Rule 16

G.R. NO. 147905 : May 28, 2007

B. VAN ZUIDEN BROS., LTD v. GTVL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, INC.
Facts:
Petitioner filed a complaint for sum of money against respondent.
Instead of filing an answer, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground
that petitioner has no legal capacity to sue.
After an exchange of several pleadings between the parties, RTC dismissed the
complaint. On appeal, CA affirmed the dismissal on the ground that the
petitioner is not exempt from being considered as doing business in the
Philippines.
Thus the case before the SC.
Issue: (related to Rule 16)
Whether respondent was correct in filing a motion to dismiss instead of filing
an answer.
Ruling: (No)
Since the New Rules of Court deleted Rule 16, Motion to Dismiss, the New
Rules allow the filing of motion to dismiss under Rule 9, Sec. 1, on the grounds
of: 1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; 2) litis pendentia; 3) res
judicata; or 4) statute of limitation/prescription.
The filing of the respondent of the motion to dismiss on the ground of
petitioner’s lack of legal capacity should have been properly raised as an
affirmative defense pursuant to Rule 8, Sec. 12 (a)

Note that I only include facts related to Rule 16, and since the said rule has
now been deleted, I cite related provisions of the Rule instead.
The original issue of this case pertains to whether petitioner, an unlicensed
foreign corporation, has legal capacity to sue before Philippine courts. The
resolution of this issue depends on whether petitioner is doing business in the
Philippines. (not related to Rule 16)
Rule 9, Section 1. Defenses and objections not 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.
Rule 8, 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; Rule 8 84 2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1997 RULES OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE (A.M. NO. 19-10-20-SC) 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.