CIVIl PROCEDURe

air conditioners he sold to Makee. Suppose

Ron’s counterclaim for the unpaid balance is Php
310,000, what will happen to his counterclaims
if the court dismisses the complaint after holding
a preliminary hearing on Ron’s affirmative
defenses? (2008 Bar)
If an answer is filed and served in response to these claims,
the pleading in response to these answers is the reply
(Sarmiento v. Juan, G.R. No. L-56605, January 28,

A: The dismissal of the complaint does not involve

the dismissal of the counterclaims of Ron. The rule
on the matter is clear. The dismissal of the complaint
shall be without prejudice to the prosecution in the
same or separate action of a counterclaim pleaded
in the answer (Sec. 6, Rule 16). The rule does not
make a distinction between a compulsory and
permissive counterclaim. A similar rule applies
under Secs. 2 and 3, Rule 17.

DISMISSAL OF COUNTERCLAIM, CROSS-CLAIM OR

THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT

The rule on the dismissal of a complaint applies to

the dismissal of any counterclaim, cross-claim or third-
party claim. A voluntary dismissal by the claimant
alone by notice pursuant to Sec. 1, Rule 17 shall be
made before a responsive pleading or a motion for
summary judgment is served or, if there is none,
before the introduction of evidence at the trial or
hearing (Sec. 4, Rule 17).

PRE-TRIAL

CONCEPT OF PRE-TRIAL

It is a procedural device by which the court is

called upon, after the filing of the last pleading, to
compel the parties and their lawyers to appear
before it, and negotiate an amicable settlement or
otherwise make a formal statement and embody in a
single document the issues of fact and law involved
in the action, and such other matters as may aid in
the prompt disposition of the action.

Conduct of a pre-trial (2001 Bar)

After the last pleading has been served and filed, it

shall be the duty of the plaintiff to promptly move ex
partethat the case be set for pre-trial (Sec. 1, Rule
18).

Particularly, the motion is to be filed within 5 days

after the last pleading joining has been served and
filed (Administrative Circular No. 3-99, January 15, 1999).

NOTE: If the plaintiff fails to file a motion within

the given period, the branch clerk of court shall
issue a notice of pre-trial (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, July 13,
2004).

Last Pleading

The last permissible pleading that a party can file is

the reply to the answer to the last pleading asserting
a claim. This claim could be the original complaint,
the counter- claim, cross-claim, or third-party
complaint.
1
 REMEDIAL LAW
1983) which is to be filed within 10 days
from the service of the pleading
responded to (Sec. 6, Rule 11).
For purposes of the pleading, the
expiration of the period for filing the last
pleading without it having been served
and filed is sufficient (Riano, 2014).
NOTE: Where the last pleading has not
yet been served and filed, the case is not
yet ready for pre-trial (Pioneer Insurance &
Surety Corporation v. Hontanosas, G.R. No. L-
35951 August 31, 1977). However, the “last
pleading” need not be literally
construed as one having been served
and filed.
NATURE AND PURPOSE
Nature of a Pre-trial
It is mandatory (Sec. 2, Rule 18).
It is not a mere technicality in court
proceedings for it serves a vital objective:
the simplification, abbreviation, and
expedition of the trial, if not indeed its
dispensation (The Philippine American Life &
General Insurance Co. v. Enario, G.R. No.
182075, September 15, 2010).
NOTE: A motion to set the case for pre-
trial is an ex parte motion. This means that
the motion need not be the subject of a
hearing (Riano, 2014).
Duty to file
6. Advisability of a preliminary reference of issues
to a commissioner;
7. Propriety of rendering judgment on the
pleadings, or summary judgment, or of
dismissing the action should a valid ground
therefore be found to exist;
8. Advisability or necessity of suspending the
proceedings; and
9. Such other matters as may aid in the
prompt disposition of the action (Sec. 2, Rule
18).
Effect of failure of the parties to settle the
case during Pre-trial Proceeding
The judge should not allow the termination of a pre-
trial simply because of the manifestation of the
parties that they cannot settle the case. Instead, he
should expose the parties to the advantages of pre-
trial. He must also be mindful that there are
important aspects of the pre-trial that ought to be
taken up to expedite the disposition of the case
(Ramos v. Spouses Lavendia, G.R No. 176706, October 8,
2008).
If all efforts to settle fail, the trial judge shall
endeavor to achieve the other purposes of a pre-
trial like, among others, obtaining admissions or
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 2
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
After the last pleading has been served and filed, it
shall be the duty of the plaintiff to promptly
move ex parte that the case be set for pre-trial
(Sec. 1, Rule 18).
NOTE: If the plaintiff does not file a motion to set
the case for pre-trial five days after the last
pleading has been served and filed, the Clerk of
Court is authorized to give to the parties a notice of
pre-trial. There will be no delay in the case because
the Clerk of Court will take over (A.M. 03-1-09-SC,
July 13, 2004).
Pre-trial Conference
During the pre-trial, the judge shall be the one to
ask questions on issues raised by the parties and
all questions or comments by counsel or parties
must be directed to the judge. The purpose of this
is to avoid hostilities between the parties (A.M. No.
03-1-09-SC, July 13, 2004).
Purposes of Pre-trial
The court shall consider the following purposes:
1. Possibility of an amicable settlement or of a
submission to alternative modes of dispute
resolution;
2. Simplification of the issues;
3. Necessity or desirability of amendments to
the pleadings;
4. Possibility of obtaining stipulations or
admissions of facts and of documents to avoid
unnecessary proof;
5. Limitation of the number of witnesses;
stipulations of fact. To obtain admissions, the
judge shall ask the parties to submit whatever
depositions have been taken under Rule 23, the
answers to written interrogatories under Rule 25
and the answers to request for admissions by the
adverse party under Rule 26. He may also require
the production of documents or things requested by
a party under Rule 37 and the results of the
physical and mental examination of persons under
Rule 28 (A.M. No. 03-1-09- SC, July 13, 2004).
One Day Examination of Witness Rule (2009,
2016 Bar)
In the pre-trial, the court shall ask the parties to
agree on the specific dates for continuous trial,
adhere to the case flow chart determined by the
court and use the time frame for each stage
setting the trial dates.
Adherence to the One Day Examination of Witness
Rule shall be required where the witness shall be
fully examined in 1 day only, subject to the court’s
discretion during the trial on whether or not to
extend the examination for justifiable reasons.
Most Important Witness Rule (2016 Bar)
Where no settlement has been effected, the court
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
shall follow the Most Important Witness Rule, where
the court shall determine the most important
witnesses and limit the number of such witnesses
and require the parties and/or counsels to submit
to the branch clerk of court the names, addresses
and contact numbers of the witnesses to be
summoned by subpoena. Note, however, that the
court may also refer the case to a trial by
commissioner under Rule 32 (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC,
July 13, 2004).
NOTICE OF PRE-TRIAL
Service of notice of pre-trial
3
It shall be served on counsel, or on the party who
has no counsel. The counsel served with such notice
is charged with the duty of notifying the party
represented by him (Sec. 3, Rule 18).
NOTE: Sending a notice of pre-trial stating the date,
time and place of pre-trial is mandatory. Its
absence will render the pre-trial and subsequent
proceedings void. This must be so as part of a
party’s right to due process (Agulto v. Tecson, G.R. No.
145276, November 29, 2005).
Non-compliance with service of notice of pre-trial
If no notice of pre-trial is served, all the proceedings
at the pre-trial et seq. are null and void. Hence, the
absence of the requisite notice of pre-trial to the
defendant’s counsel (or to the defendant himself, in
case he has no counsel) nullifies the order allowing
the plaintiff to present his evidence ex parte (Ibid.).
APPEARANCE OF PARTIES;
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO APPEAR
Appearance of parties at pre-trial
Both the parties and their counsel must appear
(Sec. 4, Rule 18). Should the lawyer undertake to
appear not only as an attorney but in substitution of
his client’s person, it is imperative for him to have
“special authority” to make such substantive
agreements as only the client otherwise has capacity
to make (Feria & Noche, 2013).
Under the new rules, the “special authority” of
the lawyer or representative should be in writing
because the courts can neither second-guess the
specific powers given, nor can the courts assume
that all the powers specified in Section 4 of Rule 18
are granted by a party to his representative
(Republic v. CA, 429 SCRA 669).
Failure to appear during pre-trial
1. Plaintiff’s failure to appear- shall be a cause for
the dismissal of the action, with prejudice,
unless otherwise ordered by the court.
NOTE: The plaintiff’s remedies from the order of
dismissal include:
a. Appeal; or
b. Re-filing of the complaint, if the order of
dismissal is without prejudice [Sec. 1 (g), Rule
41]
2. Defendant’s non-attendance- shall be a cause to
allow the plaintiff to present evidence ex parte,
and the court to render judgment on the basis
thereof (Sec. 5, Rule 18).
NOTE: The defendant may move for the
reconsideration of the order and if the denial
is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, he may
file a petition for certiorari.
When non-appearance of a party in a pre-
 REMEDIAL LAW
trial conference excused

1. If a valid cause is shown therefore; or discovery procedures or referral to commissioners; and

2. If a representative shall appear in his behalf 6. The number and names of the witnesses, and the substance
fully authorized in writing to: of their respective testimonies and the approximate
number of hours that will be required
a. Enter into an amicable settlement;
b. Submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution; and
c. Enter into stipulations or admissions of
facts and of documents (Sec. 4, Rule 18)

NOTE: The phraseology of the provision suggests

that it is not sufficient for the written authority to
give to the representative the power to enter into
one of the matters mentioned in Sec. 4 of Rule 18,
as when the only authority granted is to enter into
amicable settlement. The authority must also confer
upon the representative the power to enter into
alternative modes of dispute resolution and
stipulations and admissions of fact. An incomplete
authority does not satisfy the requirements of the
Rules and should be deemed the equivalent of
having no authority at all. Further, the mere
presentation of such written authority is not
sufficient, but must be complemented by a showing
of valid cause for the non- appearance of the party
himself (Ibid.).

The authority to submit to ADR, which includes

arbitration, is not complied with by a mere special
power to compromise since a special power to
compromise does not authorize submission to
arbitration (Art. 1880, NCC). Moreover, the written
authority must be in the form of special power of
attorney. Entering into an amicable settlement for
a client who is the principal in the attorney-client
relationship involves entering into a compromise.
Substantive law is explicit: Special power of attorney is
necessary to compromise, and to submit questions
to arbitration. Procedural rules likewise prohibit an
attorney to compromise his client’s litigation without a
“special authority” (Ibid.).

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF;
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE

When filed

The parties shall file their respective pre-trial briefs

in such a manner as shall ensure their receipt
thereof at least 3 days before the date of the pre-
trial (Sec. 6, Rule 18).

Contents of a pre-trial brief

1. A statement of their willingness to enter into

amicable settlement or alternative modes of
dispute resolution, indicating the desired terms
thereof;
2. A summary of admitted facts and proposed
stipulation of facts;
3. The issues to be tried or resolved;
4. The documents or exhibits to be presented,
stating the purpose thereof;
5. A manifestation of their having availed or
their intention to avail themselves of
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 4
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
by the parties for the
presentation of their respective Contents of a Pre-trial Order
witnesses (Sec. 6, Rule 18).
The order recites in detail the following:
NOTE: The parties are bound by the
representations and statements in their 1. The matters taken up in the conference;
respective pre-trial briefs (A.M. 03-1- 09-SC, 2. The actions taken thereon;
July 13, 2004). Hence, such 3. The amendments allowed to the pleadings;
representations and statements are in 4. The agreements or admissions made by the
the nature of judicial admissions in parties as to any matters considered.
relation to Sec. 4, Rule 129.
NOTE: These admissions embodied in the pre-trial
Effect of Failure to file a Pre-trial Brief order are binding upon the parties and conclusive
upon them.
It shall have the same effect as failure to
appear at the pre-trial (A.M. No. 03-1-09- Q: Upon termination of the pre-trial, the
SC, July 13, 2004). judge dictated the pre-trial order in the
presence of the parties and their counsel,
1. If plaintiff fails to file a pre-trial brief- such reciting what had transpired and defining
failure shall be a cause for dismissal three (3) issues to be tried.
of the action;
2. If defendant fails to do so- such failure a. If, immediately upon receipt of his copy of
shall be a cause to allow the plaintiff to the pre-trial order, plaintiff’s counsel should
present his evidence ex parte.
move for its amendment to include a
fourth (4th) triable issue which he
NOTE: The dismissal of the complaint for
allegedly inadvertently failed to mention
failure to file pre-trial brief is
when the judge dictated the order. Should
discretionary on the part of the trial
the motion to amend be granted?
court (Ramos v. Spouses Lavendia, G.R. No.
b. Suppose trial had already commenced and
176706, October 8, 2008).
after the plaintiff’s second witness had
testified, the defendant’s counsel moves for
Pre-trial Order
the amendment of the pre-trial order to
include a fifth (5th) triable issue vital to his
An order issued by the court upon
client’s defense. Should the motion be
termination of the pre-trial. Under A.M.
granted over the objection of plaintiff’s
No. 03-1-09-SC, the pre-trial order shall be
counsel? (2009 Bar)
issued within 10 days after termination of
the pre-trial.
A:

The motion to set the The pre-trial is ordered

a. YES.The motion to amend the pre-trial order case for pre-trial is made
should be granted. Under Section 7 of Rule 19, after the last pleading
the contents of the pre-trial order may be has been served and
modified before trial to prevent manifest in filed (Ibid.).
justice. For the court to refuse consideration of
a triable issue would result in a manifest
injustice.
b. NO. The motion should not be granted. The It considers the
contents of the pre-trial order shall control the possibility of an amicable
subsequent course of action unless modified settlement as an
before trial to prevent manifest injustice. Here important objective (Sec
trial was already on-going. Hence the 2(a), Rule 18).
amendment of the pre-trial order to add an Requires the proceeding
issue may no longer be made. during the preliminary
conference to be
DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRE-TRIAL IN A CIVIL recorded in the
CASE AND PRE-TRIAL IN A CRIMINAL “minutes of preliminary
conference” to be signed
Pre-trial in civil case Pre-trial in criminal case by both parties and/or
It is set when the It is ordered by the counsel. The rule
plaintiff moves ex parte court and no motion to allows either the party or
to set the case for pre- set the case for pre- his counsel to sign the
trial (Sec. 1, Rule 18). trial is required from minutes (A.M. No. 03-1-09-
either the prosecution or SC).
the defense (Sec. 1, Rule Sanctions for non-
118). appearance in a pre-trial
are imposed upon the
by the court after
arraignment and within 30
days from the date the
court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the
accused (Ibid.).
It does not include the
possibility of amicable
settlement of criminal
liability as one of its
purposes (Ibid.).
All agreements or
admissions made or
entered during the pre-
trial conference shall
be reduced in writing
and signed by both the
accused and counsel,
otherwise, they cannot
be used against the
accused (Sec. 2, Rule 118).
The sanctions in a
criminal case are
imposed upon the

5
 REMEDIAL LAW
plaintiff and the defendant counsel for the accused
in a civil case (Sec. 4, or the prosecutor (Sec. 3, the scheduled hearing with respect to motions
Rule Rule 118). and incidents, the following:
18).
It is specifically required It is not specifically 1. Judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which shall
to be submitted in a required in a criminal take the place of such witnesses’ direct
civil case (Sec. 6, Rule case. testimonies; and
18).
2. The parties’ documentary or object evidence, if
Pursuant to the Judicial Affidavit Rule under A.M. any, which shall be attached to the judicial
No. 12-8-8-SC affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C and so
on in the case of the complainant or the plaintiff,
Parties shall file with the court and serve on the and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of the
adverse party, personally or by licensed courier respondent or defendant (Sec 2,
service, not later than 5 days before pre-trial or A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC).
preliminary conference or
NOTE: Without submission of the judicial affidavit,
no witness may be allowed to be presented and
testify for it forms part of the pre-trial.

INTERVENTION

It is a legal proceeding by which a third person,

who is not originally impleaded in the action, is
permitted by the court to become a party by
intervening in a pending action after meeting the
conditions and requirement set by the Rules of
Court (First Philippine Holdings Corp. v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 88345, February 1, 1996).

In claiming the right to intervene, the intervenor

must comply with the requirements laid down by
Rule 19 of the Rules of Court (Office of the
Ombudsman v. Samaniego, G.R. No. 175573, September 11,
2008).

NOTE: Intervention is merely optional and

permissive (Mabayo Farms, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 140058,
August 1, 2002). Hence, the court has the full measure
of discretion in permitting or disallowing the
same (Yau v. Manila Banking Corporation, G.R. No.
126731, July 11, 2002).

Intervention vs. Interpleader

UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 6
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
Intervention Interpleader
An ancillary action An original action

Commenced by a Commenced by the filing

motion for leave to of a complaint.
intervene filed in a
pending case attaching
thereto the pleading-in-
intervention.
Filed by a person who Filed by a person who
has a legal interest in has no interest in the
any of the following: subject matter of the
1. The subject matter action, or if he has an
of the litigation; interest, the same is not
2. The success of disputed by the
either parties; claimants.
3. An interest against
both; or
4. He may be
adversely affected
by the dispositionor
distribution of the
property in the
custdy of the court
or
of an officer
thereof.
the adjudication of the rights of original parties; and
Defendants are already Defendants are being sued 4. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected in a
original parties to the precisely to implead separate proceeding (Mabayo Farms, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
pending suit them. 140058, August 1, 2002).

Factors in the approval of a motion to NOTE: It is recognized that a judgment creditor who has
intervene reduced his claim to judgment may be allowed to intervene
and a purchaser who acquires an interest in property upon
1. Whether or not the intervention will unduly which an attachment has been levied may intervene in the
delay or prejudice the adjudication of the underlying action in which the writ of attachment was issued for
rights of the original parties; and the purpose of challenging the attachment (Yau vs Manila Banking
2. Whether or not the intervenor’s right may be Corp, G.R. No. 126731, July 11, 2002).
duly protected in a separate proceeding (Sec. 1,
Rule 19). Intervention is NOT an independent proceeding (2000
Bar)
REQUISITES FOR INTERVENTION
It is not an independent proceeding but is ancillary and
1. There must be a motion for intervention filed supplemental to an existing litigation (Saw v. CA, G.R. No. 90580,
before rendition of judgment by the trial court April 8, 1991).
(Sec. 1, Rule 19);
Its purpose is to enable a stranger to an action to become a
NOTE: A motion is necessary because leave of party to protect his interest (Santiago Land Development
court is required before a person may be Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 106194, August 7, 1997).
allowed to intervene (Sec. 1, Rule 19).
NOTE: Denial of a motion to intervene does not constitute
2. The movant must show in his motion that he: res judicata. The remedy of the intervenor is to file a separate
action.
a. Has an immediate legal interest in the
matter in controversy, not merely
contingent;
b. Has legal interest in the success of either of
the parties in the action;
c. Has legal interest against both parties; or
d. Is so situated as to be adversely affected
by a distribution or other disposition of
the property in the custody of the court or
of an officer thereof (Sec. 1, Rule 19)(2000
Bar);

3. Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice

7
 REMEDIAL LAW
Intervention cannot alter nature of action
(2011 Bar)
An intervention cannot alter the nature of
the action, and the issues are already
joined (Castro v. David, G.R. No. L- 8508,
November 29, 1956).
TIME TO INTERVENE
Period to intervene
The motion to intervene may be filed
any time before rendition of judgment
by the trial court. A copy of the
pleading-in-intervention shall be attached
to the motion and served on the
original parties (Sec. 2, Rule 19).
Procedure for intervention
1. The intervenor shall file a motion for
intervention attaching thereto his
pleading-in-intervention. The following
are the pleadings to be filed
depending upon the purpose of the
intervention:
a. If the purpose is to assert a claim
against either or all of the
original parties – The pleading
shall be called a complaint-in-
intervention.
b. If the pleading seeks to unite
with the defending party in
resisting a claim against the
1. With respect to indispensable parties,
intervention may be allowed even on appeal
(Falcasantos v. Falcasantos, G.R. No. L-4627, May 13,
1952);
2. When the intervenor is the Republic (Lim v.
Pacquing, G.R. No. 115044, January 27, 1995);
NOTE: Prescription does not lie against the
State. The State is not estopped by the
inaction or mistakes of its agents.
3. Where necessary to protect some interest which
cannot otherwise be protected, and for the
purpose of preserving the intervenor’s right to
appeal (Pinlac
v. CA, G.R. No. 91486, September 10, 2003); or
4. May be allowed during the pendency of the
appeal, where the interest of justice so
requires (Tahanan Dev. Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. L-
55771, November 15, 1982).
The allowance or disallowance of a motion for
intervention rests on the sound discretion of the
court after consideration of the appropriate
circumstances. The rule on intervention is a rule of
procedure in which the subject is to make the
powers of the court fully and completely available
for justice. Its purpose is not to hinder or delay,
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 8
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
latter – File an answer-in-intervention (Sec. 3,
Rule 19).
2. The motion and the pleading shall be served
upon the original parties.
3. The answer to the complaint-in-intervention
shall be filed within 15 days from notice of the
order admitting the same, unless a different period
is fixed by the courts (Sec.4, Rule 19).
NOTE: A change in theory of the defense is not a
proper intervention. Intervention should not alter
the theory of both parties.
When to file an Answer to a complaint-in-
intervention
It shall be filed within 15 days from notice of the
order admitting the same, unless a different period
is fixed by the court (Sec. 4, Rule 19).
Intervention be allowed after judgment has
been rendered by the court
GR: After rendition of judgment, a motion to
intervene is barred, even if the judgment itself
recognizes the right of the movant. The motion to
intervene must be filed at any time before rendition
of judgmentby the trial court (Sec. 2, Rule 19). Hence,
intervention after trial and decision can no
longer be permitted (Yau v. Manila Banking
Corporation, G.R. No. 126731, July 11, 2002).
XPNs: Although Rule 19 is explicit on the period
when a motion to intervene may be filed, the
Supreme Court allowed exceptions in several cases
(Rodriguez v. CA, G.R. No. 184589, June 13, 2013), such as:
but to facilitate and promote the administration
of justice.”
REMEDY FOR THE DENIAL OF
MOTION TO INTERVENE
Mandamus from the Order of the court
allowing or disallowing intervention
GR: The granting or refusal of a motion to intervene
is a matter of judicial discretion, and once
exercised, the decision of the court cannot be
reviewed or controlled by mandamus, however,
erroneous it may be (Otto Gmur, Inc. v. Revilla, G.R.
No. L-34782, February 13, 193, Feria & Noche, 2013).
XPN: When there is an arbitrary abuse of that
discretion, in which case mandamus may issue if
there is no other adequate remedy, though the
result is that the court will be called upon to review
the exercise of a discretionary power (Ibid.).
NOTE: A court’s power to allow or deny
intervention is circumscribed by the basic juridical
procedure that only a person with interest in an
action or proceeding may be allowed to intervene
(Anonuevo v. Intestate Estate of Jalandoni, G.R. No. 178221,
December 1, 2010).
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
This discretion, however, must be exercised
judiciously and only after consideration of all the
circumstances obtaining in the case. Thus, where
substantial interest of the movant in the subject
matter is undisputed, a denial of a motion to
intervene is an injustice (Mago v. CA, G.R. No. 115624,
February 25, 1999).
SUBPOENA
It is a process directed to a person requiring him
to attend and to testify at the hearing or the trial
of an action, or at any investigation conducted under
the laws of the Philippines, or for taking of his
deposition (Sec. 1, Rule 21).
NOTE: Subpoena is a Latin term which literally
means “under the pain of penalty.”
Subpoena vs. Summons

Subpoena Summons
An order to appear and Writ notifying of action
testify at the hearing or brought against defendant.
for taking deposition.

May be served to a non- Served on the defendant.

party.

Needs tender of Does not need tender of

kilometrage, attendance kilometrage and other
fee and reasonable cost fees.
of
production fee.

SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

A process directed to a person requiring him to

bring with him any books, documents, or other
things under his control (Sec. 1, Rule 21).

SUBPOENA AD TESTIFICANDUM

It is a process directed to a person requiring him

to attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an
action or at any investigation conducted by
competent authority or for the taking of his
deposition (Sec. 1, Rule 21).

When requesting party may avail himself of the

issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces
tecum

If the government employee or official, or the

requested witness, who is neither the (a) witness
of the adverse party nor a (b) hostile witness:
1. unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit;
or
2. refuses without just cause to make the
relevant books, documents, or other things
under his control available for copying,
authentication, and eventual production in court.

NOTE: The rules governing the issuance of a subpoena

to the witness in this case shall be the same as when
taking his deposition except that the taking of a judicial
affidavit shall be understood to be ex parte (Sec. 5,
A.M. No. 12-8-8- SC).

SERVICE OF SUBPOENA

Issuance of subpoena

1. The court before whom the witness is required

to attend;
2. The court of the place where the deposition is to

9
 REMEDIAL LAW
be taken;

3. The officer or body authorized by law to do so to the place of attendance (Ibid.).

in connection with investigations conducted by
said officer or body; or
4. Any Justice of the SC or of the CA in any case
or investigation pending within the Philippines
(Sec. 2, Rule 21).

Subpoena to a prisoner

The judge or officer shall examine and study

carefully such application to determine whether the
same is made for a valid purpose and no prisoner
sentenced to death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment and is confined in prison shall be
brought outside the said penal institution for
appearance or attendance in any court unless
authorized by the SC (Sec. 2, Rule 21).

Contents of subpoena

It shall state the name of the court and the title of

the action or investigation, shall be directed to the
person whose attendance is required, and in the
case of a subpoena duces tecum, it shall also contain a
reasonable description of the books, documents or
things demanded which must appear to the court
prima facie relevant (Sec. 3, Rule 21).

Rule on subpoena for depositions

Proof of service of notice to take a deposition, as

provided in sections 15 and 25, Rule 23, shall
constitute sufficient authorization for the issuance of
subpoenas for the persons named in said notice by
the clerk of the court of the place in which the
deposition is to be taken. The clerk shall not,
however, issue a subpoena duces tecum to any such
person without an order of the court (Sec. 5, Rule
21).

Service of subpoena

It shall be made in the same manner as personal

or substituted service of summons (Sec. 6, Rule 21).

The original shall be exhibited and a copy thereof

delivered to the person on whom it is served,
tendering to him the fees for one day’s attendance
and the kilometrage allowed by the Rules. If the
subpoena is duces tecum, the reasonable cost of
producing the books, documents or things demanded
shall also be tendered (Ibid.).

NOTE: Service of a subpoena shall be made by

the sheriff, by his deputy, or by any other person
specially authorized, who is not a party and is not
less than 18 years of age (Ibid.).

When a subpoena is issued by or on behalf of the

Republic of the Philippines or an officer or agency
thereof, the tender need not be made (Ibid.).

Rationale for service of subpoena

The service must be made so as to allow the

witness a reasonable time for preparation and travel
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 10
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
Upon motion promptly made and, in any event, at
or before the time specified therein:
COMPELLING ATTENDANCE OF
WITNESSES; CONTEMPT 1. If it is unreasonable and oppressive;
2. The relevancy of the books, documents or things
Effect of failure to comply with subpoena
does not appear;
3. If the person in whose behalf the subpoena is
GR: The court or judge which issued the
issued fails to advance the reasonable cost of
subpoena may issue a warrant for the
the production thereof (Sec. 4, Rule 21;) or
arrest of the witness and make him pay
4. That the witness fees and kilometrage allowed
the cost of such warrant and seizure, if
by the Rules were not tendered when the
the court should determine that his
subpoena was served.
disobedience was willful and without just
cause. The refusal to obey a subpoena
Subpoena ad testificandum:
without adequate cause shall be deemed
contempt of the court issuing it (Secs. 8
1. That the witness is not bound thereby; or
and 9, Rule 21).
2. That the witness fees and kilometrage allowed
by the Rules were not tendered when the
XPNs:
subpoena was served (Sec. 4, Rule 21).
1. Viatory right – where the witness
Computation of time
resides more than 100 kms. from his
residence to the place where he is to
In computing, any period of time prescribed or
testify by the ordinary course of
allowed by these Rules, or by order of the court or
travel, generally, by overland
by any applicable statute, the day of the act or the
transportation; or
event from which the designated period of time
2. When the permission of the court
begins to run is to be excluded and the date of
in which the detention prisoner’s
performance included. If the last day falls on a
case is pending was not obtained
Saturday, or a Sunday, or a legal holiday, in the
(Sec. 10, Rule 21)(2009 Bar).
place where the court sits, the time shall not run
until the next working day (Sec. 1, Rule 22).
QUASHING OF SUBPOENA
When the law speaks of years, months, days or
Grounds for quashal of subpoena
nights, it shall be understood that years are of
three hundred sixty-five days; days of twenty-four
Subpoena duces tecum: hours; and nights from sunsets to sunrise.

11
If months are designatedby names, they shall be
computed by the number of days which they
respectively have.
In computing a period, the first day shall be
excluded and the last day included.
certain number of days up to, but not including,
the corresponding numbered day of the next
month, then up to and including the last day of
that month.

This rule applies only when the period of time is

prescribed by the Rules, by order the court or by
any applicable statute (Art. 13, NCC).

Pretermission of Holidays

It is the rule which states that the exclusion of

such holidays in the computation of the period,
whenever the first two rules of Section 1 are
present.

It does not apply to:

1. Those provided in the contract;

2. A specific date set for a court hearing or
foreclosure of sale; and
3. Prescriptive period (not reglementary) provided
by the Revised Penal Code. Accordingly, in
criminal cases the court cannot lengthen the
period fixed by aw to prosecute the offender.
The waiver or loss of the right to prosecute is
automatic and by operation of law. Where the
last day to file an information falls on a Sunday
or legal holiday, the period cannot be extended
up to the next working day since prescription
has already set in.

It shall apply to:

1. A pleading filed on the last day of the

reglementary period but after office hours is still
considered as seasonably filed if duly mailed;
and
2. Period of redemption of real properties sold at
execution sale, thus, the redemption period is
actually 360 days.

Where the last day of doing any act required or

permitted by law falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or a
legal holiday in the place where the courts sits, the
time shall not run until the next working day.

Reckoning of 15-day extension

It should be tacked on the original period and

commence immediately after the expiration of
such period.

NOTE: The SC allowed the extended period to

commence from the specific time prayed for in the
motion of extension (Moskowsky v. CA, G.R. No. 122860.
April 30, 1999).

Calendar month

It is a month designated in the calendar without

regard to the number of days it may contain. It is
the period of time running from the beginning of a
Effect of interruption
Should an act be done which effectively interrupts
the running of the period, the allowable period after
such interruption shall start to run on the day after
the notice of the cessation of the cause thereof.
The day of the act that caused the interruption shall
be excluded in the computation of the period.
The event referred to would include force majeure,
fortuitous events or calamities (Sec. 2, Rule 22).
MODES OF DISCOVERY
Discovery
It is a device employed by a party to obtain
information about relevant matters on the case
from the adverse party in preparation for the trial
(Riano, 2014).
NOTE: As contemplated by the Rules, the device may
be used by all the parties to the case (Ibid.).
Purposes of the Rules of Discovery
1. To enable a party to obtain knowledge of
material facts within the knowledge of the
adverse party or of third parties through
depositions;
2. To obtain knowledge of material facts or
admissions from the adverse party through
written interrogatories;
3. To obtain admissions from the adverse party
regarding the genuineness of relevant documents
or relevant matters of fact through requests
for admissions;
4. To inspect relevant documents or objects, and
lands or other property in the possession and
control of the adverse party; and
5. To determine the physical or mental condition of
a party when such is in controversy (Koh v. IAC,
144 SCRA 259).
NOTE: The modes of discovery are designed to
serve as an additional device aside from a pre-trial,
to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the
parties, to ascertain the facts relative to the issues
and to enable the parties to obtain the fullest
possible knowledge of the issues and facts before
civil trials and thus prevent the said trials to be
carried on in the dark. It is intended to make certain
that all issues necessary to the disposition of a case
are properly raised (Tinio v. Manzano, G.R. No. 132102,
May 19, 1999).
NOTE: Rules of Discovery also apply to special
proceedings in accordance with Sec. 2 Rule 72
(2008 Bar).
 MODES OF DISCOVERY (2000 Bar)
Deposition Pending By leave of court after jurisdiction has been obtained over any defendant or
Action (Rule over property which is the subject of the action, or without such leave after
23) an answer has been served, the testimony of any person, whether a party
or not, may be taken, at the instance of any party, by deposition upon oral
examination or written
interrogatories. (2010 Bar)
Depositions before action or A person who desires to perpetuate his own testimony or that of another
pending appeal person regarding any matter that may be cognizable in any court of the
(Rule 24) Philippines, may file a verified petition in the court of the place of the
residence of any expected
adverse party.
Written interrogatories to Under the same conditions specified in Sec. 1, Rule 23, any party desiring to
adverse parties elicit material and relevant facts from any adverse party shall file and serve
(Rule 25) upon the latter written interrogatories to be answered by the party served
or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or
association, by any
officer thereof competent to testify in its behalf.
Admission by adverse At any time after issues have been joined, a party may file and serve
party (Rule 26) upon any other party a written request for the admission by the latter of the
genuineness of any material and relevant document or of the truth of any
material and relevant matter of fact.
Production or inspection of Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor, the court in which
documents or things an action is pending may order any party to produce and permit the
(Rule 27) inspection and copying of any designated documents or order any party to
permit entry upon designated land or other property in his possession or
control for the purpose of inspecting or photographing the property or any
designated relevant object or
operation thereon. (2002, 2009 Bar)
Physical and mental In an action in which the mental or physical condition of a party is in
examination of persons. controversy, the court in which the action is pending may in its discretion
(Rule 28) order him to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician.
(2005 Bar)

DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION; DEPOSITIONS

b. If the deposition to be taken is that of a prisoner.
BEFORE ACTION OR PENDING APPEAL
2. It is not necessary when an answer has already been served
and the deponent is not confined in prison (Sec. 1, Rule 23).
MEANING OF DEPOSITION

A deposition is the taking of the testimony of any

person, whether he be a party or not, but at the
instance of a party to the action. This testimony is
taken out of court.

Deposition may either be:

1. An oral examination; or
2. Written interrogatories (Sec. 1, Rule 23)

When available

1. During a pending action (Rule 23) – deposition

de benne ess; or
2. Before action or Pending appeal (Rule 24) –
deposition in perpetuam rei memoriam

When leave of court is required before taking

deposition

1. It is necessary
a. Before service of an answer but after the
jurisdiction has been acquired over the
defendant or over the property subject of
the action; and
 Effect of substitution of parties
It does not affect the right to use
depositions previously taken; and when
an action has been dismissed and
another action involving the same subject
is afterward brought between the same
parties or their representatives or
successors-in-interest, all depositions
lawfully taken and duly filed in the
former action may be used in the latter
as if originally taken therefor (Sec. 5,
Rule 23).
Effect of using the deposition of a person
does not make that person a witness of the party
using his deposition (Riano, 2014)/
XPN: The introduction of the deposition, or any
part thereof, makes the deponent the witness of
the party introducing the deposition (Sec. 8, Rule
23).
XPN to the XPN: Introduction of deposition does
not make the deponent his witness:
1. If the deposition is used for impeaching or
contradicting the deponent (Sec. 8, Rule 23); or
2. If the adverse party uses the deposition of the
other party [Sec. 4(b), Rule 23]

GR: Taking of the deposition of a person Rebutting a deposition

At the trial or hearing, any party may rebut any

relevant evidence contained in a deposition whether
introduced by him or by any other party (Sec. 9, Rule
23).

Persons before whom deposition may be

taken

1. If within the Philippines

a. Judge;
b. Notary public (Sec. 10, Rule 23); or
c. Any person authorized to administer oaths,
as stipulated by the parties in writing (Sec.
14, Rule 23). NOTE: Letters rogatory (letters request) may be
2. If outside the Philippines applied for and issued only after a commission
a. On notice, before a secretary of embassy has been returned unexecuted (Dasmarinas
or legation, consul-general, consul, vice- Garments, Inc. v. Reyes, et al, G.R. No. 108229, August 24,
consul, or consular agent of the Philippines 1993).
(Sec. 11, Rule 23); or
b. Before such person or officer as may be
appointed by commission or letters
rogatory; or
c. Any person authorized to administer oaths,
as stipulated by the parties in writing (Sec.
14, Rule 23).

Issuance of Letters Rogatory or Commission

Commission Letters Rogatory
They shall be issued only instrument
Instrument issued by a An when necessary sent or in
court of justice
convenient, or other the
on application name and on
and notice, by such
the
competent
terms and with tribunal, authority
such direction as ofare
a just
judgeand or
directed to a(Sec.
appropriate magistrate
12, Rule 23).court of another,
by his official designation requesting the latter to
Commissionorvsto
. Lean
tterindividual
s Rogatory by cause to be examined,
name, authorizing him upon
to take depositions of the interrogatories filed in a
witness named therein case pending before the
former, a witness who is
within the jurisdiction of
the judge or court to
whom such letters are
addressed (Dasmarinas
Garments, Inc.
v. Reyes, et al, G.R.
No.108229, August 24,
1993).
Directed to officials of the Requests to foreign
issuing jurisdiction tribunals

Taken in accordance with The methods of

the rules laid down by procedure are under the
the court issuing the control of foreign
commission tribunal (Dulay v. Dulay,

Leave of court is not required when the deposition is
to be taken before a secretary of embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul or
consular agent of the Republic of the Philippines
and the defendant’s answer has already been
served. However, if the deposition is to be taken in
a foreign country where the Philippines has no
secretary of embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice-consul or consular agent, it may be taken
only before such person or officer as may be
appointed by commission or under letters rogatory
(Dulay v. Dulay, G.R. No. 158857, November 11, 2005).
Disqualifications of a deposition officer
1. One who is related to the deponent within the
6th degree of consanguinity or affinity;
2. An employee or attorney of one of the parties;
3. One who is related to the attorney of the
deponent within the same degree or employee
of such attorney; and
4. One who is financially interested in the action
(Sec. 13, Rule 23)
Stipulation in writing for the taking of depositions
The parties may stipulate in writing as to the
person authorized to administer oaths, as to the time
and place, but not as to the manner of taking
depositions which should be in accordance with
the rules (Feria & Noche, 2013).
Requirement before taking deposition upon oral
2. That it may be taken only at some designated
place other than that stated in the notice;
3. That it may be taken only on written
interrogatories;
4. That certain matters shall not be inquired
into;
5. That the scope of the examination shall be held
with no one present except the parties to the
action and their officers or counsel;
6. That after being sealed, the deposition shall
be opened only by order of the court, or that
secret processes, developments, research need
not be closed;
7. That the parties shall simultaneously file
specified documents or information enclosed
in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by
the court; or
8. The court may make any other order which
justice requires to protect the party or witness
from annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression
(Sec. 16, Rule 23).
Objections to be noted by the officer upon
the deposition
All objections made at the time of the examination to
the:
1. Qualifications of the officer taking the
deposition;
2. Manner of taking the deposition;
examination
A party desiring to take the deposition of any
person upon oral examination shall give reasonable
notice in writing to every other party to the action
(Sec. 15, Rule 23).
Contents of the notice
It shall state the time and place for taking the
deposition and the name and address of each
person to be examined, if known, and if the name
is not known, a general description sufficient to
identify him or the particular class or group to
which he belongs (Sec. 15, Rule 23).
NOTE: On motion of any party upon whom the
notice is served, the court may for cause shown
enlarge or shorten the time (Ibid.).
When the Court may order for the protection
of parties and deponents
After notice is served for taking a deposition by
oral examination, upon motion seasonably made by any
party or by the person to be examined and for
good cause shown, the court in which the action is
pending may make orders for the protection of
parties and deponents (Sec. 16, Rule 23).
Orders for the protection of parties and deponents
1. That the deposition shall not be taken;
3. Evidence presented;
4. Conduct of any party; or
5. Any other objection to the proceedings (Sec. 17, Rule 23)
NOTE: A deposition officer has no authority to rule on the
objection. Evidence objected to shall be taken subject to the
objection, which will be ruled upon by the court when the
deposition is offered in evidence (Feria & Noche, 2013).
Option of parties in lieu of participating in the oral
examination
The parties may transmit written interrogatories to the
officers, who shall propound them to the witness and record
the answers verbatim (Sec. 17, Rule 23).
Changes which the deponent desire to make
Any changes in form or substance shall be entered upon the
deposition by the officer with a statement of the reasons
given by the witness for making them (Sec. 19, Rule 23).
Necessity of signing deposition GR: It
shall be signed by the witness. XPN:
1. Parties by stipulation waive the signing;
2. Witness is ill;
3. Witness cannot be found; or
4. Witness refuses to sign (Sec. 19, Rule 23)
NOTE: If the witness does not sign the deposition, the officer
shall sign it and state on the record the fact of the
waiver or of the illness or absence of the witness or
the fact of refusal to sign together with the reason
given therefor, if any, and the deposition may then
be used as fully as though signed, unless on a motion
to suppress under Sec. 29(f), Rule 23, the court
holds that the reasons given for the refusal to sign
require rejection of the deposition in whole or in
part (Sec. 19, Rule 23).

Period to furnish a copy of the deposition to

any party or to the deponent

He shall furnish a copy upon payment of

reasonable charges therefor (Sec. 22, Rule 23).

Consequence of failure to attend of the party

giving notice

The court may order the party giving the notice to

pay such other party the amount of the reasonable
expenses incurred by him and his counsel in so
attending, including reasonable attorney’s fees
(Sec. 23, Rule 23).

Consequence of failure of a party giving notice

to serve subpoena

If because of such failure, the witness does not

attend, and if another party attends in person or
by counsel because he expects the deposition of that
witness to be taken, the court may order the party
giving the notice to pay to such other party the
amount of the reasonable expenses incurred by
him and his counsel in so attending, including
reasonable attorney’s fees (Sec. 24, Rule 23).

Deposition upon written interrogatories

A party desiring to take the deposition of any

person upon written interrogatories shall serve
them upon every other party with a notice stating
the name and address of the person who is to
answer them and the name or descriptive title and
address of the officer before whom the deposition
is to be taken. Within 10 days thereafter, a party
so served may serve cross- interrogatories upon
the party proposing to take the deposition. Within 5
days thereafter, the latter may serve re-direct
interrogatories upon a party who has served cross-
interrogatories. Within 3 days after being served
with re-direct interrogatories, a party may serve
recross- interrogatories upon the party proposing
to take the deposition (Sec. 25, Rule 23).

NOTE: The duties of the officer under Secs. 17, 19, 20,
21 & 22 of Rule 23 shall also be followed on
deposition upon written interrogatories (Secs. 26 &
27, Rule 23).

Who and how to take a deposition before

action under Rule 24

Any person who wants to perpetuate his own

testimony or that of another person regarding any
matter that may be cognizable in any court of the
Philippines, may file a verified petition in the court of
the place of residence of any expected
adverse party (Sec. 1, Rule 24). Contents of the petition

1. Any party who was present or represented at

The petition shall be entitled in the name of the the taking of the deposition; or
petitioner and shall show that: 2. One who had due notice of the deposition
(Sec. 4, Rule 23)
1. The petitioner expects to be a party to an action
in a court of the Philippines but is presently unable Uses of depositions
to bring it or cause it to be brought;
2. The subject matter of the expected action and
his interest therein;
3. The facts which he desires to establish by the
proposed testimony and his reasons for desiring to
perpetuate it;
4. The names or a description of the persons he
expects will be adverse parties and their
addresses so far as known; and
5. The names and addresses of the persons to be
examined and the substance of the testimony
which he expects to elicit from each, and shall ask
for an order authorizing the petitioner to take the
depositions of the persons to be examined named
in the petition for the purpose of perpetuating
their testimony (Sec.2, Rule 24).

Notices required before taking a deposition before

action

The petitioner shall serve a notice upon each

person named in the petition as an expected
adverse party, together with a copy of the
petition, stating that the petitioner will apply to
the court, at a time and place named therein, for
the order described in the petition. At least 20 days
before the date of the hearing, the court shall
cause notice thereof to be served on the parties and
prospective deponents in the manner provided for
service of summons (Sec. 3, Rule 24).

How to take a deposition pending appeal

The party who desires to perpetuate the testimony

may make a motion in the said court for leave to
take the depositions, upon the same notice and
service thereof as if the action was pending
therein.

The motion shall state:

1. The names and addresses of the persons to be

examined;
2. The substance of the testimony which he
expects to elicit from each; and
3. The reason for perpetuating their testimony (Sec.
7, Rule 24)

USES; SCOPE OF EXAMINATION

Persons for whom deposition may be used

against

Any part or all of the deposition, so far as

admissible under the rules of evidence, may be
used against:

1. Contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the
deponent as a witness;
2. Any purpose by the adverse party where the
deponent is a party; or
3. Any purpose by any party if the court finds that:
(DR. USE)
a. The witness is dead;
b. The witness resides more than 100 kms. from
the place of trial or hearing, or is out of the
Philippines. Unless it appears that his
absence was procured by the party offering
the deposition;
c. The witness is unable to testify because of
age, sickness, infirmity or imprisonment;
d. The party offering the deposition has been
unable to procure the attendance of the witness
by subpoena; or
e. Upon application and notice, that such
exceptional circumstances exist as to make it
desirable in the interest of justice (Sec. 4,
Rule 23).
Use of deposition pending appeal
Depositions are taken pending appeal with the view to
their being used in the event of further proceeding in
the court of origin or appellate court (Sec. 7, Rule 24).
NOTE: If the court finds that the perpetuation of
the testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of
justice, it may make an order allowing the
depositions to be taken, and thereupon the
depositions may be taken and used in the same
which would require the exclusion of the evidence if
the witness were then present and testifying (Sec.
6, Rule 23).
Effect of errors and irregularities in depositions
as stated under Sec. 29, Rule 23
1. As to notice – All errors and irregularities in the
notice for taking a deposition are waived unless
written objection is promptly served upon
the party giving the notice;
2. As to disqualification of officer – Objection to
taking a deposition because of
disqualification of the officer before whom it
is to be taken is waived unless made before
the taking of the deposition begins or as soon
thereafter as the disqualification becomes
known or could be discovered with
reasonable diligence;
3. As to competency or relevancy of evidence –
WHEN MAY TAKING OF DEPOSITION
BE TERMINATED OR ITS SCOPE
Objections to the competency of witness or
the competency, relevancy, or materiality of
testimony are not waived by failure to make
them before or during the taking of the
deposition, unless the ground, of the objection
is one which might have been obviated or
removed if presented at that time;
4. As to oral examination and other particulars –
Errors and irregularities occurring at the
manner and under the same conditions as are
prescribed under Rule 23 (Sec. 7, Rule 24).
NOTE: The deposition taken under Rule 24 is
admissible in evidence in any action subsequently
brought involving the same subject matter (Sec. 6,
Rule 24).
Scope of the examination of the deponent
Unless otherwise ordered by the court as provided
by Sec. 16 or 18, Rule 23, the deponent may be
examined regarding any matter, not privileged, which
is relevant to the subject of the pending action, whether
relating to the claim or defense of any other party,
including the:
1. Existence;
2. Description;
3. Nature;
4. Custody;
5. Condition;
6. Location of any books, documents, or other
tangible things; and
7. The identity and location of persons having
knowledge of relevant facts (Sec. 2, Rule 23).
Objections to admissibility
Subject to the provisions of Sec. 29, Rule 23,
objection may be made at the trial or hearing to
receiving in evidence any deposition or part thereof
for any reason
oral examination in the manner of taking the deposition in the
form of the questions or answers, in the oath or affirmation,
or in the conduct of the parties and errors of any kind
which might be obviated, removed, or cured if
promptly prosecuted, are waived unless reasonable
objection thereto is made at the taking of the
deposition;
5. As to form of written interrogatories – Objections to the form
of written interrogatories submitted under Secs. 25 and
26 are waived unless served in writing upon the party
propounding them within the time allowed for serving
succeeding cross or other interrogatories and within 3
days after service of the last interrogatories authorized;
6. As to manner of preparation – Errors and irregularities in the
manner in which the testimony is transcribed or the
deposition is prepared, signed, certified, sealed, indorsed,
transmitted, filed, or otherwise dealt with by the officer
under Secs. 17, 19, 20 and 26 are waived unless a motion to
suppress the deposition or some part thereof is made with
reasonable promptness after such defect is, or with due
diligence might have been, ascertained (Sec. 29, Rule 23).
Grounds for termination of deposition or limiting the scope
WHEN MAY OBJECTIONS
TO ADMISSIBILITY BE MADE
of examination
At any time during the taking of the deposition, on motion or
petition of any party or of the deponent, and upon showing that
the examination is conducted in:
1. Bad faith; 2. Such manner as unreasonably to annoy,
embarrass, or oppress the deponent party
(Sec. 18, Rule 23); or
3. When the constitutional privilege against
self- incrimination is invoked by deponent or
his counsel.

NOTE: If the order made terminates the

examination, it shall be resumed thereafter only
upon the order of the court in which the action is
pending. Upon demand of the objecting party or
deponent, the taking of the deposition shall be
suspended for the time necessary to make a notice
for an order. In granting or refusing such order, the
court may impose upon either party or upon the
witness the requirement to pay such costs or
expenses as the court may deem reasonable (Sec.
18, Rule 23).

Protection order vs.Motion to terminate or

limit examination

Protection Order (Sec. Motion to Terminate

16, Rule 23)
Provides protection to
the party or witness
before the taking of
deposition.
The Motion is filed
with the court in
which the action is
pending.
or Limit Examination
(Sec.
18, Rule 23)
Provides protection during
the taking of deposition.
Motion or petition is
filed with the court in
which the action is
pending or the RTC of the
place where the
deposition is being taken.

WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES
TO ADVERSE PARTIES

Purpose of interrogatories to parties

The framers of the new court rules intended that

the rules should provide ample facilities for
discovery of facts before trial so that surprise at the
trial and possible miscarriage of justice might be
avoided. A purpose of this rule was to obtain
admissions and thus limit subjects of controversy at
trial and avoid unnecessary testimony and waste of
time in preparation (Feria & Noche, 2013).

NOTE: The answers may now be used as judicial

admissions of the adverse party (Ibid.).

Interrogatories vs. Bill of particulars

Interrogatories Bill of Particulars
Interrogatories to parties Designed to clarify
are not directed to a ambiguities in a pleading
particular pleading. or to state with
Instead, they seek to sufficient definiteness
disclose all material allegations in a pleading.
and relevant facts from a It is therefore directed to
party (Sec. 1, Rule 25). a pleading (Sec. 1, Rule 12).

A party may properly A party may properly

seek disclosure of
matters of proof which
may later be made a
part of the records of
evidence.
seek disclosure only of
matters which define
the issues and become
a part of the pleadings.
 NOTE: If a motion to a bill of particulars is denied, answered by the same party (Sec. 4, Rule 25).
it will not bar the party to avail of modes of
discovery.

Q: Does an unsigned deposition have no force

and effect?

A: A deposition not signed does not preclude its

use during the trial. A DEPONENT’S SIGNATURE to
the deposition is not in all events indispensable since
the presence of signature goes primarily to the
form of deposition (Ayala Land v. Tagle, G.R. No.
153667, August 11, 2005).

Depositions upon written interrogatories under Sec. 25, Rule

23 vs. Interrogatories to parties under Rule 25

Depositions Interrogatories
Upon Written to Parties
Interrogatories (Rule 25)
to Parties (Sec.
25, Rule 23)
Deponent Party or ordinary Party only
witness
Procedure With intervention No intervention.
of the officer Written
authorized by interrogatories
the Court to are directed to
take deposition the party
himself
Not served upon Served directly
the adverse party upon the adverse
directly. They party (Sec. 1,
are instead Rule 25).
delivered to the
officer before
whom the
deposition is to
be taken (Sec. 26,
Rule 23).
Scope Direct, cross,
Only one set of
redirect, re-cross
interrogatories
Interrogato- No fixed time 15 days to
ries answer unless
extended
or reduced by the
court
Binding Effect Binding to anyone Binding only to
who is present the parties.
during the
Procedure in taking interrogatories

The mode of discovery is availed of by filing and

serving upon the adverse party written
interrogatories to be answered by the party served.
If the party is a juridical entity, it shall be
answered by any of its officers competent to
testify in its behalf (Sec. 1, Rule 25). The
interrogatories shall be answered fully in writing and
shall be signed and sworn to by the person making
them.

NOTE: No party may, without leave of court, serve

more than one set of interrogatories to be
 How to answer interrogatories
The interrogatories shall be answered fully in writing
and shall be signed and sworn to by the person
making them. The party upon whom the
interrogatories have been served shall file and serve
a copy of the answers on the party submitting the
interrogatories within 15 days after service thereof,
unless the court, on motion and for good cause
shown, extends or shortens the time (Sec. 2, Rule 25).
NOTE: The party against whom it is directed may
make objections to the interrogatories (Sec. 2, Rule
25).
Objections to the interrogatories
Objections shall be presented to the court within 10
days after service of the interrogatories. The filing
of the objections shall have the effect of deferring the
filing and service of the answer to the interrogatories
(Sec. 3, Rule 25).
Necessity of leave of court before a party may
be served with written interrogatories
It is necessary before answer has been served
because, at that time, the issues are not yet joined
and the disputed facts are not yet clear. However,
it is not necessary after answer has been served, for
the first set of interrogatories.
Scope and use of interrogatories
the filing of the application, or both of them, to
pay to the refusing party or deponent the
amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in
opposing the application, including attorney’s
fees (Sec. 1, Rule 29).
2. If a party or other witness refuses to be sworn
or refuses to answer any question after being
directed to do so by the court of the place in
which the deposition is being taken, the
refusal may be considered a contempt of that
court (Sec. 2, Rule 29).
3. If any party or an officer or managing agent of
a party refuses to obey an order made under
Sec. 1 of this Rule requiring him to answer
designated questions, or an order under Rule
27 to produce any document or other thing for
inspection, copying, or photographing or to
permit it to be done, or to permit entry upon
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SERVE
WRITTEN
land or other property, or an order made
under Rule 28 requiring him to submit to a
physical or mental examination, the court may
make such orders in regard to the refusal as are
just, and among others the following:
a. An order that the matters regarding which
the questions were asked, or the
character or description of the thing or
land, or the contents of the paper, or the
physical or mental condition of the party,
or any other designated facts shall be
Interrogatories may relate to any matters that can
be inquired into under Sec. 2 of Rule 23, and the
answers may be used for the same purposes
provided in Sec. 4 of the same Rule (Sec. 5, Rule 25).
CONSEQUENCES OF REFUSAL TO ANSWER
1. If a party or other deponent refuses to answer
any question upon oral examination, the
examination may be completed on other matters
or adjourned as the proponent of the question
may prefer. The proponent may thereafter
apply to the proper court of the place where the
deposition is being taken, for an order to compel
an answer. The same procedure may be availed
of when a party or a witness refuses to answer
any interrogatory submitted under Rules 23 or
25.
If the application is granted, the court shall
require the refusing party or deponent to
answer the question or interrogatory and if it
also finds that the refusal to answer was
without substantial justification, it may require
the refusing party or deponent or the counsel
advising the refusal, or both of them, to pay
the proponent the amount of the reasonable
expenses incurred in obtaining the order,
including attorney’s fees.
If the application is denied and the court finds
that it was filed without substantial justification,
the court may require the proponent or the
counsel advising
taken to be established for the purposes of the action
in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining
the order;
b. An order refusing to allow the disobedient party to
support or oppose designated claims or defenses or
prohibiting him from introducing in evidence designated
documents or things or items of testimony, or from
introducing evidence of physical or mental
condition;
c. An order striking out pleadings or parts thereof, or
staying further proceedings until the order is obeyed, or
dismissing the action or proceeding or any part
thereof, or rendering a judgment by default against the
disobedient party;
d. In lieu of any of the foregoing orders or in addition
thereto, an order directing the arrest of any party or
agent of a party for disobeying any of such orders
except an order to submit to a physical or mental
examination (Sec. 3, Rule 29).
GR: A party not served with written interrogatories may not be
compelled by the adverse party to give testimony in open court,
or to give a deposition pending appeal.
XPN: When allowed by the court and there is good cause shown
and the same is necessary to prevent a failure of justice (Sec. 6,
Rule 25).
Q: Spouses XY filed a complaint for nullification of
mortgage and foreclosure against XYZ Bank before the trial
court. Spouses XY filed a Motion for Issuance of Subpoena
Duces Tecum Ad Testificandum to
require XYZ Bank’s officers to appear as Spouses
XY’s initial witnesses during a hearing for the
presentation of their evidence-in-chief, and to
bring the documents relative to their loan with
Metrobank, as well as those covering the
extrajudicial foreclosure and sale of Spouses XY’s
land. XYZ Bank opposed arguing that its
officers may not be compelled to appear and
testify in court for the Spouses since they were
not initially served with written interrogatories.
RTC denied the Motion for Issuance of
Subpoena Duces Tecum Ad Testificandum
ruling that XYZ Bank and its officers are adverse
parties who cannot be summoned to testify
unless written interrogatories are first served
upon them. Is service of written interrogatories
upon Bank’s officers necessary before the latter
can be subpoenaed?

A: YES. As a rule, in civil cases, the procedure of

calling the adverse party to the witness stand is
not allowed, unless written interrogatories are first
served upon the latter. The rule aims to prevent
fishing expeditions and needless delays; it is there
to maintain order and facilitate the conduct of trial.
It will be presumed that a party who does not serve
written interrogatories on the adverse party
beforehand will most likely be unable to elicit facts
useful to its case if it later opts to call the adverse
party to the witness stand as its witness (Spouses
Afulugencia v. Metropolitan Bank, G.R. No. 185145, February
05, 2014, Del Castillo, J.).

REQUEST FOR ADMISSION

Matters requested to be admitted by the

adverse party

1. Genuineness of any material and relevant

document described in and exhibited with the
request; or
2. Truth of any material and relevant matter of fact
set forth in the request (Sec. 1, Rule 26).

The answer to a request for admission properly

served which was signed and sworn to by the
counsel of the party so requested is sufficient
compliance with this rule, especially in the light of
counsel’s authority under Secs. 21 and 23, Rule 138
(Nestle Philippines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 102404, February 1,
2002).

When request for admission is made

At any time after issues have been joined, a party

may file and serve upon any other party a written
request for the admission by the latter (Sec. 1, Rule
26).

Responses to a request for admission

When the party to whom the request is directed files

and serves upon the party requesting the admission
a sworn statement either denying specifically the
matters of which an admission is requested or
setting forth in detail the reasons why he cannot
truthfully either admit or deny those matters (Sec. 2, Rule 26).
 IMPLIED ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY;
CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO ANSWER
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION
PRODUCTION OR
INSPECTION OF
admission on the adverse party of material and
GR: Each of the matters of which an admission is relevant facts at issue which are, or ought to be,
requested shall be deemed admitted. within the personal knowledge of the latter, shall
not be permitted to present evidence on such facts
XPN: The request for admission must be served (Sec. 5, Rule 26).
directly upon the party; otherwise, the party to
whom the request is directed cannot be deemed to
have admitted the genuineness of any relevant
document described in and exhibited with the
request or relevant matters of fact set forth therein
on account of failure to answer the request for
admission (Briboneria v. CA, G.R. No. 101682, December
14, 1992).

Period within which to answer request for

admission

Under the Rules, each of the matters of which an

admission is requested shall be deemed admitted
unless within a period designated in the request
which shall not be less than 15 days after service
thereof, or within such further time as the court may
allow on motion, the party to whom the request is
directed files and serves upon the party requesting
the admission a sworn statement either denying
specifically the matter of which an admission is
requested or setting forth in detail the reason why
he cannot truthfully either admit or deny those
matters (Sec. 2, Rule 26).

EFFECT OF ADMISSION

Any admission made by a party pursuant to such

request is for the purpose of the pending action
only and shall not constitute an admission by him
for any other purpose nor may the same be used
against him in any other proceeding (Sec. 3, Rule 26).

Objections to any request for admission

They shall be submitted to the court by the party

requested within the period for and prior to the
filing of his sworn statement. The period for
compliance to the request for admission shall be
deferred until such objections are resolved, which
resolution shall be made as early as practicable
[Sec. 2(b), Rule 26].

Withdrawal of admission

The court may allow the party making the admission

to withdraw or amend the admission upon such
terms as may be just (Sec. 4, Rule 26).

EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE AND

SERVE REQUEST FOR

Unless otherwise allowed by the court for good

cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice a
party who fails to file and serve a request for
 Court order under this mode of discovery be received in evidence (Riano, 2014).

Upon motion of any party showing good cause 2. Should constitute or contain evidence material
therefor, the court in which an action is pending to any matter involved in the action and which
may order any party to: are in his (the party ordered) possession,
custody, or control (Sec. 1, Rule 27); and
1. Produce and permit the inspection and copying or 3. In the petition, the papers and documents to be
photographing, by or on behalf of the moving produced must be sufficiently described.
party, or of any designated documents, papers,
books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or Production or inspection of documents or
tangible things, not privileged, which constitute or things under Rule 27 vs. Subpoena duces tecum
contain evidence material to any matter
involved in the action and which are in his Production or Inspection Subpoena Duces
possession, custody or control; or Tecum
2. Permit entry upon designated land or other of Documents or Things
property in his possession or control for the Essentially a mode of Means of compelling
purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or discovery. production of evidence.
photographing the property or any designated
relevant object or operation thereon (Sec. 1, Rule Limited to the parties to It may be directed to
27). the action. any person whether a
party or
Limitations on the request for production or not.
inspection of documents or things Issued only upon Issued upon an ex parte
motion with notice to application.
1. Should not be privileged; the adverse party.

NOTE: On the ground of public policy, the NOTE: This mode of discovery does not authorize
rules providing for production and inspection of the opposing party or the clerk of court or other
books and papers do not authorize the functionaries of the court to distrain the articles
production or inspection of privileged matter; or deprive the person who produced the same of
that is books and papers which, because of their their possession, even temporarily (Tanda v. Aldaya,
confidential and privileged character, could not G.R. No. L- 13423, November 23, 1959).
the production or inspection of documents and things and
the motion must show good cause supporting the same;and
Q: Corporation (BTC) for the latter’s failure to pay 2. The order shall specify the time, place and manner of making
for its purchases of industrial chemicals. In its the inspection and taking copies and photographs, and may
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATION prescribe such terms and conditions as are just (Sec. 1, Rule 27).
OF PERSONS
answer, BTC contended that it refused to pay When available
Refusal to answer any
because CCC misrepresented that the products it
question upon oral
sold belonged to a new line, when in fact they It may be ordered in an action in which the physical or
examination
were identical with CCC’s existing products. To mental condition of a party is in controversy (Sec. 1, Rule 28).
substantiate its defense, BTC filed a motion to
1. Order to compel an answer;
compel CCC to give a detailed list of the Examples:
2. Contempt;
products’ ingredients and chemical 1. An action for annulment of a contract where the
3. Require payment of reasonable fees incurred
components, relying on the right to avail of ground relied upon is insanity;
by the proponent;
the modes of discovery allowed under Rule 27. 2. A petition for guardianship of a person alleged to be
4. Designated facts shall be taken to be
CCC objected, invoking confidentiality of the insane; or
established for the purposes of the action in
information sought by BTC. Resolve BTC’s motion An action withto recover damages
of theforparty
3. accordance personal injury
the claim
with reasons. where the issue is the extent of the injuries of the
obtaining the order.
plaintiff (Riano, 2014).
5. Dismiss the action or the proceeding;
A: BTC’s motion should be denied.A motion for
6. Render a Judgment by default against
production or inspection of documents or things Procedure to avail physical and mental examination of
the disobedient party;
under Rule 27 is subject to the requirement that the persons
7. Refuse to allow the disobedient party to
documents or things should not be privileged. Here,
support or oppose claims or defenses;
what are sought to be produced is a detailed list of an 1. A motion must be filed showing good cause for the
8. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of
industrial product’s ingredients and chemical examination, with notice to the other parties as well aside
the disobedient party;
components which are trade secrets and thus from the party to be examined (Sec. 2, Rule 28);
9. Stay further proceedings
specify theuntil order is obeyed;
privileged. Hence BTC’s motion should be dismissed 2. The motion shall time, place, manner, conditions
or
(Air Philippines Corp. v. Pennswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835, 13 and scope of the examination and by the person/s by whom
10. Order
it is made the arrest
(Sec. of28);
2, Rule the refusing party.
December 2007).
Refusal to produce document or thing for
Procedure to avail of the production orinspection inspection, copying or
of documents or things photographing

1. A motion must be filed by the party seeking 1. Designated facts shall be taken to be
established for the purposes of the action in
accordance with the claim of the party
obtaining the order;
3. The party examined may request the
party causing the examination to be
made to deliver to him a copy of a
detailed written report of the
examining physician setting out his
findings and conclusions (Sec. 3, Rule
28); and
4. The party causing the examination
to be made shall be entitled upon
request to receive from the party
examined a like report of any
examination, previously
thereafter made, of the same mental
or physical condition (Sec. 3, Rule
28).
Effect if the party examined requests
and obtains a report on the results
of the examination
1. He has to furnish the other party a copy of the
report of any previous or subsequent
examination of the same physical and mental
condition (Sec. 3, Rule 28);
2. He waives any privilege he may have in that
action or any other involving the same
controversy regarding the testimony of every
other person who has so examined or may
thereafter examine him (Sec. 4, Rule 28).
Effect of refusal to deliver the report
or
If a party refuses to deliver the report upon request
to the person causing the examination to be made,
the court may require its delivery on such terms as
are just.
If the physician refuses or fails to make a report,
the court may exclude his testimony (Sec. 3, Rule 28).
CONSEQUENCES OF REFUSAL TO COMPLY
WITH MODES OF DISCOVERY
the court may render a summary
disobedient party;judgment (Rule 35);
3. Where the4. parties
Dismisshave
theentered
action into a compromise
or the proceeding;or an amicable settlement either during the pre-trial or while the trial is
in progress
5. (Rule
Render18; Art. 2028, NCC);
a Judgment by default against the
disobedient party; 4. Where the complaint has been dismissed with
6. Stay further proceedings until order is prejudice (Sec. 5, Rule 16; Sec. 3, Rule17; Sec. 5,
obeyed; Rule 7);
7. Render a Judgment by default against the 5. Where the parties agree in writing, upon the
disobedient party; or facts involved in the litigation, and submit the
8. Order the arrest of the refusing party. case for judgment on the facts agreed upon,
Refusal to submit to without the introduction of evidence. If,
Physical or Mental however, there is no agreement as to all the
examination facts in the case, trial may be held only as to
the disputed facts (Sec. 6, Rule 30);
1. Designated facts shall be taken to be 6. Where the civil case falls under the operation of
established for the purposes of the action in the Rules on Summary Procedure (Rule 17); and
accordance with the claim of the party 7. When the case falls under the Rule on Small
obtaining the order; Claims.
2. Prohibit the disobedient party to introduce
evidence of physical and mental conditions; Trial vs. Hearing
3. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of
the disobedient party; Trial Hearing
4. Dismiss the action or the proceeding; Reception of evidence Not confined to trial
5. Render a Judgment by default against the and other processes. and presentation of
disobedient party; evidence but embraces
6. Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed; several stages of
or litigation, including pre-
7. Render a Judgment by default against the trial and determination
disobedient party. of granting or denying a
Refusal to the request motion (Trocio v. Labayo,
for admission by adverse G.R. No. L-23363, May 31,
1967).
party
The period for the Does not necessarily imply
introduction of evidence presentation of evidence
1. Require payment of reasonable fees incurred by
by both parties. in open court but the
the proponent (Secs. 1-4); and
parties are afforded
2. Each of the matters of which an admission is
the opportunity to be
requested is deemed admitted (Sec. 5, Rule 26).
heard.
NOTE: The remedy of the party, in this case, is to depositions and other papers, there is actually
file a motion to be relieved of the consequences of no genuine issue,
the implied admission. The amendment of the
complaint per se cannot set aside the legal effects
of the request for admission since its materiality

TRIAL

It is a judicial process of investigating and

determining the legal controversies starting with the
production of evidence by the plaintiff and ending
with his closing arguments. Should there be no
amicable settlement or a compromise forged
between the parties, the case will be set for trial
(Riano, 2011).

Necessity of trial

GR: Trial is necessary when an issue exists.

Decisions should not be made without trial.

XPN: There is no need for trial in the following

cases:

1. Where the pleadings of the parties tender no

issue at all, a judgment on the pleadings may be
directed by the court (Rule 34);
2. Where from the pleadings, affidavits,
 Rule on notice of trial
1. Habeas corpus cases;
Upon entry of a case in the trial calendar, the clerk 2. Election cases;
shall notify the parties of the date of its trial in such 3. Special civil actions; and
manner as shall ensure his receipt of that notice at 4. Those so required by law to be preferred (Sec.
least 5 days before such date (Sec.1, Rule 30). 1, Rule 20)

Cases where the clerk of court gives preference
in scheduling of cases
In calendaring cases, the clerk of court shall give
preference to:
ADJOURNMENTS AND POSTPONEMENTS
GR: The court may adjourn a trial from day to day,
and to any stated time, as the expeditious and
convenient transaction of business may require.

XPN: However, the court has no power to adjourn a reproduction, or pictures, failing which the latter shall not be
trial for a period longer than 1 month from each admitted.
adjournment, nor more than 3 months in all.
This is without prejudice to the introduction of secondary
XPN to XPN: When authorized in writing by the evidence in place of the original when allowed by existing rules.
Court Administrator (Sec. 2, Rule 30)
NOTE: If the adverse party admits the facts sought to be given
REQUISITES OFMOTION TO POSTPONE TRIAL in evidence, the trial shall not be postponed even if he objects
or reserves the right to their admissibility.
FOR ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE
FOR ILLNESS OF PARTY OR COUNSEL
1. A motion for postponement must be filed;
2. The motion must be supported by an affidavit 1. A motion for postponement must be filed;
or sworn certification showing: 2. The motion must be supported by an affidavit or sworn
certification showing:
a. The evidence is material or relevant; and
b. That due diligence has been used to procure
it
(Sec. 3, Rule 30).

NOTE: Sec. 3, Rule 30 has already been modified by

the Judicial Affidavit Rule (A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC),
effective January 1, 2013. The pertinent provision
thereof states:

Section 2. Submission of Judicial Affidavits and

Exhibits in lieu of direct testimonies. - (a) The
parties shall file with the court and serve on the
adverse party, personally or by licensed courier
service, not later than five days before pre-trial or
preliminary conference or the scheduled hearing
with respect to motions and incidents, the following:

(1) The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which

shall take the place of such witnesses' direct
testimonies; and

(2) The parties' documentary or object evidence, if

any, which shall be attached to the judicial
affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C, and so
on in the case of the complainant or the plaintiff,
and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of the
respondent or the defendant.

(b) Should a party or a witness desire to keep the

original document or object evidence in his
possession, he may, after the same has been
identified, marked as exhibit, and authenticated,
warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or
reproduction attached to such affidavit is a faithful
copy or reproduction of that original. In addition,
the party or witness shall bring the original
document or object evidence for comparison during
the preliminary conference with the attached copy,

a. The presence of the party or
counsel at the trial is
indispensable; and
b. That the character of his illness
is such as to render his non-
attendance excusable (Sec. 4,
Rule 30).
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
Effect of agreement on statement of facts
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 facts in
issue, the trial shall be held as to the
disputed facts in such order as the court
shall prescribe (Sec. 6, Rule 30).
Stipulations of facts in civil cases vs. Stipulation of
facts incriminal cases
Civil Cases Criminal Cases
May be signed by the Must be signed both by
counsel alone who has the counsel and the
a special power of accused.
attorney.
May be made verbally or It must always be in
in writing. writing.
ORDER OF TRIAL; REVERSAL OF ORDER
Procedure in Trial
Subject to the provisions of Sec. 2, Rule 31, and
unless the court for special reasons otherwise
directs, the trial shall be limited to the issues stated
in the pre-trial order and shall proceed as follows:

Plaintiff shall adduce evidence in support of his
cause of action/complaint.
NOTE: If several defendants or third-party
defendants and so forth having separate defenses
appear by different counsel, the court shall
determine the relative order of presentation of
their evidence (Sec. 5, Rule 30).

Reverse order of trial

Where the defendant, in his answer, relies upon

Defendant shall then adduce evidence in support
of his defense, counterclaim, cross-claim and
third party complaint.
an affirmative defense, a reverse order of trial shall
take place. Since the defendant admits the plaintiff’s
claim but seeks to avoid liability based on his
affirmative defense he shall proceed first to prove
his exemption (Yu v. Mapayo, G.R. No. L-29742, March 29,
1972).

CONSOLIDATION OR SEVERANCE
OF HEARING OR TRIAL

Third party defendant if any shall adduce Consolidation vs. Severance

evidence of his defense, counterclaim, cross-
claim, and fourth-party complaint. Consolidation Severance
Involves several actions Contemplates a single
having a common question action having a number
of law or fact which of claims,
may be jointly tried counterclaims, cross-
(Sec.1, Rule 31). claims, third-party
Fourth party, and so forth, if any, shall complaints, or issues
adduce evidence material facts pleaded which may be separately
by them. tried (Sec. 2, Rule 31).
Consolidation

1. Actions involve a common question of law or

fact are pending before the court;
2. The court may order a joint hearing or trial of
Parties against whom any counterclaim or cross-
any or
claim has been pleaded, shall adduce evidence in
all the matters in issue;
support of their defense, in the order to be
3. The court may order all the actions consolidated
prescribed by the court.
and it may make orders concerning proceedings
as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay
(Sec. 1, Rule 31).

Kinds of consolidation of cases

1.
Parties may then respectively adduce rebutting
evidence only, unless the court, for good
reasons and in the furtherance of justice,
permits them to adduce evidence upon their
original case.
2.
Upon admission of the evidence, the case shall
3.
be deemed submitted for decision, unless the
court directs the parties to argue or to
submit their respective memoranda or any
further pleadings.
Quasi-consolidation
- All, except one of several actions are
stayed until one is tried, in which case the
judgment in one trial is conclusive as to the
others.
Actual consolidation
- Several actions are combined into one.
The cases lose their identity and become a
single action in which a single judgment is
rendered.
Consolidation for trial
- Several actions are ordered to be tried
together, but each retains its separate
character and requires the entry of a
separate judgment.

Rule on consolidation of cases

GR: Consolidation is discretionary upon the court to

avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against oppression
 or abuse, prevent delay, clear congested dockets,
and simplify the work of the trial court and save
unnecessary costs and expenses.

XPN: Consolidation becomes a matter of duty when:

10 days from the termination of the hearing (Ibid.).

1. Two or more cases are pending before the TRIAL BY COMMISSIONERS

same judge; or
2. If cases are filed with the different branches of
the same RTC and one of such case has not
been partially tried (Raymundo v. Felipe, G.R.
No. L-30887, December 24, 1971).

Suspension of civil actions

1. If willingness to discuss a possible compromise

is expressed by one or both parties; or
2. If it appears that one of the parties, before
the commencement of the action or proceeding,
offered to discuss a possible compromise but
the other party refused the offer (Sec. 8, Rule 30;
Art. 2030, NCC).

Q: Doris filed a complaint for ejectment in the

MTC on the ground of non-payment of rentals
against Minda. After 2 days, Minda filed in
the RTC a complaint against Doris for specific
performance to enforce the option to purchase
the parcel of land subject of the ejectment case.
What is the effect of Minda's action on Doris'
complaint? Explain. (2000 Bar)

A: There is no effect. The ejectment case involves

possession de facto only. The action to enforce the
option to purchase will not suspend the action of
ejectment for non-payment of rentals (Wilmon Auto
Supply Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 97637, April 10, 1992).

What and when to hold separate trials

The court, in furtherance of convenience or to

avoid prejudice, may order a separate trial of any
claim, cross- claim, counterclaim, or third-party
complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number
of claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party
complaints or issues. (Sec 2, Rule 31)

DELEGATION OF RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE

GR: The judge shall personally receive and resolve

the evidence to be adduced by the parties.

XPN: The reception of evidence may be delegated to

the Clerk of Court, who is a member of the bar,
under the following conditions:

1. In default hearings;
2. Ex parte hearings; or
3. In any case where the parties agree in writing
(Sec. 9, Rule 30)

NOTE: Said clerk shall have no power to rule on

objections to any question or to admission of
evidence or exhibits; and he shall submit his report
and transcripts of the proceedings, together with
the objections to be resolved by the court, within
Commissioner and
4. Submission of accounting by executors or
A person to whom a case pending in court administrator.
is referred, for him to take testimony,
hear the parties and report thereon to
the court, and upon whose report, if Referral of a case to a Commissioner (by
confirmed, judgment is rendered. consent of the parties)

Delegation to clerk of court under By written consent of both parties, the court may
Rule 30 vs. Trial by commissioner order any or all of the issues in a case to be
under Rule 32 referred to a commissioner to be agreed upon by
the parties or to be appointed by the court (Sec. 1,
Delegation to Clerk of Trial by Rule 32).
Commissioner Court
Delegation is made Commissioner can be Cases where there is a valid referral to a
during trial. appointed even after Commissioner even without the consent of
the case has become the parties (reference by order upon motion)
final and executory.
1. When the trial of an issue of fact requires
Clerk of court must be a Commissioner need not the examination of a long account on either
lawyer. be a lawyer. side;
2. When the taking of an account is necessary for
Clerk of court cannot rule Commissioner can rule the information of the court before
on objections or on the on objections or on judgment;
admissibility of evidence. admissibility of evidence. 3. When a question of fact, other than upon the
pleadings, arises upon motion or otherwise, in
Cases where there is mandatory trial any stage of a case; or
by Commissioner 4. For carrying a judgment or order into effect
(Sec. 2, Rule 32).
1. Expropriation (Rule 67);
POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONER
2. Partition (Rule 69);
3. Settlement of estate of a deceased
1. Power to regulate the proceedings in every
person in case of contested claims;
hearing before him;

the evidence presented before him (Sec. 9, Rule 32).

REFERENCE BY CONSENT OR
ORDERED ON MOTION
2. Do all acts and take all measures necessary or
proper for the efficient performance of his duties NOTE: The commissioner’s report is not binding
under the order of reference; upon the court which is free to adopt, modify, or
3. Issue subpoenas ad testificandum and duces reject, in whole or in part, the report. The court
tecum; may receive further evidence or recommit the
4. Swear witnesses; and report with instructions (Sec. 11, Rule 32; Baltazar
5. Rule upon the admissibility of evidence (Sec.3, v. Limpin, 49 Phil. 39).
Rule 32)
Notice of filing of the report
Effect of failure of parties to appear before a
commissioner Upon the filing of the report, the parties shall be
notified by the clerk, and they shall be allowed 10
The commissioner may proceed ex parte or, in his days within which to signify grounds of objections
discretion, adjourn the proceedings to a future to the findings of the report, if they so desire.
day, giving notice to the absent party or his
counsel of the adjournment (Sec.6, Rule 32). Objections to the report based upon grounds which
were available to the parties during the proceedings
COMMISSIONER’S REPORT; NOTICE TO PARTIES before the commissioner, other than objections to
AND HEARING ON THE REPORT the findings and conclusions therein set forth, shall
not be considered by the court unless they were
Commissioner’s Report made before the commissioner (Sec.10, Rule 32).

Upon completion of the trial or hearing or
proceeding before the commissioner, he shall file
with the court his report in writing upon the matters
submitted to him by the order of reference. He shall
attach in his report all exhibits, affidavits,
depositions, papers and the transcript, if any, of
NOTE: GR: Notice of the filing of the report must
be sent to the parties for the purpose of giving
them an opportunity to present their
objections (Santos v. Guzman, 45 Phil. 646). The failure
to grant the parties, in due form, this opportunity
to object, may, in some instances, constitute a
serious error in violation of their substantial rights
(Gov’t. v. Osorio, 50 Phil. 864).
XPN: The rule, however, is not absolute. In Manila
Trading and Supply Co. v. Phil. Labor Union (71 Phil. 539),
it was ruled that although the parties were not
notified of the filing of the commissioner’s reports,
and the court failed to set said report for hearing,
if the parties who appeared before the
commissioner were duly represented by counsel
and given an opportunity to be
heard, the requirement of due process has been
satisfied, and a decision on the basis of such report,
with the other evidence of the case is a decision
which meets the requirements of fair and open
hearing.
Hearing on Commissioner’s Report
Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days
referred to in the preceding section, the report shall
be set for hearing, after which the court shall issue
an order adopting, modifying, or rejecting the report
in whole or in part, or recommitting it with
instructions, or requiring the parties to present
further evidence before the commissioner or the
court (Sec. 11, Rule 32).
In the hearing to be conducted on the
commissioner’s report, the court will review only
so much as may be drawn in question by proper
objections. It is not expected to rehear the case
upon the entire record (Kreidt v. McCullough and Co.,
37 Phil. 474).
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
When to file demurrer to evidence
After the plaintiff has completed the presentation of
his evidence, the defendant may move for dismissal
on the ground that upon the facts and the law the
plaintiff has shown no right to relief.
Nature of demurrer to evidence
A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss on
the ground of insufficiency of evidence and is presented
after the plaintiff rests his case. It is an objection by
one of the parties in an action, to the effect that the
evidence which his adversary produced is
insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to
make out a case or sustain the issue. The
evidence contemplated by the rule on demurrer is
that which pertains to the merits of the case
(Gonzales v. Bugaay G.R. No. 173008, February 22, 2012).
Motion to dismiss vs. Demurrer to evidence
 Motion to Demurrer to
Dismiss Evidence
(Rule 16) (Rule 33)
When to Before filing of After the plaintiff
file answer. rests its case or
after the
completion of the
presentation of
evidence.

Grounds The 10 grounds That upon the

enumerated in facts and the
Rule 16. law, the plaintiff
has shown no
right to relief.

If denied The defendant The defendant

may file his may present his
showing that upon the facts and the law, the plaintiff has
responsive evidence. shown no right to relief.
pleading.
EFFECT OF DENIAL
If granted The complaint The complaint
may be refiled may NOT be 1. The defendant shall have the right to present his
depending on the filed. The evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 33). This means that the denial of the
ground remedy of the demurrer to evidence does not deprive the defendant the
plaintiff is to opportunity to adduce evidence in his behalf;
of appeal from the 2. The court shall set the date for the reception of the
dismissal. dismissal. defendant’s evidence-in-chief. It should not proceed to grant
the relief demanded by the plaintiff (Northwest Airlines,
Q: ABS Co. is the operator of several buses. One of Inc. v.CA, G.R. No. 112573, February 9, 1995);
the buses owned by ABS Co. rammed upon a dump
truck causing the instantaneous death of Nilo, one
of the passengers of the ill-fated bus.
Consequently, Nestor, son of Nilo, filed a
complaint against ABS Co. for damages. After
Nestor had rested his case, ABS Co. filed a
demurrer to evidence, contending that
Nestor's evidence is insufficient because it did
not show (1) that ABS Co. was negligent and (2)
that such negligence was the proximate cause of
the collision. Should the court grant or deny
defendant's demurrer to evidence? Reason
briefly. (2004 Bar)

A: NO. The court should not grant defendant’s

demurrer to evidence. Under the Rules of Court, after
the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his
evidence, the defendant may move for dismissal on
the ground that upon the facts and the law the
plaintiff has shown no right to relief. Here, Nestor
has shown that he is entitled to the relief he is
asking for. ABS Co. is a common carrier. Under
Art.1756 of the Civil Code, in case of death of or
injuries to passengers, common carriers are presumed
to have been at fault or to have acted negligently,
unless they prove that they observed extraordinary
diligence. Proof that the defendant was negligent
and that such negligence was the proximate cause of
the collision is not required. Thus, without proof that
ABS Co. has exercised extraordinary diligence, the
presumption of negligence stands.

GROUNDS

The only ground for demurrer to evidence is upon

3. An order denying a demurrer to
evidence is not appealable because
it is interlocutory;

NOTE: It can be subject to petition

for certiorari in case of grave abuse of
discretion or an oppressive exercise
of judicial authority (Katigbak v.
Sandiganbayan,G.R. No. 140183 July 10,
2003).

Denial of a demurrer to evidence

in an election case

A party who files a demurrer to

evidence that is subsequently
denied in an election case cannot
insist on the right to present
evidence. The provision of the Rules
governing demurrer to evidence
does not apply to an election case
(Gementiza v. COMELEC G.R. No. 140884,
March 6, 2001). The Rules, under the
express dictum in Sec. 4 of Rule 1
“shall not apply to election cases,
land registration, cadastral,
naturalization and insolvency
proceeding” (Riano, 2014).

EFFECT OF GRANT

1. The case shall be dismissed;

NOTE: The plaintiff may file an

appeal and if that appeal was
granted (reversed the order of
dismissal), the defendant loses his
right to present evidence (Sec.1, Rule
33; Republic v. Tuvera, G.R. No. 148246,
February 16, 2007).

2. Upon appeal, the appellate court

reversing the order granting the
demurrer should not remand the case
to the trial court. Instead, it should
render judgment based on the
evidence submitted by the plaintiff
(Radiowealth Finance Corporation v. Del
Rosario, G.R. No. 138739, July 6, 2000).

WAIVER OF RIGHT TO PRESENT

EVIDENCE

If the demurrer is granted but on

appeal the order of dismissal is reversed,
the defendant is deemed to have waived
his right to present evidence (Sec.1, Rule
33).
 Motion for Demurrer Motion for Demurrer
Denied Granted but Reversed on
Appeal
Denial is interlocutory, Order of the court is an
hence, not appealable. Sec. adjudication on the
1, Rule 36 (that merits. Hence, the
judgment should state requirement in Sec. 1,
clearly and distinctly the Rule 36 should be
facts and the law on complied with.
which it is based),
will not apply.

DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE IN A CIVIL CASE versus DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL CASE

(1991, 1996, 2001, 2003, 2007 Bar)

Civil Case Criminal Case

How filed Afterthe plaintiff has completed the The court may dismiss the action on the ground of
 presentation of his evidence, the
defendant may move for dismissal on
the ground that upon the facts and the
law the plaintiff has shown no right to
relief (Sec. 1, Rule 33).
Leave of court Not required
If granted The plaintiff may appeal from the order
of dismissal of the case (Sec. 1, Rule 33).
If denied The defendant may proceed to adduce
his evidence
If the plaintiff If plaintiff appeals and judgment is
appeals from the reversed by the appellate court, it will
order of decide the case on the basis of the
dismissal plaintiff’s evidence with the consequence
that the defendant already loses his right
to present evidence. No res
judicata in dismissal due to demurrer.
JUDGMENTS AND FINAL
ORDERS
Judgment
It is the final ruling by a court of competent
jurisdiction regarding the rights or other matters
submitted to it in an action or proceeding
(Macahilig v. Heirs of Garcia M. Magalit, G.R. No. 141423,
November 15, 2000).
It is the court’s official and final consideration and
determination of the respective rights and obligations of
the parties (46 AM Jur 2d, Judgments SS1).
NOTE: “Judgment” is normally synonymous with
“decision” (Tung Chin Hui v. Rodriguez, G.R. No.
141938, April 2, 2001).
Judgment may be understood in 2 senses:
1. Judgment that disposes of a case in a manner that
leaves nothing more to be done by the court in
respect thereto- In this sense, a final judgment
is distinguished from an interlocutory order
which does not finally terminate or dispose of
the case. It has also the effect of ending the
litigation, and an aggrieved party may then
appeal from the judgment; and
2. Judgment that is no longer appealable and is already
capable of being executed because the period for
appeal has elapsed without a party having perfected
an appeal, or it has already been resolved by a
highest possible tribunal- In this sense, the
judgment is commonly referred to as one
that is final and executory (Riano, 2014).
insufficiency of evidence (1) On its own
initiative after giving the prosecution the
opportunity to be heard or (2) Upon demurrer
to evidence filed by the accused with or
without leave of court (Sec. 23, Rule 119).
With or Without (Sec. 23, Rule 119)
The plaintiff cannot make an appeal from the
order of dismissal due to the constitutional
prohibition against double jeopardy
The defendant may adduce his evidence only if
the demurrer is filed with leave of court.
If there was no leave of court, accused can
no longer present his evidence and submits the
case for decision based on the prosecution’s
evidence (Sec. 23, Rule 119).
If the court finds the prosecution’s evidence
insufficient, it will grant the demurrer by
rendering judgment acquitting the accused.
Judgment of acquittal is not appealable because
double jeopardy sets in.
Action of Courts act upon facts and issues not
pleaded by the parties
It is vital to keep in mind that in the process of
rendering judgment or in resolving controversies,
courts can only consider facts and issued pleaded by
the parties. Courts,
as well as magistrates presiding over them are
not omniscient. They can only act on the facts and
issues presented before their own personal
knowledge for evidence. Nor may they take notice
of matters except those expressly provided as
subjects of mandatory judicial notice (Social Justice
Society v. Atienza, G.R. No. 156052, February 13, 2008).
Kinds of judgment
1. Judgment upon compromise – It is one conferred
on the basis of a compromise agreement
entered into between the parties;
2. Judgment by confession – It is one rendered by
the court when a party expressly agrees to
the other party’s claim or acknowledges the
validity of the claim against him;
3. Judgment upon the merits – It is one that is
rendered after consideration of the evidence
submitted by the parties during the trial of the
case;
4. Clarificatory judgment – It is rendered to clarify
an ambiguous judgment or one difficult to comply
with;
5. Judgment nunc pro tunc (Now for then) – A
judgment intended to enter into the record the
acts which had already been done, but which
do not appear in the records. Its only function is
to record some act of the court which was
done at a former time, but which was not then
recorded, in order to make the record speak
the truth, without any changes in substance or
any material respect;
 6. Judgment sin perjuicio – Judgment without a to be later supplemented by the final judgment.
statement of the facts in support of its conclusion This is not allowed;

7. Judgment by default (Sec. 3, Rule 9) – Rendered

by the court following a default order or that the claims against issues material to the
after it received, ex parte, plaintiff’s each of them could claim has been made.
evidence; have been the subject The action shall proceed
8. Judgment on the pleadings (Rule 34) – Proper of a separate suit, and as to the remaining
when an answer fails to tender an issue the judgment for or claims.
because of a general or insufficient denial of against one of them will
the material allegations of the complaint or not necessarily affect
when the answer admits the material the other.
allegations of the adverse party's pleading;
9. Summary judgment (Rule 35) – One granted by NOTE: A several
the court for the prompt disposition of civil judgment is not proper
actions wherein it clearly appears that there in actions against
exists no genuine issue or controversy as to any solidary debtors.
material fact;
10. Several judgment (Sec. 4, Rule 36) – It is one Judgment on Compromise
rendered by a court against one or more
defendants and not against all of them, leaving Judgment on compromise is a judgment on the
the action to proceed against the others; merits. It has the effect of res judicata and is
11. Separate judgment (Sec. 5, Rule 36) – It is one immediately executory and not appealable. But it
rendered disposing of a claim among several may be set aside on grounds provided under Art.
others presented in a case, after a 2038, NCC, e.g. mistake, fraud, violence, intimidation,
determination of the issues material to a undue influence or falsity of documents (Aromin v.
particular claim and all counterclaims arising Floresca, G.R. No. 160994, July 27, 2006).
out of the transaction or occurrence which is the
subject matter of said claim; Q: An issue arose between Cathay and Ayala
12. Special judgment (Sec. 11, Rule 39) – One which pertaining to easement of right of way. The
can only be complied with by the judgment issue
obligor
because of his personal qualifications or
circumstances or one that requires the performance Several JudgmentSeparate Judgment
of an act other than:

a. Payment of money; and

b. Sale of real and personal property;

13. Judgment for specific acts(Sec. 10, Rule 39) –

Applicable in cases of:

a. Conveyance, delivery of deeds, or other

specific acts, vesting title;
b. Sale of real or personal property;
c. Delivery or restitution of real property;
d. Removal of improvements on property
subject of execution; or
e. Delivery of personal property;

14. Judgment on demurrer to evidence(Rule 33) – A

judgment rendered by the court dismissing a
case upon motion of the defendant, made after
plaintiff has rested his case, on the ground
that upon the facts presented by the plaintiff
and the law on the matter, plaintiff has not
shown any right to relief;
15. Conditional judgment – It is one the effectivity
of which depends upon the occurrence or
non- occurrence of an event;
16. Final judgment – One which disposes of the
whole subject matter or terminates the
particular proceedings or action, leaving
nothing to be done by the court but to enforce
by execution what has been determined.

Several judgments vs. Separate Judgments

Proper where the Proper when more than
liability of each party is one claim for relief is
clearly separable and presented in an action
distinct and
reached the court, but before trial,
the parties entered into a res judicata between the parties. Once a
compromise agreement, which was
later on approved by the court. The
agreement allows Cathay an
easement of right of way on the
condition, among others, that it will not
construct a high-rise building. Breach
Cathay’s part to comply with its
commitment entitles Ayala to suspend
or withdraw the easement.Cathay
breached its commitment when its
plans showed construction of high-rise
building. This prompted Ayala to file a
Motion of Execution with Writ of
Injunction. The Motion was granted
by the trial court ordering the
execution of the compromise
agreement and enjoining Cathay from
continuing its development project. Is
the trial court’s action proper?
A: NO. A compromise agreement has the effect of
compromise agreement is approved by a final
order of the court, it transcends its identity as a
mere contract binding only upon the parties thereto,
as it becomes a judgment that is subject to execution
in accordance with the Rules of Court. Judges,
therefore, have the ministerial and mandatory duty
to implement it and in implementing a compromise
agreement, the courts cannot modify, impose
terms different from the terms of the agreement, or
set aside the compromises and reciprocal concessions
made in good faith by the parties without gravely
abusing their discretion. The trial court’s order
enjoining construction of Cathay detracts from the
compromise agreement which only provides two
remedies against Ayala: to either suspend or
withdraw the easement (Cathay Land, Inc. v. Ayala
Land, Inc., G.R. No. 210209, August 9, 2017, Del Castillo,
J.).
Judgment upon compromise v s. Judgment
by confession
Judgment Upon Judgment By Confession
Compromise
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
Q: In a complaint for recovery of real property,
Ryan averred, among others, that he is the
The provisions and terms An affirmative and owner of the said property by virtue of a deed of
are settled and agreed voluntary act of the sale executed by Joseph in his favor. Copy of
upon by the parties to defendant himself. The the deed of sale was appended to the
the action, and which is court exercises a complaint as Annex "A" thereof. In his unverified
entered in the record certain amount of answer, Joseph denied the allegation concerning
with the consent of the supervision over the the sale of the property in question, as well as
court. entry of judgment.
Kinds of Judgment by confession the appended deed of sale, for lack of
knowledge or information sufficient to form a
1. Judgment by cognovit actionem – a written belief as to the truth thereof. Is it proper for the
confession of an action by the defendant, court to render judgment without trial? Explain.
subscribed but not sealed, and irrevocably (2005 Bar)
authorizing any attorney of any court of record
to confess judgment and issue execution usually A: YES.A judgment on the pleadings can be rendered by the
for the sum named. It is given in order to save court without need of a trial. Defendant cannot deny the sale
expense and differs from a warrant of attorney, of the property for lack of knowledge or information
which is given to an expressly designated sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof. The
attorney before the commencement of any answer amounts to an admission. The defendant must aver
action and is under seal; or state positively how it is that he is ignorant of the facts
2. Confession relicta verificationem – After pleading alleged. Moreover, the genuineness and due execution of
and before trial, the defendant both confessed the deed of sale can only be denied by the defendant under
the plaintiff’s cause of action and withdrew or oath and failure to do so is an admission of the deed. Hence,
abandoned his plea or other allegations, a judgment on the pleadings can be rendered by the court
whereupon judgment was entered. without need of a trial.

NOTE: Warrants of attorney to confess judgment
are not authorized nor contemplated by our law.
We are further of the opinion that provisions in
notes
authorizing attorneys to appear and confess
judgments against makers should not be
recognized in this jurisdiction by implication and
should only be considered as valid when given
express legislative sanction (PNB v. Manila Oil
Refining & By-Products Company, Inc. G.R. No. L-
18103, June 8, 1922).
Q: Aldrin entered into a contract to sell with
Neil over a parcel of land. The contract
stipulated a P500,000.00 down payment upon
signing and the
the Rules on Summary Procedure (Rule 17);
7. When the case falls under the Rule on Small
Claims.

JUDGMENT WITHOUT TRIAL

Instances when there can be a Judgment

without a trial

1. Where the pleadings of the parties tender no

issue at all, a judgment on the pleadings may be
directed by the court (Rule 34);
2. Where from the pleadings, affidavits,
depositions and other papers, there is actually
no genuine issue, the court may render a
summary judgment (Rule 35);
3. Where the parties have entered into a
compromise or an amicable settlement either
during the pre-trial or while the trial is in
progress (Rule 18; Art. 2028, NCC);
4. Where the parties 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
however, there is no agreement as to all the
facts in the case, trial may be held only as to
the disputed facts (Sec. 6, Rule 30);
5. Where the complaint has been dismissed with
prejudice (Sec. 5, Rule 16; Sec. 3, Rule 17; last.
par.; Sec. 5, Rule 7);
6. Where the civil case falls under the operation of

99
 REMEDIAL LAW
balance payable in twelve (12) monthly installments
of P100,000.00. Aldrin paid the down payment
and had paid three (3) monthly installments
when he found out that Neil had sold the same
property to Yuri for P1.5 million paid in cash.
Aldrin sued Neil for specific performance with
damages with the RTC. Yuri, with leave of court,
filed an answer-in- intervention as he had already
obtained a TCT in his name. After trial, the court
rendered judgment ordering Aldrin to pay all the
installments due, the cancellation of Yuri's title,
and Neil to execute a deed of sale in favor of Aldrin.
When the judgment became final and executory,
Aldrin paid Neil all the installments but the
latter refused to execute the deed of sale in
favor of the former. Aldrin filed a "Petition for
the Issuance of a Writ of Execution" with proper
notice of hearing. The petition alleged, among
others, that the decision had become final and
executory and he is entitled to the issuance of
the writ of execution as a matter of right. Neil
filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the
ground that it lacked the required certification
against forum shoppingDespite the issuance
of the writ of execution directing Neil to execute
the deed of sale in favor of Aldrin, the former
obstinately refused to execute the deed. What is
Aldrin's remedy? (2015 Bar)
A: Aldrin’s remedy is to file a motion for judgment
for specific act under Section 10(a) of Rule 39. Under
Section 10(a) of Rule 39, if a judgment directs a
party to execute a conveyance of land and the party
fails to comply, the court may direct the act to be
done at the disobedient party’s cost by some other
person appointed by the court or the court may by
an order divest the title of the party and vest it in
the movant or other person.

CONTENTS OF A JUDGMENT before it;

2. The court must have jurisdiction over the parties and the
Parts of a judgment subject matter;
3. The parties must have been given an opportunity to
1. Ratio decidendi – The body of judgment; adduce evidence in their behalf;
2. Fallo – The dispositive portion of the judgment. It 4. The evidence must have been considered by the
is also the part of judgment that is subject to tribunal in deciding the case;
execution because this is the judgment of the 5. The judgment must be in writing, personally and directly
court itself, i.e. if the petition is granted or prepared by the judge; and
denied and the relief granted.
NOTE: A verbal judgment is, in contemplation of law, not
Resolution of a conflict between the parts of a in esse, therefore, ineffective (Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan,
decision G.R. No. 162214, November 11,
2004).
GR: If there is a conflict between the ratio decidendi
and the fallo, the fallo should prevail because it is 6. The judgment must state clearly the facts and the law on
the final order while the ratio decidendi is merely a which it is based, signed by the judge and filed with the
statement ordering nothing. clerk of court (Sec. 1, Rule 36).

XPN: If there is a mere mistake in the fallo and the

the ratio decidendi is so clear that it states a
conclusion, the latter should prevail.(Poland
Industrial Limited v. National Development Company, G.R.
No. 143866, August 22, 2005)

Difference between a judgment and an opinion of

the court (2006 Bar)

The judgment or fallo is the final disposition of the

court which is reflected in the dispositive portion
of the decision while the opinion of the court is
contained in the body of the decision that serves
as a guide or enlightenment to determine the ratio
decidendi of the decision.

Obiter dictum

It is an opinion expressed by a court, which is not

necessary to the decision of the case before it. It
is neither enforceable as a relief nor a source of a
judicially actionable claim.

Requisites of a valid judgment

1. The court or tribunal must be clothed with

authority to hear and determine the matter

UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 100

OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
NOTE: This requirement refers to
decisions and final orders on the
merits not to those resolving
incidental matters (Pablo-Gualberto
v. Gualberto, G.R. No. 154994, June 28,
2005).
Q: After plaintiff, in an ordinary civil
action before the RTC, has completed
presentation of his evidence, defendant
without prior leave of court moved for
dismissal of plaintiff's complaint for
insufficiency of plaintiff's evidence.
After due hearing of the motion and the
opposition thereto, the court issued
an order, reading as follows: "The Court
hereby grants defendant's motion to
dismiss and accordingly orders the
dismissal of plaintiff's complaint, with
the costs taxed against him. It is so
ordered." Is the order of dismissal
valid? May plaintiff properly take an
appeal? (2004 Bar)
A: NO. The order or decision is void
because it neither stated the findings of
fact and law as required by Sec. 14, Art.
VIII of the Constitution and Sec. 1, Rule
36 of the Rules of Court nor adopts by
reference the factual findings by the
lower court. Being void, appeal is not
available. The proper remedy is certiorari
under Rule 65.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
It refers to decisions which adopt by
reference the findings of facts and
conclusions of law of inferior tribunals. In this
jurisdiction, it has been held that memorandum
decisions do not transgress the constitutional
requirement in Art. VIII, Sec. 14, on clearly and
distinctly stating the facts and the law on which the
decision is based. Nonetheless, it would be more
prudent for a memorandum decision not to be simply
limited to the dispositive portion but to:
1. State the nature of the case;
2. Summarize the facts with references to the
record; and
3. Contain a statement of the applicable laws
and jurisprudence and the tribunal’s
assessments and conclusions on the case. This
practice would better enable a court to make an
appropriate consideration of whether the
dispositive portion of the judgment sought to be
enforced is consistent with the findings of facts
and conclusions of law made by the tribunal
that rendered the decision (Oil and Natural Gas
Commission v. CA, G.R. No. 114323, September 28,
1999).
Interlocutory Order (2006 Bar)
It is an order which decides some point or matter
between the commencement and end of the suit but
is not the final decision on the whole controversy. It
leaves something to be done by the court before
the case is finally decided on the merits.
Remedy to question an improvident
interlocutory order
File a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 not
under Rule 45. A petition for review under Rule
45 is the proper mode of redress to question only
final judgments.
10
1
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
the latter subleases the premises, said that she
is terminating the lease. Thereafter, Go filed an
NOTE: One cannot appeal an interlocutory order. action for damages against Sunbanun. At the
pre-trial, Sunbanun moved for the case to be
JUDGMENT ON THE submitted for judgment on the pleadings
PLEADINGS (2012, 2014, considering that the only disagreement between
the
Grounds for judgment on the pleadings (1999 Bar)

1. The answer fails to tender an issue because

of:

a. General denial of the material allegations of

the complaint;
b. Insufficient denial of the material allegations
of the complaint;

2. The answer admits material allegations of the

adverse party’s pleadings (Sec. 1, Rule 34).

NOTE:In the absence of a motion for judgment on

the pleadings, the court cannot motu proprio render
such judgment (De Luna v. Abrigo, G.R. No. L-57455,
January 18, 1990).

Instances when judgment on the pleadings is

NOT applicable

1. Actions for declaration of nullity of marriage,

annulment of marriage or for legal
separation;
2. Unliquidated damages;
3. Insufficiency of fact – amendment is the
remedy

NOTE: Judgment on the pleading is proper only

when the answer fails to tender an issue, or
otherwise admits the material allegations of the
adverse party’s pleading (Sec. 1, Rule 34). When it
appears, however, that not all the material
allegations of the complaint were admitted in the
answer, because some of them were either denied or
disputed, and the defendant has set up certain
special defenses which, if proven, would have the
effect of nullifying plaintiff’s main cause of action,
judgment on the pleadings cannot be rendered
(Philippine National Bank v. Aznar, G.R. No. 17105, May 30,
2011)(2015 Bar).

Effect when the plaintiff moves for judgment on

the pleadings and defendant interposes no
objection

The latter is deemed to have admitted the truth of

the allegations of the complaint, so that there is no
longer any necessity for the plaintiff to submit
evidence of his claims (Phil. Advertising Counselors,
Inc. v. Revilla, G.R. No. L-31869, August 8, 1973).

NOTE: A motion for judgment on the pleadings may

be filed only by the plaintiff or the claimant.
(2016 Bar)

Q: Sunbanun, owner of a residential house,

entered into a lease agreement with Go, which
the latter subleased. 3 months before the
expiration of the lease agreement, Sunbanun,
alleging that Go violated the agreement because
101
 REMEDIAL LAW
parties was the correct interpretation of the
NOTE: If the his favor upon all or any
lease contract. Go did not object to the motion.
complaint states no part thereof (Secs. 1 and 2,
The trial court rendered judgment in favor of Go.
cause of action, a Rule 35).
Is judgment on the pleadings proper?
motion to dismiss
should be filed and Requisites of Summary
A: YES. The trial court has the discretion to grant
not a motion for Judgment (2015 Bar)
a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by a
judgment on the
party if there is no controverted matter in the case
pleadings. 1. The motion shall be
after the answer is filed.
served at least 10 days
before the time specified
The instant case is unusual because it was Sunbanun,
for the hearing. The
and not the claimant Go, who moved for a judgment
SUMMARY JUDGMENTS adverse party may
on the pleadings during the pre-trial. Sunbanun, in
serve opposing
moving for a judgment on the pleadings without
When proper affidavits, depositions,
offering proof as to the truth of her own allegations
or admissions at least
and without giving Go the opportunity to introduce
It is proper where, 3 days before the
evidence, is deemed to have admitted the material and
upon motion filed after hearing;
relevant averments of the complaint, and to rest her
motion for judgment based on the pleadings of the the issues had been
joined and on the basis NOTE: The hearing
parties (Sunbanun v. Go, G.R. No. 163280, February 2,
of the pleadings and contemplated (with 10-
2010).
papers filed, the court day notice) is for the
finds that there is no purpose of determining
NOTE: A motion for judgment on the pleadings is the
genuine issue as to whether the issues are
appropriate remedy where the defendant is deemed
any material fact genuine or not, not to
to have admitted the matters contained in the
except as to the receive evidence on
Request for admission by the plaintiff. The failure of
amount of damages the issues set up in the
the defendant to answer a request for admission
(Ley Construction & Dev. pleadings. The matter
results in an implied admission of all the matters
Corp. v. Union Bank of may be resolved, and
which an admission is requested (Rule 34 in
the Phil., G.R. No. usually is, on the basis
connection with Sec. 2, Rule 26, Rules of Court) (2012
133801, June 27, 2000). of affidavits,
Bar).
depositions, admissions
Summary judgments (Galicia v. Polo,
Judgment on the pleadings vs. Judgment by default
are sanctioned by the G.R. No. L-49668, Nov. 14,
Rules of Court as a 1989; Carcon Devt. Corp.
Judgment on the Judgment by Default v. CA, G.R. No. 88218,
device to simplify and
Pleadings December 17, 1989).
expedite the resolution
The defendant answered, The defendant did not file of cases when, as
but did not tender an an answer. shown by pleadings, 2. Except for the amount
issue or admitted the affidavits, depositions of damages, there must
material allegations in or admissions on the be no genuine issue as
the complaint. records, there are no to any material fact;
genuine issues which and
Evidence is not received Evidence is received. would entail an
as the same is based on expensive, lengthy and NOTE: There is
the pleadings alone. protracted trial (Jose genuine issue when an
Feliciano Loy, Jr., et al. issue of fact is
Decision is based on Decision is based on the v. San Miguel presented which
the allegations in the evidence presented. Corporation Employees requires presentation
pleadings. Union-Philippine of evidence as
Transport and General distinguished from a
Generally available only to Available to plaintiff. Workers Organization, et sham, fictitious,
the plaintiff, unless the al., G.R. No. 164886, contrived or false
defendant presents a November 24, 2009, Del claim (Villuga v. Kelly
counterclaim. Castillo, J.). Hardware and
Construction Supply Inc.,
Motion for judgment on the pleadings vs. Motion NOTE: A claimant G.R. No. 176570, July 18,
to dismiss may at any time after 2012).
the pleading in answer
Motion for Judgment Motion to Dismiss thereto has been 3. The party presenting
on the served, and the the motion for
Pleadings defendant may, at any summary judgment
Filed by the plaintiff if the Filed by a defendant to time, move with must be entitled to a
answer raises no issue. a complaint, supporting affidavits, judgment as a matter
counterclaim, cross- depositions or of law.
claim or third-party admissions for a
complaint. summary judgment in Q. The Republic filed a

UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 102

OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
complaint for there is no summary
recovery of hectare portion genuine judgment with
possession against thereof. issue as to neither of the
Calubaquib, et al., Calubaquib, et any material parties filing a
who allegedly entered al. then fact and the motion therefor
a military countered that moving (Calubaquib, et al v.
reservation site and, their party is Republic, et al., G.R.
through strategy and predecessor-in- entitled to a No. 170658, June 22,
stealth, took interest had judgment as 2011, Del
possession of a five- been in open a matter of Castillo, J.).
and continuous law. The
possession of filing of a Important features of
the property motion and Rule 35
since the early the conduct
1900s. While of a hearing 1. There is no
they on the limitation as
acknowledge the motion are to the type
issuance of the important of action in
Proclamation, because which the
they insist that these remedy is
the subject enable the available
property is
court to (claim,
excluded from
determine if counterclaim,
its operation,
the parties cross claim,
citing that the
pleadings, declaratory
Proclamation
affidavits and relief);
itself said it was
exhibits in 2. The remedy is available
“subject to
support of, or to both parties alike;
private rights”.
against, the and
On the basis of
motion are 3. The
the foregoing
admitted facts, sufficient to summary
the RTC overcome judgment
rendered a the procedure
summary opposing has been
judgment, even papers and coupled with
without the adequately deposition-
motion of either justify the discovery
party. The RTC finding that, procedure(Fe
dismissed as a matter ria & Noche,
Calubaquib, et of law, the 2013).
al’s claim of claim is
possession of the clearly Q: Garcia, et al.
property in the meritorious filed a complaint
concept of an or there is for quieting of
owner. Was the no defense title with writ of
summary to the preliminary
judgment action. The injunction with
proper? non- the RTC against
observance Eland
A.NO. The of the Philippines, Inc.
remedy of procedural The latter found
requiremen out that the lot
summary
ts of filing a was the subject
judgment
motion and of a land
without a motion
conducting a registration
being filed is in
hearing on proceeding that
derogation of a
the said had already
party's right to a
motion been decided by
plenary trial of his
warrants the the same court.
case; the trial
setting aside Eland thus filed
court cannot
of the a motion to
railroad the
summary dismiss. The
parties’ rights motion was
over their judgment.
Here, the denied and the
objections. A trial court
summary trial court
proceeded enjoined Eland
judgment is to file its answer.
permitted only if to render
Thereafter,

103
 REMEDIAL LAW
Garcia, et.al. judgment. The Bases of WHEN THE
moved to motion was summary CASE NOT FULLY
declare granted and the judgment ADJUDICATED
Eland in trial court
default decided in 1. Affidavits made Consequences
which was Garcia’s, et al. on personal when a case is
granted favor. Is knowledge; not fully
and the summary 2. Depositions of adjudicated
former judgment the adverse (2004, 2009
were proper? party or a Bar)
allowed to third party
present A: NO. Trial under Rule 23; If on motion,
evidence ex courts have 3. Admissions of the judgment is not
parte. After limited authority adverse party rendered upon the
the many to render under Rule 26; whole case or for
motions summary and all the reliefs
initiated by judgments and 4. Answers to sought and a trial
Eland were may do so only interrogatorie is necessary, the
denied, when there is s under Rule court at the
Garcia, et clearly no 25. All hearing of the
al. moved genuine issue as intended to motion, by
for to any material show that: examining the
summary fact. pleadings and the
a. There is evidence before it
no and by interrogating
Eland is already genuine
FOR THE CLAIMANT
the registered issue as to
owner of the parcel any
Aparty seeking to
of land in question, material
recover upon a
pursuant to a fact,
claim, counterclaim,
decree of except
or cross-claim or to
registration based damages
obtain a
on the ruling of the which
declaratory relief
same court that must
may, at any time
granted the always be
after the pleading
summary judgment. proved;
in answer thereto
By granting the and
has been served,
summary judgment, b. The
move with
the trial court has movant is
supporting
in effect annulled entitled to
affidavits,
its former ruling a
depositions or
based on a claim of judgment
admissions for a
possession and as a
summary judgment
ownership of the matter of
in his favor upon all
same land for more law.
or any part thereof
than 30 years
(Sec. 1, Rule 35).
without the benefit Burden of
of a full-blown demonstrating
FOR
trial. The fact that the absence of
THE DEFENDANT
Garcia, et al. seek genuine issue of
to nullify the fact
A party against
original certificate
whom a claim,
of title issued to The party who
counterclaim or
Eland on the claim moves for
cross- claim is
that the former summary
asserted or a
were in possession judgment has the
declaratory relief is
of the same land for burden of
sought may, at any
a number of years, demonstrating
time, move with
is already a clear clearly that the
supporting
indicium that a issue posed in the
affidavits,
genuine issue of a complaint is
depositions or
material fact patently
admissions for a
exists (Eland unsubstantial so as
summary judgment
Philippines, Inc. v. not to constitute a
in his favor as to all
Azucena Garcia et al., genuine issue for
or any part thereof
G.R. No. 173289, trial (Riano, 2014).
(Sec. 2, Rule 35).
February 17, 2010).

UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 104

OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
accordingly to the matters stated shall forthwith
counsel shall ascertain ordering that John therein. Certified true order the offending
what material facts shall have copies of all papers or party or counsel to
exist without judgment parts thereof pay to the other
substantial summarily against referred to in the party the amount of
controversy and what Geoff for such affidavit shall be the reasonable
are actually and in amount as may be attached thereto or expenses which the
good faith found due John for served therewith filing of the
controverted. It damages, to be (Sec. 5, Rule 35). affidavits caused
shall thereupon ascertained by trial him to incur,
make an order on October 7, 2004, Should it appear to including attorney’s
specifying the facts at 8:30 in the its satisfaction at any fees. It may, after
that appear without morning. May time that any of the hearing, further
substantial Geoff properly take affidavits presented adjudge the
controversy, an appeal from pursuant to the offending party or
including the extent said order? Or, Rules are presented counsel guilty of
to which the amount may Geoff properly in bad faith, or solely contempt (Sec. 6,
of damages or other challenge said for the purpose of Rule 35).
relief is not in order thru a special delay, the court
controversy, and civil action for
directing such certiorari? (2004 Teofilo against his
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
estranged wife Fe, Teofilo
further proceedings Bar) SUMMARY JUDGMENTS
filed (2016 Bar)
a Request for
in the action as are
just. The facts so A: NO.The plaintiff Admission of the
Judgment on the
specified shall be may not properly take genuineness of the
Pleadings
deemed established, an appeal from said complaint, answer and
(Rule 34)
and the trial shall be order because it is decision in a separate civil
Based solely on the
conducted on the an interlocutory case wherein the trial
pleadings.
controverted facts order, not a final and court ruled that the
accordingly (Sec. 4, appealable order. It subject property
Generally available only to constituted conjugal
Rule 35). does not dispose of the plaintiff, unless the property albeit said
the action or defendant presents a
NOTE: A partial proceeding. Partial decision is on appeal
summary judgment counterclaim.
summary before the CA. As Fe
is not a final or failed to file her answer
judgments are The answer fails to
appealable or response, Teofilo filed
interlocutory. There tender an issue or there
judgment (Province of a Motion for Judgment
is still something to is an admission of
Pangasinan v. CA,G.R. Based on the Pleadings
be done, which is material allegations.
No. 104266, March 31, which the trial court
the trial for the
1993). granted, treating the same
adjudication of 3-day notice for motion
damages, but the as a move to seek
Q: After Geoff has required. summary judgment.
served and filed defendant may
properly challenge Later, the CA ruled that
his answer to On the merits the subject property
John's complaint for said order thru a
special civil action constituted Fe’s
damages, John paraphernal property. Is
served and filed a for certiorari under
Rule 65 on the the filing of the Motion for
motion for a Judgment Based on the
ground of abuse of NOTE: Even if the
summary judgment Pleadings proper?
discretion answer does not
in his favor upon all
amounting to lack tender an issue, and
of his claims. Geoff A: NO. In a proper case for
or excess of therefore a judgment
served and filed his judgment on the pleadings,
jurisdiction. on the pleadings is not
opposition to the there is no ostensible issue
motion. After due proper, a summary
AFFIDAVITS at all because of the failure
hearing, the court judgment may still be
AND ATTACHMENTS of the defending party’s
issued an order (1) rendered if the issues
answer to raise an issue. On
stating that the tendered are not
Supporting and the other hand, in the case
court has found no genuine, are shams,
opposing affidavits of a summary judgment,
genuine issue as to fictitious, contrived up,
shall be made on issues apparently exist-i.e.
any material fact set-up in bad faith,
personal knowledge, facts are asserted in the
and thus concluded patently unsubstantial
shall set forth such complaint regarding which
that John is entitled (Vergara v. Suelto, G.R. No.
facts as would be there is as yet no admission,
to judgment in his L-74766, December 21,
admissible in disavowal or qualification;
favor as a matter of 1987).
evidence, and shall or specific denials or
law except as to affirmative defenses are in
show affirmatively Q: In a petition for
the amount of truth set out in the answer-
that the affiant is judicial separation of
damages but the issues thus arising
competent to testify property instituted by
recoverable, and (2)
105
 REMEDIAL LAW
from the pleadings are plaintiff, plaintiff, or2)
sham, fictitious or not preempt the defendant Defendant has
genuine, as shown by appeal (Adolfo v. promises paid the P1
affidavits, depositions, Adolfo, G.R. No. to pay million claimed
or admissions. Here, 201427, March 18, plaintiff P1 in the
no valid resort can be 2015, Del Castillo, million, promissory note
had to a motion for J.). twelve (12) (Annex "A" of
either judgment months the Complaint)
because the decision Q: Plaintiff
from the as evidenced by
of the trial court that sued defendant
above an"
the subject property for collection
indicated Acknowledgme
was conjugal was of P1 million
date nt Receipt" duly
based on the
appealed to the CA. without executed by
latter's
Until the appeal is necessity plaintiff on
promissory
resolved by the CA, it of January 30,
note. The
would be premature demand. 2015 in Manila
complaint
to render judgment on with his spouse
alleges, among
Teofilo’s motion. Both S signing as
others: 1)
the trial court and i witness. A copy
Defendant
Teofilo may not g of the
borrowed P1
million from n "Acknowledgme
plaintiff as e nt Receipt" is
evidenced by a d attached as
duly executed Annex "1"
promissory D hereof. Plaintiff
note). The e filed a motion
promissory note f for judgment on
reads: e the pleadings
n on the ground
" d that
M a defendant's
a n answer failed to
k t tender an issue
a " as the
t allegations
i A copy of therein on his
, the defenses are
promissory sham for being
P note is inconsistent;
h attached hence, no
i as Annex defense at all.
l "A."Defend Defendant filed
i ant, in his an opposition
p verified claiming his
p answer, answer
i alleged tendered an
n among issue.
e others: 1)
s Defendant a.) Is judgment
specificall on the pleadings
y denies proper?
D
the Defendant filed a
e
allegation motion for
c
in summary
.
paragraphs judgment on the
1and 2 of ground that
3 there areno
the
0 longer any
complaint,
, triable genuine
the truth
being issues of facts.
2 defendant b.) Should the
0 did not court grant
1 execute defendant's
4 any motion for
promissory summary
For value note in judgment?
received from favor of (2015 Bar)
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 106
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
Plaintiff’s court; and before its COMELEC. Is
A: contention filing,it does not yet Mr. Palma
a. NO. that constitute the real correct?
Under defendant’s judgment of the
Section answer failed court (Ago v. CA, G.R. A: NO. A decision
2 of to tender an No. L-17898, October becomes binding
Rule 8, issue as his 31, 1962). only after it is
a party defenses are validly
may set sham for Promulgation promulgated.
forth being Consequently, if at
two or inconsistent It is the process by the time of the
more is without which a decision is promulgation of a
stateme merit. published, decision or
nts of a b. YES. The officially resolution, a
defense court should announced, made member of the
alternat grant known to the collegiate court
ively or Defendant’s public or delivered who had earlier
hypothe motion for to the clerk of signed or
tically. summary court for filing, registered his vote
The judgment. coupled with has vacated his
Suprem Under notice to the office, his vote is
e Court Section 2 of parties or their automatically
has held Rule 35, a counsel. withdrawn or
that defendant cancelled. The
inconsist may at any NOTE: In civil Resolution, in this
ent time, move cases, a judgment is case, remains valid
defenses with rendered, while in because it is still
may be supporting criminal cases and supported by a
pleaded admissions election cases, a majority of the
alternati for a judgment is rendered COMELEC en banc
vely or summary and promulgated. (Benwaren v.
hypothe judgment in COMELEC, G.R. No.
tically his favor. Q: In an election 169393, April 7, 2006).
provide Here the contest between
d that Plaintiff had Mr. Palma and Mr. Preparation of a
each impliedly Monsod, the judgment(2004
defense admitted the COMELEC en banc Bar)
is genuineness unanimously
consist and due resolved the A judgment or final
ent execution of dispute in favor order determining
with the of Monsod. the merits of the
itself acknowledgm COMELEC case shall be in
(Baclayo ent receipt, Commissioner writing personally
n v. which was Garci participated and directly
Court of the basis of at the deliberation prepared by the
Appeals, Defendant’s of the said judge, stating
26 defense, by resolution. clearly and
February failing to However, when the distinctly the facts
1990). specifically resolution on the and the law on
Hence deny it said dispute was which it is based,
promulgated by signed by him, and
COMELEC en banc, filed with the clerk
under oath. Rendition of Commissioner of the court (Sec. 1,
Hence the Judgment (2004 Garci was no Rule 36).
Defendant may Bar) longer a member
move for a of the COMELEC Q: East Oceanic
summary Rendition of en banc. Mr. Palma filed a collection
judgment on the judgment is the contends that the case against Go for
basis that filing of the same decision of the failure of the
Plaintiff had with the clerk of COMELEC en banc latter to settle
admitted that court. Even if the was null and void his outstanding
Defendant had judgment has because obligation and his
already paid the already been put in Commissioner failure to make
P1 million writing and signed, Garci, who took good or pay the
obligation. it is still subject to part in the checks he issued
amendment if it has resolution of the in favor of East
not yet been filed
RENDITION OF JUDGMENTS case, was no longer Oceanic despite
AND FINAL with
ORDERS the clerk of connected with

107
 REMEDIAL LAW
notice of dishonor. without expressing records (People v.
East Oceanic also report and therein clearly and Derpo, G.R. No. L-
filed a case against recommendation distinctly the facts 41040 & 43908-10,
its Sym its former was the basis of and the law on December 14, 1988).
Managing Director approval of Go’s which it is based’. A decision need not
whose loan application. This constitutional be a complete
Upon East mandate is reflected recital of the
Oceanic's motion, in Section 1, Rule 36 evidence presented.
and finding the of the Rules of So long as the
evidence adduced Court. The parties factual and legal
in the collection to litigation should basis is distinctly
case to be likewise be informed of how and clearly set
pertinent to the it was decided, with forth, the judgment
damages case, an explanation of is valid (Chan v. CA,
the RTC ordered the factual and legal 457 SCRA 502).
the cases to be reasons that led to
consolidated. The the conclusions of NOTE: A decision
RTC ruled in favor the court. The losing that does not clearly
of East Oceanic. party is entitled to and distinctly state
There was no know why he lost, the facts and the
discussion at all so he may appeal to law on which it is
in the assailed the higher court, if based leaves the
Decision as to the permitted, should he parties in the dark
RTC's ruling in the believe that the as to how it was
collection case, decision should be reached and is
particularly, on reversed (Go v. East specially prejudicial
how it arrived at Oceanic Leasing And to the losing party,
Finance Corporation, who is unable to
its conclusion
G.R. No. 206841, pinpoint the
finding Go liable
January 19, 2018, Del possible errors of
to pay East
Castillo, J.). the court for review
Oceanic the sum
by a higher (Miguel
of
No requirement to v. JCT Group, Inc., G.R.
₱2,814,054.86 plus
state in its No. 157752, March 16,
6% interest. Is the
decision all the 2005).
RTC Decision valid
as regards Go’s civil facts found in the
records Resolutions
liability to East disposing of motion
Oceanic? to dismiss
While it is
A: NO. The required that
decisions, no It is not only
assailed Decision is
matter how judgments which
void insofar as the
concisely written, be must distinctly and
collection case is
distinctly and clearly clearly state the
concerned, as it
set forth the facts facts and the law
contained neither an
and the law upon upon which they are
analysis of the
which they are based. Under Sec. 3
evidence of East
based (Naguiat v. of Rule 16, it is
Oceanic and Go as
NLRC, G.R. No. required that the
regards the 116123, March 13, resolutions
outstanding 1997), the rule disposing of motion
balance of the however, does not to dismiss shall
latter's loan require that the state clearly and
obligation, nor a court shall state in distinctly the
reference to any its decision all the reasons therefore.
legal basis in facts found in the
reaching its
conclusion as to Go's
civil liability to East Rendition of a going outside the issues and
Oceanic. As a judgment based on purporting to adjudicate
paramount issues not raised something on which the
component of due parties were not heard is
process and fair GR: A judgment must invalid. Therefore where a
play, the conform to the court enters a judgment or
Constitution pleading and the awards relief beyond the
mandates that ‘no theory of the action prayer of the complaint or
decision shall be under which the case the scope of its allegations
rendered by any court was tried. A judgment the excessive relief is not

UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 108

OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
merely irregular but promulgated after his
is void for want of retirement (Nazareno v. CA, The be followed by
jurisdiction, and is G.R. No. 111610, February 27, doctrine of the same court
open to collateral 2002). law of the and by all courts
attack. case simply of lower rank in
Judgment may be means, subsequent
XPN: Such issues were penned by a judge who therefore, cases involving
tried with the express did not hear the that when a similar legal
or implied consent of evidence an issue. This
the parties. appellate proceeds from the
It is not necessary that the court has legal principle
Person to decide a judge who heard the once that, in the
case evidence be the same judge declared absence of
who shall pen the decision. the law in a powerful
GR: A case once The judge who originally case, its countervailing
raffled to a branch tried the case may die, declaration considerations,
belongs to that resign, be disabled or continues to like cases ought
branch unless re- transferred to another. In such be the law to be decided
raffled or otherwise an eventuality, another judge of that case alike.
transferred to another has to continue and finish even on a
branch in accordance the trial. subsequent NOTE: It is
with the established appeal, founded on the
procedure. When the When decision is binding notwithstan necessity for
Presiding Judge of that on the parties ding that securing
branch to which a case the rule certainty and
has been raffled or A judgment or order whether thus laid stability in the
assigned is transferred final or interlocutory does down may law and does not
to another station, he not bind the parties until have been require identity
leaves behind all the and unless notice thereof is reversed in of or privity of
cases he tried with the duly served on them by any other cases parties.
branch to which they of the modes prescribed by (DBP v.
belong. He does not law. This is so even if the Guariña ENTRY OF
take these cases with order or judgment has in Agricultural JUDGMENT AND FINAL
him even if he tried fact been orally pronounced and Realty ORDER
them and the same in the presence of the parties Development
were submitted to him or a draft thereof drawn up Corporation, Entry of judgment (2000
for decision. The judge and signed and/or copy G.R. No. Bar)
who takes over this thereof somehow read or 160758,
branch inherits all acquired by any party. January 15, It refers to the
these cases and 2014). physical act
assumes full The doctrine of law of performed by
NOTE: This the clerk of
responsibility for them. the case
rule does court in entering
He may decide them as
not apply to the dispositive
they are his cases.
resolutions portion of the
rendered in judgment in the
XPN: Any of the
parties moves that his connection book of entries of
case be decided by the with the judgment and
judge who substantially case after the same
heard the evidence and wherein no has become final
before whom the case rationale and executory.
was submitted for has been The record shall
decision (Valentin v. Sta. expounded contain the
Maria, G.R. No. L-30158, on the dispositive
January 17, 1974). merits of portion of the
that action. judgment or final
NOTE: A decision order and shall
penned by a judge after Principle of stare be signed by the
his retirement cannot decisis et non clerk of court,
be validly quieta movere with a certificate
promulgated and by said clerk that
cannot acquire a It holds that the judgment has
binding effect. In like a point of already become
manner, a decision law, once final and
penned by a judge established executor (Sec. 2,
during his by the SC, Rule 36).
incumbency cannot will
be validly generally NOTE: If no
109
 REMEDIAL LAW
appeal or the entry of administration the court in
motion for the of justice and declaring the
new trial or judgment thus, properties
reconsidera (Sec. 6, Rule procedurally, to enumerated in the
tion is filed 39); make orderly dispositive portion
within the 2. The filing of the discharge of of the Decision as
time a petition for judicial comprising the
provided in relief must business; and estate of Aruego.
the Rules, be filed not (b) To put an end Antonia filed a
the more than 60 to judicial Motion for
judgment days from controversies, Partition alleging
or final knowledge of at the risk of the RTC Decision
order shall the judgment occasional became final and
forthwith and not errors, which is executory in view
be entered more than 6 precisely why of the denial of
by the clerk months from the courts exist the notice of
in the book the entry of (Dare Adventure appeal filed by
of entries of the Farm petitioners and the
judgments judgment or Corporation v. dismissal of their
(Sec. 2, Rule final order CA, G.R. No. Petition for
36). (Sec. 3, Rule 161122, Prohibition and
38). September 24, Certiorari by the
There are 2012). CA and the
some Finality of judgment
subsequent denial
proceeding Q: In a Complaint of their appeal to
s the filing 1. Upon lapse of for Compulsory the Supreme
of which is the Recognition and Court. Can the
reckoned reglementary Enforcement of
period to Court review and
from the Successional modify the RTC
date of the appeal, with Rights" filed by
no appeal Decision?
entry of Antonia Aruego,
judgment: perfected the Regional Trial
within such A: NO. There is no
Court declared ground to justify
1. The period, the Antonia as an
decision the modification of
executi illegitimate the RTC Decision.
on of a becomes final
daughter of the When a final
judgme and executor
deceased Aruego judgment is
nt by (Sec. 1, Rule 39;
Sr. hence entitled executory, it
motion Banco de
Brasil v. CA, to a share in the becomes
is latter’s estate. immutable and
within 5 G.R. Nos.
121576-78, Among others, the unalterable. The
years RTC rendered a
June 16, 2000); only recognized
from Decision on June
and exceptions to the
15, 1992, general rule on
declaring what immutability of final
constitutes the judgments are the
that has attained estate of deceased correction of
2. Upon lapse of finality can no and affirmed the clerical errors, the
the longer be status of Antonia so called nunc pro
reglementary disturbed. It is Aruego as an tune entries which
period to file an sometimes illegitimate cause no prejudice
MR, decision referred to as daughter of the to any party, void
rendered by “preclusion of deceased hence the judgments, and
the SC issues” or latter is entitled whenever
becomes final “collateral to one-half of the circumstances
and executory. estoppel” whereby, share of the transpire after the
issues actually and deceased’s finality of the
Doctrine of directly resolved in legitimate decision rendering
Immutability of a former suit cannot children. A Writ of its execution
Judgments again be raised in Execution was unjust and
any future case
issued by the RTC. inequitable. These
Otherwise known between the same
Petitioners filed a exceptions, however,
as the principle of parties (Riano, 2014).
Motion for Partial are not present.
conclusiveness of Reconsideration What petitioners
judgments, this TWO-FOLD
but they did not seek is an order
doctrine provides PURPOSE:
raise therein the from the court to
that a judgment (a) To avoid delay
supposed error of allow them to
in the
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 110
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
present evidence eventually include the
with regard to the during trial (Torres, et foreclosed on the cancellation of
properties al. v. Aruego, G.R. No. mortgaged derivative titles of
comprising the 201271, September 20, properties. Dela the GSIS title. Can
estate of Aruego and 2017, Del Castillo, J.). Merced filed a the final and
the heirs who are to complaint praying executory
share in the Court to amend a for the nullity of judgment against
inheritance. The judgment after the foreclosure GSIS be enforced
Court cannot issue a same has become proceeding on the against their
writ of certiorari so executory ground that he, not successors-in-
as to allow the the Zuluetas, was interest or holders
petitioners to GR: When a the owner of these of derivative titles?
present evidence as judgment is final and lots at the time of
the same should executory, it the foreclosure. A: YES. A
have been raised by becomes immutable Dela Merced died transferee pendente
them and unalterable in 1988 and was lite of registered
(Rule of Immutability). substituted by his land, whose title
heir. The court bears a notice of a
XPNs: Courts may rendered a pending litigation
amend a judgment decision in favor of involving his
even if it has become Dela Merced who transferor’s title to
executory in the thereafter filed a the said land, is
following instances: motion for bound by the
execution. outcome of the
1. To correct Meanwhile, GSIS litigation, whether
clerical errors had already it be for or against
or to make nunc conveyed these lots his transferor.
pro tunc entries to Dimaguila and Given this
(Philippine Victorino. GSIS principle, the
Economic Zone opines that the modification of the
Authority v. holders of the final decision
Borreta, G.R. No. derivative titles against the
142669, March (Dimaguila and transferor in order
15, 2006); Victorino) are not to include the
bound by the
NOTE: A transferee pendente
judgment against
clerical error is lite does not violate
GSIS because these
one which does the doctrine of
holders are
not involve an immutability of final
strangers to the
exercise of judgments. His
action between
judicial inclusion does not
GSIS and Dela
functions. add to or change the
Merced. While both
judgment; it is only
titles contain
notices of a legal consequence
2. To clarify an lis
of the established
ambiguity pendens carried
doctrine that a final
which is borne over from GSIS’s
judgment binds the
out by and title, the Register of
privy of a litigating
justifiable in Deeds claimed
party (Dela Merced v.
the context of that the writ of
GSIS, G.R. No. 167140,
the decision; execution must
November 23, 2011,
first be modified to
Del Castillo, J.).
NOTE: The
remedy is to file a
motion for
clarificatory Amended or renders the amended
judgment. clarified judgment and clarified judgment
vs. Supplemental only after considering
3. Judgments for decision all the factual and legal
support, which issues.
can always be Amended or Clarified
amended from Judgment Effect of amendment of
time to time; It is an entirely new judgment
4. Void judgment. decision and supersedes
the original judgment. The date of the amendment
Q: Spouses should be considered as the
Zulueta mortgaged Court makes a date of the decision for the
several lots to the thorough study of the computation of the period to
GSIS, which original judgment and perfect the appeal.

111
 REMEDIAL LAW
failure to appeal the
Collateral attack on same. Are the two may no nt is
a Judgment decisions immutable and longer be conclusive
unalterable in view of their modified in upon the
GR: The validity of a finality? any title to the
judgment or order of a respect, thing; and
court cannot be A: NO. As a rule, a even if the 2. If the
collaterally attacked. decision that has acquired modification judgment is
finality becomes immutable is meant to against a
XPNs: It may be and unalterable. A final correct person, the
attacked collaterally on judgment erroneous judgment is
the following grounds: conclusions presumptive
of fact and evidence of
1. Lack of law; and a right as
jurisdiction; or whether it between the
2. The irregularity of be made by parties and
its entry is the court their
apparent from the that successor in
face of the rendered it interest by a
record. or by the subsequent
highest title.
Effect of void court in the
judgments (Doctrine land. In Grounds in
of Total Nullity) this case, assailing the
however, to judgment or
A void judgment is in hold that final order of a
legal effect no both foreign
judgment. By it no decisions are country (2007
rights are divested, no immutable Bar)
rights can be and
obtained. Being unalterable 1. Evidence of want of
worthless in itself, all would cause jurisdiction;
proceeding founded confusion 2. Want of notice to the
upon it are equally and party;
worthless. It neither uncertainty 3. Collusion;
binds nor bars any one. (Collantes v. 4. Fraud; or
All acts performed CA, G.R. No.
under it and all claims 169604, 5. Clear mistake of fact or
flowing out of it are March 6, law
void. 2007).

Q: Jayson, a career Effect of a POST-

service officer, was judgment JUDGMENT
illegally dismissed REMEDIES
from his position. or final
Thus, Jayson filed a order of a
complaint for tribunal of 1. Before a
illegal dismissal a foreign judgment
with the Career country becomes final
Executive Service having and
executory, the
Board (CESB). While jurisdictio
aggrieved
the said complaint n to render
party or
was pending before the losing party
the CESB, Jayson filed judgment may avail of
a petition for quo or final the following
warranto with the CA order remedies:
praying that he be (2007 a. Motion for
reinstated to his Bar) Reconsideration;
former post. The b. Motion for New
CESB rendered a 1. If the Trial; and
decision finding that judgme c. Appeal.
Jayson was illegally nt is on
dismissed. The CA a 2. After the
found that Jayson specific judgment
resigned and was not thing, becomes
illegally dismissed. the executory, the
Both decisions judgme aggrieved
became final for
UNIVERSITYOF S ANTO T 112
OMAS
2018G OLDEN N OTES
 CIVIl PROCEDURe
party or a. Petition for relief
losing from judgment;
party b. Action to annul
may judgment;
avail of c. Certiorari; and
the d. Collateral attack of
followin a judgment.
g:

113