BILAG, MILLER PAULO D.

GACAYAN, RYAN DERRICK

MALLONG, JAYSAR KYLE
SANGLAY, IMMANUEL RAY
TABADERO, ROBERT CHRISTIAN

RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

SECTION 1. Title. – These Rules shall be known as “The Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases.” Environmental cases. These refer to those cases covered by Sec. 2 of
these Rules.

SEC. 2. Scope. – These Rules shall govern the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil
actions before the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts involving
enforcement or violations of environmental and other related laws, rules and regulations
such as but not limited to the following:
(a) Act No. 3572, Prohibition Against Cutting of Tindalo, Akli, and Molave Trees;
(b) P.D. No. 705, Revised Forestry Code; 98 Annotation to the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases 99
(c) P.D. No. 856, Sanitation Code;
(d) P.D. No. 979, Marine Pollution Decree;
(e) P.D. No. 1067, Water Code;
(f) P.D. No. 1151, Philippine Environmental Policy of 1977;
(g) P.D. No. 1433, Plant Quarantine Law of 1978;
(h) P.D. No. 1586, Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System Including
Other Environmental Management Related Measures and for Other Purposes;
(i) R.A. No. 3571, Prohibition Against the Cutting, Destroying or Injuring of Planted or
Growing Trees, Flowering Plants and Shrubs or Plants of Scenic Value along Public Roads,
in Plazas, Parks, School Premises or in any Other Public Ground;
(j) R.A. No. 4850, Laguna Lake Development Authority Act;
(k) R.A. No. 6969, Toxic Substances and Hazardous Waste Act;
(l) R.A. No. 7076, People’s Small-Scale Mining Act;
(m) R.A. No. 7586, National Integrated Protected Areas System Act including all laws,
decrees, orders, proclamations and issuances establishing protected areas;
(n) R.A. No. 7611, Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan Act;
(o) R.A. No. 7942, Philippine Mining Act;
(p) R.A. No. 8371, Indigenous Peoples Rights Act;
(q) R.A. No. 8550, Philippine Fisheries Code;
(r) R.A. No. 8749, Clean Air Act;
(s) R.A. No. 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act;
(t) R.A. No. 9072, National Caves and Cave Resource Management Act;
(u) R.A. No. 9147, Wildlife Conservation and Protection Act; 100 A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
(v) R.A. No. 9175, Chainsaw Act;
(w) R.A. No. 9275, Clean Water Act;
(x) R.A. No. 9483, Oil Spill Compensation Act of 2007; and
(y) Provisions in C.A. No. 141, The Public Land Act; R.A. No. 6657, Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988; R.A. No. 7160, Local Government Code of 1991; R.A. No.
7161, Tax Laws Incorporated in the Revised Forestry Code and Other Environmental
Laws (Amending the NIRC); R.A. No. 7308, Seed Industry Development Act of 1992; R.A.
No. 7900, High-Value Crops Development Act; R.A. No. 8048, Coconut Preservation Act;
R.A. No. 8435, Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997; R.A. No. 9522, The
Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law; R.A. No. 9593, Renewable Energy Act of 2008;
R.A. No. 9637, Philippine Biofuels Act; and other existing laws that relate to the
conservation, development, preservation, protection and utilization of the environment and
natural resources.

Scope versus jurisdiction. It must be noted that the Rules remain consistent with prevailing
jurisprudence regarding the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and primary
jurisdiction.

Laws, rules and regulations. These Rules apply to environmental cases arising from laws
that relate to the conservation, development, preservation, protection and utilization of the
environment and natural resources. These may include environmental laws and those laws that
may contain provisions that relate to the environment but are not environmental laws per se (e.g.
C.A. No. 141, “The Public Land Act”; R.A. No. 7160, “The Local Government Code of 1990”,
etc…). While this section includes a list of such applicable laws, it is not meant to be exhaustive.

In addition, since this section covers “civil, criminal and special civil actions…involving
enforcement or violations of environmental and other related laws” (emphasis added), these
Rules may apply in other suits not necessarily based on environmental laws or laws containing
environmental provisions. Specifically, for example, if a defendant in a civil damages or
defamation suit (the case of which is governed by the regular rules of civil/criminal procedure)
invokes a SLAPP defense (see Rule 6 and 19 infra.), then these Rules shall apply insofar as the
SLAPP defense is concerned.

The courts referred to in this section are those designated as special courts to try hear, try
and decide environmental cases under Administrative Order No. 23-20081 and those that may be
designated as such thereafter.

SEC. 3. Objectives. – The objectives of these Rules are:

 (a) To protect and advance the constitutional right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology;
(b) To provide a simplified, speedy and inexpensive procedure for the enforcement of
environmental rights and duties recognized under the Constitution, existing laws, rules and
regulations, and international agreements;
(c) To introduce and adopt innovations and best practices ensuring the effective enforcement
of remedies and redress for violation of environmental laws; and
(d) To enable the courts to monitor and exact compliance with orders and judgments in
environmental cases.

Objectives. This section contains the principal objectives of the Rules and is not meant to be
an exhaustive listing of objectives. This section states in very broad terms the basic principles
and objectives animating the rules. They are likewise intended to be guideposts in construing the
Rules. It re-affirms the Court’s recognition of environmental rights and provides a backdrop for
the construction of the provisions of contained herein.

Subparagraph (a) recognizes the right to “a balanced and healthful ecology” pursuant to
Section 16, Article II of the Constitution.

Subparagraph (b) promotes access to justice by supporting the adoption of procedural

mechanisms to ensure a simplified, speedy and inexpensive procedure for the enforcement of
environmental rights. This subparagraph also enumerates the various sources for such rights.

Subparagraph (c) refers to innovative provisions of these Rules regarding the defense against
strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) and the precautionary principle.

Finally, Subparagraph (d) gives emphasis to the means by which the courts carry their
jurisdiction to effect. It pertains to the adoption of the writs of kalikasan and continuing
mandamus, as well as the issuance of an Environmental Protection Order (EPO) and Temporary
Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) to ensure the enforcement of court orders and
judgments in environmental cases.

SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. –

 (a) By-product or derivatives means any part taken or substance extracted from
wildlife, in raw or in processed form including stuffed animals and herbarium specimens.

By-product or derivates. This definition was taken from Sec. 5 (b) of R.A. No. 9147, “The
Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act.”

(b) Consent decree refers to a judicially-approved settlement between concerned

parties based on public interest and public policy to protect and preserve the environment.

Consent decree. The designation of a consent decree as a mode of settlement gives emphasis
to the public interest aspect in environmental cases and encourages the parties to expedite the
resolution of litigation.

A consent decree derives its contractual nature from the fact of their being entered into by
the parties themselves through which they arrive at a certain compromise with respect to the
issues involved in the case, whereas their judicial feature is acquired through the approval of the
court. It has a number of advantages:

(1) It encourages the parties (the government and the violators) to come up with
comprehensive, mutually acceptable solutions to the environmental problem, and since the
agreement was arrived at voluntarily, there is a greater possibility of actual compliance;

(2) It is open to public scrutiny;

(3) It allows the parties to address issues other than those presented to the court; and

(4) It is still subject to judicial approval and can be enforced through a court order.

(c) Continuing mandamus is a writ issued by a court in an environmental case

directing any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof to perform an
act or series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall remain effective until judgment
is fully satisfied.

Continuing mandamus. The Philippine concept of a continuing mandamus traces its origin to
the cases of T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India & Ors, 2 SCC 267 (1997), and Vineet Narain v.
Union of India, 1 SCC 266 (1998). In the Godavarman case, the Supreme Court of India in the
former case issued this novel writ to save the country’s forests from rapid deterioration due to
illegal logging, and in view of the nature of the case which requires the court to continuously
monitor compliance with its orders. In the Narain case, the writ was issued for the enforcement
of the court order to clean up the Ganges River. Comments made regarding such issuances harp
upon how the judiciary took upon itself policy making functions, and as in any other jurisdiction
where the principle of separation of powers is recognized, such judicial move received accolades
as well as criticisms.

In Philippine jurisprudence, the concept of continuing mandamus was originally enunciated

in the case of Concerned Residents of Manila Bay v. MMDA.4 The Rules now codify the Writ
of Continuing Mandamus as one of the principal remedies which may be availed of in
environmental cases.

(d) Environmental protection order (EPO) refers to an order issued by the court
directing or enjoining any person or government agency to perform or desist from
performing an act in order to protect, preserve or rehabilitate the environment.

EPO. The EPO is one of the remedial measures adopted to ensure the effective enforcement
of environmental laws.

(e) Mineral refers to all naturally occurring inorganic substance in solid, gas, liquid, or
any intermediate state excluding energy materials such as coal, petroleum, natural gas,
radioactive materials and geothermal energy.

Minerals. This definition was taken from Sec. 3 (aa) of R.A. No. 7942, “The Philippine
Mining Act of 1995.”

(f) Precautionary principle states that when human activities may lead to threats of
serious and irreversible damage to the environment that is scientifically plausible but
uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat.

Precautionary principle. The adoption of the precautionary principle as part of these Rules,
specifically relating to evidence, recognizes that exceptional cases may require its application.
The inclusion of a definition of this principle is an integral part of Part V, Rule on Evidence
(infra.) in environmental cases in order to ease the burden on the part of ordinary plaintiffs to
prove their cause of action.
 In its essence, the precautionary principle calls for the exercise of caution in the face of risk
and uncertainty. While the principle can be applied in any setting in which risk and uncertainty
are found, it has evolved predominantly in and today remains most closely associated with the
environmental arena.

The Rules acknowledge the peculiar circumstances surrounding environmental cases in that
“scientific evidence is usually insufficient, inconclusive or uncertain and preliminary scientific
evaluation indicates that there are reasonable grounds for concern” that there are potentially
dangerous effects on the environment, human, animal, or planet health. For this reason, principle
requires those who have the means, knowledge, power, and resources to take action to prevent or
mitigate the harm to the environment or to act when conclusively ascertained understanding by
science is not yet available. In effect, the quantum of evidence to prove potentially hazardous
effects on the environment is relaxed and the burden is shifted to proponents of an activity that
may cause damage to the environment.

There are numerous formulations of the precautionary principle and it is recited in many
international declarations and treaties, so much so that “while not all scholars agree to its status
as that of customary international law, many respected scholars do.”

In formulating the definition of the precautionary principle in the Rules, the definitions
found in the Rio Declaration of 1992,the 1999 Canadian Protection Act (CEPA 1999),and the
World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST) 2005
were considered.

(g) Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) refers to an action whether
civil, criminal or administrative, brought against any person, institution or any
government agency or local government unit or its officials and employees, with the intent
to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that such person, institution
or government agency has taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws,
protection of the environment or assertion of environmental rights.

SLAPP. The SLAPP provisions under these Rules are innovations of the doctrine first
introduced by Dr. George W. Pring, as well as doctrines and practices in other jurisdictions. The
main purpose of a SLAPP suit is to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse
on any person, including the government from enforcing environmental laws or protecting or
asserting environmental rights.
This provision applies not only to suits that have been filed in the form of a countersuit, but
also to suits that are about to be filed with the intention of discouraging the aggrieved person
from bringing a valid environmental complaint before the court. Specific SLAPP provisions in
these Rules are directed separately, against civil and criminal actions. The Rules pertaining to
each, however, are interrelated.

(h) Wildlife means wild forms and varieties of flora and fauna, in all developmental
stages including those which are in captivity or are being bred or propagated.

Wildlife. This definition was taken from Sec. 5 (x) of R.A. No. 9147, the “Wildlife
Resources Conservation and Protection Act.”

PART II CIVIL PROCEDURE RULE 2 PLEADINGS AND PARTIES

SEC. 1. Pleadings and motions allowed. – The pleadings and motions that may be filed
are complaint, answer which may include compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim,
motion for intervention, motion for discovery and motion for reconsideration of the
judgment.

Motion for postponement, motion for new trial and petition for relief from judgment
shall be allowed in highly meritorious cases or to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice.

Exclusive list. The enumeration in this section is exclusive and must be read in conjunction
with the succeeding provision, infra.

SEC. 2. Prohibited pleadings or motions. – The following pleadings or motions shall

not be allowed:

(a) Motion to dismiss the complaint;

(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, except to file answer, the extension
not to exceed fifteen (15) days;
(d) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(e) Reply and rejoinder; and
(f) Third party complaint.
Prohibited pleadings. While the enumeration of prohibited pleadings have been adopted in part
from the Rule on Summary Procedure in response to the question of delay which often
accompanies regular cases, summary procedure is not adopted in its entirety given the complex
and wide range of environmental cases. Procedural safeguards have been introduced for truly
complex cases which may necessitate further evaluation from the court. Among these are the
exclusion of the motions for postponement, new trial and reconsideration, as well as the petition
for relief from the prohibition.

Motion for postponement, motion for new trial and petition for relief from judgment shall
only be allowed in certain conditions – highly meritorious cases or to prevent a manifest
miscarriage of justice. The satisfaction of these conditions is required since these motions are
prone to abuse during litigation.

Motion for intervention is permitted in order to allow the public to participate in the filing
and prosecution of environmental cases, which are imbued with public interest.

Petitions for certiorari are likewise permitted since these raise fundamentally questions of
jurisdiction. Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court may not be deprived of its certiorari
jurisdiction.

SEC. 3. Verified complaint. – The verified complaint shall contain the names of the
parties, their addresses, the cause of action and the reliefs prayed for. The plaintiff shall
attach to the verified complaint all evidence proving or supporting the cause of action
consisting of the affidavits of witnesses, documentary evidence and if possible, object
evidence. The affidavits shall be in question and answer form and shall comply with the
rules of admissibility of evidence. The complaint shall state that it is an environmental case
and the law involved. The complaint shall also include a certification against forum
shopping. If the complaint is not an environmental complaint, the presiding judge shall
refer it to the executive judge for re-raffle.

Evidence all in; complaint misfiled as an environmental complaint. The provision requires
the attachment of all evidence then available. This is to facilitate complete presentation of facts
by the parties. This likewise entails a relaxation of the technical rules on admissibility.

The appropriate action to be taken by the presiding judge if a complaint is misfiled as an

environmental complaint is to refer the complaint to the executive judge for re-raffle, the
complaint should not be dismissed.
 SEC. 4. Who may file. – Any real party in interest, including the government and
juridical entities authorized by law, may file a civil action involving the enforcement or
violation of any environmental law. Real party in interest. The phrase “real party in
interest” in this provision retains the same meaning under the Rules of Civil Procedure and
jurisprudence.It must be understood, however, in conjunction with the nature of environmental
rights, which are enjoyed in general by all individuals. Under this section, both a Filipino citizen
and an alien can file a suit so long as they are able to show direct and personal injury. This
provision on real party in interest must be read in conjunction with citizen suit provisions — Sec.
5 of this Rule and Sec. 1, Rule 5.

A person who suffers damage or injury arising from an environmental prejudice which is
also the same subject of a citizen suit can file a separate action under this section to recover for
his personal injury. In this instance, a citizen suit can take place simultaneously with the filing of
an individual complaint.

SEC. 5. Citizen suit. – Any Filipino citizen in representation of others, including

minors or generations yet unborn, may file an action to enforce rights or obligations under
environmental laws. Upon the filing of a citizen suit, the court shall issue an order which
shall contain a brief description of the cause of action and the reliefs prayed for, requiring
all interested parties to manifest their interest to intervene in the case within fifteen (15)
days from notice thereof. The plaintiff may publish the order once in a newspaper of a
general circulation in the Philippines or furnish all affected barangays copies of said order.

Citizen suits filed under R.A. No. 8749 and R.A. No. 9003 shall be governed by their
respective provisions.

Citizen suit. To further encourage the protection of the environment, the Rules enable
litigants enforcing environmental rights to file their cases as citizen suits. This provision
liberalizes standing for all cases filed enforcing environmental laws and collapses the traditional
rule on personal and direct interest, on the principle that humans are stewards of nature. The
terminology of the text reflects the doctrine first enunciated in Oposa v. Factoran, insofar as it
refers to minors and generations yet unborn.

While the Rules liberalize the requirements for standing, in the case of non-government
organizations (NGOs) and people’s organizations (POs), proof of their juridical personality (i.e.
accreditation, recognition or registration) given the relative ease by which a number of groups
can loosely organize and label themselves as NGOs or POs. The same proof of juridical
personality is also required in a petition for a writ of kalikasan.

Unlike the previous section on real party in interest, Sec. 5 is a suit limited to Filipino
citizens and one that is filed in the public interest hence, no proof of personal injury is required.
A Filipino citizen may be an individual or a corporation so long as the requirements of Philippine
citizenship are complied with. The reliefs that may be awarded in a citizen suit are discussed in
Rule 5, Sec. 1, infra.

As a procedural device, citizen suits permit deferment of payment of filing fees until after
the judgment.

The provision permits the plaintiff to publish the order containing a brief description of the
action in order to allow other persons to join as co-plaintiffs and to sufficiently apprise the judge
of persons interested to join as such, consistent with the public character of the citizen suit. This
adopts the features of the general rule on publication found in cases in rem, and is meant to
reflect the distinct nature of environmental cases. In this Rule, however, publication is
permissive and non-jurisdictional and is meant only to encourage public participation.

Citizen suits may be filed for all types of environmental cases. In deference to the
legislature, however, the provision adds as a caveat that citizen suits under the Clean Air Act of
1999) and the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 shall be governed by their
respective provisions.

SEC. 6. Service of the complaint on the government or its agencies. – Upon the filing of
the complaint, the plaintiff is required to furnish the government or the appropriate
agency, although not a party, a copy of the complaint. Proof of service upon the
government or the appropriate agency shall be attached to the complaint.

Service of complaint upon government or its agencies. This provision makes it mandatory
for plaintiffs to notify the concerned branch of government. Two agencies have been noted in
particular: the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and the Office of the
Solicitor General (OSG). If their participation should prove unwarranted, they may file a
manifestation to that effect.
 The service of the complaint would apprise the government of the pendency of the case and
the agencies may intervene if warranted. The government agency may thus employ its resources,
as well as expertise, to successfully pursue the case.

SEC. 7. Assignment by raffle. – If there is only one (1) designated branch in a multiple-
sala court, the executive judge shall immediately refer the case to said branch. If there are
two (2) or more designated branches, the executive judge shall conduct a special raffle on
the day the complaint is filed.

SEC. 8. Issuance of Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO). – If it

appears from the verified complaint with a prayer for the issuance of an Environmental
Protection Order (EPO) that the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer
grave injustice and irreparable injury, the executive judge of the multiple-sala court before
raffle or the presiding judge of a single-sala court as the case may be, may issue ex parte a
TEPO effective for only seventy-two (72) hours from date of the receipt of the TEPO by the
party or person enjoined. Within said period, the court where the case is assigned, shall
conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the TEPO may be extended until the
termination of the case.

The court where the case is assigned, shall periodically monitor the existence of acts
that are the subject matter of the TEPO even if issued by the executive judge, and may lift
the same at any time as circumstances may warrant.

The applicant shall be exempted from the posting of a bond for the issuance of a
TEPO.

TEPO. The temporary environmental protection order (TEPO) integrates both prohibitive
and mandatory reliefs in order to appropriately address the factual circumstances surrounding the
case. This is derived from the nature of an EPO, which, as defined, is an “order issued by the
court directing or enjoining any person or government agency to perform or desist from
performing an act in order to protect, preserve, or rehabilitate the environment.”

The procedure for the issuance of the TEPO stems from the same procedure for the issuance
of a Temporary Restraining Order, as it appears in Sections 5 and 6 of Rule 58 of the Rules of
Court.
 The Rules provide that an applicant who files for the issuance of a TEPO is exempt from the
posting of a bond, but the Rules also provide for safeguards for the possible pernicious effects
upon the party or person sought to be enjoined by the TEPO:

1. A TEPO may only be issued in matters of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer
grave injustice and irreparable injury, the TEPO effective for only seventytwo (72) hours; and

2. The court should periodically monitor the existence of acts which are the subject matter of
the TEPO, the TEPO can being lifted anytime as the circumstances may warrant.

While the TEPO may be issued ex parte, this is more of the exception. The general rule on
the conduct of a hearing, pursuant to due process, remains.

SEC. 9. Action on motion for dissolution of TEPO. – The grounds for motion to
dissolve a TEPO shall be supported by affidavits of the party or person enjoined which the
applicant may oppose, also by affidavits.

The TEPO may be dissolved if it appears after hearing that its issuance or continuance
would cause irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the applicant may
be fully compensated for such damages as he may suffer and subject to the posting of a
sufficient bond by the party or person enjoined.

SEC. 10. Prohibition against temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary
injunction. – Except the Supreme Court, no court can issue a TRO or writ of preliminary
injunction against lawful actions of government agencies that enforce environmental laws
or prevent violations thereof.

Prohibition against TRO and preliminary injunction. The formulation of this section is
derived from the provisions of P.D. 60523 and likewise covers the provisions of P.D. 1818.To
obviate future conflict between the present provision and these two laws, the prohibition on the
issuance of a TRO remains the general rule while its issuance is the exception. In availing of the
exception, the movant must overcome the presumption of regularity in the performance of a duty
by the respondent government agency or official. The judge must then require a higher standard
and heavier burden of proof.
 R. A. No. 8975 amended P.D. 605 and P.D. 1818. Pursuant to the mandate of R.A. No.
8975,only the Supreme Court has the authority to issue a temporary restraining order,
preliminary injunction and preliminary mandatory injunction against the Government or any of
its instrumentalities, officials and agencies in cases such as those filed by bidders or those
claiming to have rights through such bidders involving such contract or project. R.A. No. 8975
prohibits lower courts from issuing injunctive orders in connection with the implementation of
government infrastructure projects unless the case pertains to matters of extreme urgency
involving constitutional issues such that unless a temporary restraining order is issued, grave
injustice and irreparable injury will arise.

This provision is distinct from the previous section on the issuance of a TEPO where the
latter is premised on the violation of an environmental law or a threatened damage or injury to
the environment by any person, even the government and its agencies, the prohibition against the
issuance of a TRO or preliminary injunction is premised on the presumption of regularity on the
government and its agencies in enforcing environmental laws and protecting the environment.
This section is formulated to support government and its agencies in their responsibilities and
tasks. Therefore, in the absence of evidence overcoming this presumption of regularity, no court
can issue a TRO or injunctive writ. It is only the Supreme Court which can issue a TRO or an
injunctive writ in exceptional cases.

SEC. 11. Report on TEPO, EPO, TRO or preliminary injunction. – The judge shall
report any action taken on a TEPO, EPO, TRO or a preliminary injunction, including its
modification and dissolution, to the Supreme Court, through the Office of the Court
Administrator, within ten (10) days from the action taken.

Report on action taken. As an additional measure to ensure the proper issuance of such court
orders, the Rules provide a requirement for the issuing judge to report any action taken on such
court issuances. The report shall be submitted to the High Court through the Office of the Court
Administrator within ten (10) days from the action taken.

SEC. 12. Payment of filing and other legal fees. – The payment of filing and other legal
fees by the plaintiff shall be deferred until after judgment unless the plaintiff is allowed to
litigate as an indigent. It shall constitute a first lien on the judgment award. For a citizen
suit, the court shall defer the payment of filing and other legal fees that shall serve as first
lien on the judgment award.

SEC. 13. Service of summons, orders and other court processes. – The summons,
orders and other court processes may be served by the sheriff, his deputy or other proper
court officer or for justifiable reasons, by the counsel or representative of the plaintiff or
any suitable person authorized or deputized by the court issuing the summons.

Any private person who is authorized or deputized by the court to serve summons,
orders and other court processes shall for that purpose be considered an officer of the
court.

The summons shall be served on the defendant, together with a copy of an order
informing all parties that they have fifteen (15) days from the filing of an answer, within
which to avail of interrogatories to parties under Rule 25 of the Rules of Court and request
for admission by adverse party under Rule 26, or at their discretion, make use of
depositions under Rule 23 or other measures under Rules 27 and 28.

Should personal and substituted service fail, summons by publication shall be allowed.
In the case of juridical entities, summons by publication shall be done by indicating the
names of the officers or their duly authorized representatives.

Service by a suitable person. The “suitable person” indicated in the first paragraph of this
section is required to perform the duties of a sheriff. The role is also similar to that of a process
server. The next paragraph imposes the duties and responsibilities of an officer of the court on a
private person authorized or deputized to serve summons.

Under the last paragraph, service by publication is deemed a sufficient compliance with the
requirement of due process. The plaintiff, however, must file a motion in order to avail of this
mode of service. This mode of service by publication is an innovation to the traditional rule on
service of summons and applies to environmental cases.

SEC. 14. Verified answer. – Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of summons, the
defendant shall file a verified answer to the complaint and serve a copy thereof on the
plaintiff. The defendant shall attach affidavits of witnesses, reports, studies of experts and
all evidence in support of the defense.

Affirmative and special defenses not pleaded shall be deemed waived, except lack of
jurisdiction.
 Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims not asserted shall be considered barred.
The answer to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be filed and served within ten (10) days
from service of the answer in which they are pleaded.

Attachment of all evidence in support of defense. The term “evidence” is used in its broad
sense and is meant to be inclusive of all types of evidence peculiar to an environmental case.
Evidence attached to the verified answer includes affidavits of witnesses, reports and studies of
experts on a particular environmental theory.

SEC. 15. Effect of failure to answer. – Should the defendant fail to answer the
complaint within the period provided, the court shall declare defendant in default and
upon motion of the plaintiff, shall receive evidence ex parte and render judgment based
thereon and the reliefs prayed for.

RULE 3 PRE-TRIAL

SEC. 1. Notice of pre-trial. – Within two (2) days from the filing of the answer to the
counterclaim or cross-claim, if any, the branch clerk of court shall issue a notice of the pre-
trial to be held not later than one (1) month from the filing of the last pleading.

The court shall schedule the pre-trial and set as many pretrial conferences as may be
necessary within a period of two (2) months counted from the date of the first pre-trial
conference.

Issuance of notice of pre-trial. A time limit to the issuance of the notice of pre-trial inasmuch
as the setting of pre-trial sets the entire proceedings in motion.

SEC. 2. Pre-trial brief. – At least three (3) days before the pre-trial, the parties shall submit
pre-trial briefs containing the following:

(a) A statement of their willingness to enter into an amicable settlement indicating the
desired terms thereof or to submit the case to any of the alternative modes of dispute resolution;

(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts; 1

 (c) The legal and factual issues to be tried or resolved. For each factual issue, the parties
shall state all evidence to support their positions thereon. For each legal issue, parties shall state
the applicable law and jurisprudence supporting their respective positions thereon;

(d) The documents or exhibits to be presented, including depositions, answers to

interrogatories and answers to written request for admission by adverse party, stating the purpose
thereof;

(e) A manifestation of their having availed of discovery procedures or their intention to avail
themselves of referral to a commissioner or panel of experts;

(f) The number and names of the witnesses and the substance of their affidavits;

(g) Clarificatory questions from the parties; and

(h) List of cases arising out of the same facts pending before other courts or administrative
agencies.

Failure to comply with the required contents of a pre-trial brief may be a ground for
contempt.

Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial.

Contents of pre-trial brief. The contents of a pre-trial brief was generally taken from A.M.
No. 03-1-09-SC, “Rule on Guidelines to be Observed by Trial Court Judges and Clerks of Court
in the Conduct of Pre-Trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures” (Guidelines on Pre-
trial).

Sanctions. The last paragraph imposes a sanction on the failure to file a pre-trial brief.
Nevertheless, the judge may proceed in setting the pre-trial, to keep the case docketed. A show-
cause order may likewise be issued seeking an explanation as to why either or both the parties
failed at pre-trial. The Rules provide a more lenient approach to a party who fails to file a pre-
trial brief since it is important for evidence to be submitted given the peculiar nature of an
environmental case and the complex character of evidence involved.
 SEC. 3. Referral to mediation. – At the start of the pre-trial conference, the court shall
inquire from the parties if they have settled the dispute; otherwise, the court shall
immediately refer the parties or their counsel, if authorized by their clients, to the
Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) unit for purposes of mediation.

If not available, the court shall refer the case to the clerk of court or legal researcher
for mediation.

Mediation must be conducted within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from
receipt of notice of referral to mediation.

The mediation report must be submitted within ten (10) days from the expiration of the
30-day period.

Mediation. If the parties have not settled their dispute at this stage, the provision makes it
mandatory for the judge to refer the parties to mediation. Another innovation in the provision is
the availability of the services of the legal researcher for the conduct of mediation in the absence
of the PMC or the clerk of court. This is in recognition of the fact the mediation services by the
PMC is not available in some areas and the heavy workload of the clerk of court may not permit
the latter’s participation in mediation proceedings.

SEC. 4. Preliminary conference. – If mediation fails, the court will schedule the
continuance of the pre-trial. Before the scheduled date of continuance, the court may refer
the case to the branch clerk of court for a preliminary conference for the following
purposes:

(a) To assist the parties in reaching a settlement;

(b) To mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and copies
thereof to be attached to the records after comparison with the originals;

(c) To ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the
genuineness and due execution of the documents marked as exhibits;
 (d) To require the parties to submit the depositions taken under Rule 23 of the Rules of
Court, the answers to written interrogatories under Rule 25, and the answers to request for
admissions by the adverse party under Rule 26;

(e) To require the production of documents or things requested by a party under Rule
27 and the results of the physical and mental examination of persons under Rule 28;
(f) To consider such other matters as may aid in its prompt disposition;
(g) To record the proceedings in the “Minutes of Preliminary Conference” to be signed
by both parties or their counsels;

(h) To mark the affidavits of witnesses which shall be in question and answer form and
shall constitute the direct examination of the witnesses; and

(i) To attach the minutes together with the marked exhibits before the pre-trial proper.

The parties or their counsel must submit to the branch clerk of court the names,
addresses and contact numbers of the affiants.

During the preliminary conference, the branch clerk of court shall also require the
parties to submit the depositions taken under Rule 23 of the Rules of Court, the answers to
written interrogatories under Rule 25 and the answers to request for admissions by the
adverse party under Rule 26. The branch clerk of court may also require the production of
documents or things requested by a party under Rule 27 and the results of the physical and
mental examination of persons under Rule 28.

Use of depositions. The sole purpose for the use of depositions at pre-trial is to obtain
admissions. This excludes the presentation of evidence.

SEC. 5. Pre-trial conference; consent decree. – The judge shall put the parties and their
counsels under oath, and they shall remain under oath in all pre-trial conferences.

The judge shall exert best efforts to persuade the parties to arrive at a settlement of the
dispute. The judge may issue a consent decree approving the agreement between the
parties in accordance with law, morals, public order and public policy to protect the right
of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology.
 Evidence not presented during the pre-trial, except newly discovered evidence, shall be
deemed waived.

Consent decree. This section encourages parties to reach an agreement regarding settlement
through a consent decree, which gives emphasis to the public interest aspect in the assertion of
the right to a balanced and healthful ecology.
SEC. 6. Failure to settle. – If there is no full settlement, the judge shall:

(a) Adopt the minutes of the preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial
proceedings and confirm the markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and
admissions on the genuineness and due execution of documents;

(b) Determine if there are cases arising out of the same facts pending before other
courts and order its consolidation if warranted;

(c) Determine if the pleadings are in order and if not, order the amendments if
necessary;

(d) Determine if interlocutory issues are involved and resolve the same;

(e) Consider the adding or dropping of parties;

(f) Scrutinize every single allegation of the complaint, answer and other pleadings and
attachments thereto, and the contents of documents and all other evidence identified and
pre-marked during pre-trial in determining further admissions;

(g) Obtain admissions based on the affidavits of witnesses and evidence attached to the
pleadings or submitted during pre-trial;

(h) Define and simplify the factual and legal issues arising from the pleadings and
evidence. Uncontroverted issues and frivolous claims or defenses should be eliminated;

(i) Discuss the propriety of rendering a summary judgment or a judgment based on the
pleadings, evidence and admissions made during pre-trial;
 (j) Observe the Most Important Witness Rule in limiting the number of witnesses,
determining the facts to be proved by each witness and fixing the approximate number of
hours per witness;

(k) Encourage referral of the case to a trial by commissioner under Rule 32 of the
Rules of Court or to a mediator or arbitrator under any of the alternative modes of dispute
resolution governed by the Special Rules of Court on Alternative Dispute Resolution;
(l) Determine the necessity of engaging the services of a qualified expert as a friend of
the court (amicus curiae); and

(m) Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates for continuous trial, comply with the
one-day examination of witness rule, adhere to the case flow chart determined by the court
which shall contain the different stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of the
decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting the trial dates.

Amicus curiae. The engagement of an amicus curiae involves a prior determination by the
court that the person summoned is an expert. There is no requirement that the amicus curiae be
qualified as an expert. In selecting an expert, the court may take into consideration, in addition to
or in lieu of formal education the expert’s skill, experience and other factors. The expert,
however, is subject to cross examination.

SEC. 7. Effect of failure to appear at pre-trial. – The court shall not dismiss the
complaint, except upon repeated and unjustified failure of the plaintiff to appear. The
dismissal shall be without prejudice, and the court may proceed with the counterclaim. If
the defendant fails to appear at the pre-trial, the court shall receive evidence ex parte.

Failure to appear at pre-trial. Some leeway is provided for the plaintiff in an environmental
case insofar as the complaint is not immediately dismissed on account of a single failure to
appear at pre-trial. The dismissal of the case to judicial discretion as to the number of absences
involved. In fairness to the defendant, the counterclaim filed shall be allowed to proceed, unless
the counterclaim is determined to be a SLAPP.

SEC. 8. Minutes of pre-trial. – The minutes of each pretrial conference shall contain
matters taken up therein, more particularly admissions of facts and exhibits, and shall be
signed by the parties and their counsel.
 SEC. 9. Pre-trial order. – Within ten (10) days after the termination of the pre-trial, the
court shall issue a pre-trial order setting forth the actions taken during the pre-trial
conference, the facts stipulated, the admissions made, the evidence marked, the number of
witnesses to be presented and the schedule of trial. Said order shall bind the parties, limit
the trial to matters not disposed of and control the course of action during the trial.
SEC. 10. Efforts to settle. – The court shall endeavor to make the parties agree to
compromise or settle in accordance with law at any stage of the proceedings before
rendition of judgment.

Power of the court to impose participation and cooperation in pre-trial. Alternative modes
of dispute resolution should be encouraged because of the nature of environment cases which
require broader settlements that are more appropriate to negotiation or agency action. In
recognition of this, the Rules emphasize the court’s role to encourage participation and
cooperation between the parties during pre-trial.

RULE 4
TRIAL
SEC. 1. Continuous trial. – The judge shall conduct continuous trial which shall not exceed
two (2) months from the date of the issuance of the pre-trial order.
Before the expiration of the two-month period, the judge may ask the Supreme Court for
the extension of the trial period for justifiable cause.
*NOTE: This section guarantees speedy disposition of environmental cases. Continuous trial is
the shortened timeline available and permitted for the courts in resolving environmental cases
which shall not exceed two months from the date of the issuance of the pre-trial order. This,
however, does not warrant the conduct of trial on a day-to-day basis. Emphasis is simply made
on the timeframe within which the trial must be conducted. Moreover, the presiding judge may
ask the Supreme Court for the extension of trial before the expiration of the two-month period
provided by this rule for a justified cause, in order to maintain impartiality in the conclusion of
the case.
SEC. 2. Affidavits in lieu of direct examination. – In lieu of direct examination, affidavits
marked during the pre-trial shall be presented as direct examination of affiants subject to
cross-examination by the adverse party.
*NOTE: Affidavits are employed in lieu of direct examination to prevent delays in the
proceeding which have been identified and known to accompany direct examinations. The
preparation of affidavits narrows the scope of examination, as well as focuses the inquiry on the
very merits of the controversy. Prior to their presentation as evidence, this provision presupposes
that the admissibility of the affidavits have already been considered at pre-trial.
SEC. 3. One-day examination of witness rule. – The court shall strictly adhere to the rule
that a witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day, subject to the court’s discretion of
extending the examination for justifiable reason. After the presentation of the last witness,
only oral offer of evidence shall be allowed, and the opposing party shall immediately
interpose his objections. The judge shall forthwith rule on the offer of evidence in open
court.
*NOTE: The mandate of this rule is clear; one-day examination of witness must be strictly
followed by the court. (Exception: the one day examination of a witness may be extended by the
court in the presence of justified cause)
SEC. 4. Submission of case for decision; filing of memoranda.– After the last party has
rested its case, the court shall issue an order submitting the case for decision.
The court may require the parties to submit their respective memoranda, if possible in
electronic form, within a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from the date the case is
submitted for decision.
The court shall have a period of sixty (60) days to decide the case from the date the case is
submitted for decision.
*NOTE: The section provides for the submission of the memoranda in electronic form. This is
in response to developments in information technology and in anticipation of further
developments in the legal system with respect to the use of computers and the internet.
The court has a disposition period of sixty (60) days from the date that the case is submitted for
decision. The period applies with or without a memorandum being filed.
SEC. 5. Period to try and decide. – The court shall have a period of one (1) year from the
filing of the complaint to try and decide the case. Before the expiration of the one-year
period, the court may petition the Supreme Court for the extension of the period for
justifiable cause.
The court shall prioritize the adjudication of environmental cases.
*NOTE: This section mandates the court to have a period of one (1) year to try and decide an
environmental case from the filing of its complaint. (Exemption: the court may ask the Supreme
Court for the extension of adjudication of the case if there is a justified cause to do so) Moreover,
environmental cases must be prioritized by the court. The designated environmental courts will
try and decide environmental cases on top of their other caseload.
RULE 5
JUDGMENT AND EXECUTION
SEC. 1. Reliefs in a citizen suit. – If warranted, the court may grant to the plaintiff proper
reliefs which shall include the protection, preservation or rehabilitation of the environment
and the payment of attorney’s fees, costs of suit and other litigation expenses. It may also
require the violator to submit a program of rehabilitation or restoration of the
environment, the costs of which shall be borne by the violator, or to contribute to a special
trust fund for that purpose subject to the control of the court.
*NOTE: Article 1167 of the Civil Code states that, “If a person obliged to do something fails to
do it, the same shall be executed at his cost.” Thus, this section provides for a number of broad
reliefs in a citizen suit, which are the following: (a) monetary awards; these include the (b)
protection ; (c) preservation; and/or (d) rehabilitation of the environment ;and (e) the payment of
attorney’s fees, (f) costs of suit and other litigation expenses. (“Litigation expenses” in this
provision encompasses expenses for preparation of witnesses, witness fees and other fees which
cannot be paid for under the present rules)
Furthermore, no damages can be awarded in a citizen suit. This measure is in line with the policy
that a citizen suit is filed in the public interest, and in effect, it is the environment which is
vindicated in the action. Hence, a party or person who suffers damage or injury arising from an
environment prejudice which is also the same subject of citizen suit cannot claim for damages in
a citizen suit since it is the environment that is vindicated in the action. The only recourse of a
party or person who wishes to recover damages for injury suffered is to file a separate action
under Sec. 4, Rule 2.
SEC. 2. Judgment not stayed by appeal. – Any judgment directing the performance of acts
for the protection, preservation or rehabilitation of the environment shall be executory
pending appeal unless restrained by the appellate court.
*NOTE: A judgment rendered pursuant to these Rules is immediately executory. It may not be
stayed by the posting of a bond under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and the sole remedy lies
with the appellate court. The appellate court can issue a TRO to restrain the execution of the
judgment and should the appellate court act with grave abuse of discretion in refusing to act on
the application for a TRO, a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 can be brought before the
Supreme Court.
SEC. 3. Permanent EPO; writ of continuing mandamus. – In the judgment, the court may
convert the TEPO to a permanent EPO or issue a writ of continuing mandamus directing
the performance of acts which shall be effective until the judgment is fully satisfied.
The court may, by itself or through the appropriate government agency, monitor the
execution of the judgment and require the party concerned to submit written reports on a
quarterly basis or sooner as may be necessary, detailing the progress of the execution and
satisfaction of the judgment. The other party may, at its option, submit its comments or
observations on the execution of the judgment.
 *NOTE: Permanent EPO; writ of continuing mandamus.— In the judgment, the court may
convert the TEPO to a permanent EPO or issue a writ of continuing mandamus directing the
performance of acts which shall be effective until the judgment is fully satisfied. The court may,
by itself or through the appropriate government agency, monitor the execution of the judgment
and require the party concerned to submit written reports on a quarterly basis or sooner as may
be necessary, detailing the progress of the execution and satisfaction of the judgment. The other
party may, at its option, submit its comments or observations on the execution of the judgment.
In this provision, continuing mandamus is made available as a final relief. As a remedy,
continuing mandamus is decidedly an attractive relief. Nevertheless, the monitoring function
attached to the writ is decidedly taxing upon the court. Thus, it is meant to be an exceptional
remedy. Among others, the nature of the case in which the judgment is issued will be a decisive
factor in determining whether to issue a writ of continuing mandamus. A TEPO may be
converted into a writ of continuing mandamus should the circumstances warrant.
SEC. 4. Monitoring of compliance with judgment and order of the court by a
commissioner. – The court may motu proprio, or upon motion of the prevailing party,
order that the enforcement of the judgment or order be referred to a commissioner to be
appointed by the court. The commissioner shall file with the court written progress reports
on a quarterly basis or more frequently when necessary.
*NOTE: The court may, by itself or through the appropriate government agency:
(a) monitor the execution of the judgment; (b) require the party concerned to submit written
reports on a quarterly basis or sooner, detailing the progress of the execution and satisfaction of
the judgment.
The other party may submit comments or observations on the execution
SEC. 5. Return of writ of execution. – The process of execution shall terminate upon a
sufficient showing that the decision or order has been implemented to the satisfaction of the
court in accordance with Section 14, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.
*NOTE: (Section 14, RULE 39 of the Rules of Court) Return of writ of execution. — The writ
of execution shall be returnable to the court issuing it immediately after the judgment has been
satisfied in part or in full. If the judgment cannot be satisfied in full within thirty (30) days after
his receipt of the writ, the officer shall report to the court and state the reason therefor. Such writ
shall continue in effect during the period within which the judgment may be enforced by motion.
The officer shall make a report to the court every thirty (30) days on the proceedings taken
thereon until the judgment is satisfied in full, or its effectivity expires. The returns or periodic
reports shall set forth the whole of the proceedings taken, and shall be filed with the court and
copies thereof promptly furnished the parties

RULE 6
STRATEGIC LAWSUIT AGAINST PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION
SEC. 1. Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). – A legal action filed to
harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person, institution or
the government has taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws,
protection of the environment or assertion of environmental rights shall be treated as a
SLAPP and shall be governed by these Rules.
*NOTE: These sections on SLAPP are the distillation of existing provisions of Philippine law
and analgous provisions from several jurisdictions.
This section identifies the legal action that constitutes a SLAPP. The constitutional rights to
freedom of speech, expression and assembly (and in certain cases, the right to petition the
government for redress of grievances) in relation to the right to a balanced and healthful ecology
are affected by a SLAPP.
The Rules recognize that formidable legal challenges may be mounted against those who seek to
enforce environmental law, or to assert environmental rights. These legal challenges may be pre-
emptive in character and may be done in order to “chill” the latter. In light of this, the Rules
make available a formidable defense in these provisions.
SEC. 2. SLAPP as a defense; how alleged. – In a SLAPP filed against a person involved in
the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment, or assertion of
environmental rights, the defendant may file an answer interposing as a defense that the
case is a SLAPP and shall be supported by documents, affidavits, papers and other
evidence; and, by way of counterclaim, pray for damages, attorney’s fees and costs of suit.
The court shall direct the plaintiff or adverse party to file an opposition showing the suit is
not a SLAPP, attaching evidence in support thereof, within a non-extendible period of five
(5) days from receipt of notice that an answer has been filed.
The defense of a SLAPP shall be set for hearing by the court after issuance of the order to
file an opposition within fifteen (15) days from filing of the comment or the lapse of the
period.
*NOTE: Once the defense of SLAPP is alleged in an answer for a civil case outside the
coverage of these Rules, this Rule will apply insofar as the determination of whether such is a
SLAPP is concerned. A SLAPP suit is in every sense a harassment suit and the affront against
constitutional rights is the very reason why no pending legal action is required to counter a
SLAPP suit. In the context of environmental rights protection, a SLAPP suit may occur in the
following scenarios, among others:
1. X files a complaint in an environmental case against A (violator of environmental laws) and
the A retaliates by filing a complaint for damages against X;
2. X is a witness in a pending environmental case against A and the latter retaliates by filing a
complaint for damages or libel against X; or
3. X is an environmental advocate who rallies for the protection of environmental rights and a
complaint for damages is filed against him by A. Since a motion to dismiss is a prohibited
pleading,31 SLAPP as an affirmative defense should be raised in an answer along with other
defenses that may be raised in the case alleged to be a SLAPP.
SEC. 3. Summary hearing. – The hearing on the defense of a SLAPP shall be summary in
nature. The parties must submit all available evidence in support of their respective
positions. The party seeking the dismissal of the case must prove by substantial evidence
that his acts for the enforcement of environmental law is a legitimate action for the
protection, preservation and rehabilitation of the environment. The party filing the action
assailed as a SLAPP shall prove by preponderance of evidence that the action is not a
SLAPP and is a valid claim.
*NOTE: The hearing for the defense of a SLAPP is summary to expedite the proceedings. The
party seeking the dismissal of the case alleged to be a SLAPP may easily assert this defense and
prove it only with substantial evidence. If the court finds a SLAPP defense valid, the plaintiff is
required to prove the following: (1) that the case is not a SLAPP; and (2) the merits of the case.
The quantum of evidence, preponderance of evidence, in proving the two abovementioned
remains the same as in other civil cases.
SEC. 4. Resolution of the defense of a SLAPP. – The affirmative defense of a SLAPP shall
be resolved within thirty (30) days after the summary hearing. If the court dismisses the
action, the court may award damages, attorney’s fees and costs of suit under a
counterclaim if such has been filed. The dismissal shall be with prejudice.
If the court rejects the defense of a SLAPP, the evidence adduced during the summary
hearing shall be treated as evidence of the parties on the merits of the case. The action shall
proceed in accordance with the Rules of Court.
*NOTE: The court is required to prioritize the hearing and resolution of a SLAPP defense. The
prioritization in hearing a SLAPP defense is another mode of expediting the proceedings.
The dismissal of a SLAPP suit constitutes res judicata and is a bar to the refiling of a similar
case. On the other hand, the denial of a SLAPP defense allows the action to proceed in
accordance with the Rules of Court. Since the evidence adduced in the hearing of a SLAPP
defense remains on record, the plaintiff is not required to offer the evidence already adduced
again.

2019 Proposed Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure

RULE 6
Section 1.
Pleadings defined- Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of
the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.
Pleadings; Motion (2007) No.II. (c) A motion is a pleading.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: False. A motion is not a pleading but a mere application for relief
other than by a pleading (Rule 15, Sec. 1, Rules of Court).

Section 2.
Pleadings allowed - The claims of a party are asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim,
third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention.

The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading asserting a claim against him or
her.

An answer may be responded to by a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable
document to the answer.

Section 3.
Complaint - The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff’s or claiming party’s cause or
causes of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the
complaint.

Pleadings; Amendment of Complaint (2009)

No.X. Upon termination of the pre-trial, the judge dictated the pre-trial order in the presence of
the parties and their counsel, reciting what had transpired and defining three (3) issues to be
tried. (a) If, immediately upon receipt of his copy of the pre-trial order, plaintiff’s counsel should
move for its amendment to include a fourth (4th) triable issue which he allegedly inadvertently
failed to mention when the judge dictated the order. Should the motion to amend be granted?
Reasons.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Depending on the merit of the issue sought to be brought in by the
amendment, the motion to amend may be granted upon due hearing. It is a policy of the Rules
that parties should be afforded reasonable opportunity to bring about a complete determination of
the controversy between them, consistent with substantial justice. With this end in view, the
amendment before trial may be granted to prevent manifest injustice. The matter is addressed to
the sound and judicious discretion of the trial court.

(b) Suppose trial had already commenced and after the plaintiff’s second witness had testified,
the defendant’s counsel moves for the amendment of the pre-trial order to include a fifth (5th)
triable issue vital to his client’s defense. Should the motion be granted over the objection of
plaintiff’s counsel? Reasons.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The motion may be denied since trial had already commenced and
two witnesses for the plaintiff had already testified. Courts are required to issue pre-trial Order
after the pre-trial conference has been terminated and before trial begins, precisely because the
reason for such Order is to define the course of the action during the trial. Where trial had
already commenced, more so the adverse party had already presented witnesses, to allow an
amendment would be unfair to the party who had already presented his witnesses. The
amendment would simply render nugatory the reason for or purpose of the pre-trial Order. Sec.7
of Rule 18 on pre-trial in civil actions is explicit in allowing a modification of the pre-trial Order
“before” trial begins to prevent manifest injustice.

Section 4.
Answer - An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his or her defenses. (4a)

Section 5.
Defenses — Defenses may either be negative or affirmative.
(a) A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of
the claimant essential to his or her cause or causes of action.
(b) An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically
admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or
bar recovery by him or her. The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release,
payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any
other matter by way of confession and avoidance.
Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint, specifically, that
the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending between
the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment.

Section 6.
Counterclaim — a counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an
opposing party.

Jurisdiction; RTC; Counterclaim (2008) No.II. Fe filed a suit for collection of P387, 000 against
Ramon in the RTC of Davao City. Aside from alleging payment as a defense, Ramon in his
answer set up counterclaims for P100, 000 as damages and 30,000 as attorney’s fees as a result
of the baseless filing of the complaint, as well as for P250, 000 as the balance of the purchase
price of the 30 units of air conditioners he sold to Fe. (a) Does the RTC have jurisdiction over
Ramon’s counterclaim, and if so, does he have to pay docket fees therefor?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, applying the totality rule which sums up the total amount of
claims of the parties, the RTC has jurisdiction over the counter claims. Unlike in the case of
compulsory counterclaims, a defendant who raises a permissive counterclaim must first pay
docket fees before the court can validly acquire jurisdiction. One compelling test of
compulsoriness is the logical relation between the claim alleged in the complaint and the
counterclaim (Bayer Phil, Inc. vs. C.A., G.R. No. 109269, 15 September 2000). Ramon does not
have to pay docket fees for his compulsory counterclaims. Ramon is liable for docket fees only
on his permissive counterclaim for the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of air
conditioners in the sum of P250,000, as it neither arises out of nor is it connected with the
transaction or occurrence constituting Fe‟s claim (Sec. 19 [8] and 33 [1], B.P. 129; AO 04-94,
implementing R.A. 7691, approved March 25, 1994, the jurisdictional; amount for MTC Davao
being P300,000 at this time; Alday vs. FGU Insurance Corporation, G.R. No. 138822, 23
January 2001).
(b) Suppose Ramon’s counterclaim for the unpaid balance is P310, 000, what will happen to his
counterclaims if the court dismisses the complaint after holding a preliminary hearing on
Ramon’s affirmative defenses?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 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. 3, Rule
17; Pinga vs. Heirs of German Santiago, G.R. No. 170354, June 30, 2006).
(c) Under the same premise as paragraph (b) above, suppose that instead of alleging payment as
a defense in his answer, Ramon filed a motion to dismiss on that ground, at the same time setting
up his counterclaims, and the court grants his motion. What will happen to his counterclaims?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: His counterclaims can continue to be prosecuted or may be pursued
separately at his option (Sec. 6, Rule 16; Pinga vs. Heirs of German Santiago, G.R. No. 170354,
June 30, 2006).
Pleadings; Counterclaim (2010) No.VI. Antique dealer Mercedes borrowed P1,000,000 from
antique collector Benjamin. Mercedes issued a postdated check in the same amount to Benjamin
to cover the debt. On the due date of the check, Benjamin deposited it but it was dishonored. As
despite demands, Mercedes failed to make good the check, Benjamin filed in January 2009 a
complaint for collection of sum of money before the RTC of Davao. Mercedes filed in February
2009 her Answer with Counterclaim, alleging that before the filing of the case, she and Benjamin
had entered into a dacion en pagoagreement in which her vintage P1,000,000 Rolex watch which
was taken by Benjamin for sale on commission was applied to settle her indebtedness; and that
she incurred expenses in defending what she termed a "frivolous lawsuit." She accordingly
prayed for P50,000 damages. (a) Benjamin soon after moved for the dismissal of the case. The
trial court accordingly dismissed the complaint. And it also dismissed the Counterclaim.
Mercedes moved for a reconsideration of the dismissal of the Counterclaim. Pass upon
Mercedes’ motion.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Mercedes‟ Motion for Reconsideration is impressed with merit: the
trial courts should not have dismissed her counterclaim despite the dismissal of the Complaint.
Since it was the plaintiff (Benjamin) who moved for the dismissal of his Complaint, and at a time
when the defendant (Mercedes) had already filed her Answer thereto and with counterclaim, the
dismissal of the counterclaim without conformity of the defendant-counterclaimant. The Revised
Rules of Court now provides in Rule 17, Sec. 2 thereof that “If a counterclaim has been pleaded
by a defendant prior to the service upon him of the plaintiff‟s motion for dismissal, the dismissal
shall be limited to the complaint. The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the
defendant to prosecute his counterclaim.
Section 7.
Compulsory counterclaim — A compulsory counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the
regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its
adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such a
counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature
thereof, except that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court, the counterclaim may
be considered compulsory regardless of the amount. A compulsory counterclaim not raised in the
same action is barred, unless otherwise allowed by these Rules.

Section 8.
Cross-claim - A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the
transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may cover all or part of the original claim.

Section 9.
Counter-counterclaims and counter-cross-claims — a counterclaim may be asserted against an
original counter-claimant.

A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross-claimant.

Section 10.
Reply — All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. If the plaintiff wishes
to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in
an amended or supplemental complaint. However, the plaintiff may file a reply only if the
defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her answer. A reply is a pleading, the
office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters
alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.

In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder if
the same is based solely on an actionable document.

Section 11.
Third, (fourth, etc.)-party complaint — A third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint is a claim that a
defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the action, called the
third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in
respect of his or her opponent's claim.

The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and the court shall require the
defendant to institute a separate action, where: (a) the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant cannot
be located within thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of such leave; (b) matters extraneous to
the issue in the principal case are raised; or (c) the effect would be to introduce a new and
separate controversy into the action.

Section 12.
Bringing new parties — When the presence of parties other than those to the original action is
required for the granting of complete relief in the determination of a counterclaim or cross-
claim, the court shall order them to be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over them can be
obtained.

Section 13.
Answer to third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint — A third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant may
allege in his or her answer his or her defenses, counterclaims or cross-claims, including such
defenses that the third (fourth, etc.)-party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiff's claim.
In proper cases, he or she may also assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect
of the latter's claim against the third-party plaintiff.

RULE 8
MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS IN PLEADINGS
Section 1.
In general — every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and
direct statement of the ultimate facts, including the evidence on which the party pleading relies
for his or her claim or defense, as the case may be.

If a cause of action or defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof and their
applicability to him or her shall be clearly and concisely stated. (1a)

Section 2.
Alternative causes of action or defenses — a party may set forth two or more statements of a
claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in one cause of action or defense or in
separate causes of action or defenses. When two or more statements are made in the alternative
and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the pleading is not made insufficient
by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.

Section 3.
Conditions precedent — In any pleading, a general averment of the performance or occurrence
of all conditions precedent shall be sufficient.

Section 4.
Capacity — Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to
sue or be sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of
persons that is made a party, must be averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal
existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity,
shall do so by specific denial, which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly
within the pleader’s knowledge.

Section 5.
Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind — In all averments of fraud or mistake, the
circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity. Malice, intent,
knowledge, or other condition of the mind of a person may be averred generally.
Section 6.
Judgment — In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-
judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without
setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it. An authenticated copy of the judgment or
decision shall be attached to the pleading.

Section 7.
Action or defense based on document - Whenever an action or defense is based upon a written
instrument or document, the substance of such instrument or document shall be set forth in the
pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the pleading as an exhibit, which
shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading.

Section 8.
How to contest such documents - When an action or defense is founded upon a written
instrument, or attached to the corresponding pleading as provided in the preceding section, the
genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse
party, under oath specifically denies them, and sets forth what he or she claims to be the facts;
but the requirement of an oath does not apply when the adverse party does not appear to be a
party to the instrument or when compliance with an order for an inspection of the original
instrument is refused.

Section 9.
Official document or act - In pleading an official document or official act, it is sufficient to aver
that the document was issued or the act was done in compliance with law.

Section 10.
Specific denial — A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he
or she does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon
which he or she relies to support his or her denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part
of an averment, he or she shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only
the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
as to the truth of a material averment made to the complaint, he or she shall so state, and this
shall have the effect of a denial.

Section 11.
Allegations not specifically denied deemed admitted — Material averments in a pleading
asserting a claim or claims, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be
deemed admitted when not specifically denied.

Section 12.
Affirmative defenses — (a) a defendant shall raise his or her affirmative defenses in his or her
answer, which shall be limited to the reasons set forth under
Section 5(b), Rule 6, and the following grounds:

1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party;
2. That venue is improperly laid;
3. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
4. That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; and
5. That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with.

(b) Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at the earliest opportunity shall constitute a waiver
thereof.
(c) The court shall motu proprio resolve the above affirmative defenses within thirty
(30) Calendar days from the filing of the answer.
(d) As to the other affirmative defenses under the first paragraph of Section 5(b),
Rule 6, the court may conduct a summary hearing within fifteen
(15) Calendar days from the filing of the answer. Such affirmative defenses shall be resolved by
the court within thirty (30) calendar days from the termination of the summary hearing.

(e) Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be the subject of a motion for
reconsideration or petition for certiorari , prohibition or mandamus , but may be among the
matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment on the merits.

Section 13.
Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein — Upon motion made by a party before
responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by these Rules, upon motion
made by a party within twenty (20) calendar days after the service of the pleading upon him or
her, or upon the court's own initiative at any time, the court may order any pleading to be
stricken out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter
be stricken out therefrom.
RULE 9
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD
Section 1.Defenses and objections no pleaded — Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a
motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. However, when it appears from the
pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that
there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is
barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss the claim.
Villamar, R. 2014 (Remedial Law -Civil Procedure-Rule 9 Effect of Failure to Plead)
Section 2.Compulsory counterclaim
, or cross-claim, not set up barred — a compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-claim, not set up
shall be barred.

Section 3.
Default; Declaration of — If the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor,
the court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and proof
of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to
render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his or her pleading may warrant, unless the
court in its discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may
be delegated to the clerk of court.
(a)
Effect of order of default — a party in default shall be entitled to notices of subsequent
proceedings but shall not take part in the trial.

(b)
Relief from order of default — A party declared in default may at any time after notice thereof
and before judgment, file a motion under oath to set aside the order of default upon proper
showing that his or her failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
negligence and that he or she has a meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may be
set aside on such terms and conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice.

(c)Effect of partial default — when a pleading asserting a claim states a common cause of action
against several defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the court
shall try the case against all upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence
presented.
(d)Extent of relief to be awarded — A judgment rendered against a party in default shall neither
exceed the amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor award unliquidated damages.
(e) Where no defaults allowed — If the defending party in an action for annulment or declaration
of nullity of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the Solicitor
General or his or her deputized public prosecutor, to investigate whether or not a collusion
between the parties exists, and if there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to
it that the evidence submitted is not fabricated.

RULE 10
AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
Section 1. Amendments in general. – Pleadings may be amended by adding or striking out
an allegation or the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party or
a mistaken or inadequate allegation or description in any other respect, so that the actual
merits of the controversy may speedily be determined, without regard to technicalities, in
the most expeditious and inexpensive manner. (1a)
Section 7. Filing of amended pleadings. – When any pleading is amended, a new copy of the
entire pleading, incorporating the amendments, which shall be indicated by appropriate
marks, shall be filed. (7)
*NOTE: Amendments to a pleading should be indicated in the amended pleading, as by
underscoring, enclosing them in quotation marks, putting them in capital letters, and so forth, as
would make them readily evident.
-The amended pleading supersedes the original pleading which is deemed withdraw n and no
longer constitutes part of the record. However, the filing of the amended pleading does not
retroact to the date of the filing of the original, hence, the sta tut e of limitations runs until the
filing of the amendment. But an amendment which merely supplements and amplifies facts
originally alleged in the complaint relates back to the date of the commencement of the action
and is not barred by the statute of limitations which expired after the service of the original
complaint. It is the actual filing in court that controls, and not the dat e of the formal admission
of the amended pleading.
-Where the original complaint states a cause of action but does it imperfectly, and afterwards an
amended complaint is filed correcting the defect, the plea of prescription will relate to the time of
the filing of the original complaint. However, such rule would not apply to the party who was
impleaded for the first time in the amended complaint which was filed after the period of
prescription had already lapsed, hence the amended complaint must be dismissed as to such party
who was thus belatedly included in the action.
-The rule is that amendments should be liberally allowed. This liberality at the outset of the
action decreases as the case moves to its termination. However, amendments to pleadings may be
permitted even for the first time on appeal if, without changing the cause of action or causing
unfair prejudice to the other party, the purpose is to (a) correct a defect of party plaintiff, as
where it is merely to include the husband of the plaintiff wife; or (b) substitute the name of the
real party in interest. Thus, since a sole proprietorship is a business organization without juridical
personality to sue, an amendment to substitute the owner thereof as plaintiff is only a formal
amendment. These are authorized as formal amendment s under Sec. 4 of this Rule.
Section 2. Amendments as a matter of right. – A party may amend his [or her] pleading once
as a matter of right at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, in the case of a
reply, at any time within ten (10) calendar days after it is served. (2a)
*NOTES. Amendment for the first time is a matter of right before a responsive pleading is filed
or, in the case of a reply, within 10 days after it was served. However, amendment for the second
or subsequent time must always be with leave of court even before a responsive pleading is filed
or before the case is set in the calendar of the court.
-Where some but not all the defendants have filed their answers, the plaintiff may amend his
complaint, once as a matter of right, in respect to the claims asserted only against the non-
answering defendants, but not as to the claims asserted against the other defendants who have
answered.
-Even after a motion to dismiss has been filed by defendant or such motion has been submitted
for decision, the plaintiff can still amend his complaint as a matter of right, since a motion to
dismiss is not a responsive pleading within this rule. An error of the court in refusing such
amendment is controllable by mandamus.
-Amendment of the complaint may be allowed even if an order for its dismissal has been issued
as long as the motion to amend is filed before the dismissal order became final. An amended
answer may also be allowed even after the case had been set for trial on the merits if the purpose
of the amendment is to submit the real matter in dispute without intent to delay the action.
-It has also been held that a complaint can still be amended as a matter of right before an answer
thereto has been filed, even if there was a pending proceeding in a higher court for the dismissal
of that complaint.
Under Sec. 3 of Rule 10, substantial amendments of the complaint are not allowed
without leave of court after an answer has been served, and this is because any material change
in the allegations in the complaint could prejudice the defendant who has already set up his
defenses in his answer. Conversely, no rights of the defendant will be violated by change s mad e
in the complaint if he has yet to file an answer thereto. The defendant has not presented any
defense that can be altered or affected by an amendment made in accordance with Sec. 2 of the
Rule. In fact, he can thereafter address the amended allegations by setting up the defenses thereto
in his projected answer.
-The defense of prescription, which was not raised in a motion to dismiss nor as an affirmative
defense in the original answer, may be validly set up for the first time in an amended answer.
This situation would not be violative of, because it does not fall under, the general rule in then
Sec. 2 (now, Sec. 1), Rule 9. The effect of the filing of the amended answer is the withdrawal of
the original answer and its substitution by the former. Since in this case no responsive pleading,
such as a reply, had been filed by the plaintiff and the case had not been calendared for hearing,
the defendant had the right to amend his answer, pursuant to Sec. 2, Rule 10, and in the process
set up the defense of prescription.
Section 3. Amendments by leave of court. – Except as provided in the next preceding
Section, substantial amendments may be made only upon leave of court. But such leave
shall be refused if it appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to delay [or]
confer jurisdiction on the court, or the pleading stated no cause of action from the
beginning which could be amended. Orders of the court upon the matters provided in this
Section shall be made upon motion filed in court, and after notice to the adverse party, and
an opportunity to be heard. (3a)
Section 4. Formal amendments. – A defect in the designation of the parties and other clearly
clerical or typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the court at any stage of
the action, at its initiative or on motion, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the
adverse party. (4)
*NOTES. Sec. 3 of this Rule amended the former rule by eliminating the phrase "or that the
cause of action or defense is substantially altered." The clear import of such amendment is that
under the new Rule "the amendment may (now) substantially alter the cause of action or
defense." This should only be true, however, when despite a substantial change or alteration in
the cause of action or defense, the amendments sought to be made shall serve the higher interests
of substantial justice, prevent delay and thus equally promote the laudable objective of the Rules
which is to secure a "just, speedy and in expensive disposition of every action and proceeding."
Amendments are not proper and should be denied:
a.) Where the court has no jurisdiction over the original complaint and the purpose of the
amendment is to confer jurisdiction on the court by eliminating the objectionable portion, or
where the cause of action originally pleaded in the complaint was outside the jurisdiction of the
court, since the court must first have jurisdiction over the case before it can order such
amendment;
(b) If it would result in delay;
(c) If it would result in a change of the cause of action or defense or change the theory of the
case, or are inconsistent with the allegations in the original complaint, unless justice and equity
warrant such amendment which would negate defendant' s liability, or will not result in
substantial injury to the adverse party; and
(d) If the plaintiff had no cause of action at the filing of the original complaint and the purpose of
the amendment is to introduce a subsequently-accrued cause of action.
-To determine whether a different cause of action is introduced by amendments to the complaint,
what is ascertained is whether the defendant is being required to answer for a liability or legal
obligation completely different from that stated in the original complaint. The same test may be
applied with respect to supplemental pleadings.
-As earlier stated, a plaintiff may move to amend his complaint even if the same was dismissed
on motion of the defendant provided the dismissal order is not yet final. An order denying such
motion to amend the complaint is appealable and the reglementary period to perfect the appeal
runs from plaintiff’s receipt of the order denying his motion to amend the complaint.
Section 5. No amendment necessary to conform to or authorize presentation of evidence. –
When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the
parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. No
amendment of such pleadings deemed amended is necessary to cause them to conform to
the evidence. (5a)
*NOTES. This is an instance wherein the court acquires jurisdiction over the issues even i f the
same are not alleged in the original pleadings of the parties, i.e., where the trial of said issues is
with the express or implied consent of the parties. Also, this rule is premised on the fact that
evidence had been introduced on an issue not raised by the pleadings without any objection by
the adverse party. It, therefore, does not apply when the case was decided on a stipulation of
facts in which case the pleadings are not deemed amended to conform to the evidence.
- One line of cases holds that where the evidence sustain s an award in excess of that claimed in
the complaint, but the plaintiff failed to amend the prayer of its complaint as to the amount of
damages to conform to the evidence, the amount demanded in the complaint should be the
measure of damages. There have, however, also been cases where the Supreme Court has held
that even without such amendment to conform to the evidence, the amount proved at the trial
may be validly awarded. The rule on amendment need not be applied rigidly, particularly where
no surprise or prejudice is caused the objecting and where there is a variance in the defendant's
pleadings and the evidence adduced at the trial, the court may treat the pleading as amended to
conform to the evidence.
Consequently, the trial court should not be precluded from awarding an amount higher than that
claimed in the pleadings notwithstanding the absence of the required amendment, provided that
the evidence of such higher amount has been presented properly, with full opportunity on the
part of the opposing parties to support their respective contentions and to refute each other's
evidence.
-Where the ejectment case was dismissed by the inferior court and on appeal the plaintiff filed an
amended complaint to include, as additional cause of action, contractual breach by the defendant
which was not alleged in the original complaint but on which issue the parties had presented their
respective evidence, a n amended complaint may be admitted since the amendment is to make
the pleadings conform to the evidence.
Section 6. Supplemental pleadings. – Upon motion of a party, the court may, upon
reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit him or her to serve a
supplemental pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences or events which have
happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented. The adverse party may
plead thereto within ten (10) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the
supplemental pleading. (6a)
*NOTES Distinctions between amended and supplemental pleadings:
a. Amended pleadings refer to facts existing at the time of the commencement of the
action; supplemental pleadings refer to facts arising after the filing of the original pleading.
b. An amended pleading results in the withdrawal of the original pleading; a
supplemental pleading is merely in addition to, but does not result in the withdrawal of, the
original pleading.
c. An amended pleading can be made as of right, as when no responsive pleading has yet
been filed; supple• mental pleadings are always with leave of court.
-Unlike the former provision wherein the court could require the adverse party to plead to the
supplemental pleading if it deemed the same advisable, it is now up to said party to decide
whether or not to plead thereto, provided that if he desires to plead he must observe the
reglementary period of 10 days therefor.
-For correlation, Sec. 7 of this Rule has been transposed to follow Sec. 1 thereof.
Section 8. Effect of amended pleadings. – An amended pleading supersedes the pleading
that it amends. However, admissions in superseded pleadings may be offered in evidence
against the pleader, and claims or defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended
pleading shall be deemed waived. (8a)
*NOTES. The first sentence of this section states, in general, the effect on the original pleading
by the subsequent filing of a pleading amendatory thereof.
-Although the supersedure of the original pleading, upon the admission of the amended pleading,
amounts to the withdrawal of the former, it is nevertheless not expunged from but remains in the
record of the case. Reference can thereby be readily made thereto with regard to the effects of the
amendment, that is, (a) admissions in the superseded pleading can still be received in evidence
against the pleader, and (b) claims or defenses alleged therein but not incorporated or reiterated
in the amended pleading are deemed waived.
The first effect, that is, the admissibility in evidence of whatever admission had been made by
the pleader therein is in line with the rulings on judicial admissions. It will be noted that the
admission made in that pleading was, before it was superseded by amendment, in the nature of a
judicial admission which does not even require proof and ordinarily cannot be contradicted by
the pleader. Despite its being superseded and withdrawn, the admissions therein are still
considered extrajudicial admission s and may be proved by the party relying thereon by formal
offer in evidence of such original pleading.

RULE 12
BILL OF PARTICULARS
Section 1. When applied for; purpose. – Before responding to a pleading, a party may move
for a definite statement or for a bill of particulars of any matter, which is not averred with
sufficient definiteness or particularity, to enable him or her properly to prepare his or her
responsive pleading. If the pleading is a reply, the motion must be filed within ten (10)
calendar days from service thereof. Such motion shall point out the defects complained of,
the paragraphs wherein they are contained, and the details desired. (1a)
*NOTES. Under this revised Rule, the purpose of a bill of particulars is to enable the defending
party to properly prepare his responsive pleading. Under the former formulation, the other
purpose was supposedly to enable him "to prepare for trial," but that statement has been
eliminated for being inaccurate. Besides, there are other and more proper remedies or modes of
discovery whereby a party may chart his course of action for the prospective trial.
- What may be considered as a rationale for requiring a bill of particulars in proper cases is that,
while pleadings should be liberally construed with a view to substantial justice, courts should not
be left to conjecture in the determination of the issues submitted by the litigants. Where the
pleading is vague and uncertain, courts should not be led to the commission of error or injustice
by exploring in the midst of uncertainty and divining the intention of the parties from the
ambiguities in the pleadings.
-The granting of a motion for a bill of particulars lies within the sound discretion of the court and
its ruling will not be reversed unless there was palpable abuse of discretion or it was a clearly
erroneous order. Thus, the Supreme Court refused to disturb the order of the trial court
dismissing the complaint where plaintiff refused to submit a bill of particulars despite the court's
order therefor, it appearing that the allegations on the cause of action were in the nature of legal
conclusions which should have been clarified by ultimate facts.
Section 2. Action by the court. – Upon the filing of the motion, the clerk of court must
immediately bring it to the attention of the court, which may either deny or grant it
outright, or allow the parties the opportunity to be heard. (2)
Section 3. Compliance with order. – If the motion is granted, either in whole or in part, the
compliance therewith must be effected within ten (10) calendar days from notice of the
order, unless a different period is fixed by the court. The bill of particulars or a more
definite statement ordered by the court may be filed either in a separate or in an amended
pleading, serving a copy thereof on the adverse party. (3a)
Section 4. Effect of non-compliance. – If the order is not obeyed, or in case of insufficient
compliance therewith, the court may order the striking out of the pleading or the portions
thereof to which the order was directed, or make such other order as it deems just. (4)
*NOTES. These new or amended provisions spell out the mechanics involved in the obtention
of a bill of particulars and the sanctions for non-compliance therewith. Judicial experience shows
that resort to a motion for a bill of particulars is sometimes actually intended for delay or, even if
not so intended, nonetheless results in delay since the reglementary period for filing a responsive
pleading is suspended and the subsequent exchanges are likewise set back in the meantime.
Sec. 3 is a new provision which is intended to clarify how a bill of particulars may be filed, that
is, through either a separate or an amended pleading. Thus, the former provision in Sec. 1(b) of
the old Rule that a bill of particulars "shall be governed by the rules of pleading and the original
shall be filed with the clerk of court" has been eliminated in the reproduction of that former
provision as Sec. 6 of the present rule.
Said Sec. 3 further makes it clear that the motion fora bill of particulars may be granted in whole
or in part as not all the allegations questioned by the movant are necessarily so ambiguous as to
require clarification
Section 5. Stay of period to file responsive pleading. – After service of the bill of particulars
or of a more definite pleading, or after notice of denial of his or her motion, the moving
party may file his or her responsive pleading within the period to which he or she was
entitled at the time of filing his or her motion, which shall not be less than five (5) calendar
days in any event. (5a)
Section 6. Bill a part of pleading. – A bill of particulars becomes part of the pleading for
which it is intended. (6)
*NOTES. As understood under Sec. 1 of this Rule, a motion for a bill of particulars must be
filed within the reglementary period for the filing of a responsive pleading to the pleading sought
to be clarified. This contemplates pleadings which are required by the Rules to be answered
under pain of procedural sanctions, such as default or implied admission of the facts not
responded to. A special provision regarding a vague reply is included in Sec. 1, that is, that a
motion for a bill of particulars directed to a reply must be filed within 10 days, since a responsive
pleading is not required for a reply as, in fact, the filing of the reply itself is optional or
permissive.
- This specification of a reply took the place of the former provision which merely provided for
that 10-day period if the pleading sought to be clarified is one to which "no responsive pleading
is permitted by these rules." That is in itself correct but may be susceptible of misunderstanding
since there are other pleadings evolved and sanctioned by practice as responsive pleadings,
which are of American vintage but not expressly provided for in our Rules.
Thus, after the reply, there can be a rejoinder with a sur-rejoinder and then a rebutter with a sur-
rebutter. If these subsequent pleadings are allowed by the court, as responsive pleadings which
are not required but at least authorized, then it would be logical for it to fix a period for the filing
of a motion for a bill of particulars whenever the same is necessary to make more definite the
allegations in said pleadings.
-Judicial experience, however, reveals that resort to the filing of rejoinders and sur-rejoinders or
other subsequent pleadings were often resorted to for dilatory purposes, with the parties
intentionally leaving incomplete their antecedent pleadings in order to justify the grant of leave
to file said subsequent pleadings.
Consequently, the Supreme Court resolved in A. M. No. 99-2-04-SC to dispense with rejoinders
and to substitute a different procedure to sub serve the purpose of affected parties on a more
meaningful and productive process designed to enhance and expedite judicial action on the case.
- The filing of a motion for a bill of particulars interrupts the time to plead, but only if it is
sufficient in form and substance.
-If the motion is granted, the movant can wait until the bill of particulars is served on him by the
opposing party and then he will have the balance of the reglementary period within which to file
his responsive pleading. If his motion is denied, he will still have such balance of the
reglementary period to do so, counted from service of the order denying his motion. In either
case, he will have at least 5 days to file his responsive pleading.

RULE 18
 PRE-TRIAL
Section 1. When conducted. – After the last responsive pleading has been served and filed,
the branch clerk of court shall issue, within five (5) calendar days from filing, a notice of
pre-trial which shall be set not later than sixty (60) calendar days from the filing of the last
responsive pleading. (1a)
*NOTES. To obviate the conflicting views and decisions under the former Rule, Sec. 1 now
imposes upon the plain• tiff the duty to promptly move ex parte that the case be set for pretrial,
and this he must do upon the service and filing of the last pleading required in the case by the
Rules or, in appropriate circumstances, by the court itself. This clarifies an d changes the
procedure prescribed in the former Sec. 5 of Rule 20 which imposed that duty on the clerk of
court "upon the submission" of the last pleading. The transfer of responsibility to the plaintiff
himself, as has been followed in other provisions of the revised Rules, is based on the policy that
whosoever is the proponent of the particular stage of the proceeding should himself initiate the
corresponding steps to have judicial action taken thereon since he is presumed to be the one
interested in the speedy disposition thereof.
- Pre-trial under the former Rules was required only in Courts of First Instance (now, the
Regional Trial Courts) and not in inferior courts, but the latter could conduct pre-trial if they so
desired. However, Par. 9 of the Interim Rules required the inferior courts to observe the same
procedure as that followed in the Regional Trial Courts and Rule 5 now provides for that uniform
procedure, albeit with qualifications.
- The pre-trial and trial on the merits of the case must be held on separate dates.
-A pre-trial cannot validly be held until the last pleading has been filed, which last pleading may
be the plaintiffs reply, except where the period to file the last pleading has lapsed. The pre-trial
may be properly scheduled even if the plaintiff had not yet filed his answer to the defendant's
compulsory counterclaim since no answer is required to be filed thereto.
Section 2. Nature and purpose. – The pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated
promptly. The court shall consider:
(a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes
of dispute resolution;
(b) The simplification of the issues;
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents
to avoid unnecessary proof;
(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of
trial dates;
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or
of dismissing the action should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;
 (g) The requirement for the parties to:
1. Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of
their witnesses;
2. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the
copies to be marked;
3. Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the
reproductions and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse
parties’ evidence;
4. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following
manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the
testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular
description of the evidence.
No reservation shall be allowed if not made in the manner described above.
(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action.
The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial,
despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the
reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution.
The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence
required shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.
The branch clerk of court shall prepare the minutes of the pre-trial, which shall
have the following format. (2a)
*NOTES. The purposes of a pre-trial under the old Rule have been reproduced with two
substantial amendments, (a) the court shall consider submission to alternative modes of dispute
resolution including conciliation and mediation, and not only arbitration; and (b) it shall also
consider the advisability of judgment on the pleadings, summary judgment or dismissal of the
action on the bases of the proceedings at the pre-trial conference.
-With regard to submission to arbitration.
R.A. 876 and Arts. 2028 to 2041 of the Civil Code on compromises and arbitrations . For
recent legislation providing for a broader scope of alternative modes of dispute resolution, see
R.A. 9285 which institutionalized the use of an alternative dispute resolution system and
established the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution.
-The findings of fact of a trial court consequent to a pretrial conference are findings which are
based on evidence and can accordingly support a decision or an order.
Section 3. Notice of pre-trial. – The notice of pre-trial shall include the dates respectively set
for:
(a) Pre-trial;
(b) Court-Annexed Mediation; and
(c) Judicial Dispute Resolution, if necessary.
The notice of pre-trial shall be served on counsel, or on the party if he or she has no
counsel. The counsel served with such notice is charged with the duty of notifying the party
represented by him or her.
Non-appearance at any of the foregoing settings shall be deemed as non-appearance
at the pretrial and shall merit the same sanctions under Section 5 hereof. (3a)
*NOTES. Under the former procedure, the Supreme Court held that a notice of pre-trial must be
served on the party affected separately from his counsel, and the same may be served directly to
him or through his counsel, otherwise the proceedings will be null and void. It was the duty of
counsel upon whom such notice is served to see to it that his client receives such notice and
attends the pre-trial, otherwise he will be liable for grave administrative disciplinary.
The procedure has been simplified in this revised section in the sense that the notice of
pre-trial shall be served on counsel, and service shall be made on the party only if he has no
counsel. However, the duty of counsel served with such notice to duly notify his client thereof
remains substantially the same.
Section 4. Appearance of parties. – It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsel to
appear at the pre-trial, court-annexed mediation, and judicial dispute resolution, if
necessary. The non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only for acts of God,
force majeure, or duly substantiated physical inability.
A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized in
writing to enter into an amicable settlement, to submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution, and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents.
*NOTES. The specificity introduced by this new section underscores the necessity for the
personal appearance of the parties at the pre-trial conference in view of the purposes thereof.
This provision is based on the doctrines of the Supreme Court which held that the purpose of the
revised Rules is to compel the parties to appear personally before the court to reach, if possible, a
compromise. Where the counsel for the plaintiff asserted that he had been given authority by his
client to compromise but the court was not satisfied that said authority existed, the court i s
authorized to dismiss the case for non-appearance of the plaintiff. A special authority for an
attorney to compromise is required under Sec. 23, Rule 138. Under Art. 1878(c) of the Civil
Code, a special power of attorney is required. However, it has also been held tha t the authority
need not be in writing and may be established by competent evidence or subsequently ratified by
the party concerned. If the party is a corporation, such authority must be made with an
appropriate resolution of its board of directors.
- It must further be noted that the special authority should confer on the party' s representative
not only the power to enter into a compromise, as it was under the former provision, but also to
submit to alternative modes of dispute settlement, and to enter into stipulations or admission s of
facts and documents. Also, 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.
-Where nobody appeared at the pre-trial except the counsel for the plaintiff but said counsel had
no special authority to represent the plaintiff therein, the plaintiff may properly be declared non-
suited. The plaintiff may be so declared non-suited and the case dismissed without motion by the
defendant
Section 5. Effect of failure to appear. – When duly notified, the failure of the plaintiff and
counsel to appear without valid cause when so required, pursuant to the next preceding
[S]ection, shall cause the dismissal of the action. The dismissal shall be with prejudice,
unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the part of the defendant and
counsel shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his or her evidence ex parte within
ten (10) calendar days from termination of the pre-trial, and the court to render judgment
on the basis of the evidence offered. (5a)
*NOTES. This is a substantial reproduction of Sec. 2 of the former
Rule 20 with the change that, instead of the defendant being declared "as in default" by reason of
his nonappearance, this section now spells out that the procedure will be to allow the ex parte
presentation of plaintiffs evidence and the rendition of judgment on the basis thereof. While
actually the procedure remains the same, the purpose is one of semantical propriety or
terminological accuracy as there were criticisms on the use of the word "default" in the former
provision since that term is identified with the failure to file a required answer, not non-
appearance in court.
- The trial court has discretion to declare a party non –suited and, unless otherwise provided,
such dismissal has the effect of an adjudication on the merits. Such exercise of discretion will not
be interfered with by the appellate courts, absent a showing of grave abuse thereof. Where, as in
one case, both counsel and plaintiff did not appear at the pre-trial, an order of non-suit was
proper.
-Where the defendant is declared in default for his failure to appear at the pre-trial, his remedy is
to file a motion for reconsideration without need for affidavits of merits regarding the fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable negligence, obviously because the defenses of the defendant are
set out in his answer. If denied with grave abuse of discretion, certiorari is the demand remedy as
such order of default is interlocutory. The remedy of the plaintiff who is nonsuited, on the other
hand, is to appeal from the order of dismissal, the same being a final order. If has also been held
that said motion of the plaintiff need not be accompanied by affidavits of merits since the
sufficiency of the cause of action can be determined from the allegations in the complaint.
- Where the defendant was present at the pre-trial, the court has no authority to thereafter call a
second pretrial and declare defendant in default for his absence therein. For that matter, where a
pre-trial has already been held, the fact that an amended complaint was later filed, with leave of
court, does not necessitate another pre-trial.
- The dismissal of the case by the court due to non-appearance of the plaintiff and his counsel at
the pretrial, but without proper notice of said pre-trial served on them, is violative of due process
and the dismissal should be set aside. Where petitioner' s counsel was not served with a separate
notice of pre-trial, although his client acknowledged receipt of a copy thereof in its behalf and of
said counsel, said service is insufficient and the order of default and the ex parte proceedings
before the commissioner are null and void.
Section 6. Pre-trial brief. – The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse
party, in such manner as shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three (3) calendar days
before the date of the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial briefs which shall contain, among
others:
(a) A concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;
(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
(c) The main factual and legal issues to be tried or resolved;
(d) The propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;
(e) The documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose
thereof;
(f) The names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and
(g) A brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities.
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the
pre-trial. (8)
*NOTES. This section makes it the mandatory duty of the parties to seasonably file their pre-
trial briefs under the conditions and with the sanctions provided therein. The case of
Dimayacyac, et al. vs. CA, et al. (G.R. No. 50907, Sept. 27, 1979) which excused the non-filing
of the pretrial brief on the ground that the former Rule did not then require the same is
accordingly abrogated.
Section 7. Pre-Trial Order. – Upon termination of the pre-trial, the court shall issue an
order within ten (10) calendar days which shall recite in detail the matters taken up. The
order shall include:
(a) An enumeration of the admitted facts;
(b) The minutes of the pre-trial conference;
(c) The legal and factual issue/s to be tried;
(d) The applicable law, rules, and jurisprudence;
 (e) The evidence marked;
(f) The specific trial dates for continuous trial, which shall be within the period
provided by the Rules;
(g) The case flowchart to be determined by the court, which shall contain the
different stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of the decision and the
use of time frames for each stage in setting the trial dates;
(h) A statement that the one-day examination of witness rule and most important
witness rule under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (Guidelines for Pre-Trial) shall
be strictly followed; and
(i) A statement that the court shall render judgment on the pleadings or summary
judgment, as the case may be.
The direct testimony of witnesses for the plaintiff shall be in the form of judicial
affidavits. After the identification of such affidavits, cross-examination shall proceed
immediately.
Postponement of presentation of the parties’ witnesses at a scheduled date is
prohibited, except if it is based on acts of God, force majeure or duly substantiated physical
inability of the witness to appear and testify. The party who caused the postponement is
warned that the presentation of its evidence must still be terminated within the remaining
dates previously agreed upon.
Should the opposing party fail to appear without valid cause stated in the next
preceding paragraph, the presentation of the scheduled witness will proceed with the
absent party being deemed to have waived the right to interpose objection and conduct
cross-examination.
The contents of the pre-trial order shall control the subsequent proceedings, unless
modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice. (7a)
*NOTES. This provision on the procedure in pre-trial proceedings in civil cases is different from
that obtaining in criminal cases wherein, as provided in Sec. 2 of Rule 118, an agreement or
admission of a party in the pre-trial conference shall be admissible against him only if reduced to
writing and signed by him and his counsel.
- The amendment of a pre-trial order is addressed to the sound discretion of the court.
- Where the amount of back rentals to be paid by the defendant is stated in the pre-trial order in
the nature of a compromise agreement thereon, said pre-trial order in that sense has the force of
res judicata on that issue.
- A pre-trial order is not mean t to be a detailed catalogue of each and every issue that is to be or
may be take n up during the trial. Issues that are impliedly included therein by necessary
implication are as much integral part s of the pre-trial order as those that are expressly stipulated.
Section 8. Court-annexed mediation. – After pre-trial and, after issues are joined, the court
shall refer the parties for mandatory court-annexed mediation.
The period for court-annexed mediation shall not exceed thirty (30) calendar days
without further extension. (n)
Section 9. Judicial dispute resolution. – Only if the judge of the court to which the case was
originally raffled is convinced that settlement is still possible, the case may be referred to
another court for judicial dispute resolution. The judicial dispute resolution shall be
conducted within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days from notice of
failure of the court-annexed mediation.
If judicial dispute resolution fails, trial before the original court shall proceed on the
dates agreed upon.
All proceedings during the court-annexed mediation and the judicial dispute
resolution shall be confidential. (n)
Section 10. Judgment after pre-trial. – Should there be no more controverted facts, or no
more genuine issue as to any material fact, or an absence of any issue, or should the answer
fail to tender an issue, the court shall, without prejudice to a party moving for judgment on
the pleadings under Rule 34 or summary judgment under Rule 35, motu proprio include in
the pre-trial order that the case be submitted for summary judgment or judgment on the
pleadings, without need of position papers or memoranda. In such cases, judgment shall be
rendered within ninety (90) calendar days from termination of the pre-trial.
The order of the court to submit the case for judgment pursuant to this Rule shall
not be the subject to appeal or certiorari. (n)

RULE 15: MOTIONS

Section 1.Motion defined.

– A motion is an application for relief other than by a pleading. (1)

Bar Question:

Pleadings; Motion (2007) No.II. (c) A motion is a pleading. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER: False. A motion is not a pleading but a mere application for
relief other than by a pleading (Rule 15, Sec. 1, Rules of Court).

Section 2.Motions must be in writing.

- All motions shall be in writing except those made in open court or in the course of a
hearing or trial.
 A motion made in open court or in the course of a hearing or trial should
immediately be resolved in open court, after the adverse party is given the opportunity to
argue his or her opposition thereto.

When a motion is based on facts not appearing on record, the court may hear the matter on
affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct that the
matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions. (2a)

Section 3. Contents.
– A motion shall state the relief sought to be obtained and the grounds upon which it is based,
and if required by these Rules or necessary to prove facts alleged therein, shall be accompanied
by supporting affidavits and other papers. (3)
[Section4. Hearing of motion. — Deleted]
Section 4. Non-litigious motions.
— Motions which the court may act upon without prejudicing the rights of adverse parties are
non-litigious motions.
These motions include:
a) Motion for the issuance of an alias summons;
b) Motion for extension to file answer;
c) Motion for postponement;
d) Motion for the issuance of a writ of execution;
e)Motion for the issuance of an alias writ of execution;
f)Motion for the issuance of a writ of possession;
g)Motion for the issuance of an order directing the sheriff to execute the final certificate of sale;
and
h)Other similar motions. These motions shall not be set for hearing and shall be resolved by the
court within five (5) calendar days from receipt thereof. (n)

Section 5. Litigious motions. — (a) litigious motions include:

1) Motion for bill of particulars;

Bar Question:
X filed a motion for Bill of Particulars, after being served with summons and a copy of the
complaint However, X's motion did not contain a notice of hearing. The court may therefore:
a. require the clerk of court to calendar the motion.
b. motu proprio dismiss the motion for not complying with Rule 15.
c. allow the parties the opportunity to be heard.
d. return the motion to X's counsel for amendment.

2) Motion to dismiss;
3) Motion for new trial;
4) Motion for reconsideration;
5) Motion for execution pending appeal;
6) Motion to amend after a responsive pleading has been filed;
7) Motion to cancel statutory lien;
8) Motion for an order to break in or for a writ of demolition;
9) Motion for intervention;
10) Motion for judgment on the pleadings;
11) Motion for summary judgment;
12) Demurrer to evidence;
13) Motion to declare defendant in default; and
14) Other similar motions.
(b) All motions shall be served by personal service, accredited private courier or registered mail,
or electronic means so as to ensure their receipt by the other party.
(c) The opposing party shall file his or her opposition to a litigious motion within five (5)
calendar days from receipt thereof. No other submissions shall be considered by the court in
the resolution of the motion.
The motion shall be resolved by the court within fifteen (15) calendar days from its receipt of the
opposition thereto, or upon expiration of the period to file such opposition. (n)

Section. 6. Notice of hearing on litigious motions; discretionary.

— The court may, in the exercise of its discretion, and if deemed necessary for its resolution, call
a hearing on the motion. The notice of hearing shall be addressed to all parties concerned, and
shall specify the time and date of the hearing. (5a)
Section 7.Proof of service necessary.
— No written motion shall be acted upon by the court without proof of service thereof, pursuant
to Section 5(b) hereof.(6a)
— Except for motions requiring immediate action, where the court decides to conduct hearing on
a litigious motion, the same shall be set on a Friday. (7a)

Bar Question:
The bank‟s second motion to dismiss which is grounded on improper venue, should be
denied. The improper venue of an action is deemed waived by the bank‟s filing an earlier
motion to dismiss without raising improper venue as an issue, and more so when the bank filed
an Answer without raising improper venue as an issue after its first motion to dismiss was
denied.
Under the “omnibus motion rule” (Rule 15, Sec. 8, Rules of Court) which governs the
bank‟s motion to dismiss, such motion should include all objections then available; otherwise,
all objections not so included shall be deemed waived.
Although the improper venue became known only in the course of the trial, the same
should not be allowed to obstruct or disturb the proceedings since venue of civil actions is
defined for the convenience of the parties, nay jurisdictional.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The “omnibus motion rule” should not apply, because the improper venue
became known and thus available only to the movant bank after the motions to dismiss
were filed and resolved by the court, and in the course of the trial of the case. In fairness
to the defendant bank, it should not be precluded by the “omnibus motion rule” from
raising objection to the improper venue only when said ground for objection became
known to it.
The court may not resolve the second motion to dismiss precisely because of the
“omnibus motion rule”, since the bank filed an earlier motion to dismiss but did not
raise the ground of improper venue, and subsequently filed an Answer wherein the
improper venue has not again been raised. Hence, the question of improper venue has
become moot and academic. The only grounds not barred by the “omnibus motion rule”
are (a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; (b) litis pendencia; and (c) bar by
prior judgment or by statute of limitations.
Section 9.Omnibus motion.
— Subject to the provisions of Section 1 of Rule 9, a motion attacking a pleading, order,
judgment, or proceeding shall include all objections then available, and all objections not so
included shall be deemed waived. (8a)
Section 10.Motion for leave.
— A motion for leave to file a pleading or motion shall be accompanied by the pleading or
motion sought to be admitted. (9)
Section 11.Form.
— The Rules applicable to pleadings shall apply to written motions so far as concerns caption,
designation, signature, and other matters of form. (10)

Section. 12. Prohibited motions.

— The following motions shall not be allowed:
(a)Motion to dismiss except on the following grounds: 1)That the court has no jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the claim; 2)That there is another action pending between the same parties
for the same cause; and 3)That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute
of limitations;
(b)Motion to hear affirmative defenses;
(c)Motion for reconsideration of the court’s action on the affirmative defenses;
(d)Motion to suspend proceedings without a temporary restraining order or injunction issued by
a higher court;
(e)Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other papers, except a motion
for extension to file an answer as provided by Section 11, Rule 11; and
(f)Motion for postponement intended for delay, except if it is based on acts of God, force
majeure or physical inability of the witness to appear and testify. If the motion is granted based
on such exceptions, the moving party shall be warned that the presentation of its evidence must
still be terminated on the dates previously agreed upon.
 A motion for postponement, whether written or oral, shall, at all times, be accompanied
by the original official receipt from the office of the clerk of court evidencing payment of the
postponement fee under Section 21(b), Rule 141, to be submitted either at the time of the filing
of said motion or not later than the next hearing date. The clerk of court shall not accept the
motion unless accompanied by the original receipt. (n)

Section. 13. Dismissal with prejudice.

— Subject to the right of appeal, an order granting a motion to dismiss or an affirmative defense
that the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute of limitations; that the
claim or demand set forth in the plaintiff’s pleading has been paid, waived, abandoned or
otherwise extinguished; or that the claim on which the action is founded is unenforceable under
the provisions of the statute of frauds, shall bar the refiling of the same action or claim. (5, R16)

RULE 37: NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

SECTION 1. Grounds of and period for filing motion for new trial or reconsideration.
— Within the period for taking an appeal, the aggrieved party may move the trial court to set
aside the judgment or final order and grant a new trial for one or more of the following causes
materially affecting the substantial rights of said party:(a) Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
negligence which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against and by reason of which such
aggrieved party has probably been impaired in his rights; or(b) Newly discovered evidence,
which he could not with reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial, and
which if presented would probably alter the result.Within the same period, the aggrieved party
may also move for reconsideration upon the grounds that the damages awarded are excessive,
that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that the decision or final
order is contrary to law. (1a)
SEC. 2. Contents of motion for new trial or reconsideration and notice thereof.
— The motion shall be made in writing stating the ground or grounds therefor, a written notice
of which shall be served by the movant on the adverse party.A motion for new trial shall be
proved in the manner provided for proof of motions. A motion for the cause mentioned in
paragraph (a) of the preceding section shall be supported by affidavits of merits which may be
rebutted by affidavits. A motion for the cause mentioned in paragraph (b) shall be supported by
affidavits of the witnesses by whom such evidence is expected to be given, or by duly
authenticated documents which are proposed to be introduced in evidence.A motion for
reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final
order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to law, making express
reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to the provisions of law alleged to be
contrary to such findings or conclusions.A pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration
shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal. (2a)
SEC. 3. Action upon motion for new trial or reconsideration.
— The trial court may set aside the judgment or final order and grant a new trial, upon such
terms as may be just, or may deny the motion. If the court finds that excessive damages have
been awarded or that the judgment or final order is contrary to the evidence or law, it may amend
such judgment or final order accordingly. (3a)
SEC. 4. Resolution of motion.
— A motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be resolved within thirty (30) days from the
time it is submitted for resolution. (n)
SEC. 5. Second motion for new trial.
— A motion for new trial shall include all grounds then available and those not so included shall
be deemed waived. A second motion for new trial, based on a ground not existing nor available
when the first motion was made, may be filed within the time herein provided excluding the time
during which the first motion had been pending. No party shall be allowed a second motion for
reconsideration of a judgment or final order. (4a; 4, IRG)
SEC. 6. Effect of granting of motion for new trial.
— If a new trial is granted in accordance with the provisions of this Rule, the original judgment
or final order shall be vacated, and the action shall stand for trial de novo; but the recorded
evidence taken upon the former trial, in so far as the same is material and competent to establish
the issues, shall be used at the new trial without retaking the same. (5a)
SEC. 7. Partial new trial or reconsideration.
— If the grounds for a motion under this Rule appear to the court to affect the issues as to only a
part, or less than all of the matter in controversy, or only one, or less than all, of the parties to it,
the court may order a new trial or grant reconsideration as to such issues if severable without
interfering with the judgment or final order upon the rest. (6a)
SEC. 8. Effect of order for partial new trial.
— When less than all of the issues are ordered retried, the court may either enter a judgment or
final order as to the rest, or stay the enforcement of such judgment or final order until after the
new trial. (7a)
SEC. 9. Remedy against order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration.
— An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration is not appealable, the remedy
being an appeal from the judgment or final order. (n)
Bar Question:
(c), If the executor or administrator has a claim against estate he represents, he shall give notice
thereof, in writing, to the court, and the court shall appoint a special administrator (Rule 86,
Sec. 8, Rules of Court). 77. A defendant declared in default may, after judgment but before
finality, file a: a. Petition for Relief from Judgment; b. Petition for Certiorari; c. Motion for
Reconsideration; d. Motion to Set Aside Order of Default.
(c), A defendant declared in default may after judgment but before finality file a Motion for
Reconsideration in order to give the Court an opportunity to rectify its mistakes and set aside the
previous judgment by default before it attains finality.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
A defendant declared in default may, after judgment but before finality, file a Motion for
New Trial. It is well-settled that a defendant who has been declared in default has the following
remedies, to wit:
(1) he may, at any time after discovery of the default but before judgment, file a motion,
under oath, to set aside the order of default on the ground that his failure to answer was due to
fraud, accident, mistake or excusable neglect, and that he has a meritorious defense; (2) if
judgment has already been rendered when he discovered the default, but before the same has
become final and executor, he may file a motion for new trial under Section 1(a) of Rule 37; (3)
if he discovered the default after the judgment has become final and executor, he may file a
petition for relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and (4) he may also appeal from the judgment
rendered against him as contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if no petition to set aside the
order of default has been presented by him. (B.D. long Span Builders vs. R.S. Ampeloquio Realty
Development, Inc., G.R. No. 169919, September 11, 2009).
RULE 38: RELIEF FROM JUDGMENTS, ORDERS, OR OTHER PROCEEDINGS
SECTION 1. Petition for relief from, judgment, order, or other proceedings
— When a judgment or final order is entered, or any other proceeding is thereafter taken against
a party in any court through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, he may file a
petition in such court and in the same case praying that the judgment, order or proceeding be set
aside. (2a)
SEC. 2. Petition for relief from denial of appeal.
— When a judgment or final order is rendered by any court in a case, and a party thereto, by
fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, has been prevented from taking an appeal, he
may file a petition in such court and in the same case praying that the appeal be given due
course. (1a)
SEC. 3. Time for filing petition; contents and verification.
— A petition provided for in either of the preceding sections of this Rule must be verified, filed
within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding
to be set aside, and not more than six (6) months after such judgment or final order was entered,
or such proceeding was taken; and must be accompanied with affidavits showing the fraud,
accident, mistake, or excusable negligence relied upon, and the facts constituting the petitioner’s
good and substantial cause of action or defense, as the case may be. (3)
SEC. 4. Order to file an answer.
— If the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify relief, the court in which it is filed,
shall issue an order requiring the adverse parties to answer the same within fifteen (15) days
from the receipt thereof. The order shall be served in such manner as court may direct, together
with copies of the petition and the accompanying affidavits. (4a)
SEC. 5. Preliminary injunction pending proceedings.
— The court in which the petition is filed, may grant such preliminary injunction as may be
necessary for the preservation of the rights of the parties, upon the filing by the petitioner of a
bond in favor of the adverse party, conditioned that if the petition is dismissed or the petitioner
fails on the trial of the case upon its merits, he will pay the adverse party all damages and costs
that may be awarded to him by reason of the issuance of such injunction or the other proceedings
following the petition; but such injunction shall not operate to discharge or extinguish any lien
which the adverse party may have acquired upon the property of the petitioner. (5a)
SEC. 6. Proceedings after answer is filed.
— After the filing of the answer or the expiration of the period therefor, the court shall hear the
petition and if after such hearing, it finds that the allegations thereof are not true, the petition
shall be dismissed; but if it finds said allegations to be true, it shall set aside the judgment or final
order or other proceeding complained of upon such terms as may be just. Thereafter the case
shall stand as if such judgment, final order or other proceeding had never been rendered, issued
or taken. The court shall then proceed to hear and determine the case as if a timely motion for a
new trial or reconsideration had been granted by it. (6a)
SEC. 7. Procedure where the denial of an appeal is set aside.
— Where the denial of an appeal is set aside, the lower court shall be required to give due course
to the appeal and to elevate the record of the appealed case as if a timely and proper appeal had
been made. (7a)

Bar Question:
In Gentle Supreme Philippines, Inc. vs. Ricardo Consulta, G.R. No. 183182, September 1, 2010,
the Supreme Court held that it is not necessary that the person in charge of the defendant‟s
regular place of business be specifically authorized to receive the summons. It is enough that he
appears to be in charge. Consequently, the substituted service of summons to the defendant‟s
secretary in the office is valid. (B) If declared in default, what can Charlie do to obtain relief?
(4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If Charlie is declared in default, he has the following remedies to wit:
2) if judgment has already been rendered when he discovered the default, but before the same
has become final and executor, he may file a motion for new trial under Section 1(a) of Rule 37:
3) if he discovered the default after the judgment has become final and executor, he may file a
petition for relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and
RULE 58: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

SECTION 1. Preliminary injunction defined; classes.

  — A preliminary injunction is an order granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior to

the judgment or final order, requiring a party or a court, agency or a person to refrain from a
particular act or acts. It may also require the performance of a particular act or acts, in which
case it shall be known as a preliminary mandatory injunction. (1a)

SEC. 2. Who may grant preliminary injunction. 

— A preliminary injunction may be granted by the court where the action or proceeding is
pending. If the action or proceeding is pending in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court,
it may be issued by said court or any member thereof. (2a)

SEC. 3. Grounds for issuance of preliminary injunction. 

— A preliminary injunction may be granted when it is established:

(a) That the applicant is entitled to the relief demanded, and the whole or part of such relief
consists in restraining the commission or continuance of the act or acts complained of, or in
requiring the performance of an act or acts, either for a limited period or perpetually;

(b) That the commission, continuance or non-performance of the act or acts complained of
during the litigation would probably work injustice to the applicant; or

(c) That a party, court, agency or a person is doing, threatening, or is attempting to do, or is
procuring or suffering to be done, some act or acts probably in violation of the rights of the
applicant respecting the subject of the action or proceeding, and tending to render the judgment
ineffectual. (3a)

SEC. 4. Verified application and bond for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining
order. — A preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order may be granted only
when:

(a) The application in the action or proceeding is verified, and shows facts entitling the applicant
to the relief demanded; and
(b) Unless exempted by the court, the applicant files with the court where the action or
proceeding is pending, a bond executed to the party or person enjoined, in an amount to be fixed
by the court, to the effect that the applicant will pay to such party or person all damages which he
may sustain by reason of the injunction or temporary restraining order if the court should finally
decide that the applicant was not entitled thereto. Upon approval of the requisite bond, a writ of
preliminary injunction shall be issued. (4a)

(c) When an application for a writ of preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order is
included in a complaint or any initiatory pleading, the case, if filed in a multiple-sala court, shall
be raffled only after notice to and in the presence of the adverse party or the person to be
enjoined. In any event, such notice shall be preceded, or contemporaneously accompanied, by
service of summons, together with a copy of the complaint or initiatory pleading and the
applicant’s affidavit and bond, upon the adverse party in the Philippines.

However, where the summons could not be served personally or by substituted service despite
diligent efforts or the adverse party is a resident of the Philippines temporarily absent therefrom
or is a nonresident thereof the requirement of prior or contemporaneous service of summons
shall not apply.

(d) The application for a temporary restraining order shall thereafter be acted upon only after all
parties are heard in a summary hearing which shall be conducted within twenty-four (24) hours
after the sheriffs return of service and/or the records are received by the branch selected by raffle
and to which the records shall be transmitted immediately.

SEC. 5. Preliminary injunction not granted without notice; exception.

— No preliminary injunction shall be granted without hearing and prior notice to the party or
person sought to be enjoined. If it shall appear from facts shown by affidavits or by the verified
application that great or irreparable injury would result to the applicant before the matter can be
heard on notice, the court to which the application for preliminary injunction was made, may
issue ex parte a temporary restraining order to be effective only for a period of twenty (20) days
from service on the party or person sought to be enjoined, except as herein provided. Within the
said twenty-day period, the court must order said party or person to show cause, at a specified
time and place, why the injunction should not be granted, determine within the same period
whether or not the preliminary injunction shall be granted, and accordingly issue the
corresponding order.

However, and subject to the provisions of the preceding sections, if the matter is of extreme
urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury the executive judge of
a multiple-sala court or the presiding judge of a single-sala court may issue ex parte a temporary
restraining order effective for only seventy-two (72) hours from issuance but he shall
immediately comply with the provisions of the next preceding section as to service of summons
and the documents to be served therewith. Thereafter, within the aforesaid seventy-two (72)
hours, the judge before whom the case is pending shall conduct a summary hearing to determine
whether the temporary restraining order shall be extended until the application for preliminary
injunction can be heard. In no case shall the total period of effectivity of the temporary
restraining order exceed twenty (20) days, including the original seventy-two hours provided
herein.

In the event that the application for preliminary injunction is denied or not resolved within the
said period, the temporary restraining order is deemed automatically vacated. The effectivity of a
temporary restraining order is not extendible without need of any judicial declaration to that
effect and no court shall have authority to extend or renew the same on the same ground for
which it was issued.

However, if issued by the Court of Appeals or a member thereof, the temporary restraining order
shall be effective for sixty (60) days from service on the party or person sought to be enjoined. A
restraining order issued by the Supreme Court or a member thereof shall be effective until further
orders. (5a)

Bar Question
Q(2012): In Petition for Certiorari, the Court of Appeals issues a Writ of Preliminary Injunction
against the RTC restraining the latter from trying a crucial case. The Court of Appeals should
therefore: a) Decide the main case within 60 days. b) Decide the certiorari petition within 6
months. c) Decide the main case or the petition within 60 days. d) Decide the main case or the
petition within 6 months from issue of the preliminary injunction.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d) Decide the main case or the petition within 6 months from issue of the preliminary injunction.
The trial court, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Tax Appeals that issued
a writ of preliminary injunction against a lower court, board, officer, or quasi-judicial agency
shall decide the main case or petition within six (6) months from the issuance of the writ. (Rule
58, Sec. 5, as amended by A.M. NO. 07-7-12-SC)

SEC. 6. Grounds for objection to, or for motion of dissolution of, injunction or restraining
order.

 — The application for injunction or restraining order may be denied, upon a showing of its
insufficiency. The injunction or restraining order may also be denied, or, if granted, may be
dissolved, on other grounds upon affidavits of the party or person enjoined, which may be
opposed by the applicant also by affidavits. It may further be denied, or, if granted, may be
dissolved, if it appears after hearing that although the applicant is entitled to the injunction or
restraining order, the issuance or continuance thereof, as the case may be, would cause
irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the applicant can be fully compensated
for such damages as he may suffer, and the former files a bond in an amount fixed by the court
conditioned that he will pay all damages which the applicant may suffer by the denial or the
dissolution of the injunction or restraining order. If it appears that the extent of the preliminary
injunction or restraining order granted is too great, it may be modified. (6a)
SEC. 7. Service of copies of bonds; effect of disapproval of same.

— The party filing a bond in accordance with the provisions of this Rule shall forthwith serve a
copy of such bond on the other party, who may except to the sufficiency of the bond, or of the
surety or sureties thereon. If the applicant’s bond is found to be insufficient in amount, or if the
surety or sureties thereon fail to justify, and a bond sufficient in amount with sufficient sureties
approved after justification is not filed forthwith, the injunction shall be dissolved. If the bond of
the adverse party is found to be insufficient in amount, or the surety or sureties thereon fail to
justify a bond sufficient in amount with sufficient sureties approved after justification is not filed
forthwith, the injunction shall be granted or restored, as the case may be. (8a)

SEC. 8. Judgment to include damages against party and sureties 

— At the trial, the amount of damages to be awarded to either party, upon the bond of the
adverse party, shall be claimed, ascertained, and awarded under the same procedure prescribed in
section 20 of Rule 57. (9a)

SEC. 9. When final injunction granted.

— If after the trial of the action it appears that the applicant is entitled to have the act or acts
complained of permanently enjoined, the court shall grant a final injunction perpetually
restraining the party or person enjoined from the commission or continuance of the act or acts or
confirming the preliminary mandatory injunction. (10a)