Transcribed Lectures of Dean Riano 2011, Part IV

REMEDIAL LAW
I. General Principles
A. Concept of Remedial Law
The Rules of Court as a whole constitute the body of rules governing pleadings, practice
and procedure. As they do not originate from the legislature, they cannot be called
laws in the strict sense of the word. However, since they are promulgated by authority
of law, they have the force and effect of law if not in conflict with a positive law. The
Rules are subordinate to statute, and in case of conflict, the statute will prevail.
The concept of Remedial Law lies at the very core of procedural due process, which
means a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders
judgment only after trial, and contemplates an opportunity to be heard before judgment
is rendered.
Remedial Law is that branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing the rights
for obtaining redress for their invasion.
Remedial laws are implemented in our system of government through the pillars of the
judicial system, including the prosecutory service, our courts of justice and quasi judicial
agencies.
We cannot separate remedial law from substantive law. Remedial law does not
establish a right. Substantive law establishes that right, but remedial law protects and
enforces such right.
B. Substantive Law as Distinguished from Remedial Law
SUBSTANTIVE LAW is that part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights
concerning life, liberty, or property, or the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the
administration of public affairs. This is distinguished from REMEDIAL LAW which
prescribes the method of enforcing those rights and obligations created by substantive
law for obtaining redress for their invasion.
C. Rule-making Power of the Supreme Court
The SC has the constitutional power to promulgate
rules concerning pleading,practice and procedure (Sec 5(5), Art. VIII, Constitution).
But this is not an absolute power, it is subject to some limitations.
1. Limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court
The following are imposed by the Constitution on the rule-making power of the SC:
a. The Rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for thespeedy
disposition of cases;
b. The Rules shall be uniform for courts of the same grade; and
c. The Rules shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights (Sec. 5(5), Art.
VIII, Constitution). Only the legislature can do these acts, not the SC.
2. Power of the Supreme Court to amend and suspend procedural rules
The courts have the power to relax or suspend technical or procedural rules or to
except a case from their operation when compelling reasons so warrant orwhen the
purpose of justice requires it. What constitutes good and sufficient cause that would
merit suspension of the rule is discretionary upon the courts.
When a rule promulgated by the SC is not applied by the SC to a particular case, it is
not a situation where the SC violates its own rules. It is a situation where the SC has
promulgated a rule on that particular case only pro hac vice. This is the power of the SC
to suspend the rules in the interest of justice. The SC can even not apply a particular
rule.
In a case where the action of the MTC was patently null and void, the SC took
cognizance of a petition for certiorari without it having to pass the RTC. The SC in this
particular case did not follow a rule. What is the justification of the court? Action has to
be done immediately. Only the SC can do that.
The SC has also sustained appeals filed beyond the reglementary period shown to be
meritorious and the failure to file on time was with a reason that will compel the court to
recognize that reason. The rules are not intended to be applied with pedantic rigor. The
rules and technicalities have to give way to the interest of substantial justice. So when
there is a conflict between the interest of justice and technicalities, the latter have to
give way in order to give way to justice.
Reasons which would warrant the suspension of the Rules:
1. Existence of special or compelling circumstances;
2. the merits of the case;
3. a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the
suspension of rules;
4. lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory; and
5. the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby.
Compliance with the rules is the general rule, and abandonment thereof should only be
done in the most exceptional circumstances.
Power to amend the rules. The SC has the power to amend, repeal or even establish
new rules for a more simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of
cases. The constitutional power of the SC to promulgate rules of practice and procedure
and to amend or repeal the same necessarily carries with it the power
to overturn judicial precedents on points of remedial law through the amendment of the
ROC.
The ROC are to be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a
just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of every action or proceeding.
D. Nature of Philippine Courts
Philippine courts are both courts of law and equity. Hence, both legal and equitable
jurisdiction is dispensed with in the same tribunal.
1. Meaning of a court
Referred to here is the court as a public office, an office under the judiciary. It is tasked
with the primary purpose of resolving controversies among individuals, and also tasked
with enforcement of the procedures for defending the State against disorder like in
criminal prosecution.
A court itself does not actually physically exist. The courtroom does. A court exists
because of legal fiction.
2. Court as distinguished from a judge
It is a court which has jurisdiction over cases. A judge has no jurisdiction. While a court
is an office, the officer that presides over a court is called a judge. A judge is a physical
actual being while a court is a creation of law. A judge may die but a court remains.
3. Classification of Philippine courts
4. Courts of original and appellate jurisdiction
Original jurisdiction is where a case is filed first.
The MTC has original jurisdiction. Does the CA also have original jurisdiction? Yes.
There are cases which are filed in the CA for the first time. Does the SC also have
original jurisdiction? Yes.
Appellate jurisdiction is the authority to review, revise, reverse or modify decisions of
a lower court. The MTC has no appellate jurisdiction.
5. Courts of general and special jurisdiction
Courts normally have jurisdiction given to them by law. But there are some courts which
even if not specifically given could be within the jurisdiction of that court.
The RTC is a court of general jurisdiction. If there is no law which confers jurisdiction
over a subject matter to any particular court, it is now assumed automatically under BP
129 that it will go to the RTC because it is a court of general jurisdiction.
The MTC, CA, and SC are not courts of general jurisdiction. They exercise aspecial
jurisdiction. They only exercise jurisdiction over subject matters conferred directly to
them by law.
6. Constitutional and statutory courts
Statutory courts are courts created by law, by statute or other specific laws other then
the fundamental law. Those laws are authorized by the Constitution. There is only 1
court created directly by the Constitution, the SC.
The Sandiganbayan is not constitutional court because it is not directly created by the
constitution; it is a constitutionally-mandated court. As early as the 1973 Constitution
directed an order to create the Sandiganbayan.
7. Courts of law and equity
Philippine courts exercise 2 general types of jurisdiction; the legal and the equity
jurisdiction. That means that Philippine courts are not only courts of law but also courts
of equity.
Courts of equity decide a case not in relation to a particular statutory provision. Courts
of equity decide a case on the basis of the natural concept of what is just and what is
fair because human beings have natural concepts of what is right and what is wrong
even if we have not gone to school.
There is one principle we have to remember. The courts are not authorized to apply the
rules or laws on equity if there is a specific statutory provision. Equity is not supposed to
come in if there is a law applicable to certain state of facts. No matter how harsh the law
is, if there is a law, the court will have to apply the law. If there is no law, that’s the time
that courts go to the laws on equity.
Reyes vs. Lim, August 11, 2003: This was about an agreement to sell a land. Actually it
was a conditional sale. The buyer gave a hefty down payment of P10 million because it
involved a parcel of land with a prime location in Pasay City. He noticed that the seller
really had no intention to go on with the sale. He filed alternatively an action to rescind
or to annul the contract. During the pendency of the case, he asked the court to require
the defendant seller to deposit in court the P10 million he already gave as down
payment because he noticed that the seller is engaged in some activities which made
him to believe that the guy was squandering the money he gave as earnest money. If
the contract is annulled or rescinded, there is then an obligation for the obligee to make
restitution, and the buyer fears that there will be no more money to return. The
defendant said that the plaintiff in effect is asking for a provisional remedy that is not
found in the rules. The SC said there is a vacuum in the law, and there is a need to
protect the right of the plaintiff should he win. And so the court allowed a deposit as a
provisional remedy pro hac vice only on that particular case using its equity jurisdiction.
8. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy
This principle arises in case of concurrent jurisdiction. Meaning there are cases
cognizable by 1 court and another court or courts authorized by law; there are several
courts authorized by law to take cognizance over a case. In petitions for a writ
of amparo, there is concurrent jurisdiction between the RTC, CA, SC and even the
Sandiganbayan.
Our courts follow the so-called ladderized procedure. If you could file it in the lowest
court, then file it there first. You must have a compelling reason for filing it in a
higher court than in a lower court. This is judicial hierarchy, a general rule which may
be disregarded sometimes.
9. Doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial stability
A court cannot issue an order against a co-equal court. An RTC cannot enjoin the acts
of another RTC. This is to promote the doctrine of stability. This is also applied to certain
quasi-judicial agencies. The RTC cannot enjoin the SEC because they have equal
ranks. Go to the CA by way of Rule 43.
Part II
II. Jurisdiction
A. Jurisdiction over the parties
1. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired
An original plaintiff may sometimes become a defendant in the same case. And an
original defendant may become a plaintiff in the same case. For example, OP filed a
claim against OD. Then OD filed a counterclaim against OP. OD becomes a plaintiff in
the counterclaim and OP becomes a defendant.
The filing of the complaint by the plaintiff vests upon the court jurisdiction upon his
person.
2. How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired?
A true defendant is whom relief is directly sought against. A defendant in name only is
the not a true defendant. Therefore, you do not need jurisdiction over the person of
every defendant in all cases. You only need the jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant when the action is in personam. And this is mandatory. We did not say
personal action, it is different from action in personam.
In actions in rem and quasi in rem, technically there are no defendants although some
persons may be named. You only need jurisdiction over the thing or res, which is either
a thing or a status of a person.
An action in rem is an action against the whole world addressed to no one in particular.
For example, in a probate proceeding the heirs are mentioned because they have
interests in the estate but the court needs jurisdiction over the estate only. It is an action
in rem.
An annulment of marriage or declaration of nullity is also an action in rem. The parties
are only incidental to the action. A cadastral case is also an action in rem.
An injunction and an action for unlawful detainer and for forcible entry are actions in
personam.
An action involving the status of an individual is an action in rem. But there is an action
about the status of an individual which is not an action in rem but in personam- an
action for compulsory recognition of a child.
There are other actions called quasi in rem. There is a specific individual who is
interested in a property but it’s actually the property which is the focal point of the suit.
For instance, foreclosure of a mortgage, an action quasi in rem. A proceeding for
preliminary attachment is a proceeding quasi in rem. Accounting of funds is also quasi
in rem.
These are jurisprudential examples coming from the Bar exams.
So when talking about jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, we are talking only
of actions in personam where such jurisdiction is mandatory.
When there is voluntary appearance, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is
acquired even without service of summons or upon a summons invalidly served. It is
found in Sec. 20 Rule 14. Master this!
Sec. 20 – The defendant’s voluntary appearance in the action shall be equivalent
to service of summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds
aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall not be
deemed a voluntary appearance.
Voluntary appearance is equivalent to service of summons (1 st sentence of Sec. 20).
What is the defendant’s 1st opportunity to question the court’s jurisdiction over his
person? Motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over his person.Adding
other grounds to the motion to dismiss is not considered voluntary appearance
as opposed to the old rule. You can add as many defenses.
B. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
1. Meaning of jurisdiction over the subject matter
The subject matter refers to the class to which the case belongs. For example, forcible
entry and unlawful detainer; actions of incapable of pecuniary estimation; admiralty
cases; these are classes.
The Filing of a complaint vests jurisdiction upon the court with respect to the person of
the plaintiff.
Bar: the plaintiff was abroad, his counsel filed the complaint. The defendant moved to
dismiss on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction over the complainant because
the is not in the Philippines. Defendant is wrong: jurisdiction is not acquired through his
personal presence in court to file the complaint. Jurisdiction on his person is acquired by
the filing of the complaint in his name and under his authority. Jurisdiction was
acquired by virtue of the complaint filed in court.
2. Jurisdiction versus the exercise of jurisdiction
When the question speaks about jurisdiction vs. the exercise of jurisdiction, it means
jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Jurisdiction is the power or authority belonging to the court. When the court acts
according to such authority, that action in accordance with such authority is an exercise
of jurisdiction. A court has jurisdiction over an UD case; when it receives the complaint
and acts in accordance with such authority to take cognizance over such UD case, its
action falls under the concept of exercise of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is static, the exercise is active. To be valid, the exercise of jurisdiction must
be based on jurisdiction. An exercise of jurisdiction without jurisdiction is not a valid act.
The court is acting without jurisdiction.
3. Error of jurisdiction as distinguished from error of judgment
When the court is exercising jurisdiction without jurisdiction, there is an error called error
of jurisdiction. It is a grievous error; it strikes at the very action of the court. It is
reviewable by certiorari (Rule 65).
When the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter, and the manner of the exercise
of that jurisdiction has been found out to be erroneous, it is an error of
judgment correctible by appeal (Rule 45). It involves errors in the appreciation of the
facts and evidences. It could ripen into a valid judgment if not questioned in a proper
proceeding like appeal because it is not a void judgment. It needs to be questioned. If
there is a remedy of appeal, do not use certiorari.
4. How jurisdiction is conferred and determined
Jurisdiction is conferred by law. It cannot be conferred by the agreement of the
parties or of the approval of the court. Good faith of the judge does not confer
jurisdiction. Neither can estoppel confer jurisdiction; it will only prevent you from
questioning jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint, not the title of the case.
Sometimes the title of the complaint and the allegations are in conflict. The allegations
prevail.
Pay and vacate -> unlawful detainer (MTC)
Pay or vacate -> action for a sum of money (depends upon the amount)
Comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate -> UD (MTC)
Comply or vacate -> specific performance (RTC)
UD: there is a need to demand to vacate
FE: no such need
Can the parties to a case agree for their convenience and for the convenience of the
court that the RTC will try a forcible entry case? No.
The court will not rely on the title of the complaint. It has to read the complaint and
determine the allegations on the complaint.
It is the plaintiff, in effect, that determines jurisdiction thru his allegations. The
allegations of the defendant will not determine jurisdiction.
If the amount of the claim is 1 million, jurisdiction will go to the RTC and the court
cannot dismiss it if in the course of the trial it was convincingly established that only
100,000 is due to the plaintiff. In this case, the court will render judgment only for
100,000 in favor of the plaintiff, but the court should not dismiss the complaint.
5. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction
There are cases which the court will not handle at first because jurisdiction belongs to
an administrative or quasi judicial agency. For example tenancy (DARAB), agrarian
reform case (DAR), rates for electricity (Energy Dept.)
6. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction (the doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction)
Once the court acquires jurisdiction by virtue of a valid complaint, that jurisdiction shall
continue up to the end of the case. Intervening facts will not deprive the courts of
jurisdiction.
Suppose an action for a sum of money, 1 million, was filed in the RTC. During the trial of
the case it was convincingly established that the liability of the defendant was only 100,
000 cognizable at first instance by the MTC. Can the defendant move to dismiss on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction? No, the court already acquired jurisdiction by virtue of the
allegations of a valid complaint. Its jurisdiction will not be ousted by contrary evidence.
The court should continue with the case and render judgment for 100, 000. This is
adherence of jurisdiction doctrine.
Even the existence of a new law will not divest the court of jurisdiction already acquired
unless the law itself orders that such court be divested of jurisdiction.
There was this official of the government with a salary range of grade 27, he was sued
in the Sandiganbayan, and while the case was pending he resigned from office and said
that the SB no longer had jurisdiction over him in lieu of his resignation. He was wrong.
Jurisdiction has already attached and once attached it shall continue until the end of the
proceedings by virtue of the doctrine of adherence.
7. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter
The court may on its own initiative object to an erroneous jurisdiction and may ex mero
motu take cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any point in the case and has a clearly
recognized right to determine its own jurisdiction. The court’s authority however is only
to dismiss the complaint and not to make any other order like forwarding the case to the
proper court.
8. Effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdiction
Estoppel does not confer jurisdiction. It will only prevent you from questioning the lack of
jurisdiction. The ancient case of Tijam vs. Sibunghanoy is the perfect example of
estoppel by latches, as used in that case. One litigant in that case knew that the court
has no jurisdiction over the case beforehand; when the case was dragging 15 years and
he realized he was losing the case only then did he question the court’s jurisdiction. The
SC said he was gambling on the results of the litigation; estoppel by latches was born
and he was precluded from questioning the jurisdiction of the court. The jurisdiction of
the court was left untouched. But estoppel is not the GR, it should be applied only in
cases strictly analogous to Tijam vs. Sibunghanoy. The rule still is: the lack of
jurisdiction can be questioned in any stage of the proceeding even for the first time on
appeal. This is the general rule established in Calimlim vs. Ramirez.
C. Jurisdiction over the issues
When is an issue created? 1. When a material allegation is specifically deniedan issue
is created. Then the court has a reason for trial to determine which interpretation is
right, to determine who is telling the truth. A material allegation not specifically denied is
deemed admitted and there is no issue.
If the issue on a case is possession, the court has no jurisdiction to render judgment on
ownership. If the only issue is ownership without the parties talking about possession,
the court cannot motu proprio include possession in its judgment. To rule on possession
would be to do so without jurisdiction on the issue.
To have an issue, a denial must be specific. Memorize Sec. 10 of Rule 8.
A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not
admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon
which he relies to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of
an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only
the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint, he shall so state,
and this shall have the effect of a denial.
If the provisions above are not followed, you are making a general denial even if
you are denying and what is the effect of a general denial? It is an admission.
Failure to follow the denials mandated in Sec. 10 would render it no longer specific but
general. There are 3 types of denials specified.
Blanket denial or general denial where the defendant denies all the allegations of all the
paragraphs in the complaint; it is deemed an admission.
When you deny, deny every paragraph, every allegation of the complaint or of the
pleading.
Suppose that par(4) of the complaint alleged that the defendant borrowed 1 million from
the plaintiff. The first way of denying it is mentioning the paragraph where it is alleged.
Deny it by saying that you never borrowed money from the plaintiff. The truth of the
matter being that it was a donation. It is an absolute denial of the
allegation. Another way is saying that “I admit I borrowed 1 million but the due date is
till 5 years from now so it is not yet due.” You admit it but by way of avoidance you say
something by way of a defense. The third way is to say that you have no sufficient
knowledge of the debt. This is a disavowal that must be done in good faith because it is
equivalent to admission if done in bad faith as a penalty for such bad faith. Memorize
this concept. Be familiar with the words and the meanings of the words.
The pleadings actually will tell us the issues of the case. They will tell the controverted
matters meaning those which are denied. 2. When the opposing counsel offers
evidence not within the issue of the case, you object. You cannot object if you do not
know the issues of the case. But sometimes there are issues being created not because
of the pleading but because evidence on a matter was offered in court that was not
objected to, it is as if an issue was created by the consent of the parties even if it is not
in the pleadings. Sec. 5 of Rule 10. If an issue was tried with the express or implied
consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been
raised in the pleadings. This has been the subject of many bar exams.
Suppose an evidence for ownership was presented in a case for possession. If it is not
objected to, the court will treat the same as if raised in the pleadings and the court may
now rule on the issue of ownership as well. This is the concept ofimplied
amendment of the pleading.
Bar: There was an action to collect a sum of money. The plaintiff in the complaint did not
even state that he made a prior demand for payment. If there is no prior demand, there
is a failure to state a cause of action because as a rule no demand, no delay unless the
exceptions of 1169 apply. During the trial of the case, the plaintiff presented in evidence
exhibit A, a written extrajudicial demand to pay. The defendant did not object to that.
Can the court admit exhibit A in evidence? Yes. There was no objection, it is as if the
issue of a demand has been tried by the parties impliedly and it is as if the pleadings
included a demand. What can the other party do? He can move to amend the pleading
to incorporate the evidence in the pleading. Suppose the party did not do so, can the
court still try and include the admission of exhibit A? Yes, as if it is raised in the
pleading.
Bar: An action for ejectment did not mention a demand to vacate. During the trial there
was offer of evidence of a demand to vacate. Can the pleading be amended to conform
to the evidence? Yes. There was no objection from the defendant. Dean is of the
opinion that the question was wrong as there is no trial in an ejectment case the same
being a summary procedure.
The question should be this was. The demand was for a debt of 2 million. If the plaintiff
offers evidence for 3 million, which the defendant did not object to, then the evidence
was admitted. Can the court admit the evidence? Yes because the court cannot motu
proprio object in behalf of the defendant. Inadmissible evidence will be admitted
because of waiver and that waiver is because of the failure to object. Inadmissibility can
be waived by the failure to object. Can the court consider the 3 million? Yes, it is as if it
was raised in the pleading which is deemed amended. So, as the counsel for defendant,
object as to the excess of 2 million because the issue is only 2 million. Remember this
concept!
Advice: offer evidence not in issue in the pleadings because the adverse party may not
object to it and so such evidence may be admitted by the court. This doctrine however
is not applicable to a criminal proceeding. This rule has been incorporated in the rules
of criminal procedure effective December 2000, Sections 8 and 9 in Rule 110. The life
and liberty of an accused is not made to depend upon the skill of his counsel to object.
Sometimes issues could be created not because of the pleadings or on the failure to
object. 3. It could be created by stipulations like in the pre-trial conference where parties
limit the issues. And sometimes even during the trial the parties could already agree on
the issues to be tried. Agreement could also create issues.
Sec. 6 of Art. 30 – The parties to any action may agree, in writing, upon the facts
involved in the litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts agreed upon,
without the introduction of evidence.
If the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the trial shall be held as to the
disputed facts in such order as the court shall prescribe.
In sum, jurisdiction over the issue can be obtained thru specific denial, failure to
object to new evidence, and by agreement of the parties.
D. Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation
This jurisdiction is mandatory in actions in rem and quasi in rem because the object of
these actions is the thing which could either be a property or the status of the parties.
The court acquires jurisdiction upon the thing or the res depending on the nature of the
case. For instance, in an action for a sum of money there is yet no jurisdiction over the
property, but if you apply for a writ of preliminary attachment and such writ is issued by
the court, the court now acquires jurisdiction over the property of the defendant which is
now in custodia legis. The court acquires jurisdiction over the res. But there are cases
where jurisdiction over the res is acquired by simply filing of the proper complaint.
For instance, when you file an action to foreclose a real estate mortgage with the proper
allegations in the complaint, then the court will acquire jurisdiction over that thing. Now if
it is a foreclosure of a chattel mortgage, then the court will acquire jurisdiction over the
property if replevin or attachment of the property is made.
So jurisdiction over the res or the property is mandatory and very important in an
accion in rem and in quasi in rem. While jurisdiction over the defendant is
mandatory in an action in personam. Do not forget this because this is very relevant
when we talk about summons.
III. Civil Procedure
A. Actions
1. Meaning of ordinary civil actions
One by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the
prevention or redress of a wrong.
2. Meaning of special civil actions
Generally follow the rules on ordinary civil actions, but there are some special rules only
for it sometimes. That’s why it’s called special.
What is an action for rescission of a contract? Is it an ordinary civil action or a special
civil action? It is an ordinary civil action. Annulment of a contract is also an ordinary civil
action. Reformation of an instrument (incapable of PE) falls under declaratory relief
and other similar remedies under Rule 63. Quieting of title falls under Rule 63 not as
declaratory relief but other similar remedies. Consolidation of ownership falls under Rule
63 but not under declaratory relief but other similar remedies. Read the table of
contents.
Saan mo ipafile ang application for preliminary attachment proceeding? Hindi mo yan
pina-file separartely kasi yan ay provisional remedy. Ang titingnan mo ay principal
remedy. Kung saan ang principal remedy, doon ang application for a writ of preliminary
attachment.
Saan mo ipa-file ang support pendent elite? Hindi rin yan pina-file separately kasi
provisional rememdy. Yong action for support ay sa Family Court or sa RTC kung
walang FC.
Meron bang action for preliminary injunction? There’s none. There’s only action for
injunction.
Which court has the jurisdiction to issue a provisional remedy? The court which has
jurisdiction over the main action. Can an MTC issue a provisional remedy? Yes, if the
main action is with the MTC.
3. Meaning of criminal actions
One by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law.
4. Civil actions versus Special proceedings
Special proceedings establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. They are not there
for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. If
you want a person to be declared as absent, use a special proceeding; do not go to an
ordinary civil action.
Features:
1. The State is interested in the proceeding
2. Proceedings are in rem
3. Rules are for expediency
4. Usually not adversarial in the traditional sense of 2 contending private parties.
Special proceedings:
1. Settlement of estate of deceased persons
2. Escheat
 3. Guardianship and custody of children
4. Trustees
5. Adoption
6. Rescission and revocation of adoption
7. Hospitalization of insane patient
8. Habeas corpus
9. Change of name
10. Voluntary dissolution of corporations
11. Judicial approval of voluntary recognition of minor natural children;
12. Constitution of family home
13. Declaration of absence and death
14. Cancellation of correction of entries in civil registry
5. Personal actions and real actions
A classification of actions according to foundation.
Real actions are those affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest
therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the
area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.
The rule does not define personal actions. It says all other actions not falling under real
actions are personal actions. If I file an action for damages, that is personal action; it
has nothing to do with interest or title or possession to any real property. The same with
an action for collection of a sum of money.
But not all action which deals with real property is a real action. Example: you leased an
apartment belonging to me for 30k/month. A small apartment with a single room. Then
after three months, when I came to you to collect the rental, I realized that it changed a
lot, the floors which were made of Italian marbles are now gravel and sand from
Boracay, you changed them. When I asked you why, you said you wished to have an
environment that is as much close to nature as possible. Then I noticed that you tore
down the wall of the apartment and replaced them with nipa wall. Everything was
changed. When I realized it, I suffered from a mild heart attack. When I was revived I
filed an action for damages for P5 million for destroying my apartment. Is it a real or a
personal action? It is personal action. It’s not about title to the property, it’s not about
possession or interest, it’s about damages. He did not want to pay, he resisted so I
decided to file an action for unlawful detainer so I could regain possession of the
premises. Real or personal? It is a real action because the issue is possession of real
property. FE is also a real action. They are real actions in accordance with the nature of
the action but they are not real actions in accordance with the objective of the
action.Actions for UD and FE are real actions but they are in personam. An in
personam action could be real.
An annulment of marriage is a personal action, it has nothing to do with real property,
but it is in rem. No privity of real estate is mentioned or involved. An action for
recognition of myself as a natural child is in personam directed against a person but it is
also personal. An action for declaration of nullity of marriage is in rem but it is personal.
An action to collect a sum of money is personal and also in personam. Kasi nga
directed to or against a particular defendant. An action for damages, personal and in
personam. Cadastral and land registration case is real action and also in rem.
When the issue in the Bar exams is the venue of a complaint or an action, do not ask
yourself this way: is it personam, in rem or quasi in rem? The question is, is it real or
personal? It is the analysis for purposes of venue.
Pag ang tanong ay what kind of summons will be proper against this non-resident? O di
itatanong mo, is it in personam, in rem or quasi in rem? What summons will be used?
The clerk of court will ask if it’s in personam, in rem or quasi in rem.
If you want to know whether in that particular case jurisdiction is necessary over the
defendant, your question will be “is it in rem, in personam, or quasi in rem”. These
principles have not been exploited in the Bar exam because they are difficult to
understand. It was only asked in 2008 about partition, partition is quasi in rem. But there
was a question there: how do you acquire jurisdiction over the defendant? Holy
smoke! It should not be asked because in an action quasi in rem, jurisdiction over
the defendant is not required.
Why do you need to know if an action is real or personal? In order to determine the
venue. Why do you need to know if an action is in personam, in rem or quasi in rem? So
that you will know if jurisdiction over the defendant is necessary and to determine what
kind of summons will be served.
Example. Kapag ang action ay in personam, hindi ka pwede magpadala ng summons
thru publication. This is the general rule. Because this action is directed to a particular
person, and a summons by publication is directed to the whole world. If the defendant
was not able to read such publication, then you still haven’t reached him/her. But if it’s
an action in rem or quasi in rem, then publication is allowed.
6. Local and transitory actions
A real action is “local,” its venue depends upon the location of the property involved in
the litigation. A personal action is “transitory,” its venue depends upon the residence of
the plaintiff or the defendant at the option of the plaintiff.
7. Actions in rem, in personam and quasi in rem
A classification of actions according to the object of the actions.
Actions in rem
It is in rem when it is directed against the whole world. An action for the declaration of
nullity of marriage is a personal action because it is not founded on real estate. It is also
in rem because the issue of the status of a person is one directed against the whole
world. A cadastral proceeding is an action in rem. A land registration proceeding is an
action in rem. Hence, failure to give a personal notice to the owners or claimants of the
land is not a jurisdictional defect. It is the publication of such notice that brings in the
whole world as a party in the case and vests the court with jurisdiction.
A proceeding in personam is a proceeding to enforce personal rights and obligations
brought against the person and is based on the jurisdiction of the person, although it
may involve his right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or seek to
compel him to control or dispose of it in accordance with the mandate of the
court. Purpose: to impose thru the judgment of a court some responsibility or liability
directly upon the person of the defendant. No one other than the defendant is sought to
be held liable. Example: an action for a sum of money; an action for damages.
Actions in personam
An action in personam is not necessarily a personal action. Nor is a real action
necessarily an action in rem. An action to recover title, or possession of real property is
a real action but it is an action in personam. It not brought against a person but against
at the person upon whom the claim is made. An action for specific performance is an
action in personam. An action for specific performanceand/or rescission is not an action
in rem. An action for damages is a personal action as well as an action in personam.
Actions quasi in rem
A proceeding quasi in rem is one brought against persons seeking to subject the
property of such persons to the discharge of the claims assailed. An individual is named
defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his interests therein to the
obligation or loan burdening the property. But the action is one brought against the
whole world. The object is the sale or disposition of the property whether by attachment,
foreclosure or any other form of remedy.Example: action for partition; action for
accounting; attachment; and foreclosure or mortgage.
B. Cause of Action
1. Meaning of cause of action
It is the act or omission by which a party violates the rights of another. There is an
existence of a right that was violated by someone who has the obligation to respect that
right. In order to have a cause of action, do you have to prove the damage sustained?
No need. Evidence of damage is not found in the definition. As long as you can
establish a right, and that right was violated, there is damage automatically without need
to prove it because you will be awarded anyway nominal damages for a vindication of a
right, for the recognition of the right. If you want to recover actual damages, you have to
prove the damage. You cannot recover actual or compensatory damages without
evidence of the harm sustained.
Do you need a COA for every civil action? No. Only in ordinary civil actions are
COAs mandatory. The concept of a COA ad defined in Sec.2 of Rule 2 does not
always fit a special civil action. A declaratory relief for example, you want the court to
state what your rights are under a law, a treaty, a statute, a deed, a will, before a
violation occurs. In a COA definition, there is a cause of action. Here in declaratory
relief, there is none. That’s why the definition of a COA does not fit. Also for interpleader
where you are asking the court to decide who between 2 persons is the rightful
claimant. It is filed a person whose rights are not violated. He cannot just determine who
among 2 persons is the rightful owner of a property being claimed from me. There is no
violation of my right. Also the definition of a COA does not apply to an administrative
proceeding. You will be charged administratively not because of a violation of a right of
another but because you violated a rule. If you violated a Civil Service rule, you will be
charged administratively. It does not also apply to a criminal case.
2. Right of Action versus Cause of action
The concept of COA is substantive law. A COA while defined in the ROC is not coming
from the Rules; the essence comes from substantive law. A right of action is procedural.
It is a right to file the case. There cannot be w ROA without a COA. Article 1156 of the
Civil Code enumerates the sources of a COA: law, contracts, quasi contracts, delicts,
quasi delicts, and acts and omissions punished by law. That’s why when you are asked
in civil procedure, what is the basis of your COA? Your basis will either be the law, the
contract which is breached, a crime etc.
I borrowed money from X. On the due date of the obligation I did not pay. That he has a
COA against me? Not yet because I still have not violated his right. He has no demand
to pay. If he comes to me and demand payment but I do not pay and just turned my
back, I know violate his right to be paid upon demand. He now has a COA. If on the due
date of the obligation, he comes to me and said “I am reminding you of you debt to me.”
I did not pay. Is there a violation? No, because it was not a demand, it was just a
reminder. The demand must be clear and unequivocal requirement to comply with an
obligation. If you did not demand from me on the due date of the obligation, the
implication is that you voluntarily extended the obligation with a period. That’s why 1169
provides, no demand no delay.
3. Failure to state a cause of action
The allegations of a complaint run: the defendant borrowed P1M from the plaintiff. The
defendant under promissory note hereto attached as Exh. A and forming an integral part
of the complaint mentions that the debt is payable on Aug. 1, 2010. Until now the debt
remains unpaid… Is there a correct statement of a COA? No; from the allegations,
judgment cannot be rendered in favor of the plaintiff because there was no allegation of
a sufficient COA. You will notice only the debt was mentioned, and the due date; it did
not mention that there was demand to pay. The complaint was defective. Sa totoo,
nagdemand sha pero hindi lang nya sinabi sa complaint. Actually he has a COA, but
when he made the complaint, he did not state it. It’s not a case of an absence of a
COA. It’s a case of failure to state a COA. Aside from the demand, the allegations
must also include the fact that the debt is already due and demandable. These are the
elements; if incomplete, failure to state COA!
Absence of a COA is not a ground for a motion to dismiss; it is a ground for demurrer
to evidence according to the SC. Meaning there is no evidence that you do have a
COA, demurrer to evidence is anchored on insufficiency of evidence.
4. Test of the sufficiency of a cause of action
Assuming that the allegations of the plaintiff are true, will the court be able to render
judgment on the basis of the allegations of the plaintiff? If the answer is yes, it is
sufficient.
But when can the court not be able to render a judgment? If the elements of the COA
are not present. Example: you sued me for breach of contract; what are the 2 essential
elements that must be found in the complaint? 1. The existence of the contract; 2. The
violation of the contract. It is sufficient.
The test for sufficiency of a COA is the same with the test for the validity of an
information. Are the elements of a felony mentioned in an information? If not, you
cannot convict him on the basis of that information.
5. Splitting a single cause of action and its effects
If you have 1 COA, do not divide it into several parts making each part the subject of a
separate complaint. Example: Dean Riano was hit by a running Mr. Javier along Recto.
The latter slammed into his frail 60-year old body. He laid unconscious for several
minutes. The doctor told him that his left and right legs, as well as his right and left arms
were broken; also 3 of his ribs were broken, and the strands of his hair were removed.
Can Dean Riano file separate complaints for each broken part? No; that would be
splitting.
In every COA, there is a primary relief sought and the others are incidental
reliefs.Example: you file an action for collection for a sum of money P500,000; this is the
main claim, the payment of the principal; but then there was a stipulation to the interest;
there was no payment of the interest; so there was a claim for the interest; if you file for
the recovery of P500,000 and another for the interests, there’s a clear case of splitting
of a COA. You only have to file a single complaint for this.
Bar: An action to recover shares of stock was filed. After it was recovered thru a final
judgment, an action for the recovery of dividends received by the defendant was also
filed. Was there splitting of a single COA? Yes; the 1 st action should have included the
recovery of dividends on the shares.
City of Bacolod vs. San Miguel Brewery: the city filed an action to recover from SMB
unpaid local taxes which have not been paid for a long time despite assessments sent;
the court decided in favor of the city; SMB, when it received the decision, paid the taxes;
3 months after, the wise boys of the city remembered something: that SMB did not pay
the surcharges and the penalties of the overdue taxes; the reason is they did not
include in their prayer such recovery; so they filed an action to recover those surcharges
on the taxes paid; the issue that went to the SC is very simple: was the 2 nd suit already
barred by the judgment on the 1st suit? The answer is yes. Kung nagclaim ka ng
recovery of taxes dapat pati surcharges isinama mo na sa pag claim sa 1 st case, they
belong to a single COA.
Case, Labitoria: there was a case for partition against co-heirs; the one who filed the
partition case already introduced improvements on the property but since it was owned
in common he later on decided to take the part belonging to him; the court ordered the
partition; after partition where the improvements went to the other heirs, he filed an
action to recover the improvements on the property. The 2 nd suit was barred. It should
have been included in the 1st suit, he should have prayed for the recovery of the
improvements introduced or its expenses when he filed the action for partition.
Actions actually have a main part and an incidental part. If you split the incidental part
from the main part, that is splitting.
Sometimes a single act gives rise to distinct COAs. An act of negligence causing
physical injuries is a COA under quasi-delict, culpa criminal, or independent civil action.
A single act gives rise to many COAs because the sources are different provisions of
the law. You can pursue them separately and there is no splitting of a COA because
they are distinct COAs with different bases.
A split COA filed may be dismissed for litis pendentia. It could also be barred by res
judicata. The rule does not say which case will be dismissed, the 1 st one filed or the
second, the rule is silent. It could also be dismissed for forum shopping, in which all
cases will be dismissed.
Bar: While cruising on a highway, a taxi cab driven by Miles hit an electric post. As a
result thereof, its passenger Joey suffered serious injuries. Miles, the driver, was
subsequently charged before the MTC with reckless imprudence resulting in serious
physical injuries. Thereafter, Joey filed a civil action against Lourdes, the owner of the
taxi cab for breach of contract of carriage and also against Miles for quasi-delict.
Lourdes and Miles filed a motion to dismiss the civil actions on the ground of litis
pendentia, that is the pendency of the civil action impliedly instituted in the criminal
action for reckless imprudence. Is there litis pendentia? None. The action for breach of
contract against the taxi owner cannot be barred by the criminal action against the
driver. The civil action for quasi-delict against the driver is a separate civil action under
Art. 33 of the CC. They can be filed separately and may proceed independently of the
criminal action and regardless of the results of the latter.
An obligation that is divisible gives rise to separate causes of actions. Example: an
obligation payable in installments; each installments that will not be paid can be a
source of a distinct COA. But if you wait for 5 defaults before filing the action on the
6th default, then you can no longer file an action for each, you have to lump in one action
all the previous defaults.
The doctrine of anticipatory breach: if there are 12 installments and on the
1stinstallment the debtor already said that he can never ever pay any installment, you
cannot file an action for all 12 installments, only 1 installment because of the doctrine of
anticipatory breach. Only 1 action can be filed even if there are divisible obligations. The
rationale being to avoid court dockets to be clogged. Ang marami pwedeng pag-isahin
pero ang isa hindi pwedeng paramihin.
6. Joinder and misjoinder of causes of action
Presupposes there are several COAs that you could combine in 1 complaint. It is
different from consolidation, you don’t call it consolidation.
Requisites of Joinder of Causes of Action:
a. The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder
ofparties; (applicable only if there are several plaintiffs or several defendants;example:
1 plaintiff vs. several defendants or several plaintiffs vs. 1 defendant; several plaintiffs
vs. several defendants)
b. The joinder shall NOT include special civil action or actions governed by special
rules;
c. Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdiction, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the
causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of the RTC and the venue lies therein;
d. Where the claims in all the COA are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate
amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.
Ø If given a problem on joinder, immediately look at the number of parties. if there is
only 1 plaintiff and 1 defendant, go to the 2 nd requirement of the Rule. Skip the first.
The keyword is a one-on-one situation. Example: Pedro filed an action against D. This
is one-on-one, don’t look at joinder of parties. But if it says: several plaintiffs vs. 1
defendant or 1 plaintiff vs. several defendants, look at joinder of parties (ramble
situation).
Ø Plaintiff vs. Defendant. Defendant owes P P350,000 on a separate promissory note.
He also have another PN in favor of P for P375,000. And another separate PN for
P200,000. And another for P100,000. How many COA are there if all the debts fall due
and demands have been made but unable to pay? Four because each PN is a separate
obligation. Can P file separate suits? Yes. But there can be also only 1 action filed
against the defendant; this is a proper subject of joinder. Whether or not they come from
different transactions is totally immaterial because this is a one-on-one situation. If filed
under 1 complaint, you follow the totality rule so RTC will have jurisdiction.
Ø Suppose that the defendant is also a lessee of P who has failed to pay rentals and
there has already been a demand to pay and vacate, can this action be joined with the
action above? No. There is now UD which is a special civil action expressly prohibited
by the 2nd rule on joinder of COAs.
Ø Suppose there are 4 defendants, all neighbors who owe P amounts of money;
demand has been made, but still did not pay. Can P join them in one complaint? Now
you look at the rule on joinder of parties, Sec. 6 of Rule 3.
Requisites of Permissive Joinder of Parties:
1. Right to relief arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions,
whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative;
2. There is a question of law or fact common to all the plaintiffs and defendants;
 3. Such joinder is not otherwise proscribed by the provisions of the Rules on
jurisdiction and venue.
Ø The above are separate PNs executed by different people, these are transactions
totally unrelated to each other, therefore they cannot be joined. You have to file separate
complaints against the defendants.
Ø The perfect example would be: 2 injured passengers of a bus filing 1 complaint for
quasi-delict against the driver. There are 2 distinct COAs, passenger 1 can sue the
driver under his own complaint, and passenger 1 can sue the driver under his own
complaint. But they can join as plaintiffs under 1 complaint against the driver. You have
now to comply with the rule on joinder of parties because this is no longer a non-on-one
situation. There are now 2 plaintiffs against 1 defendant. The rule says the plaintiffs
must be related under a single transaction or a series of transactions, and there
must be a common question of law or of fact. Where they injured under a single
accident? Yes. Same transaction. Could there be a common question of law or of fact?
Yes- whether the driver was negligent. So, there can be a joinder.
Ø But in the course of the action where he hit an electric post, he hit another car with
passenger C who was injured; the circumstances of C are not the same with the
circumstances of the 2 earlier passengers; the joinder is not clear.
Ø Another example is recovery of money under a PN signed by 4 joint debtors. The
plaintiff ,ay file a separate complaint against each debtor but he can only recover as to
that debtor’s art of the debt. He can also join all COA in a single complaint against all
joint debtors.
Ø Can you join an action for rescission of a contract with an action to collect a sum of
money? Say rescission of a contract of a sale of a car. Yes. They are on ordinary
actions. Nothing there is a special civil action. What are the special civil actions
Types of Special Civil Actions :
1. Mandamus
2. Interpleader
3. Certiorari
4. Contempt
5. Prohibition
6. Eminent Domain
7. Declaratory Relief
8. Quo warranto
9. Partition of real estate
10. Foreclosure of mortgage
11. Unlawful detainer
l. Forcible Entry
Ø If it is a one-on-one case, do not anymore look at the rule on joinder of parties, look if
there is a special civil action. If there is, then it must be severed.
Ø A joinder of COA and of parties is not compulsory. It is permissive.
C. Parties to Civil Actions
Is the word plaintiff always the original plaintiff? No. can the original defendant become
the plaintiff in the same proceeding? Yes; when he file a counterclaim, a cross-claim, a
third-party complaint, he is a plaintiff in that sense. The original plaintiff also becomes a
defendant in these instances.
Who may be parties to a civil action? Can a natural person be a party? Yes. Can a
juridical person be a party? Yes. Can some neither natural nor juridical person be a
party? Only natural persons, or juridical persons, or entities authorized by law may
be parties to a civil action. Under the Labor Code, a labor organization duly registered in
accordance by the Code can file suits.
Know the concept of real parties in interest, their definition will be in the exams,
Dean Riano can feel it.
1. Real Parties in interest; Indispensable parties; Representatives as parties;
Necessary parties; Indigent Parties; Alternative defendants
Real parties in interest
Parties who stand to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the parties
entitled to the avails of the suit.
It’s not enough to be a natural person, it’s not enough to be a juridical person, it’s not
enough to be an entity authorized by law, in order to sue or be sued or be a party to a
civil action. What is important is you have to be a real party in interest.
There are 2 general types of real parties in interest:
i.) The indispensable parties
Ang indispensable party hindi pwedeng wala; kung wala sya, there will never be a final
determination of the case. The keywords there will be final determination. When the
party is indispensable there is a compulsory joinder.
ii.) The necessary parties.
Pwedeng matuloy ang kaso kahit walang necessary parties. kaya lang wala kang
complete relief and full recovery kapag hindi mo isinali ang ibang necessary party. Pero
kapag indispensable party, hindi pwedeng wala sha sa suit.
Alternative Defendants
Nasaktan ka, hindi mo alam kung sino sa 2 tao ang nag cause og iyong harm or loss or
damage. Anong remedy mo? Idemanda mo silang 2 in the alternative. Alternative
plaintiffs, yes theoretically. “In whom..in the alternative” – plaintiffs. “Against whom… in
the alternative” – defendants. There are also alternative COAs and alternative defenses.
2. Compulsory and permissive joinder of parties
A joinder of COA and of parties is not compulsory. It is permissive. There is only 1
instance where a joinder of parties is compulsory, it’s in Sec. 7 of Rule 3. Parties in
interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined
either as plaintiffs or as defendants. When the party is indispensable there is a
compulsory joinder.
Remember the example on the joint obligation where the debt of each debtor is
P250,000 each. Can the plaintiff sue 1 debtor alone without including the others? Yes.
But he will only recover 250,000. The other debtors are necessary parties because
without them, there will be no full recovery of 1 million.
But Sec. 9 imposes an obligation upon the plaintiff to state the names of the necessary
parties and the reasons why they are not included in the suit. Absent this requirement,
there could be a waiver of your right against the other parties.
If P sues 1 debtor alone under a solidary obligation, the debtor is an indispensable
party because P cannot collect without suing him. What about the other debtors, are
they necessary or indispensable? Neither because P can collect everything from that 1
debtor alone under that solidary obligation. P can collect from any of the debtors.
3. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties
Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is a ground for dismissal of an action.
Parties may be dropped or added by order of a court on motion of any party or of its
own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against
a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately (Sec. 11 Rule 3).
When an indispensable party is not impleaded, the court’s 1 st option is not to dismiss but
to order that that party be joined thru a proper amendment of the pleading. If the order
was not followed or complied with, the court can now dismiss the complaint not on the
basis of non-joinder but on the basis of Sec. 3 of Rule 17,failure to obey the order of
the court, fault of the plaintiff.
Should an action be prosecuted and defended by the real party in interest? No. In the
name of the real party in interest, not by, but in his name. Example: minors sue with
the assistance of parents or guardians, not thru their parents or guardians.
4. Class Suit
You will be asked to determine if a class suit exists. You go by definitions. Sec. 13 of
Rule 3. When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general
interest to many persons so numerous that is it impracticable to join all as parties, a
number of them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as
to fully protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Any
party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.
Requisites of a Class Suit:
1. Subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to
many persons; (this will be the focal point of the Bar)
2. Parties affected are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all to the
court;
3. Parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representativeof
the class and have the legal capacity to file the action.
Example: Wowowee stampede some years ago where more than 70 people died.
Assuming there is an average of 20 heirs per person who died, then it would be 20x70
plus, they would be numerous. The heirs of those who died, assuming they filed a class
suit against ABS-CBN; is there a class suit? No. The law says common or general
interest in the subject matter, not the issue or the question or the facts. Each person
who died is a separate SM. Each lola who died is not a common or general lola to the
other heirs.
Example: Each fisherman in Guimaras affected by the oil spill in the area has a
separate interest as to his income. He is not interested in the income of other fishermen.
A class suit is not possible. Remedy is to file individual suits and have them
consolidated.
Example: Princess of the Stars, June 2008. There is no class suit.
Case: A barrio that put up a big wooden coin bank for the common fund of everyone.
Each person who has extra coins will drop them in that wooden bank. It has been there
for 7 years that each depositor can no longer identify his contribution and how much.
One day, the coin bank disappeared. The treasurer also disappeared. When he was
found, the entire barrio filed a class suit against him for an action to recover the giant
coin bank. Is it proper? Yes. There is a common interest; each barrio folk can no longer
identify his share in the coin bank.The keyword is if you can no longer identify what
is yours. Your interest is merged with the interests of others, then there is common or
general interest.
Opposa vs. Factoran: the basis of the class suit is the protection of the environment.
There is a class suit even in the name of future generations, there is intergenerational
responsibility. The plaintiffs, in behalf of the generations yet to come, filed a class suit
against then DENR Secretary Fulgencio Factoran to prevent the rape of the forests and
the environment and recall all timber licenses issued before and to prevent issuance of
more licenses. The issue that went to court is, is there class suit? The SC, thru Justice
Davide, said yes because there was a common or general interest in the SM which is
the environment and the natural resources. Can you identify which is yours in the
environment and the natural resources? No.
Newsweek vs. IAC: a case involving the sugar planters and barons in Negros
Occidental. Several writers of Newsweek Asia visited the place and they wrote an article
about the exploitation of the plantation workers. It was written in such a fashion that
every sugar planter would really shrink in shame and would feel like fading in a wall.
The title of the article is Island of Fear. It showed how the sakadawere living in a very
pitiful condition. They would earn 1 peso a day but 45 cents of that 1 peso would go
back to the landowners as payment of their debts. It was outlined in the article which
hurt the feelings of the sugar planters and their families. They came together to file a
class suit against Newsweek Asia. Was there a class suit? No problem with their
number, what about the common or general interest? The SC said none. Each sugar
planter is only considered with his own reputation, he is not concerned with
the reputation of the other planters. There is no common or general interest in each’s
reputation. No class suit.
Mathay vs. Consolidated Corporation: this has not yet come out in the exams. There
was a wide tract of land divided into let’s say 1,000 equal squares at 100sm each. Each
square is occupied by a family composed of ten. They have been living there for many
years to wake up 1 day to find each of them given a note to vacate because the land
and the parcels of land were already titled in the name of a corporation named Land
Grabbing Corporation with a primary purpose of land grabbing. They filed a suit for
reconveyance. Is there a class suit? None. Each family has interest only on the land it
occupies. There is no common or general interest.
Bar: an airplane carrying 200 passengers crashed somewhere in the jungles of Agusan.
All the passengers and crew perished. The relatives of the fatalities filed for themselves
and in behalf of all the relatives in the mishap a class suit for damages totaling 5M
pesos against the airline. The propriety of the class suit is questioned by the defendant.
Is there a class suit? None. Because there is no common or general interest in the SM
of the controversy. Each of the plaintiffs has a separate claims for damages.
Bar, 1994: 400 residents of Barrio Ramos initiated a class action suit thru Albert, a
former mayor of the town, to recover damages sustained due to their exposure to toxic
wastes and fumes emitted by the cooking gas plant of a top fuel corporation located at
the town. Is the class suit proper? None. No common general interest in each other’s
illness.
5. Suits against entities without juridical personality
There are friends, A, B and C who owns a motor shop operating under the name Macho
Boys Corporation. The truth is the latter is not registered with the SEC, no such
corporation, it has not juridical personality. They were able to borrow 2M from XYZ
Bank. They were not able to pay the loan so the bank sued them as Macho Boys Corp.
Their defense was that the complaint cannot state a COA because it cannot sue
somebody which has no legal capacity. Can they be sued under the name MBC? Yes
(Sec. 15). But if it was somebody who borrowed money from them, can they sue under
the name MBC? No because they have no legal capacity to sue. Who will be eventually
liable? The 3 of them that’s why when they file their answer, they must state their names
and addresses because they will be the ones liable.
6. Effect of death of party litigant
Let us assume that there is a case going on and the defendant died during the pre-trial.
First, the court will be notified, within 30 days from the death, by the counsel of the
deceased, it is his duty. What will the court do? The court will ask itself: is this an action
that survives the death of a party? Or is this an action that is extinguished by the death
of a party? Then the court will look at the nature of the case. If it is say an action for
legal separation, the court will dismiss it, no need to go on. If it is say money claim, it
survives. Claims against property survives even claims against UD cases survive. If the
plaintiff wants to continue it, it can be continued because once jurisdiction has attached,
it remains with the court until the termination of the proceedings, adherence of
jurisdiction. So if it is a money claim against the defendant, the court will call the lawyer
of the deceased and ask for a substitute such as the heir. But you cannot force the heir
to substitute the deceased, in this case the lawyer must get an administrator for
purposes of that suit. If the defendant cannot produce an administrator, the plaintiff can
procure it. Pwedeng masingil later on sa judgment. Tuloy ang kaso. Judgment against
the deceased thru a substitute. Can you file a motion for the execution of the judgment if
you were the plaintiff who won the case? No. the judgment should be presentedas a
claim against the estate. Special proceedings will come in. do not ask for a writ of
execution. Rule 86.
A claim of real property will not be extinguished. That’s why the next step is substitution.
The substitute will fall under the jurisdiction of the court not thru summons, but thru the
order of substitution. This is an instance where jurisdiction over the person will apply
even if there is no summons- when the defendant dies.
It is the same if it was the plaintiff who died. The rules work both ways. Example: the
plaintiff dies in an action to recover a sum of money, the defendant cannot rejoice
because he has no debt anymore.