Selma is the direct descendant of the spouse Vida. that: complained that XYZ’s hotel was being used as a center for sex tourism and child trafficking. and A: No. Thus. Rule 130). The marital disqualification rule applies this time. secretary of the psychiatrist. age. residence or business address. Is the objection valid? EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS A: No. in the criminal case involving child which are the following: prostitution? Reason. the following separation from XYZ since last year. L-39012 on parental privilege January 31.M. John could testify on the confidential psychiatric of the marital disqualification rule under the Rules of evaluation report of his wife that he obtained from the Court.

12-8. you the judicial affidavit of Mario. which fit the accused well. Identify the attached documentary and object evidence and establish their authenticity in Since the receipt attached to the judicial affidavit was orally accordance with the Rules of Court. 2005). and any objection to it should acquired the facts upon which he testifies. She also submitted the judicial affidavit of Mario.A. A pair of short pants allegedly left by A at the crime offer. People v Domingo. Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the (Section 6 and 8. the basis of Juan's judicial affidavit. 154629. are convinced that he can be utilized as a state witness.000 is prison mayor in its minimum may require (Sec. he A: Yes. have been made at the time the witness was presented 2. at the time it cannot be the basis of conviction. Thus. can law to administer the same. Can he recall a only to criminal actions where the maximum of the witness? (1997 Bar) imposable penalty does not exceed six (6) years (Section 9(a)(1). A. regardless of the penalties involved (Section 9. No. 6981. Rule 130. September 8.00.000. At the trial. 7. Thus. the maximum imposable penalty for the crime of theft or withhold leave in its discretion as the interests of justice of a cellphone worth P20. the plaintiff can recall a witness with leave of court. Admissions and confessions c.R. G. 3. Pedro's lawyer seasonably filed a admission of guilt because rape cases are not allowed to be motion for reconsideration of the decision asserting compromised (Sec. The Judicial Affidavit Rules shall apply considered an important evidence. after formally submitting his evidence. I will advise my client to ask for a reinvestigation and convince the prosecutor for him to A: No. Rule 132). is separate documentary evidence. and Rule). can the opponent in his re-cross lawyer objected to the prosecution's use of judicial examination ask questions on matters not dealt with affidavits of her witnesses considering the imposable during the re-direct? (1997 Bar) penalty on the offense with which his client was charged. It is offered. REMEDIAL LAW 1. 27. because it is filed in lieu of circumstantial evidence of his guilt. is not correct. People. Justice pursuant to R. Rule 132). No. At the conclusion of the prosecution's presentation of evidence. and the court rendered judgment finding him guilty as charged and holding him civilly liable for A: A’s offer to marry X is admissible in evidence an Implied P20. G. 8. A jurat with the signature of the notary public who Q: Aside from asking a witness to explain and administers the oath or an officer who is authorized by supplement his answer in the cross-examination. The court may grant Here.M. The right to prosecute vests the 8-SC or the Judicial Affidavit Rule). The judicial affidavit is not required to be orally offered as A: The pair of short pants. affidavit of Mario? Q: After plaintiff has formally submitted his evidence. offered. 12-8-8-SC or the Judicial Affidavit issues that the case presents. A. a. Prosecutor Marilag orally offered the Q: A was accused of having raped X. and when he did. Is the motion for reconsideration meritorious? which the court. (2015) A: Yes. No. The signature of the witness over his printed name. e. An offer of A to marry X. 12-8-8-SC. Pedro’s lawyer is correct in objecting to Q: As counsel of an accused charged with homicide. Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting to the judicial the court in its discretion (Sec. 1993). 000. No. the opponent in his re-cross-examination may also ask questions on such other matters as may be allowed by a. prove civil liability. The motion for reconsideration is not meritorious. although standing alone the direct testimony of the witness. Security and Benefit Act. and f. No. Pedro’s lawyer is correct in objecting to the judicial realized that he had forgotten to present what is affidavit of Mario. The accused cannot UST BAR OPERATIONS 68 . questions on matters not pre-trial submitted the judicial affidavit of Juan dealt with during the cross-examination may be allowed by attaching the receipt for the purchase of the cellphone to the court in its discretion (Sec. show the circumstances under which the witness the witness is called to testify. A. The Witness Protection. (Sec. 12-8-9-SC or the Judicial Affidavit Rule).M.00. on redirect examination. to medium periods. there was enough basis for the court to award civil liability. No. the objection of Pedro’s lawyer to the judicial affidavit of Juan October 5. including what of Juan was offered to prove the civil liability of Pedro. or the judicial affidavit of Juan because the Judicial Affidavit Rules accused can apply as a state witness with the Department of apply with respect to the civil aspect of the actions. an eyewitness who narrated therein Q: Aside from asking the witness on matters stated in his how Pedro stole Juan's cellphone. the proponent ask in re-direct examination questions on Judicial Affidavit Rule) matters not dealt with during cross-examination? (1997 Bar) Q: Pedro was charged with theft for stealing Juan's cellphone worth P20. which admissibility of the following pieces of evidence: the court admitted over the objection of Pedro's lawyer. documentary evidence which Prosecutor Marilag failed to orally b. No. Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting to the judicial affidavit of Juan? A: As counsel for the accused. What procedure will you take? (2006 Bar) b. Rule on the receipt attached to Juan's judicial affidavit. 9. A.R. (1998 Bar) A: No. it fit him well. that the court erred in awarding the civil liability on 97921. required (2015 Bar) him to put on. A: Yes. Here the judicial affidavit prosecutor with a wide range of discretion. over the objection of A.M. After Pedro's presentation of his evidence. and whom to charge (Soberano v. Rule 132). or six years and one day to eight years and one day. 3. Pedro's re-direct examination. Prosecutor Marilag at the A: Yes. Pedro’s lawyer is not correct in objecting to the move for the discharge of my client as a state witness.M.

The testimony of Y should be excluded because its purpose was not initially stated and it was not a. To be admissible in evidence. usually through intimidation or not admissible in evidence to prove his guilt in both civil and for a monetary consideration.R. There is always the probability that it will be repudiated (Molina v. 1995). and implied admission of guilt. the victim's father. The accused can testify by repeating his earlier imprudence. QUAMTO (1997-2016) object to the court requiring him to put the short pants on. it was X who actually shot the victim. arresting officer asked Edmond to acknowledge in writing that six (6) sachets of “shabu” were confiscated Q: What are the requirements in order that an admission from him.R. and signed by the accused and counsel. the prosecution presented Artemon to formally offered in evidence as required by Section testify on Ramil's offer and thereby establish an 34. July b) Is the offer by A’s insurance carrier to pay for 24. The Rule on pre-trial in criminal cases (Sec. by Edmond. 000. (2) the confession testimonial evidence. It G. the arresting officer testified and identified the documents executed A: An admission of guilt during a custodial investigation is a and signed by Edmond. During trial. After the prosecution rested its case. During the investigation. Upon application of the prosecution.R. defense filed a motion for demurrer to evidence based Ramil. Principe. rejected because B considered the amount offered was inadequate. A’s insurance carrier offered to pay for the uncounseled extrajudicial confession. The obligation of the insurance Information to be utilized as a state witness. G. A: The demurrer to the evidence should be denied because: where the accused had no participation in such negotiation (People v. while driving his car. Y was thoroughly cross-examined by the defense counsel. December 6. Moreover. the Q: Bembol was charged with rape. Nos. who immediately put the offer on record thoroughly cross-examined Y and thus waived the in the presence of the trial judge. Is Bembol's offer a objection. 135862. 27[4]. they Edmond refused to give any statement. Rule 118) Q: Arrested in a buy-bust operation. because he can be injuries and damages suffered by B. Edmond’s lawyer did not object confession. Y was discharged from the A: No. No implied admission of guilt can be drawn from efforts to settle a criminal case out of court. the defense counsel prosecutor. Is Ramil's offer to settle 2. the prosecutor made a formal must be made with the assistance of competent and offer of evidence which included the documents signed independent counsel. (2003 Bar) rule of res inter alios acta. 115908-09.” A: No. However. Q: If the accused on the witness stand repeats his earlier uncounseled extrajudicial confession implicating his co- Q: A. 1. ran over B. Godoy. approached Artemon. courts look with disfavor upon recantations because they can easily A: The offer by A to pay the hospitalization expenses of B is be secured from witnesses. People. G. Rule 130). the cannot be used against the accused. exceedingly unreliable. 2. Bembol's father. Q: What is the probative value of a witness’ Affidavit of Recantation? (1998 Bar) a) Is the offer by A to pay hospitalization expenses of B admissible in evidence? A: On the probative value of an affidavit of recantation. 1996). 2002). May 2. After the presentation of the are: (1) the confession must be voluntary. The company is based on the contract of insurance and is not prosecutor presented Y as witness but forgot to state the admissible in evidence against the accused because it was purpose of his testimony much less offer it in evidence. has not been reduced in writing or signed by the accused. The offer is not a judicial admission of guilt because it examination. Bembol personally offered to the fact that the prosecutor forgot to state its purpose or settle the case for P1 Million to the private offer it in evidence. Nos. (3) the confession must be express. otherwise. Recanted testimony is criminal cases (Sec. The res inter alios acta rule does not apply because Y testified in open court and was subjected to cross A: No. allegedly representing the admitted in evidence? (2006 Bar) “purchase price of the shabu. It is irrelevant. 70168-69. judicial admission of his guilt? (2008 Bar) 2. admissibility of the documents for being the “fruit of the 69 . The offer to settle not being made by the accused or Rule on the motion for demurrer to evidence on the with his participation is not admissible against him under the above grounds. Y’s testimony is not admissible against X pursuant to admissible in evidence? the rule on “res inter alios acta. Edmond’s lawyer objected to the and (4) the confession must be in writing (People v. injuries and damages of B admissible in evidence? (1997 Bar) Q: X and Y were charged with murder. The testimony of Y was the only material evidence establishing the guilt of Res inter alios acta rule X.” At the trial. during on the following grounds: the preliminary investigation and offered P1 Million to Artemon to settle the case. No. Artemon refused the offer. After the filing of the criminal case against A for serious physical injuries through reckless A: Yes. the offer was subjected to cross-examination. not offered by the accused but by the insurance company Y testified that he and X conspired to kill the victim but which is not his agent. Rule 132 of Rules of Evidence. A visited B at the accused in the crime charged. is that testimony hospital and offered to pay for his hospitalization admissible in evidence against the latter? (1998 Bar) expenses. 1. is not part of his right against self-incrimination because it is a mere physical act. During the pre-trial. The testimony of Y should not be excluded because the defense counsel did not object to his testimony despite b.00. Edmond was requires that all agreements or admissions made or entered brought to the police station where he was informed of during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in writing his constitutional rights. Edmond consented and also signed a receipt of guilt of an accused during a custodial investigation be for the amount of P3. the requirements to the testimony.

000. 1997). refers only to witnesses. Herrera. examine the dog. a door to door forwarder company.00 was received not hearsay based on the following grounds: by him pursuant to the illegal selling of the drugs. evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or the rules (Section 3. REMEDIAL LAW poisoned tree. hence. (ii) the testimony of the trainer of the dog is hearsay. April 4. entries in official records. the accused may not argue that he cannot cross- examine the dog as the Constitutional right to confrontation A: The exceptions to the hearsay rule are: dying declaration. As alluded. having Section 12(3). evidence is the one that should be cross-examined. d.e. Julieta’s testimony is not admissible against Romeo. and (d) the declaration is offered in a against him. The owner objected concerns the cause and surrounding circumstances of the of the package was arrested and charges were filed declarant’s death. Maximo presented witness Mariano UST BAR OPERATIONS 70 . testifies that Romeo told her (Julieta) that he worldwide and had been successful in dangerous drugs (Romeo) heard Antonio. the testimony of the trainer of the dog is shabu came from him and that the P3. the prosecution. Is Julieta’s testimony admissible against accused objected on the grounds that : (i) the guards had Romeo over proper and timely objection? Why? (2002 no personal knowledge of the contents of the package Bar) before it was opened. 1959]. He has personal knowledge of the facts in issue.” Resolve the objection with reasons. contention that the guards had no personal knowledge of the (2009 Bar) contents of the package before it was opened is without merit.). Ergo. is well-taken. that the On the other hand. entries in the the contention of the accused that the he could not cross- course of business. The occurrence. experience or training of to cross-examination by opposing counsel. commercial examine the dog is misplaced. (see: Sec. No. act or declaration about who have explained the workings of the non-human pedigree. 323 S. Id. through (criminal) case wherein the declarant's death is the subject the trainer who was present during the incident and an of inquiry (People v. 36. the guards opened the package and at the time competent as a witness. Rule 128). Rule 130). He is an expert witness. Hence. Q: What are the exceptions to hearsay rule? (1999 Bar) Conversely. i. 94545. The law permits the so-called “non-human evidence” on the ground that machines and animals. learned treatises. being physically present at the benefit of counsel. The prosecution moved to admit this an excited account of the accident immediately after its evidence to justify the opening of the package. the Under Section 36. Q: Maximo filed an action against Pedro. part of the res gestae. lack a conscious motivation to tell on personal knowledge of the person testifying. Julieta. Exceptions and e. and because the workings of machines can Rule 130).W. Testimony of a witness as to statements made by Q: Distinguish clearly but briefly between hearsay nonhuman declarants does not violate the rule against evidence and opinion evidence. (City of the person testifying (Sec. imply an “admission” without the benefit of counsel. Decide. Santos. 37 to 47. and testimony or evidence of the prosecution is admissible for being relevant deposition at a former proceeding (Secs. testified that the dog was highly trained to sniff packages to determine if the Q: Romeo is sued for damages for injuries suffered by the contents were dangerous drugs and the sniffing plaintiff in a vehicular accident. and (iii) the accused could not cross. a witness administrator of the estate of deceased Juan. therein. a signal that the package contained dangerous consciousness of his impending death. (b) the deceased was drugs. common reputation. signed by the accused while under custodial investigation. G. c. 49. The guards can testify as to the facts surround the A: The objection to the admissibility of the documents which opening of the package since they have personal knowledge the arresting officer asked Edmond to sign without the of the circumstances thereof. expert in this kind of field. while opinion evidence is expert evidence based be explained by human witnesses who are then subject on the personal knowledge skill. 50. which makes it hearsay. Id.) and evidence of an Webster Groves v. 1943]. Hearsay merely contemplates an out-of-court custodial investigation. knowledge and derived from his own perception. In one of the routinary inspections of packages waiting to be send to the United A: The requisites for the admissibility of a dying declaration States of America (USA). there is no doubt that the lists and the like. 2d 115 [Okla. Said documents having been time of its discovery. A: Hearsay evidence consists of testimony that is not based unlike humans. v. was told to Romeo. the human witnesses declaration against interest. An Julieta about it. (2014 Bar) because while the excited account of Antonio. Article III of the 1987 Constitution. to sniff packages in their depot at Q: Requisites of Dying Declaration (1998 Bar) the international airport. falsehoods. his testimony may HEARSAY RULE constitute an exception to the hearsay rule. During the trial. 2d 386 [Mo. was hired by FDP Corporation. a witness to the accident. the objection to the declaration of a person which is being offered to prove admissibility of the evidence was timely made. Thus.. witnessed the same. The accused has the opportunity to cross-examine him. the dog sat beside one of the are: (a) the declaration is made by the deceased under the packages. Quick. particularly the right to be assisted by the counsel during b. 1999). State.R. and competent. it was only Romeo who told A: The objections of the accused should be overruled. family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. Rules 130 of the Rules of Court. (2004 Bar) hearsay. a witness to the accident. The During the trial. 138 P. Buck ordinary witness on limited matters (Sec. for the can testify only to those which he knows of his personal recovery of a car which is a part of the latter’s estate. it was obtained by the arresting officer in clear violation of a. give operations. (c) the declaration found two (2) kilograms of cocaine. Thereafter. when the the truthfulness and veracity of the facts asserted same is formally offered. Moreover. a witness in technique of their highly trained dogs was accepted court. Q: A foreign dog trained to sniff dangerous drugs from Dying declaration packages. A: No.

23. should immediately return the car to Maximo. 130). 37. QUAMTO (1997-2016) who testified that he was present when Maximo and Juan Rules of Court and special laws to show pedigree agreed that the latter would pay a rental of P20. Q: Linda and spouses Arnulfo and Regina Ceres were co. gusto akong 71 . Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree Candida can no longer be located. because he was availability of the records of birth does not prove testifying on what he actually observed. It is support for their petition the baptismal certificates of part of the res gestae. Gaddi. No. Rule Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio had barged into the 130). Dencio then brought Candida. Dencio was charged with robbery with rape. 2) entry in the family bible is hearsay. It is one of the other means allowed under the mentioning to PO2 Asintado “Si Rene. upon a claim or demand against his estate as to any pertaining to the decedent. Court of Appeals. raped her. expressly deceased is in dispute. Marcela could hear statement admissible as a dying declaration? (1999 Bar) Candida crying and pleading.R. inadmissible? Explain. PO2 Asintado immediately went to Kulasa’s rescue. If you 2. eleven (11) hours after the crime. His answers were put down in chair and robbed her of assorted pieces of jewelry and writing. Rule 130). Declaration of heirship in a settlement proceeding is not assignors of the parties to a case. not to the truth of Candida’s statement. but since he was in a critical condition. proceedings is necessary. prior and separate judicial provides that a witness may testify on his impressions of the declaration of heirship in a settlement of estate emotion. 2009 Bar) Linda. and 5) there is need for publication as real property is involved. the testimony is admissible in evidence because presentation of secondary evidence. a. The man hurriedly left thereafter. As counsel for Q: While passing by a dark uninhabited part of their Jocelyn and her co-petitioners. 40. Court of Appeals. Kulasa. without any issue. segregation of Linda’s share in the property (Sec. testify on the agreement. condition or appearance of a person. photocopy of the birth certificate of Jocelyn (Heirs of the deceased person agreed upon. 1998). i. is not disqualified to Ignacio Conti v. Id. and they do not prove filiation of the alleged collateral hence. only of the administration of the sacrament of baptism would such testimony be considered as opinion. despite her pleas. Discuss each of the five (5) behind the bushes and saw a man beating a woman arguments briefly but completely (2000 Bar) whom he recognized as his neighbour. to brother and the policemen signed the statement. 118707. 1989). 1998). because he was in critical condition. or persons in whose behalf necessary.R. The last paragraph filiation. When Kulasa was already in agony the man stabbed her and A: she fell on the ground. a photocopy of the birth certificate of Jocelyn. 118904. The baptismal certificate can show the filiation or prove Kulasa who was then in a state of hysteria. Rule 130. Rule The victim suffered several stab wounds. Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the the victim subsequently dies and his answers were made police station about a kilometer away and told Police under the consciousness of impending death (Sec. If the police officer will testify that he noticed baptismal certificates of the parish priest are evidence Candida to be hysterical and on the verge of collapse.e. tied her to a accused as his assailant. while the victim was being brought to the hospital in a jeep. kept pedigree. objected to the admission of Mariano’s testimony. No. Candida also related to does not affect its admissibility as a dying declaration. supra). Linda died intestate and Maawa to testify on what Candida had told him. would you sustain Pedro’s objection? of pedigree (Sec. December 21.). Ten (10) persons headed by Jocelyn. Rule interest. G. argue against the barangay. The certification by the civil registrar of the non- availability of records is needed to justify the A: No. No. The police officer testified his own personal Linda in which the names of the petitioners have been knowledge. Dencio had dying declaration need not be in writing (People v. April 20. The fact that he did not sign the statement point to the house of Marcela. The spouses Ceres refused partition on the following grounds: 1) the b. 4) in partition case where filiation to the of Sec. 3) the certification of the registrar on non. with his brother Part of the res gestae and a policeman as companions. PO2 Asintado hid himself court to allow the partition. G. Dencio fled from the house A: Yes. against the administrator or Juan’s partition wherein the heirs are exercising the right estate. It can be made in the ordinary action for a case is prosecuted. the victim was asked certain questions which he answered. which is the witness Mariano who testified as to what Maximo and Juan. (1999. Even if real property is involved. no publication is necessary. she told him. February 27. 1. 1. hysterical and on the verge of collapse. her of her jewelry and money. It is also an independently relevant seven of the petitioners.000 for (Trinidad v. Viovicente. Revised Rules of Evidence. that entered. The testimony of the policemen is not hearsay. a family bible belonging to statement. pointing to the Q: Dencio barged into the house of Marcela. Why? 3. his money. office had been completely razed by fire. G. Pedro 118464. 5. February 2. tied the latter to a chair and robbed accused as his assailant. Marcela’s maid. Those disqualified are parties or 4.R. Dencio has raped her (People and a certification of the local civil registrar that its v. 50. PO2 Asintado observed shadows and heard objections of the spouses Ceres so as to convince the screams from a distance. The statement is admissible as a dying declaration of with loot. to ask for partition as co-owners (Id). submitting in A: No. A the police officer that despite her pleas. behavior. 74065. If the prosecutor presents Police Officer Roberto owners of a parcel of land. filed an action for partition with the RTC praying for the segregation of Linda’s ½ share.R. would such testimony of the policemen be hearsay? claiming to be the collateral relatives of the deceased Explain. their predecessor-in- matter of fact occurring before Juan’s death (Sec. The policemen noticed that Candida was G. (2005 Bar) relatives of the deceased. “Huwag! Maawa ka sa akin!”After raping Candida. It appears that 69. the use of Maximo’s car for one month after which Juan 1998. During the trial. Heirs of Ignacio Conti v. Court of Appeals.. It cannot be considered as an opinion. Is the a bedroom where he raped her. A: No. because what is sought is the mere Q: The accused was charged with robbery and homicide. No. Entries in the family bible may be received as evidence were the judge.

she would see Nolan where only the fact that such statements were made is very prim and proper. April 24. conviction. the statements made by PO2 Asintado constitutes 28. Both pieces of The trial court convicted Rene of homicide on the basis evidence were objected to by the defense.R. and without any undue because a written statement signed by an officer having the influence in obtaining it. aside from referring to the event in custody of an official record or by his deputy that after question or its immediate attending circumstances. X admitted that he had robbed the victim of is proven beyond reasonable doubt. the testimony of Kim should not be excluded. While a witness can only testify as to those facts which he has b.R. People. impressions of the emotion. behavior. Rene opted to release his statement to the press warrant of arrest issued by the court. 178301. Jr. REMEDIAL LAW patayin! Sinaksak niya ako!” When PO2 Asintado was are deemed voluntary and are admissible in evidence (People about to carry her. G. or to concoct or contrive a A: Yes. Should you influence of a startling event and without any opportunity to as a judge exclude the testimony of Kim? (1994 Bar) concoct or devise a falsehood. the statement of PO2 Asintado may fall within the prohibited drugs. for the opportunity for her cross-examination. 2010). would be sufficient to warrant a appearance of a person (Sec. Hipona. In the case. 1992). God bless us all. v. On the strength of a media. Chatto. v. The certifying officer. Even b. or to fabricate an account. made by a suspect to news reporters on a televised interview UST BAR OPERATIONS 72 . condition or standing alone. The trial court erred in holding that Rene’s though Kim is not an expert witness. 185709.R. of PO2 Asintado’s testimony. testified that on a particular day. Nolan objects to the admissibility of Kim’s testimony on the On the other hand. the personal knowledge of the facts in issue. accompanied by a No. The trial court erred in giving weight to PO2 A: Yes. November 14. Q: At Nolan’s trial for possession and use of the In addition. The robbery and illegal Although I admit that I performed acts possession of firearm cases were tried jointly. and Rene’s statement to the press. and the truth and falsity thereof is immaterial days after. last par Rule 130). known as “shabu” his girlfriend Kin. alert and sharp. 2009). Rene’s confessions to the media Q: D was prosecuted for homicide for allegedly beating were properly admitted because statements spontaneously up V to death with an iron pipe. June 16. the newspaper clipping is admissible in evidence Asintado’s testimony. jewelry valued at P500. part of res gestae since the same were made without any opportunity to fabricate and while a startling occurrence Opinion rule was actually taking place. Kulasa’s statements. L-87584 Asintado’s testimony. Evidence as to making considered Kulasa’s statements despite lack of of such statement is not secondary but primary. Rene learned of Kulasa’s death and. 181052. They seized from his person a handgun. however. found to exist in the records of his office. surrendered to the authorities with his counsel. Malibiran. certificate as above provided. was not presented as a witness. No. The that may take one’s life away. No. press conference stating that X admitted the robbery. and hearsay rule does not apply and the statement may be shown violated Rene’s right to due process when it where the fact that it is made relevant. X was arrested by which goes: police operatives.. Kulasa refused and said “Kaya ko. It (Sgd. G. the Rules provide that a statement Office without the certifying officer testifying on it made under the influence of a startling event witnessed by admissible in evidence against X? (2003 Bar) the person who made the declaration before he had time to think and make up a story. Rule 132). statement itself may constitute a fact in issue or be circumstantially relevant as to the existence of such fact A: The trial court did not err in giving weight to PO2 (Gotesco Investment Corporation v. Rene raises the a. 50. As his surrender was broadcasted all over Q: X was charged with robbery. G.000. Mababaw lang to.) likewise presented a certification of the PNP Firearms and Explosive Office attesting that the accused had no Rene” license to carry any firearm. (2014 Bar) Character evidence A: The trial court did not err in holding that Rene’s statement to the press is a confession. is an diligent search no record or entry of a specified tenor is exception being part of res gestae (Belbis. A: No. Resolve. tired and overly (People v. the certification is admissible in evidence against X falsehood. as the latter did not have against X regardless of the truth or falsity of a statement. nervous at the slightest sound he would hear. Is the newspaper clipping admissible in evidence following errors: against X? a. purview of the doctrine of independent relevant statement. I hope and prosecution presented in evidence a newspaper clipping pray that justice will be served in the of the report to the reporter who was present during the right way. bothered by his Entries in official records conscience. Kim may testify on her statement to the press was a confession which.R. is admissible as evidence that the records of his office contain no such record of entry (Sec. No.” The following day. On appeal. 2012). February 18. A charge for illegal possession of firearm was “I believe that I am entitled to the also filed against him. In a press conference called by the presumption of innocence until my guilt police. Is the certification of the PNP Firearm and Explosive personal knowledge. he would appear haggard. G. but that three relevant. Habulin mo si Rene. Kulasa’s statements are also admissible ground that Kim merely stated her opinion without as part of res gestae since the same were made under the having been first qualified as expert witness.

2000. Environmental Cases). 35. NO. concerned A: The same is true with object evidence. NO. mandamus against the Laguna Lake Development 73 . b. Documentary evidence is formally offered after the Part 1. Court of Examples of the second are evidence obtained in violation of Appeals.. Q: What are the two kinds of objections? Explain each (2004 Bar) briefly. The RTC in time denied said motion for conviction by final judgment (Sec. Q: Charged with the offense of slight physical injuries plan. citing Joven v. except on rebuttal and only if it involves a prior order. May D introduce evidence of specific violent acts by V? Why? (2002 Bar) REVISED RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE A: Yes. Rule 132). Object evidence Q: Hannibal. actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat. second par. In this case. Rule 130). (2010 Bar) a prohibited motion under the said Rule. AM No. The MeTC denied the motion on the ground that it is what ground/s. Moreover.. 1992). 4 [f]. system. custom or usage. Rules of Procedure for presentation of the testimonial evidence (Sec. 09-6-8-SC) Q: A trial court cannot take into consideration in deciding a case an evidence that has not been “formally offered. first par. Rule 132). Documentary evidence essence. you object. the A: Yes. Rule 130). Rule prohibited pleading under Section 19(g) of the Revised Rule 138). An example of the first is when the prosecution offers on Summary Procedure and the motion for reconsideration. relied upon for sustaining the objection and thereafter move its reconsideration thereof (Sec. Respond. which in the meantime had duly issued an order declaring that the case shall be governed by the Revised Q: In a prosecution for murder. The accused thereupon filed with the RTC in Manila a petition for A: The objection is on the ground that the fact sought to be certiorari in sum assailing and seeking the nullification elicited by the prosecution is irrelevant and immaterial to of the MeTC’s denial of his motion to quash. 35. environment that is scientifically plausible but uncertain. Florence and Joel. and (2) the evidence is are both not correct. 3. Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the PROHIBITED PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS same or a similar thing at another time. Rule 132). the precautionary principle calls for the exercise of caution in the face of risk and uncertainty (Sec. Rule 1. filed a complaint of after the presentation of the testimonial evidence. Were the RTC’s Offer and objection orders denying due course to the petition as well as denying the motion for reconsideration correct? Reason. scheme. 09-6-8-SC. A. MTJ-99-1226. 34. Fabros.M. Can A: The prosecution may introduce evidence of the good or Counsel 8 ask for a reconsideration of the ruling? Why? even bad moral character of the victim if it tends to establish (2012 Bar) in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged (Sec. should be denied the Constitutional prohibition against unreasonable because the petition for certiorari is a prohibited pleading. and the like under an information duly filed with the MeTC in Manila (Sec. 51. As officer who filed the information had no authority to do defense counsel. The judge banged his gavel and ruled by saying "Objection Sustained". Testimonial evidence A: Precautionary principle states that when human activities A: Testimonial evidence is formally offered at the time the may lead to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the witness is called to testify (Sec. Rule 130). the Rules due time issued an order on the ground that it is not do not allow the prosecution to adduce evidence of bad allowed by the said Rule. 38. It is also offered residents of Laguna de Bay. Donna. (1997 Bar) A: The RTC’s orders denying due course to the petition for A: Two kinds of objections are: (1) the evidence being certiorari as well as denying the motion for reconsideration presented is not relevant to the issue. the prosecutor asks Rule on Summary Procedure.M.” When are the following pieces of evidence Q: What do you understand about the “precautionary formally offered? (1994. The RTC in the offense under prosecution and trial. RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES (A. WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS c. The trial court asks you on so. D may introduce evidence of specific violent acts by V. The petition for certiorari is a incompetent or excluded by the law or the rules (Sec. searches and seizures and confessions and admissions in violation of the rights of a person under custodial investigation. Give example each. the accused filed with said accused Darwin if he had been previously arrested for court a motion to quash on the sole ground that the violation of the Anti. and Rule 20. 80739 August 20. January 31. G. In its b. as evidence the alleged offer of an insurance company to pay while it is not prohibited motion (Lucas v. but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge. No. 51[a][3]. QUAMTO (1997-2016) a. for the damages suffered by the victim in a homicide case. habit. identity. May the prosecution introduce evidence that V had a Q: Counsel A objected to a question posed by opposing good reputation for peacefulness and non-violence? Counsel B on the grounds that it was hearsay and it Why? assumed a fact not yet established. Counsel B may ask the Judge to specify the ground/s evidence is not relevant. reconsideration on the ground that the same is also a prohibited motion under the said Rule.Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. 1997 Bar) principle” under the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases? (2012 Bar) a. The accused forthwith filed moral character of the accused pertinent to the offense with said RTC a motion for reconsideration of its said charged.R.

09-6-8-SC also Class C waters as prescribed by Presidential Decree known as Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases) 1151. Directing the respondent public official. Rule 8. rules or regulations. under the law. the writ of mandamus lies to require the RTC of Marinduque or vice-versa. e. A. 1152. judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to preservation. and to pay damages sustained by the petitioner petitioner. the ordinary course of law. Department of Agriculture. 2008) a. The following reliefs may be included under the writ of Concerned Residents of Manila Bay. the person aggrieved thereby d. private person or entity to monitor strict there is no other plain. ABC’s toxic mine cleanup of Laguna de Bay. G. ABC used highly to perform their duties prescribed by law relating to the toxic chemicals in extracting gold. While the recommend? Explain. and evidence. (Section 15. the RTC may issue a writ of continuing magnitude as to prejudice the life. (2016 Bar) implementation of the government agencies mandated tasks may entail a decision-making process. A: you are requested to explain the advantages derived from a petition for writ of kalikasan before the the a. (A. No.M. or private individual or entity. rule rehabilitate or restore the environment. As a lawyer for the organization. What is the writ of continuing mandamus? (2016 The damage to the crops and loss of earnings were Bar) estimated at P1 Billion. What action will you execution of a ministerial duty. preserve. Department of Interior and Local forum shopping. Damage to the environment is estimated at P1 Billion. Is the RTC correct in issuing the writ of mandamus? The mine tailings found their way to Calancan Bay Explain. (Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. tailings were accidentellay released from its storage dams and were discharged into the rivers of said town. the Department of Environment and Natural the respondent. Yes. private person or entity to protect. specifying that the petition concerns an e.M. involving environmental damage of such Accordingly. speedy and adequate remedy in compliance with the decision and orders of the court. rehabilitation or restoration of the do an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully environment. Directing the respondent public official.R. thus. except the award of damages to individual satisfied. Inc. ministerial in nature and can be compelled by violated. (Section 1 of the government or officer thereof to perform an act or Rule 7. people’s Here. Department of of Procedure for Environmental Cases) Budget and Philippine National Police before the RTC of Laguna alleging that the continued neglect of defendants A writ of continuing mandamus is a writ issued by a in performing their duties has resulted in serious court in an environmental case directing any agency or deterioration of the water quality of the lake and the instrumentality of the government or officer thereof to degradation of the marine life in the lake. Cruz. rule or regulation and praying that to a balanced and healthful ecology or to the protection. d. It constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is is. or unlawfully excludes c. act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting b. the A: As a lawyer for the organization. attaching thereto supporting reports on the execution of the final judgment. Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the people environmental law. or private person or entity to make periodic the facts with certainty. The Resources. government from an office. government may file a verified petition in the proper court. the Department of Public Works and petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non- Highways. or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or mandamus. allegedly to the waters of nearby Romblon and Quezon. ibid. No. health or property of mandamus directing any agency or instrumentality of inhanbitants in two or more cities or provinces.) by reason of malicious neglect to perform the duties of UST BAR OPERATIONS 74 . 09-6-8-SC also known as Rules Government. No. (Section 7. I would recommend the enforcement of the law or the very act of doing what the filing of a petition for issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan. Defendants raise the defense that the clean up of WRIT OF KALIKASAN the lake is not a ministerial function and they cannot be compelled by mandamus to perform the same. Rule 7. or regulation or a right therein. 09-6-8-SC also known as Rules of Procedure for series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall Environmental Case) remain effective until the judgement is fully satisfied. Directing the respondent public official. government another from the use or enjoyment of such right and agency. Directing respondent to permanently cease and desist b. A. alleging agency. kalikasan: December 18. on behalf of persons whose Philippine Environment Code. law exacts to be done is ministerial in nature and may be compelled by mandamus. Marinduque. REMEDIAL LAW Authority. A writ of continuing mandamus is a writ issued when from committing acts or neglecting the performance ofa any agency or instrumentality of the government or duty in violation of environmental laws resulting in officer thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an environmental destruction or damage. The Writ of Kalikasan is a remedy available to a natural or juridical person. entity authorized by law. the duty to clean up Laguna Lake and restore its organization. otherwise known as the Philippine Environment Code. Supreme Court over a complaint for damages before the Generally.M. The plaintiffs perform an act or series of acts decreed by final prayed that said government agencies be ordered to judgment which shall remain effective until judgment is clean up Laguna de Bay and restore its water quality to fully satisfied. trust or station in connection with the agency. The RTC Q: The officers of “Ang Kapaligiran ay Alagaan. or any public water quality to Class C is required not only by interest group accredited by or registered with any Presidential Decree No. omission of a public official or employee. Nos. non-governmental organization. 171947-48.” of Laguna rendered a decision declairing that it is the engaged your services to file an action against ABC duty of the agency to clean up Laguna de Bay and issued Mining Corporation which is engaged in mining a permanent writ of mandamus ordering said agencies operations in Sta. but also in its charter. enforcement or violation of an environmental law. otherwise known as the government agency. the RTC is correct in issuing the writ of mandamus.

Rule 7. Rule 7. I would recommend. the filing of a petition for the issuance of Writ of Kalikasan shall not preclude the filing of separate civil. (b) production or inspection of documents or things. (Sec. any of the following may file a petition for writ of kalikasan: (a) natural or juridical person. it is clear that filing a petition for Writ of Kalikasan would be the best remedy to address all the environmental problems caused by the release of the toxic waste to the waters of Romblon and Quezon without the burden of paying docket fees. thus. the organization can later file a complaint for damages with the Regional Trial Court.) Additionally. should they desire to do so. 12. As lawyer for the organization. NGOs. Unlike a complaint for damages before the RTC which only be filed by a real-party-in-interest as defined in Rule 3(2) of the Ruels of Court. the rules provide that judgment must be rendered within sixty (60) days from the time the petition is submitted for decision which expedites the proceedings significantly considering the urgency of situation in the instant case. the rule on locus standi is relaxed in peitions for Writ of Kalikasan which allows the petition to be filed by parties as citizen suit. At any rate. ibid. (b) entity authorized by law. ibid. or any public interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated. QUAMTO (1997-2016) The rules also provide interim reliefs in favor of the petitioner upon filing a verified motion. After all. the petition for Writ of Kalikasan is exempted from the payment of docket fees. the filing of a petition for a Writ of Kalikasan with the Supreme Court. the petition for Writ of Kalikasan is more advantageous compared to a complaint for damages before the RTC because it may be filed directly with the Supreme Court or with any of the stations of the Court of Appeals. or administrative actions. therefore.) Besides. (Section1. namely: (a) ocular inspection. or (c) POs. In addition. criminal. 75 . From the foregoing.