Jurisprudence: Manzano v. Despalidares, G.R. No.

148786, December 16, 2004

In one case decided by the court, there was no request for admission, it was during pre-trial.
But there was a list of objects that will have to be submitted to the adverse party, required of
that party during pre-trial. But, he was not able to complete the list. So, the court gave him
some leeway, and allowed him to submit the same within a period of ten (10) days, and the
other party had no objection with that. But, instead of filing/submitting the list, that party filed
a request for admission directed upon the other party of the list that would have been submitted
in the first place, but this time, it was a request for admission of facts, and documents, which
should have been the contents of the list, to be submitted during the pre-trial. And the other
party, thinking that it was still the same list, ignored it: he did not respond, did not react, did
not comply, and did not even object.

The Court said that the failure to respond to the request to admission amounts to an implied
admission.

● If a fact has already been previously denied in an answer, or any pleading for that matter,
it need not be subject of a request for admission. Syempre, ayaw ng husgado na paulit-
ulit kasi dineny na yan.
● A matter subject of a request for admission should only be facts and documents. It cannot
be based on opinion, it cannot be based on conclusions.
● You cannot make the other party admit the law, because the judge is expected to know
the law.
● What is the effect of failure to file and serve a request for admission?: A party who
fails to file and serve a request of admission on the adverse party of a material or relevant
fact in issue within the personal knowledge of the latter shall not be permitted to present
said facts.
● Note: The policy of our law is that we avail of these modes of discovery. Now, every
party to an action should file and serve a request for admission of a material or relevant
fact and issue. Failure to do so means he will not be permitted to present evidence of such
fact—a very serious consequence.
○ Personal notation: However, in practice, this rarely happens. Very few lawyers
actually use these modes of discovery. But, if you would want, you may call the
attention of the court: not having called for the request for admission, he may not
be allowed to present certain facts. However, some judges give so much leeway
and will concede that you instead just prove it during trial. This will be discussed
in more detail when we reach Rule 29: Refusal to Comply with Modes of
Discovery.