A cross defendant is actually a defendant
among the defendants
The court only acquires jurisdiction the
moment all these defendants file an answer
For example X sued X and W husband and
wife. The husband has a cross claim
against his wife. For whatever reason we do
not know but for per weather that cross cling
it would the issuance of service of summons
no need because it is the jurisdiction of the
court the moment the answer or they
voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of
the court.
Principally you only have to look the
principal defendant, iii iv v defendant
The moment these parties are served with
summons the court now acquires
jurisdiction over the person
How many modes of service are now
provided in the amended rules insofar as
the summons is concerned?
Before we have personal service section 6,
substituted service section 7, electronic
service section 12, service by publication
14, extraterritorial service 15, and section
16 (resident defendant who is temporarily
outside the PH)
Now, under these amendments there are
more modes of service of summons:
- sec 5 personal service
- sec 6 substitude service
- dervice by publication
- service by mail
- electronic
- by facsimile transmission
Service in person/personal service (sec 5)
When you serve to the defendant personally
and he refuses it, you tender the summons
and leave it in his presence because he
refuses to receive because that sheriff must
secure the signature of the defendant if
personal service is necessary/practicable,
available, possible. He shall acknowledge
the receipt of summons and copy of the
complaint
If there is provisional remedy assuming that
the complaint was filed praying for a
provisional remedy like attachment
Take note that provisional remedies except
preliminary injunction that application for
preliminary injunction is urgent, which must
be heard can be granted ex parte, a writ of
preliminary injunction may be issued ex
parte
Ex parte means without the presence of the
adverse party and the court will hear the
application for preliminary attachment
without notice and participation of the
defendant
If the court grants it and subsequently the
requirement because he will be required to
post a bond will subsequently be issued by
the court
So together with the summons, complaint,
the order granting the writ, and the writ of
execution and copy of that they also be
served to the defendant
If you're talking about execution of a
provisional remedy at the very least a
contemporaenous service summons and
the writ
Unless of course if you're talking of
unknown defendants or if defendant's
whereabouts are unknown
By serving personally the summons up on
the defending party or if he refuses by
tendering it to him a copy to him in his
presence
If he resists leaving the premises, will he
incur criminal liability? What is the crime if
you refuse to leave upon the order of the
owners of the premises? Trespassing
Yung kay president marcos sa hawaii there
was a personal service of summons to him
they were inside of the compound of that
house in hawaii (case of manotoc). This is
about the secretary of foreign affairs. Ayaw
lumabas ng mag-asawa, the caretaker
likewise did not entertain the consular
official when he serve the summons. You
know what the consular did tinapon sa
bakod yung service of summons. Issue was
whether or not there was a valid service of
summons. Yes there was a valid service of
summons.
So there will be a personal service even if
he refuses to receive. This has to be stated
in details by the sheriff in his return
Do you know what is return? They call this
sheriff's return or process service return. It
is actually a report submitted officer who
serves the summons detailing on how
service of summons was made to up if
serve served the reason why it was not
served
Take note that the service of summons can
be affected by a private individual at the
instance of the plaintiff provided that this
private individual has been duly
commissioned by the court
What is this commission? It is simply the
authority issued by the court to a person to
serve judicial processes or any act
authorized by the court
Primarily it is the duty of the sheriff. In
default of the sheriff, the process server of
the court. In default of court personnel, any
other person who the court may competition
for that purpose. Without that commission
and service was made by anyone who is not
a court personnel, the service is invalid
Substituted service
Substituted service can only be made where
the sheriff had already filed a return
Why should he file a return because it was
not served personally if you did not file a
return he ko summons through substituted
service that there are several attempts,
three attempts in two different occasions.
The decision of the supreme court in the
case of Miralles is now incorporated under
this substituted service together with the
doctrine in Salandane.
In Miralles, these these were the facts: This
woman was sued and she was a swindler
with a pending case. Where she live is a
subdivision. The sheriff serving the
summons to the address of the defendant of
the defendant but every time he goes there,
the security guard at the gate would tell him
"walang tao diyan, may pasabi si ma'am na
wag kayo patuloyin kasi walang tao diyan".
Three attempts on different dates when to
the subdivision with the same answer. Fed
up, the summons to the security guard.
After that, the plaintiff filed motion to declare
defendant in default the court granted.
Eventually, the defendant, through his
counsel, was questionning the lack of
jurisdiction over this person that there was
an invalid service by way of substituted
service of summons cause it was served up
on the security guards. The present rule and
under the amendment, substituted service
can be effected either in the residence or
office of the defendant. If it is in his
residence, true a person residing therein of
age and discretion. If the person who
receive that summons is a mere visitor,
there is an invalid substituted service.
For example, sheriff goes there death of the
defendant and latter at that time has his
nephew who is a lawyer who is vacationing
from new york. It was this nephew who
entertained the sheriff and examined the
summons. He received it. Valid? It is invalid.
He is not a resident therein which is
required by the rules, he is just a visitor. It
did not comply with the rules
Supposed it was the driver who is a high
school graduate. 60 years old. Valid? It
depends never is a stay in driver, then he is
a resident. Or any person in the office who
is of sufficient age and discretion. Primarily
with duties to receive communications.
Otherwise, kung ang tumanggap ay janitor,
ibang usapan yan.
defendant by giving instruction to refuse the
sheriff to her residence.
Sa Salandana, ibang usapan na yan. It was
the refusal of the brother to receive the
summons. That brother refused to give the
address of the defendant so it was served a
upon brother and eventually the defendant
was declared in default. It was this brother
who received the summons, when his
brother was declared in default, was the one
who filed a motion for reconsideration and
to lift the order of default. First of all he is
not a real party in interest. But that was not
important in so far as the rule on summons
is concerned. What is important is that the
supreme court that there was a valid
substituted because that person is residing
therein, who even refuses to provide the
sheriff the address of the defendant.
Substituted service (sec 6)
How many modes of service can summons
be made? 4.
a. By leaving copies

Eventually the case reachef the supreme

court because the motion for
reconsideration which is actually a motion to
lif the order of the court was denied. The
supreme court ruled that the service of
summons with defendant in Miralles case
was valid because the failure to serve the
summons personally was due to the