New Rules of Court to Take Effect on May 1 29 April 2020

22 April 2020

The amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence (Administrative Matter No. 19-08-15-SC) and
Rules of Civil Procedure (Administrative Matter No. 19-10-20-SC) (collectively, the “Amended Rules”)
will take effect on May 1, 2020. The Philippine Supreme Court approved these amendments to help
minimize delays in court litigation and to expedite the resolution of cases.

The full copies of the Amended Rules are available on the Philippine Supreme Court’s website at
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/9284/ and http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/9282/.

The Amended Rules will apply to all newly filed cases and even to pending cases, based on the
discretion of the court and the attendant circumstances. While there have been efforts by members of
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to request the postponement of the effectivity of the Amended
Rules, especially considering the conditions brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, [1] which led to
the physical closure of courts [2] the Supreme Court has yet to issue any announcement on a
postponement.

The Amended Rules reflect developments in law, codify Supreme Court rulings and international
conventions, and incorporate technological advancements. They also introduce significant changes
that will affect how cases are initiated, tried, and resolved.

The following are some issues which parties and their counsel may consider in the course of preparing
for and litigating a court case:

A. Evidence Submitted with the Filing of Complaint and Answer (Rules 7 and 11)

Parties to a case are now required to attach to their opening pleading (i.e., the complaint for the plaintiff
or the answer for the defendant) copies of all the pieces of evidence supporting their claims and
defenses. They must also indicate the names of intended witnesses and the summaries of their
testimonies.

With this new rule, the prospective plaintiff must now frontload a substantial portion of work before the
filing of the complaint, including the preparation of documentary evidence, interview of witnesses,
preparation of the witnesses’ judicial affidavits, among others.

The answering party, in turn, would have a very limited period to complete the same amount of work in
an effort to submit a complete and viable defense.

SyCipLaw Litigation Bulletin

Page | 1
This approach, which is a complete turnaround from previous procedure that only required litigants to
present a basic overview of their positions before trial, could impact a party’s strategies in addressing
an emerging dispute, engaging counsel, negotiating a settlement, and projecting costs.

B. Electronic Filing and Service of Pleadings (Rule 13)

If the parties consent, a court may now allow documents, except for certain pleadings, to be filed in
court and served on the other party through private courier or email. While electronic filing and service
may expedite matters, issues are expected to arise on the sufficiency of proof of sending and receipt,
especially in complex disputes involving voluminous submissions.

C. Service of Summons (Rule 14)

The Amended Rules have liberalized the rules on service of summons on defendant corporations.
Previously, service may only be made on the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate
secretary, treasurer, or in-house counsel.

Now, summons can be served through these individuals’ respective secretaries in their absence or
unavailability. If service cannot be made through the secretaries, it may also be made through the
person who customarily receives the correspondence for the defendant at its principal office, such as a
receptionist or security guard.

With this development, companies must now consider implementing measures to expeditiously refer
any summons received to their in-house or external counsel, especially considering the new
requirement, as noted above, to include all supporting evidence in the defendant’s answer.

D. Minimizing Delays in Motion Practice and Mediation (Rules 11, 15, and 18)

A motion for extension is now strictly prohibited except for a one-time extension for the filing of the
defendant’s initial answer to the complaint. Unlike the current practice of setting for hearing every
motion that can affect the rights of the adverse party, a hearing will only be conducted if the judge
considers it necessary and the adverse party is given only five days to comment on or oppose the
motion.

Further, the second round of court mediation conducted before trial, called Judicial Dispute Resolution,
is no longer required in all instances.

Mediation before the judge will only be conducted if the judge is convinced that a settlement between
the parties is still possible. This particular change may expedite the pre-trial process but the absence of
an additional mediation forum should be taken into account in any settlement negotiation strategy.

E. Final Judgment after Pre-Trial (Rule 18)

After the pre-trial, the courts are now empowered to unilaterally render a judgment (even without a
motion by a litigant) if the court opines that there are no more controverted facts, no more genuine
issue as to any material fact, absence of any issue, or the answer fails to tender an issue.

SyCipLaw Litigation Bulletin

Page | 2
The court’s order submitting the case for resolution due to the foregoing grounds is included in the pre-
trial order and cannot be subject of an appeal or a special civil action for certiorari before the higher
courts. With this, a party can suffer an adverse decision without further recourse while denied the
opportunity to fully present its case or to properly cross examine the other party’s witnesses, thus
requiring increased care and planning in the preparation of court submissions from the inception of a
proceeding.

F. Duplicates as Original Documents (Rule 130)

The Amended Rules appear to have relaxed the stringent requirements on presenting the original of a
document by defining an “original” as including any printout or other output shown to accurately reflect
the data, if the data is stored in a computer or similar device.

A “duplicate” is also now considered as an original document unless a genuine question is raised as to
its authenticity or if it would be unjust to allow the duplicate in lieu of the original. It appears that a
photocopy, depending on the circumstances, may be admitted as an original document.

G. Privileged Communications (Rule 130)

The Amended Rules codified additional exceptions to the attorney-client privilege, such as those
communications relative to the furtherance of a crime or fraud, a breach of duty by the lawyer or the
client, or a document where the lawyer is the attesting witness. Further, privileged communications
remain privileged even in the hands of a third party who may have obtained the information if the
original parties to the privileged communication took reasonable precautions to protect confidentiality.

[1] Please see our client bulletin dated April 26, 2020 on the extension of the enhanced community
quarantine until May 15 over high risk areas including Metro Manila;
https://mailchi.mp/e27e5987e28a/ecq-over-metro-manila-extended-until-may-15-other-covid-19-
issuances.

[2] Please see our client bulletin dated April 3, 2020 on the physical closure of courts;
https://mailchi.mp/1447dc0e37e5/online-filing-of-cases-electronic-inquest-ph-updates-on-covid-19-
issuances.

SyCipLaw Litigation Bulletin

Page | 3
For more information about the Amended Rules, please contact your account partner or the authors of this
client bulletin:

Ricardo Ma. P.G. Ongkiko

Senior Partner; Head of the Litigation Department
rmpgongkiko@syciplaw.com

Russel L. Rodriguez
Partner
rlrodriguez@syciplaw.com

Ma. Patricia B. Paz

Partner
mpbpaz@syciplaw.com

This bulletin contains a summary of the legal issuance discussed above. It was prepared by SyCip
Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan(SyCipLaw) to update its clients about recent legal developments. This
does not constitute legal advice or an opinion of SyCipLaw or any of its lawyers.

This bulletin is only a guide material and SyCipLaw makes no representation in respect of its
completeness and accuracy. You should check the official version of the issuance.

No portion of this advisory may be copied or reproduced in books, pamphlets, outlines or notes, whether
printed, mimeographed, typewritten, copied in different electronic devices or in any other form, for
distribution or sale, or reposted or forwarded without the prior written consent of SyCipLaw.

SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan

SyCipLaw Center, 105 Paseo de Roxas
Makati City 1226, The Philippines
t: +632 8982 3500; +632 8982 3600; +632 8982 3700
f: +632 8817 3145; +632 8817 3896
e: sshg@syciplaw.com
www.syciplaw.com

SyCipLaw Litigation Bulletin

Page | 4