Civil Procedure 2nd Exam 2014 - Atty. Suarez (Cutie)

1
RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

2nd Exam Coverage (SY 2014-‐2015)
Based on the Lectures of Atty. Melissa Romana P. Suarez

Note: Read in conjunction with Lakas Atenista’s 1997 Rules of which he makes his claim? The elements of cause of action -‐
Civil Procedure Transcription (From the lectures of Dean Inigo right, obligation, violation and damage.
with updates from the Lectures of Atty. De La Banda and
Atty. Suarez. How do you assert your claim? You do not call the judge nor
write a letter to him. There is a format to be followed when
January 7, 2015 you submit a pleading to the court. Pleading is submitted to
the court.

RULE 5: Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts
Section 2. Pleadings allowed. — The claims of a party are

asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-‐claim, third
Rule 5 talks about the procedures in the MTC.
(fourth, etc.)-‐party complaint, or complaint-‐in-‐intervention.

The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to
Section 1. Uniform procedure. — The procedure in the
the pleading asserting a claim against him.
Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same as in the Regional
An answer may be responded to by a reply. (n)
Trial Courts, except (a) where a particular provision

expressly or impliedly applies only to either of said courts,
What are the pleadings that we have in civil cases?
or (b) in civil cases governed by the Rule on Summary
Procedure. (n) • Complaint
• Counterclaim
Rule 5 says that the procedure in the MTC is the same as the • Cross-‐claim
procedure in the RTC. In other words, this is the procedure • Third party complaint (4th, etc.)
for all the courts. If there is a special court that says that “this • Complaint-‐in-‐intervention
will be the procedure to be followed”, then follow it. Of • Answer
course, the Summary Procedure will apply to MTC. • Reply

Section 2. Meaning of terms. — The term "Municipal Trial Illustration: P files a complaint against D. We are talking
Courts" as used in these Rules shall include Metropolitan about the claims. We have the counter-‐claim filed by D
Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial against P. We also have a cross-‐claim. Let’s say we have D1
Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts. (1a) and D2. If D1 files against D2, that is a cross-‐claim. Then, D2
files a 3rd party complaint against X. Now, Y wants to enter
the action. He can file a complaint-‐in-‐intervention. These are
RULE 6: Kinds of Pleadings
all pleadings which assert a claim. Those who file the

pleadings are all plaintiffs in their respective actions.
Section 1. Pleadings defined. — Pleadings are the written

statements of the respective claims and defenses of the
“The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the
parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.
pleading asserting a claim against him.”
(1a)
Illustration: Defendant files an answer to the complaint of the
plaintiff. Plaintiff files an answer to the counterclaim. D2 files
What are pleadings? an answer to the crossclaim. X files an answer to the 3rd party
According to Section 1, they are the written statements of the complaint. And maybe if the complaint-‐in-‐intervention is
respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to focused on P, P can file an answer to the complaint-‐in-‐
the court for appropriate judgment. intervention. So those are the pleadings which assert the
defenses of the respective defendants.
They are always written. We don’t have oral pleadings. “Of
the respective claims and defenses” – the pleading should be “An answer may be responded to by a reply.” Answer to the
about a claim or a defense. If it is a motion for extension of complaint, to the counterclaim, etc. will all fall under
time to file an answer, that is not a pleading because you are “answer.” Okay?
not claiming something or defending yourself. You are just
asking for more time. Motion to postpone trial is also not a The main pleadings are:
pleading. Motions are not pleadings. 1. Complaint – where the claims of a party are asserted
2. Answer – where the defenses of a party are alleged
Who makes the claim? The plaintiff. 3. Reply – the response to an answer

What should be contained in his pleading or complaint in

2 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

You cannot have an action without the two – complaint and witness or the offended party. If probable cause is proven to
answer. A reply kasi is optional, as we will see later. Is exist, then it will be filed with the prosecutor then the
counterclaim important in an action? We will see later. prosecutor will file an information. The accused in the
Generally, no. What about a 3rd party complaint? Generally, criminal case is allowed to file a counter-‐affidavit. It is still in
no. an affidavit form, not a pleading. Once the information is filed
in court, we have the judicial affidavits so affidavit pa rin.
Again, the main pleadings are the complaint and the answer.
We already learned under our discussion on jurisdiction: How do you know when a complaint is sufficient enough to
Jurisdiction over the issues – the issues are joined upon the pass the test of sufficiency?
filing of an answer. If upon omission or proof of the facts being alleged, a
judgment may be properly given. So if the court could render
Just take note that a counterclaim is different from an a judgment based on the allegations in a complaint.
answer. (Refer to the illustrations above) Who files the
answer? D. Who files the counterclaim? Also D. Can you file an A fact essentially cannot be stricken out without leaving the
answer with counterclaim? Yes, but they are different. What statement of the cause of action insufficient.
are contained in the answer are his defenses to the Example: X files an action for sum of money against Y.
complaint. What is contained in the counterclaim is his claim According to him, Y borrowed P1M from him and promised to
against the plaintiff. pay on December 15, 2014. It is now January but Y failed to
pay. So, there is a violation of his obligation. Because Y failed
Section 3. Complaint. — The complaint is the pleading to pay, X suffered damages. So, complete the allegations of
alleging the plaintiff's cause or causes of action. The names the facts. Now, if one element is not included, then the
and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated complaint fails to state a cause of action.
in the complaint. (3a) What if there is an additional allegation there that
according to X, when December 2014 came, he called up the
What is a complaint? house of Y but the latter was busy so he tried the cellphone
The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's cause or and all he got was that the person cannot be reached. Then,
causes of action. X said that he sent his driver to Y’s house. Are these the facts
that need to be stated in the complaint? No, they are not
We already mentioned that if the plaintiff does not state his essential. They can be stricken out. If you remove them from
cause of action, it can be dismissed. What is the ground? your allegations, will still there be a sufficient statement
Failure to state a cause of action. What else should be cause of action? Yes. That is the test of sufficiency.
contained in the complaint? It must state the names and
residences of the plaintiffs and defendants. If you are the What are not ultimate facts?
plaintiff and you do not state the residence of the defendant, • Evidentiary or immaterial facts
it would be difficult for the court to send summons. • Legal conclusions or interferences from facts not
stated
Again, going back to cause of action, the complaint is not • Details of probative matter or particulars of evidence
complete without elements of the cause of action of the • Statements of law
plaintiff. But as a plaintiff, it is not required of him to tell his • Arguments
entire story in the complaint. A complaint must contain only • Allegation that a contract is valid or void is merely a
the ultimate facts, not the evidentiary facts. conclusion of law

A complaint is a concise statement of ultimate facts “When Y borrowed money from me, he signed a promissory
constituting a plaintiff’s cause of action with a specification note” – you can write this down in your complaint. “This
of the relief sought. So the plaintiff must state in his pleading promissory note is valid” – you don’t have to write it down.
the cause of action and what he wants the court to do for That is a conclusion and it is up to the court to determine
him (prayer). whether or not the promissory note is valid.

This complaint is the initiatory pleading in a civil action. You Section 4. Answer. — An answer is a pleading in which a
cannot start a civil action with an answer nor with a defending party sets forth his defenses. (4a)
counterclaim. There are no pleadings in criminal cases ha. In
criminal cases, we file an affidavit of complaint wherein you
have the testimony of the affiant – whether the affiant is the


Whatever the plaintiff alleges in the complaint, then the provision, it is an allegation of a new matter which, while
defendant can rebut the allegations. The opportunity to do hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the
that is given to him when he files his answer. So an answer is pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar
called a responsive pleading. Because it is a pleading filed in recovery by him.
response to a complaint.
What is an example of an affirmative defense? Itong si Y, in
Is there such a thing as answer in CrimPro? No. The his answer, states that “Yes, I borrowed P1M from X but I
counterpart of an answer in criminal cases is the plea entered already paid him by giving him my car worth P1.5M.” So, may
by the accused – guilty or not guilty. But you know very well admission or confession na nag-‐borrow ng money pero may
that during arraignment, the accused cannot defend himself. avoidance which nevertheless prevents or bars recovery by X.
All he can say is “guilty” or “not guilty”. The defense of the
accused is normally done in a counter-‐affidavit which will Another affirmative defense is… let’s say the loan was made
rebut the allegations in the affidavit complaint. in 2000 tapos 2015 na. Ngayon pa lang naningil si X. X only file
the case today so in the answer of Y, he can say that “Yes,
Section 5. Defenses. — Defenses may either be negative or sure I borrowed money from X but it was in the year 2000.
affirmative. His action has prescribed.” The prescriptive period diba is 10
(a) A negative defense is the specific denial of the years based on a written contract. So may confession and
material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of the claimant avoidance of liability.
essential to his cause or causes of action.
(b) An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new The affirmative defenses:
matter which, while hypothetically admitting the material • fraud
allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would • statute of limitations
nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him. The • release
affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, • payment
release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, • illegality
former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other • statute of frauds
matter by way of confession and avoidance. (5a) • estoppel
• former recovery
Is it that simple to make a defense? How do you defend • discharge in bankruptcy
yourself if you are the defendant? Section 5 tells us the two • and any other matter by way of confession and
kinds of defenses. Defenses may either be negative or avoidance
affirmative.
Take note that the enumeration here is not exclusive because
What is a negative defense? It is also called a defense of the last part says: any other matter by way of confession and
specific denial. It is the specific denial of the material fact or avoidance. Any other matter as long as it will allow the
facts alleged in the pleading of the claimant essential to his defendant to escape liability despite admission of the
cause or causes of action. allegation, then that is fine.

Going back to the example that we talked about earlier: Y is Section 6. Counterclaim. — A counterclaim is any claim
the defendant here in the complaint of X. It was already which a defending party may have against an opposing
stated that Y borrowed P1M to be paid in December 2014 but party. (6a)
he did not. By reason of his failure to pay, X suffered

damages.
This is very easy. Look at the definition: it is any claim which a

defending party may have against an opposing party. In our
Now, how is a negative defense done? If Y is the defendant
very basic illustration there: A counterclaim may be filed by D
and he makes a negative defense, he will say in his answer “I
against P, by P against Y, by X against D2.
did not borrow money from Y.” That is a specific denial of a

material fact alleged in the pleading. He can say “In fact, how
Example: P’s car collides with D’s car sa Diversion road. P files
could I borrow money from Y when I was out of the country
an action for damages against D for culpa aquiliana kasi
during the time alleged when I borrowed money from him.”
nasira ang car ni P. According to P, while he was driving his

car along Diversion, following the speed limit of 60 km/h., D
The second type of defense is the affirmative defense or
tried to overtake another car kaya nagkabangaan sila. His car
defense of confession and avoidance. According to the


was damaged and he needs to have it repaired so he needs said that he did not pay the money because P is occupying his
P200,000. P claims na he was driving within the speed limit land. Meron konting connection diba? What if there is no
and it was D who was negligent. So that is the complaint. connection? Is the counterclaim allowed? Sure. Although
there is no connection between what P is asking and what D
Ito namang si D files an answer defending himself. “I was not is filing, if D does not allow the filing of a counterclaim
negligent. In fact, I was the one driving within the speed limit. against P, then D will have to file a separate case in the
It was P who was negligent. Therefore, I am filing a future.
counterclaim for damages against P because I also have my
car damaged. It also needs to be repaired. Since P’s car is What then is the purpose of allowing the filing of a
Toyota and mine is Hummer, I need P1M to have the car counterclaim even if it is not connected to the main action?
repaired.” Ito na yung counterclaim niya. So parang ganti ba. To avoid multiplicity of suits. In our example, to discourage D
That is the most simple type of counterclaim. from filing a separate action and there will be same evidence,
etc. If it is in one case, then maybe the parties can save a little
In other words, if there is a counter claim, there would now bit in fees of lawyers and filing fees.
be two issues to be resolved by the court:
1. The complaint of P – whether or not P was negligent DE BORJA vs. DE BORJA
2. The counterclaim of D against P
A died here. If a party dies, in relation to special
Does a counterclaim have to be like that? Whatever P files proceedings, X was appointed as the administrator of A. We
against D, does D need to file the same thing against P? Not have W who owes money to the estate of A. The utang of W
necessarily. The example I gave you is the most common and is now an utang to the estate of A. X, the administrator, filed
easiest type of counterclaim. an action for sum of money against W to collect the unpaid
loan. X here is called the representative of the estate. So,
Pwede ba na the complaint was for a sum of money – P filed “Estate of A, Represented by X – the administrator.”
an action for sum of money against D alleging that D
borrowed money from him… Tapos D files an answer made W filed an answer to the complaint against him for
an affirmative defense saying na he borrowed money but collection of sum of money. In his answer, he says that X
right now, P is occupying my land. He says “So I am suing him owes him money. Sabi niya na the administrator X ang may
for accion publiciana.” What’s that? Recovery of possession. utang. Is the counterclaim proper? The answer is no.
“And I’m asking the court to vacate my property.” Pwede bay
un? The complaint is for sum of money and the counterclaim When you talk about a counterclaim it is P vs. D, D vs.
is for accion publiciana? The answer is Yes. There is no rule. P. Who is the plaintiff here? Is it X? No, it is the estate of A
represented by X. X is merely a representative party. The real
According to the SC in the case of De borja vs. De borja, party in interest is the estate of A. If W wants to file a
“There is no such rule for the two cases to be similar in counterclaim, the defendant should be the estate of A
nature.” It is possible for P to file an action for sum of money represented by X.
and for D to file a counterclaim for accion publiciana.
X cannot be sued in his personal capacity because he
What about the amount of the counterclaim? Kanina, when is merely a representative in the sum of money claim. There
we talked about the collision – sa Toyota car, the damage must be a separate action for that. The plaintiff must be sued
was for P200,000 tapos for the Hummer was P1M. Is there a in the same capacity that he is suing the defendant.
ceiling to the limit of the counterclaim? Generally, no.
A counterclaim is either compulsory or permissive. From the
According to the same case of Deborja, there is no rule that terms alone, you know that compulsory counterclaim is one
limits D’s counterclaim to the same amount he is claiming. “A which must be filed. The defendant has to file a counterclaim.
counterclaim need not diminish or defeat the recovery Otherwise, there will be sanctions. What is permissive? The
sought by the opposing party.” The problem is that in the defendant has an option to file or not. No sanctions.
example that we gave, the complaint falls under the
jurisdiction of the RTC while the counterclaim falls under the How do you know if a counterclaim is compulsory? We have
jurisdiction of the MTC. So we will go to this later. Section 7. There is no provision for permissive counterclaim
because if the counterclaim is not compulsory, it is
What if there is absolutely no connection between the automatically permissive.
complaint and the counterclaim? Kanina the sum of money, D


Section 7. Compulsory counterclaim. — A compulsory make the example specific: P filed an action for infringement
counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the regular against D with the RTC. Now, D files a complaint for
courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the cancellation for P’s patent, a counterclaim, with the RTC.
transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of Pwede ba yun? No, because the jurisdiction belongs to the
the opposing party's claim and does not require for its jurisdiction of the Bureau of Legal Affairs. Can D file an action
adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court for cancellation? Yes sure but it should not be a counterclaim
cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such a counterclaim must be but a separate case. That is why we know that an
within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount infringement case can go together with a cancellation case.
and the nature thereof, except that in an original action
before the Regional Trial Court, the counter-‐claim may be 2nd requisite: It arises out of or is connected with the
considered compulsory regardless of the amount. (n) transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of
the opposing party’s claim
Let us breakdown the provisions so we can get the requisites
for a counterclaim to be considered compulsory. The number In the example that we have earlier, the collision of two
5 requisite is not found in Section 7 but in Rule 11, Section 8 vehicles, is that a compulsory counterclaim? Yes. Sabihin
which states that: nalang natin na the value is baliktad like si P yung owner ng
Section 8. Existing counterclaim or cross-‐claim. — A Hummer so siya yung may claim ng P1M for the repairs. D is
compulsory counterclaim or a cross-‐claim that a the owner of the Toyota and yung damages claim niya is
defending party has at the time he files his answer P200,000 lang. Is it connected to the transaction or
shall be contained therein. (8a, R6) occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing
party’s claim? Yes, because it is the same accident – collision
Requisites for compulsory counterclaim: between the vehicles of P and D.
1. It is cognizable by the regular courts of justice
2. It arises out of or is connected with the What if, let us say P files an action for collection of sum of
transaction or occurrence constituting the money against D and D files a counterclaim for breach of
subject matter of the opposing party’s claim contract of sale of a car. It is totally different from the loan. Is
3. It does not require for its adjudication the that compulsory counterclaim? No. It is merely permissive
presence of 3rd parties of whom the court because the counterclaim did not arise out of or is connected
cannot acquire jurisdiction with the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject
4. It must be within the jurisdiction of the court, matter of the P’s claim. P’s claim is for utang and the
both as to the amount and the nature thereof, counterclaim of D is a separate contract of sale so merely
except that in the original action before the RTC, permissive.
the counterclaim may be considered
compulsory, regardless the amount Example: P files an action against D for recovery of a parcel of
5. The defending party has a counterclaim at the land – accion publiciana. According to P, he is the owner of
time he files his answer (Rule 11, Section 8) the land and D is occupying it. D filed an answer claiming that
he spent a lot of money for necessary expenses to preserve
If one requisite is missing, then it no longer becomes the land. So builder in good faith daw siya. P then must
compulsory. It is now permissive. A counterclaim is reimburse D for the necessary expenses or improvements.
permissive when there is a choice to raise it as a counterclaim Under the law on property, the defendant-‐possessors are
or a separate action. It is considered compulsory if there is no entitled to reimbursement for xxx. So is D’s counterclaim
choice but to raise it in the same action. Meaning, the arising out of or connected with the transaction constituting
defendant must file an answer with counterclaim. Hindi the subject matter of P’s claim? Yes, because it is kinda
pwede na answer lang muna and then later, may related.
counterclaim na. If you look at R11 S8, A compulsory
counterclaim that a defending party has at the time he files According to our legal luminaries, this is the most important
his answer shall be contained therein. He must file it together requisite to make the counterclaim compulsory. This was
with his answer. discussed in the case of Meliton vs. CA (1992, 216 S 485).

1st requisite: It is cognizable by the regular courts of justice MELITON vs. CA

In other words, you cannot file a complaint with the RTC and It has been postulated that while a number of
then a counterclaim under the jurisdiction of the BLA. To criteria have been advanced for the determination of


whether the counterclaim is compulsory or permissive, the original action is with the MTC, it is not compulsory but
"one compelling test of compulsoriness" is the logical merely permissive.
relationship between the claim alleged in the complaint and
that in the counterclaim, that is, where conducting separate Example: P filed an action against D for accion publiciana. The
trials of the respective claims of the parties would entail a value of the property is P1M. The action should be filed with
substantial duplication of effort and time, as where they the RTC. D is claiming for the reimbursements thereon
involve many of the same factual and/or legal issues. amounting to P50,000, is this a compulsory counterclaim?
The reimbursement? Yes.
Why is it important to determine whether or not the
counterclaim is compulsory? Because a compulsory Example: P files a complaint for forcible entry against D. The
counterclaim must be invoked in the same action. It cannot jurisdiction is with the MTC. D wants to file an action for
be a subject matter in a separate action. reimbursement for the expenses, the amount is P200,000. Is
the counterclaim compulsory? Yes, both under the
What is the effect of not filing a compulsory counterclaim in jurisdiction of the MTC. What if the counterclaim for
filing one’s action? According to Rule 9, Section 2: A reimbursement amounts to P500,000. It is no longer
compulsory counterclaim not set up shall be barred. This compulsory because he cannot file it with the MTC. He has to
means that sorry nalang si defendant. If he does not file his file a separate action.
compulsory counterclaim with his answer, he can no longer
do so. It is barred forever. But if the counterclaim is The thing to remember is that when it comes to actions
permissive, it is optional na – the defendant can file it in the falling within two separate jurisdiction: If the original action
same answer or he can file a separate case. It is really up to falls with the RTC, no problem. Ang problem lang is if the
him. main action is accion publiciana and the counterclaim is
forcible entry, pwede ba yun sa RTC? We will answer that
3rd requisite: It does not require for its adjudication the when you report on the cases.
presence of 3rd parties of whom the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction 5th requisite: The defending party has a counterclaim at the
time he files his answer
If the counterclaim of D against P will involve the presence of
an indispensable party who is out of the jurisdiction of the The cause of action of the defendant must already exist at
court, maybe he is abroad, then it is not compulsory. the time he files his answer. Hindi pwede na naka-‐file na siya
ng answer tapos later the cause of action exists then magfile
4th requisite: It must be within the jurisdiction of the court, agad ng counterclaim. Hindi na yung compulsory diba?
both as to the amount and the nature thereof, except that in Permissive nalang siya if it arises later.
the original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be
considered compulsory, regardless the amount What does this mean? If one files a counterclaim, it is a
pleading asserting a claim, it must have a cause of action. Any
Going back to the example of the collision of vehicles: If P pleading asserting a claim must have a cause of action.
owns the Toyota, P200,000 yung damages and D owns the
Hummer with P1M damages, P can file with the MTC. D wants Take note that counterclaims are not allowed in criminal
to file a counterclaim for P1M. Is that counterclaim cases. Can an accused file a counterclaim against the state
compulsory? No, because it is not within the jurisdiction of (People of the Philippines)? No. If the accused feels that he
the MTC. Both as to the amount and the nature thereof. So has a cause of action against the private complainant, then
look at the amount and the nature of the case. he can file a separate action.

Except: that in the original action before the RTC, the What is the basis for saying that? Rule 111, Section 1A:
counterclaim may be considered compulsory, regardless the xxx No counterclaim, cross-‐claim or third-‐party
amount. If we reverse like P owns the Hummer (P1M complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal
damages) and D owns the Toyota (P200,000 damages), P case, but any cause of action which could have been
files with the RTC. Is the counterclaim of D compulsory? Yes. the subject thereof may be litigated in a separate
He has to file the counterclaim. Can the RTC handle a civil action.
P200,000 case? Yes sure. That is what number four is saying,
pwede as long as the original action is with the RTC. If the Let’s go to the issues on docket fees. Take note that if you
file an action, you have to file the proper docket fees because


you are asking the court to award you something. So the Example: D1 and D2 are solidary debtors in a sum of P100,000.
docket fees are normally based on what you are claiming – They owe P. D1 and D2 signed a promissory note so that P
the value of the land, etc. If there is a counterclaim, there is would collect the P100,000 on December 2014. Although D1
also a claim. The defendant is also claiming against the and D2 signed the promissory note, D1 is not the real debtor.
plaintiff. Only D2 used the money. D1 and D2 failed to pay on
December 2014 so P sued both D1 and D2 because both of
If all he does is file an answer without a counterclaim, no them are signatories of the promissory note. So may
need to pay docket fees because he is only defending permissive joinder of parties. Are both indispensable parties?
himself. But once he files a claim against the plaintiff, he has No, only necessary parties. P can sue D1 only or D2 only
to pay docket fees. Before August 16, 2004, if the because they are solidary debtors.
counterclaim is compulsory, no need to pay docket fees na.
But after this AM, whether the counterclaim is compulsory or According to D1, wala siyang liability sa P100,000 because it
permissive, docket fees must be paid. was only D2 who used the money. So he can file a cross-‐claim
against D2. Is this allowed? Is this a proper cross-‐claim? Yes,
Effective August 16, 2004, under Section 7, Rule 141, as because it arose out of the same transaction.
amended by AM 04-‐2-‐04-‐SC, docket fees are now required to
be paid in all compulsory counterclaim and cross-‐claim. Suppose P files an action against D1 and D2 to collect from
the promissory note then D1 files a cross-‐claim against D2
Section 8. Cross-‐claim. — A cross-‐claim is any claim by one saying that their cars bump each other and so he wants to file
party against a co-‐party arising out of the transaction or a claim damages for the vehicular collision, is this allowed? No
occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original because it did not arise from the same transaction.
action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross-‐claim may
include a claim that the party against whom it is asserted is A cross-‐claim is merely a consequence of the case or the
or may be liable to the cross-‐claimant for all or part of a action filed by the plaintiff against the defendant. If there is
claim asserted in the action against the cross-‐claimant. (7) no main action, there is no cross claim.

A cross-‐claim is any claim by one party against a co-‐party Example: P filed an action against D to collect a loan of P1M.
arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject D files a counterclaim against P for the recovery of a parcel of
matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim land – this is a permissive counterclaim. But suppose P files an
therein. In other words, a cross-‐claim always arises out of: action to collect the loan against D1 and D2 then D1 files a
• The original action or cross-‐claim against D2 to recover a parcel of land, again, this
• The counterclaim therein is not allowed.

It cannot be a far-‐out incident. Unlike a counterclaim which But the cross-‐claim may arise from the counter-‐claim
can be totally unconnected to the main complaint, a therein.
crossclaim has to be connected. Again, “it must arise out of
the transaction or occurrence xxx.” Example: D1 and D2 filed an action against P. Baliktad ha. D1
and D2 are the plaintiffs and P is the defendant. So P files his
How do you distinguish a counterclaim from a cross-‐claim? answer with counterclaim against D1 and D2. D1 and D2 are
now defendants with respect to the counterclaim filed by P.
Counterclaim Cross-‐claim So D1 files a cross-‐claim against D2 arising out of the
A claim by D against P A claim by D against a co-‐D counterclaim, that is also allowed.
May be asserted w/n it arises Must always arise out of the
out of the same transaction same transaction or In your transcription, there are illustrations of the different
or occurrence that is the occurrence that is the subject scenarios which may arise. Let’s go through them quickly.
subject of the action matter of the action
If the main action is If the main action is Illustration: We have P1 and P2 and D1 and D2 – two plaintiffs,
dismissed, the counterclaim dismissed, the cross claim two defendants. The complaint contained a promissory note
may exist (no automatic ceases to exist which D1 and D2 signed. D1 claimed that every centavo of the
dismissal of the loan went to D2 so he will file a cross-‐claim against D2. Does it
counterclaim) arise out of the same transaction? Yes.


However, D1 contends that P1 and P2 occupied his land so he That is Section 9. The counterclaims, no need to be related
filed an accion publiciana. Pwede ba yun? Yes because it is a but the cross-‐claims have to be related.
counterclaim. Now, D1 is the plaintiff and P1 and P2 are the
defendants. January 8, 2015

In the accion publiciana case, D alleged na there were DANIEL vs. VILLAROSA
damages on the property. Now, P1 claims na hindi siya ang
nag-‐cause ng damages but si P2 so he files a cross-‐claim What was missing? The violation? So this is just a
against P2 based on the counterclaim (the damages being review on cause of action. We already took up this case. So
asked by D), pwede yun. Even though it is not related to the this is just an illustration of Section 3.
main action of the loan, it is related to the counterclaim.
From the 1st exam transcription: In this case, the SC
D2, who has to answer in the collection charges, dito sa cross-‐ allowed attachment to be considered in determining whether
claim, files a counterclaim against P1 and P2 for damages. or not the complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action. But
According to D2, P1 and P2 bumped him while he was walking despite the inclusion of attachment, the SC said that by look
on the street. Ito naming si P1 and P2 who are defendants in at the facts, still there was no sufficient statement of the
the counterclaim, P2 claims that he was no where near the cause of action.
car but it was only P1 who bumped D2 so he files a cross-‐claim
against P1 based on the counterclaim. The SC said that “The complaint, however, failed to
state that the said condition had been fulfilled. Without the
How many cases are there? We lost count. That’s how it is in said condition having taken place, petitioner cannot be said
civil cases. Just remember that a cross-‐claim arises out of a to have breached its obligation to pay.”
transaction that is already in the main action.
VELARDE vs. LOPEZ
What if the counterclaim filed by D1 against P1 and P2 is
dismissed? Then the cross-‐claim is also dismissed – the one When a plaintiff files a complaint against the
which arose out of the counterclaim. How about the other defendant, the plaintiff has to state his cause of action
counterclaim? They will survive. What will be dismissed is the against the defendant. When the defendant files a
one which arises out of which it is based. (?) counterclaim against the plaintiff, there must also be a cause
of action whatever it is. The counterclaim that Velarde filed
Section 9. Counter-‐counterclaims and counter-‐crossclaims. against Lopez is not really against Lopez but Sky Vision which
— A counter-‐claim may be asserted against an original is a separate entity. Can Velarde file a counterclaim against
counter-‐claimant. Sky Vision? Of course not. Sky Vision is not the opposing
A cross-‐claim may also be filed against an original party, diba?
cross-‐claimant. (n)
From the FT of the case: But even if the subject
Let’s simplify. Example: P1 and P2 – Main Complaint – D1 and matter of the counterclaims is now cognizable by RTCs, the
D2. P1 and P2 files a complaint and D1 and D2 files a filing thereof against respondent is improper, it not being the
counterclaim against P1 and P2. What is a counter-‐ real party-‐in-‐interest, for it is petitioner’s employer Sky Vision,
counterclaim? It may be asserted against an original counter-‐ respondent’s subsidiary. It cannot be gainsaid that a
claimant. subsidiary has an independent and separate juridical
personality, distinct from that of its parent company, hence,
Let’s say that the case (main action) is for sum of money any claim or suit against the latter does not bind the former
based on promissory note and the counterclaim is for accion and vice versa.
publiciana. Can P1 and P2 file a counter-‐counterclaim against
D1 and D2 for infringement? Yes, that is permissive. MELITON vs. CA

D1, dito sa sum of money, files a cross-‐claim against D2. Sabi With respect to the second requisite, what is the
niya na si D2 lang ang person who used the money. D2, on the term used by the Supreme Court here? Logical relationship.
other hand, claims that the money actually went to the son of The "one compelling test of compulsoriness" is the logical
D1 so D2 filed a counter-‐crossclaim but it has to be connected relationship between the claim alleged in the complaint and
to the transaction. that in the counterclaim. So the counterclaim in the first


action to recover the value of the improvements is a of the parties will not entail a substantial duplication of effort
compulsory counterclaim. and time as the factual and/or legal issues involved, as already
explained, are dissimilar and distinct
Take note that a compulsory counterclaim, if it is not
brought up in the answer, it will be barred. But the thing is in FINANCIAL BUILDING vs. FORBES PARK
this case, there was an answer with counterclaim but the
counterclaim was dismissed for nonpayment of docket fees. Forbes Park was sued by Financial Building. It filed a
At that time, docket fees were not required for the payment motion to dismiss instead of an answer with counterclaim.
of compulsory counterclaims (note: this is a 1992 case). So This is the reason why even if you have reasons for motion to
the dismissal here was incorrect. Therefore, the counterclaim dismiss, you do not automatically file, you have to think of
can be set up in a separate action because this is only an the consequences that may arise later. Meron ka pang
exception. compulsory counterclaim so why file a motion to dismiss? You
can file an answer with counterclaim. This is exactly what
From the FT of the case: In dismissing private happened in this case.
respondent's complaint, the trial court could not but have
reserved to petitioners, as a condition for such dismissal, the Forbes Park did not file an answer with counterclaim,
right to maintain a separate action for damages. Petitioners' nag-‐motion to dimiss lang on the ground na Financial Building
claims for damages in the three counterclaims interposed in was not a real party in interest. That is wrong. So na-‐dismiss
said case, although in the nature of compulsory nga but the thing is the counterclaim is already barred
counterclaims but in light of the aforesaid reservation in the because it was not set up in the action file by Financial
dismissal order, are consequently independent causes of Building.
action which can be the subject of a separate action against
private respondent. Thus, the filing of a motion to dismiss and the setting
up of a compulsory counterclaim are incompatible remedies.
At any rate, the ambivalent positions adopted by the If you are filing a motion to dismiss, you are asking the court
lower court can be considered cured by what we have to dismiss the entire case. So if you want to file a
construed as effectively a reservation in its order of dismissal counterclaim, do not file a motion to dimiss. You file an
for the filing of a complaint based on the causes of action in answer with your counterclaim.
the dismissed counterclaims. This, then, is one case where it
is necessary to heed the injunction that the rules of In the event that a defending party has a ground for
procedure are not to be applied in a rigid and technical sense. dismissal and a compulsory counterclaim at the same time, he
must choose only one remedy. If he decides to file a motion
YULIENCO vs. CA to dismiss, he will lose his compulsory counterclaim. But if he
opts to set up his compulsory counterclaim, he may still plead
Here, ACC filed a separate complaint for injunction his ground for dismissal as an affirmative defense in his
against Yulienco. Is ACC prohibited from filing a counterclaim answer.
in the first case? No, because it is permissive. He can do so
because it is against Yulienco, the same party. Just because The latter option is obviously more favorable to the
you have two identical parties involved doesn’t mean that the defendant although such fact was lost on Forbes Park. Why?
counterclaim is compulsory. You have to look at the second Because you do not lose your chance to have the action
requisite which is the most important. dismissed but you are given an opportunity to file your
counterclaim. You file your answer and mention all your
In this case, the first case Yulienco vs. ACC involved grounds which will cause the dismissal of the main action.
PN 1, 2 and 3 and then the second case ACC vs. Yulienco vs.
ACC involved PN 4 and 5. So it is not a compulsory January 9, 2015
counterclaim.
EVANGELINE ALDAY vs. FGU INSURANCE
From the FT of the case: More importantly, the "one
compelling test of compulsoriness" i.e., the logical Alday was an insurance agent and she was not able
relationship between the claim and counterclaim, does not to remit certain amounts. That was the cause of action in the
apply here. To reiterate, there is no logical relationship complaint – for her failure to remit the cash advances, etc.
between YULIENCO's petition for injunctive relief and ACC's Then, she filed a counterclaim asking for damages. According
collection suit, hence separate trials of the respective claims to her, she suffered sleepless nights, moral shock due to the


case filed against her. She asked for moral damages she Apply the tests. Know the tests. Know the questions. So if
suffered by reason of the filing of the case. That is a you are presented with a set of facts, then raise those
compulsory counterclaim because it arose out from the main questions then give your answer so that your answer will be a
action. legal answer. We don’t really have to memorize the facts. We
just have to see how the tests and questions are being
Aside from the damages, she also wanted to be paid answered by the Court in different cases using the same
the commissions, bonuses, etc. due her for the sales, tests.
perhaps, that she was able to previously make. This
counterclaim is not compulsory because it is not related to From the FT of the case: To determine whether a
the main action. Whether or not she is entitled to the counterclaim is compulsory or not, we have devised the
commissions, etc. is under the special agent’s contract. Even following tests:
if we have an answer with counterclaim but with different (1) Are the issues of fact or law raised by the claim
causes for action – one for damages and one for collection of and the counterclaim largely the same?
commissions – the counterclaim is separable. Part of it can be (2) Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on
considered compulsory and part of it can be permissive. defendant’s claims absent the compulsory counterclaim rule?
(3) Will substantially the same evidence support or
That is an issue because before (note: this is a 2001 refute plaintiff’s claim as well as the defendant’s
case), docket fees for compulsory counterclaim is not counterclaim? and
required. Docket fees are only based on the permissive (4) Is there any logical relation between the claim
counterclaim. But now, we know that even if the and the counterclaim?
counterclaim is compulsory, docket fees are to be paid.
The counterclaims of respondents herein are
From the FT of the case: Tested against the obviously compulsory, not permissive. As aptly held by the
abovementioned standards, petitioner's counterclaim for Court of Appeals, the issues of fact and law raised by both
commissions, bonuses, and accumulated premium reserves is the claim and counterclaim are largely the same, with a
merely permissive. The evidence required to prove logical relation, considering that the two claims arose out of
petitioner's claims differs from that needed to establish the same circumstances requiring substantially the same
respondent's demands for the recovery of cash evidence. Any decision the trial court will make in favor of
accountabilities from petitioner, such as cash advances and petitioner will necessarily impinge on the claim of
costs of premiums. The recovery of respondent's claims is respondents, and vice versa. In this light, considering that the
not contingent or dependent upon establishing petitioner's counterclaims of respondents are compulsory in nature,
counterclaim, such that conducting separate trials will not payment of docket fees is not required. The CA did not err in
result in the substantial duplication of the time and effort of holding that the trial court had acquired jurisdiction on the
the court and the parties. xxx However, petitioner's claims matter.
for damages, allegedly suffered as a result of the filing by
respondent of its complaint, are compulsory. KOREA EXCHANGE vs. JUDGE GONZALES

TAN vs. KAAKBAY FINANCE How is this related to the certificate of non-‐forum
shopping? If you have a permissive counterclaim, you have
If you noticed, in the earlier case of Alday, the SC the option whether to file the counterclaim in the same
cited the same the four questions and the compelling test of action or in a separate action. If you file your permissive
compulsoriness but at the end of the presentation of the counterclaim in the same action, no need to file a certificate
questions and tests, the SC in the case of Alday said that of non-‐forum shopping (CNFS) because it is merely a
“Tested against the standards, Alday's counterclaim for continuation of the case. It is within the case. But if you file a
commissions, bonuses, and accumulated premium reserves is counterclaim in a separate action, there is a requirement of
merely permissive.” certificate of non-‐forum shopping. Take note that a CNFS is
required in every initiatory pleading.
In the case of Tan, the SC said: “Tested against the
abovementioned standards, we agree that Kaakbay’s In this case, since the counterclaim is merely
counterclaims are compulsory in nature.” permissive, the claim for set off, but it was filed as a
counterclaim, it is no longer an initiatory pleading. So, CNFS
What is important for me is how do you determine not required. But if they filed it separately, then CNFS is
whether or not a complaint is permissive or compulsory. required.


having presented its evidence. In short, the trial court
From the FT of the case: As correctly held by the CA, disregarded the fact that LIGON’s cross-‐claim was connected
the counterclaim of the respondents for moral and with, or dependent on, the subject of INC’s original
exemplary damages against the petitioner is permissive. So is complaint.
the respondents’ claim of a set-‐off or compensation of the
US$160,000.00 which they sought in Civil Case No. G-‐3012 PETRON vs. SPOUSES CUDILLA
against the US$500,000.00 claimed by the petitioner against
the respondents in Civil Case No. G-‐3119. Is it possible for a cross-‐claim to be dismissed but for
the main case to continue? Yes. As you already heard earlier,
FLORENZO RUIZ vs. CA Cudilla, the victim of the fire, sued Petron as the oil company
for damages, Uy (dealer) and Villaruz (hauler). Apparently,
It’s just unfair noh because when one file a cross-‐ the -‐ -‐ -‐ was used by Villaruz was not an authorized equipment
claim, he has to pay the docket fees. So if the main action is of Petron. Petron, as defendant in the case filed by Cudilla,
dismissed for lack of merit, the cross-‐claim goes with it so you filed a cross-‐claim against Villaruz. The cross-‐claim was
have to say goodbye to the docket fees. They are non-‐ dismissed. Now, can this be appealed?
refundable.
Can the dismissal of the cross-‐claim be dismissed?
LIGON vs. CA Yes, because it is a final order which disposes of that portion
of the case. Even if the main case is still going on, the
Later, when we reach Rule 9, we will look at default dismissal of the cross-‐claim is a final order which can be
and default is imposed against a defendant who fails to file appealed.
his answer. Every pleading that asserts a claim has to be
answered to address the issues. So what is the purpose of When Petron appealed the case with the CA, it did
filing the answer? To address the issues. If you do not file not question the dismissal of the cross-‐claim. It merely
answers in the complaint, then you can be declared in default alleged that Villaruz was liable to it because of hauling.
if the plaintiff files a motion to declare the defendant in Because they did not question the dismissal of the cross-‐
default. claim, they cannot invoke the cross-‐claim. A cross-‐claim
should be filed with the main case. If you question that in the
But what about a cross-‐claim? In this case, Ligon filed higher court for it to be reopened, then there is no problem.
a cross-‐claim against IDP – its co-‐defendant in the case. Can
IDP be declared in default if it does not answer the cross-‐ But in this case, Pedro failed to so. The SC said that:
claim? When you talk about cross-‐claim, it is only a subsidiary Absent an appeal before the SC assailing the ruling of the RTC
of the main action. Therefore, whatever issues brought in the regarding the dismissal of the cross-‐claim, Villaruz remains to
cross-‐claim should have already have some kind of be solidarily liable to Petron and Uy. They were all held
connection with the main action. solidarily liable by the RTC.

Despite the fact that there was no connection Can Petron run after Villaruz based on the hauling
between the main action and the cross-‐claim, the cross-‐claim contract? No. It may only claim contribution from him in
should not be dismissed. Since it is only a subsidiary issue, it accordance with Article 1217 of the Civil Code. Meaning, since
cannot be heard ahead of the main issue. The main issue has they are all solidarily liable, they have to contribute to the
to be heard then the cross-‐claim can be addressed maybe at award the court may give to Cudilla.
the same time or after the main issues.
Supposedly, under the hauling contract, Petron may
From the FT of the case: From the foregoing, it is require Villaruz to indemnify it for its share. However,
inevitable that IDP’s cross-‐claim effectively joined the because it was not able to maintain the cross-‐claim filed
subsidiary issues between the co-‐parties. Requiring an against Villaruz, it shall be liable for its own share under
answer to LIGON’s cross-‐claim would be superfluous. Article 1208 and can no longer seek indemnification or
Consequently, declaring IDP in default on the cross-‐claim was subrogation from him under its dismissed cross-‐claim. What’s
improper. LIGON’s contention that INC was not aggrieved by the difference? If the dismissal of the cross-‐claim was
the trial court’s order of foreclosure of mortgages cannot be questioned because Petron said that they had nothing to do
taken seriously. INC’s principal cause of action was the with the fire so they should not be all liable. Petron will still
annulment of the mortgages. The partial decision resolved have to share in the liability of all three.
this issue against INC through the backdoor and without INC


From the FT of the case: Thus, Villaruz is also liable to complaint against Estate of Chua claiming that in case it is
petitioner based on the hauling contract. Under Rule 6, Sec. 8 held liable in the 3rd party complaint filed by AMC, it is the
of the Rules of Court, petitioner may enforce the terms of the Estate of Chua that has to pay the liability.
hauling contract against him. However, considering that it did
not implead Villaruz in the present case, nor did it assail the According to Metrobank, it should be allowed to file
Decision of the CA in dismissing the cross-‐claim, petitioner the 4th party complaint against the estate in the RTC. Its 4th
can no longer go after him based on that cross-‐claim. party was merely filed to enforce its right to be reimbursed
from Chua’s estate in case Metrobank is held liable to AMC.
Petron may not pursue its cross-‐claim against Rubin Hence, Section 11 of Rule 6 should apply. According to AMC,
Uy and Dortina Uy, because the cross-‐claims against them Metrobank’s claim is a quasi-‐contract and that it should be
were also dismissed; moreover, they were all equally liable filed under Section 5 of Rule 86. Not in the sum of money
for the conflagration as discussed herein. case daw but in the special proceedings against the estate.

January 14, 2015 – NO CLASS OR NO RECORDING (?) The issue is WON the 4th party complaint should be
allowed. The SC said yes because the 4th party complaint
January 15, 2015 fulfills the requisites of solutio indebiti which is a quasi-‐
contract. Meaning, Metrobank has a cause of action based on
Section 10. Reply. — A reply is a pleading, the office or quasi-‐contract.
function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or
avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in the The next question is where it should be filed. Where
answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new should the action of Metrobank against the estate of Chua be
matters. If a party does not file such reply, all the new filed? RTC 18 under ordinary civil action or with the RTC of
matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. Pasay under the special proceedings case? The SC said that a
If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising distinctive character of Metrobank’s fourth-‐party complaint is
out of the new matters so alleged, such claims shall be set its contingent nature – the claim depends on the possibility
forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. (11) that Metrobank would be adjudged liable to AMC, a future
event that may or may not happen. This characteristic
Section 11. Third, (fourth, etc.)—party complaint. — A third unmistakably marks the complaint as a contingent one that
(fourth, etc.) — party complaint is a claim that a defending must be included in the claims falling under the terms of
party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a Section 5, Rule 86 of the Rules of Court:
party to the action, called the third (fourth, etc.) — party Sec. 5. Claims which must be filed under the notice. If
defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any not filed, barred; exceptions. – All claims for money
other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim. (12a) against the decedent, arising from contract, express
or implied, whether the same be due, not due, or
METROBANK vs. ABSOLUTE contingent, all claims for funeral expenses and
January 9, 2013 expenses for the last sickness of the decedent, and
judgment for money against the decedent, must be
We have SCHI, the buyer of plywood, which issued filed within the time limited in the notice.
Metrobank checks to AMC in payment for the plywood. AMC
did not deliver the plywood to SCHI. SCHI sued AMC for sum But Metrobank insists that Section 11 of Rule 6
of money – to return the advance payment they made. should apply because it impleaded Chua’s estate for
Apparently, SCHI gave the checks payable to AMC to a certain reimbursement in the same transaction upon which it has
Chua who was then the general manager of AMC. Chua died been sued by AMC. But the SC said that because Rule 86,
and there was a special proceeding for the settlement of his Section 5 is a special rule with specific provision which talks
estate. The sum of money was filed in the RTC-‐18 of QC and about contingent claims, then it will prevail over Section 11 of
the special proceedings with RTC of Pasay. The sum of money Rule 6.
is an ordinary civil action. While the special proceeding case
was going on, AMC filed a third party complaint against There are times wherein a 3rd party complaint, 4th
Metrobank which apparently released the amount of the party complaint, etc. would be dismiss not because it is not
checks that were given to Chua. Metrobank averred that proper but because it should be filed in a different court. In
AMC knew about the release of the money to Chua. this case, it is the RTC acting as a court of limited jurisdiction
Metrobank filed a motion for leave of court to file 4th party in a special proceeding for settlement of estate.


RULE 7: Parts of a Pleading Example: The vice-‐mayor of Davao city vs.
vice-‐mayor of Tagum; so no need to put the
This is very, very important. Rule 7 talks about the parts of a names.
pleading. How do we write a pleading?
Section 2. The body. — The body of the pleading sets fourth
Section 1. Caption. — The caption sets forth the name of the its designation, the allegations of the party's claims or
court, the title of the action, and the docket number if defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading.
assigned. (n)
The title of the action indicates the names of the (a) Paragraphs. — The allegations in the body of a
parties. They shall all be named in the original complaint or pleading shall be divided into paragraphs so numbered to be
petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if readily identified, each of which shall contain a statement of
the name of the first party on each side be stated with an a single set of circumstances so far as that can be done with
appropriate indication when there are other parties. convenience. A paragraph may be referred to by its number
Their respective participation in the case shall be in all succeeding pleadings. (3a)
indicated. (1a, 2a) (b) Headings. — When two or more causes of action
are joined the statement of the first shall be prefaced by the
“The caption sets forth the name of the court, the title of the words "first cause of action,'' of the second by "second
action, and the docket number if assigned.” cause of action", and so on for the others.
Let’s just draw *illustrates on the board*. Name of the court: When one or more paragraphs in the answer are
RTC – Branch 17 Davao Judicial Region 11; We also have addressed to one of several causes of action in the
Plaintiff vs. Defendant, their names tapos for sum of money. complaint, they shall be prefaced by the words "answer to
Then we have the complaint. What is the caption? Docket the first cause of action" or "answer to the second cause of
number XXX-‐XXX. It says the name of the court, the title of action" and so on; and when one or more paragraphs of the
the action and the docket number of assigned. answer are addressed to several causes of action, they shall
(For better illustration, check Dean’s TSN – page 201) be prefaced by words to that effect. (4)
(c) Relief. — The pleading shall specify the relief
“The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. sought, but it may add a general prayer for such further or
They shall all be named in the original complaint or petition; other relief as may be deemed just or equitable. (3a, R6)
but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name (d) Date. — Every pleading shall be dated. (n)
of the first party on each side be stated with an appropriate
indication when there are other parties.” “The body of the pleading sets fourth its designation, the
Indicate the name of the parties ha. If there are many allegations of the party's claims or defenses, the relief prayed
plaintiffs, you don’t have to put all the names. You can say for, and the date of the pleading.”
“A, et. al.” It is already sufficient. (For an illustration, check Dean’s TSN.)

“Their respective participation in the case shall be indicated.” “Paragraphs. — The allegations in the body of a pleading
Kaya we have “A, B, C, plaintiff” and “X, Y, Z, defendants”. shall be divided into paragraphs so numbered to be readily
identified, each of which shall contain a statement of a single
What are the instances when all the names of the parties set of circumstances so far as that can be done with
need not be stated? convenience.”
• Rule 7, Section 1: If the pleadings are not the Before, complaints used to be one block of typewritten
initiatory pleadings anymore. Subsequent pleadings words, without paragraphs. But nowadays, you have to
like answer, reply, etc. number so it is easy to be referred. Example: Paragraph 2 of
• Rule 3, Section 12: Class suit – no need to put all the the complaint. One idea – one number. Do not put three
names of the parties numbers for one ideas. Do not put three ideas in one number.

• Rule 3, Section 14: When the identity or name of the
“A paragraph may be referred to by its number in all
defendant is unknown
succeeding pleadings.”
• Rule 3, Section 15: When an entity without juridical
So if you file an answer, you can say “I admit the allegation in
capacity is sued
paragraph 1 of the complaint that I am XYZ. But I do not
• When a party is sued in his official capacity; his
admit the allegation in paragraph 2 that I am a resident of
designation is already sufficient
Davao city.”


“Headings. — When two or more causes of action are joined box.
the statement of the first shall be prefaced by the words The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by
"first cause of action,'' of the second by "second cause of him that he has read the pleading; that to the best of his
action", and so on for the others.” knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to
If you have a joinder, you put a little heading “First cause of support it; and that it is not interposed for delay.
action” then 1, 2, 3 and “Second cause of action” then 4, 5, 6. An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect.
So put a heading to know what cause of action is being However, the court may, in its discretion, allow such
talked about. deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that the same
was due to mere inadvertence and not intended for delay.
“When one or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or
to one of several causes of action in the complaint, they shall signs a pleading in violation of this Rule, or alleges
be prefaced by the words "answer to the first cause of scandalous or indecent matter therein, or fails promptly
action" or "answer to the second cause of action" and so on; report to the court a change of his address, shall be subject
and when one or more paragraphs of the answer are to appropriate disciplinary action. (5a)
addressed to several causes of action, they shall be prefaced
by words to that effect.” “Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel
Meaning simply that whatever you have there in your body, it representing him, stating in either case his address which
is better to identify each. There is nothing wrong with putting should not be a post office box.”
a heading. If it is not signed, it is not complete. The party or the counsel
representing him signs. If it is the party who signs, he signs as
“Relief. — The pleading shall specify the relief sought, but it “plaintiff.” If it is the counsel who signs, you put “signs as
may add a general prayer for such further or other relief as counsel for plaintiff” and the address should be the address
may be deemed just or equitable.” of the counsel. If it is the party who signs, it can be the
What do you want the court to do? Example: “The plaintiff address of the lawyer or of the party.
prays that after due hearing, the court order the defendant
to pay xxx damages, costs, expenses, etc.” If the signature of the lawyer is there in the pleading? What is
the implication? The signature of counsel constitutes a
“Date. — Every pleading shall be dated.” certificate by him that:
Date is normally placed at the end of the body – before the a. He has read the pleading
signature. It is implied that he has read the pleading. If
you become a lawyer, do not sign anything
Is a prayer or relief part of the main action? without reading
According to jurisprudence, no. But it may indicate what is b. To to the best of his knowledge, information, and
the nature of the cause of action. Causes of action are mere belief there is good ground to support it
allegations. Prayer is not part of the action but it is important. Somehow, he believes that this pleading has
We already talked about this when we discussed docket fees. some kind of merit. Hindi puro bola or
When the clerk of court computes the docket fees to be paid, kasinungalingan. It is not just to harass the
she will not read the entire complaint or look at the body. She person. He is also certifying that.
will go straight to the relief or prayer where everything is c. That it is not interposed for delay
specified. So the prayer is what you are asking the court to Everything that a lawyer signs, he is
do. It is not part of your complaint anymore. certifying that “I did not file this to delay the
case.”
Example: P filed an action against D for the annulment of a
contract of sale. The caption: “annulment of contract of sale” If it just the party who signs, there is no implied certification
which looks like a personal action but if you look at the prayer because a party is not deemed to know the law.
“Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that after trial, the deed
of sale be annulled xxx and the ownership of the land be “An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However,
ordered returned.” From the prayer or relief, it can be seen the court may, in its discretion, allow such deficiency to be
that it is not really a personal action but a real action. remedied if it shall appear that the same was due to mere
inadvertence and not intended for delay.”
Section 3. Signature and address. — Every pleading must be If the pleading is unsigned, it produces no legal effect even if
signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating in it is written beautifully. But there is an exception: When the
either case his address which should not be a post office


court, in its discretion, allows such deficiency to be remedied PNCC is now beyond dispute), it cannot be denied that the
xxx.” bond contains a written claim provision, and compliance with
it is essential for the accrual of PCIC’s liability and PNCC’s
“Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or signs right to collect under the bond.
a pleading in violation of this Rule, or alleges scandalous or
indecent matter therein, or fails promptly report to the court BUKLARAN vs. CA
a change of his address, shall be subject to appropriate
disciplinary action.” A pleading shall be signed by the party OR counsel.
If the pleading is deliberately unsigned, who will be subject to So it is in the alternative. In this case, it can be signed by the
disciplinary actions? The lawyer who did not sign. Or if he counsel or by the representative of the union. Not necessarily
signs the pleading in violation of Section 3 like he certifies to the lawyer ha. The thing is, since this is a petition for
the best of knowledge there is good ground to support it but certiorari before the say, normally it is the party who signs
he knows for a fact that what is written on the pleading is a the pleading in the RTC…
lie. If it is discovered, he could be subjected to disciplinary
action. The address of the lawyer is very important. The court The court applies Section 3 of Rule 7 here. Even if a
is the one which should know first if there is a change in petition for certiorari is not a pleading per se, the rules also
address. apply to such provision. So it is sufficient for the union
president to sign the petition.
Take note that what else should be included aside from the
address. Here, we have the signature of the counsel and the From the FT of the case: The respondent alleges that
address. It is not enough. Nowadays, you have to put your the petition for certiorari filed before the CA was correctly
IBP number, your PTR number and the MCLE compliance dismissed as it was not signed by counsel. The respondent
number under the address. If the pleading is filed with the SC, noted that petitioner Tomaroy was not a lawyer and that
you have to place your cellular phone number. What about petitioner Enrique Belarmino did not manifest in the petition
somebody like me who is already exempt from MCLE? No that he was the lawyer. The respondent, thus, contends that
need to place the MCLE number na. Any pleading filed Tomaroy and Belarmino engaged in the illegal practice of law,
without the MCLE number or with the wrong MCLE number is in violation of Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.We
considered as a sham pleading. It could be stricken out as do not agree.Section 3, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court provides
sham or false. The case can proceed but the pleading cannot that every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel
be considered, as though it does not exist. The IBP number, if representing him. Considering that the union is one of the
you are not a life member, you have to renew every year. The petitioners, Tomaroy, as its president, may sign the pleading.
PTR number, it is to be renewed yearly. All the three numbers For this reason alone, the CA cannot dismiss the petition.
mentioned must be updated from time to time.
DADIZON vs. BERNADAS
PCIC vs. PNCC
In our discussion of indispensable parties, we said
So if the relief sought was not specifically prayed for, that if an indispensable party is not included as the plaintiff or
the court must not grant it. If the relief sought is only for this defendant, there would be a consequence. If not included as
one and not for the other one, the court has no authority to plaintiff, then i-‐dismiss ang case. We know this already. A
allow it. case cannot be decided without impleading the indispensable
parties.
From the FT of the case: A general prayer for “other
reliefs just and equitable” appearing on a complaint or In this case of Dadizon, there were 5 heirs who were
pleading normally enables the court to award reliefs all indispensable parties to the original case. Who has to sign?
supported by the complaint or other pleadings, by the facts If it is the lawyer who signs, then siya lang. If indispensable
admitted at the trial, and by the evidence adduced by the parties as plaintiffs, then all of them has to sign. So it is better
parties, even if these reliefs are not specifically prayed for in for the lawyer to sign.
the complaint. We cannot, however, grant PNCC the “other
relief” of recovering under PCIC Bond No. 27546 because of On appeal, do you have include all the indispensable
the respect due the contractual stipulations of the parties. parties? No. The rule on indispensable parties is only
While it is true that PCIC’s liability under PCIC Bond No. 27546 applicable to original actions. For appealed cases, it is the
would have been clear under ordinary circumstances prerogative of the party to include or not to. Let us say that if
(considering that Kalingo's default under his contract with


one of the five indispensable parties decided to file an Because Galicto’s signature does not indicate his PTR
appeal, then only his signature is required. number, MCLE number and IBP number.

The SC said: While it is true that not all the parties in Issue: Was there a violation of Section 3 of Rule 7?
the original case below appear as petitioners or respondents According to the SC, no. Galicto did not sign the petition as
in the case before us, suffice it to say that the mandatory counsel but as a party litigant. Those things are only required
requirement of impleading all indispensable parties applies if you are the counsel of the party. But if you are the party
only to the filing of an original action, but not to an appeal, who signed the pleading or petition, there is no need to put
since it is the party’s choice whether to appeal or not, and he the numbers. Signature and address lang.
or she cannot be compelled to do so.
The SC said: We do not see any violation of Section 3,
Let’s just quickly look at the complaint. Rule 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure as the petition bears the
• Caption petitioner’s signature and office address. The present suit
• Title includes the names of the parties was brought before this Court by the petitioner himself as a
• Designation -‐ everything has to be numbered; name party litigant and not through counsel. Therefore, the
of the plaintiff and defendant and their residence requirements under the Supreme Court En Banc Resolution
• Ultimate facts dated November 12, 2001 and Bar Matter No. 1922 do not
• Prayer – relief prayed; must be specific apply. In Bar Matter No. 1132, April 1, 2003, we clarified that a
• General prayer party who is not a lawyer is not precluded from signing his
• Date own pleadings as this is allowed by the Rules of Court; the
• Signature of the plaintiff or the lawyer purpose of requiring a counsel to indicate his IBP Number
and PTR Number is merely to protect the public from bogus
SOPA vs. SANTOS lawyers. A similar construction should be given to Bar Matter
No. 1922, which requires lawyers to indicate their MCLE
From the FT of the case: Obviously, the rule allows Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption;
the pleadings to be signed by either the party to the case or otherwise, the provision that allows parties to sign their own
the counsel representing that party. In this case, ASBT, as pleadings will be negated.
petitioner, opted to sign its petition and its motion for
reconsideration in its own behalf, through its corporate Section 4. Verification. — Except when otherwise
president, Mildred R. Santos, who was duly authorized by specifically required by law or rule, pleadings need not be
ASBT’s Board of Directors to represent the company in under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit .(5a)
prosecuting this case. Therefore, the said pleadings cannot A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant
be considered unsigned and without any legal effect. has read the pleading and that the allegations therein are
true and correct of his knowledge and belief.
GALICTO vs. BS AQUINO A pleading required to be verified which contains a
February 28, 2012 verification based on "information and belief", or upon
"knowledge, information and belief", or lacks a proper
Galicto is a Philippine citizen and an employee of Phil verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading. (6a)
Health. He is currently holding the position of Attorney 4 and
assigned at the Phil Health Office in Caraga. BS Aquino issued Section 4 talks about verification. According to this section,
EO 7 strengthening the supervision of the compensation not all pleadings are required to be verified or accompanied
levels of GOCCs and GFIs by controlling the grant of excessive by affidavit. Enough na yung signed complaint. There is no
salaries, allowances, incentives and other benefits. need to put verification except when otherwise specifically
required by law or rule.
Galicto filed a petition for certiorari before the SC
claiming that as a Phil Health employee, he is affected by the What do you mean when the pleading is verified? This means
implementation of EO 7 which was issued with grave abuse that aside from the pleading itself, there is another paper
of discretion. It was contended by the other side that the attached to it as an affidavit.
petition of Galicto violates Section 3 of Rule 7 of the Rules of
Court which requires the party or the counsel representing to A pleading is verified by an affidavit that:
sign the pleading and indicate the address of the party. Why? 1. The affiant has read the pleading and
2. The allegations therein are true and correct of his
knowledge and belief


court, tribunal or quasi-‐judicial agency and, to the best of his
To be safe, copy the wordings under Section 4. Take note knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;
that the pleading shall be treated as unsigned if what is (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a
contained there is a verification based on "information and complete statement of the present status thereof; and
belief", or upon "knowledge, information and belief", or lacks (c) if he should thereafter learn that the same or
a proper verification. similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall
report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court
What should be stated there? That “I have read the pleading wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has
and the allegations therein are true and correct of my been filed.
personal knowledge or based on authentic records.” Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements
Information is not enough. It must be personal knowledge. shall not be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or
other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal
Who knows whether or not what is stated in the complaint is of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided,
true? Or that what is based on the personal knowledge of the upon motion and after hearing. The submission of a false
person who filed the complaint? Does the lawyer know? No. certification or non-‐compliance with any of the undertakings
It is the party himself. He is the one who knows that the therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without
defendant borrowed from him or that it was not paid. So he prejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal
must be the one who should sign the verification, not the actions. If the acts of the party or his counsel clearly
lawyer. constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same
shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and
What happens if the pleading is not verified? Meaning it is not shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for
verified or that there is a wrong verification? administrative sanctions. (n)
The provision says that it shall be considered as an unsigned
pleading. But jurisprudence tells us that “lack of verification Section 5 is one of the most popular provisions in Civil
or wrong verification is merely a formal defect.” So it can be Procedure – certificate against forum shopping or certificate
rectified. If the defect is formal, it can be cured by amending of non-‐forum shopping (CNFS).
the pleading or correcting the verification. It is a defective
pleading but the defect is merely formal – not substantial or These are the things that one must include in a certificate of
jurisdictional. non-‐forum shopping.
(a) that he has not theretofore commenced any
Suppose the pleading does not require verification but the action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any
lawyer had it verified, what is the effect? court, tribunal or quasi-‐judicial agency and, to the best of his
It is a mere surplusage. Generally speaking, a pleading need knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;
not me verified. (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status thereof; and
What pleadings are required to be verified? (c) if he should thereafter learn that the same or
• Pleadings under the Summary Rules similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall
• Petition for certiorari, mandamus report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court
wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has
Each rule will tell you whether or not the paper that you are been filed.
going to file will require verification. Motions need not be
verified. We cannot enumerate one by one what has to be When is this required?
verified. Just know that as a general rule, there is no need to Upon filing of the initiatory pleading or complaint.
verify a pleading.
If you are merely a defendant, you don’t have to include a
Section 5. Certification against forum shopping. — The certificate of non-‐forum shopping when you file your answer.
plaintiff or principal party shall certify under oath in the Only the plaintiff is required. Going back to what we looked
complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for at earlier, the verification and CNFS – you can put them
relief, or in a sworn certification annexed thereto and together. Again, a certification has to be signed by the parties
simultaneously filed therewith: and not the lawyer. You can have it in the complaint or in a
(a) that he has not theretofore commenced any separate document attached in the complaint.
action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any
What are the consequences if you don’t follow Section 5?


• If the CNFS is defective or there is none – it shall not allowed to be a party in a suit, like a corporation… the person
be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or who should sign is the one who is authorized by corporation
other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the through a board resolution. It cannot be anyone. It cannot be
dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless the President. Even if he is the President or the CEO of the
otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. corporation, if he is not authorized by a board resolution,
(defect in form) then he cannot sign.

For verification, formal defect lang. But for certificate for How about entities like NPC? This is a GOCC. It has its
non-‐forum shopping, you cannot cure if by amendment. The own charter. The charter will normally provide who is
case can be dismissed. That is the general rule. You can re-‐file authorized to sign. It does not have to be the name of a
and thus, you have to pay the docket fees again. The person. It can be a position. In-‐house counsel or legal counsel
dismissal is not without prejudice so you can re-‐file with the – pwede yun as long as it is provided in the charter.
CNFS. An exception is when the dismissal is with prejudice.
The problem here is the one who signed the
The dismissal is upon motion. If you look at the court cannot verification is Atty. Canete who is the Acting Regional
motu proprio dismiss because the CNFS is defective. If Counsel who is not named in the charter. The said position
walang motion, then the case will continue. was not named in the charter.

• If you have a CNFS (not defective in form) but what But SC said that: He was in the best position to know
is included is not true so false CNFS or non-‐ and certify whether or not a similar action is already filed or
compliance with any of the undertakings therein –it pending before the court. So the SC looked at the spirit
shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without behind the rule. Why? What is the purpose of executing this
prejudice to the corresponding administrative and document? Who really has personal knowledge? The person
criminal actions. (substance not true) authorized by the charter or the one who really has personal
knowledge? According to the SC, si Atty. Canete daw. Even if
Who will be sanctioned here? The lawyer. Maybe if there is no he was not authorized, his signature daw is already sufficient.
lawyer, then the party who signs it but normally, it is really This is what the SC said here but let’s look at the other cases
the lawyer. if the same ruling is made.

• If the acts of the party or his counsel clearly TORRES vs. SPECIALIZED
constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping –
the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with What was filed in this case was a certification and
prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as verification in one. The problem is that they are governed by
well as a cause for administrative sanctions. (the act different provisions. We are talking about a defective
itself of forum shopping) verification (only 2 signed out of 25 parties) and a defective
certification (same reason.) The effects are different under
This is the situation when you file different cases in different Sections 4 and 5.
courts. So, guilty talaga of acts of forum shopping dito. There
will be a dismissal with prejudice so you can no longer file. If the verification is defective, it can be cured by
amendments. So according to the SC, formal defect lang so
So these are the three violations of Section 5: pwede na yung dalawa lang out of 25. But for a CNFS, if it is
• Formal violation defective, it shall not be curable. It is quite confusing if you
• Substantive violation combine the two because the effects are different if the two
• The act itself of forum shopping are defective.

ROBERN vs. QUITAIN Exemptions were made by the SC in this case. Both
the certification and verification were accepted as substantial
This is an old case (1999). We already know that compliance even if both are defective. If you have 25 parties
CNFS and the verification must be signed by the party and and you cannot get everyone to sign the verification or the
not the lawyer. Now, who’s the party? If the party is a natural CNFS, what is the proper thing to do? Get a special power of
person, then no problem because the party himself can sign. attorney. Maybe only one person can sign as long as he has
But if the party is non a natural person but an entity that is an SPA signed by the other parties. The SC was a bit liberal in
this case.


(12) petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus
January 16, 2015 – NO CLASS OR NO RECORDING (?) under Rule 65, Sections 1 to 3;
(13) petition for quo warranto under Rule 66, Section 1;
January 21, 2015 (14) complaint for expropriation under Rule 67, Section 1;
(15) petition for indirect contempt under Rule 71, Section
VALLACAR TRANSIT vs. CATUBIG 4, all from the 1997 Rules of Court;
(16) all complaints or petitions involving intra-‐corporate
This is a complaint for damages – an ordinary civil controversies under the Interim Rules of Procedure on
action. Very straightforward complaint. What is required? Intra-‐Corporate Controversies;
Only the CNFS because it is an initiatory pleading. Verification (17) complaint or petition for rehabilitation and
here is not required. suspension of payment under the Interim Rules on
Corporate Rehabilitation; and
In this case, the SC compared the three different (18) petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void
Section 4s. The first Section 6 (now section 4) under the 1964 marriages and annulment of voidable marriages as well
Rules says that what should be placed in the verification is as petition for summary proceedings under the Family
that “I read the pleading and the allegations thereof are true Code.
on my own knowledge.” Under 1997 Rules, what should be
placed in the verification is “I read the pleading and all the There is only one pleading in this list, under the
allegations therein are true and correct of my knowledge and ordinary rules, that has to be verified – declaration of
belief.” But this provision was amended in May 2000 and that absolute nullity of void marriages and annulment of voidable
is our present provision: A pleading required to be verified marriages under the Family Code. This is an ordinary civil
which contains a verification based on “information and action and the petition has to be verified.
belief” or upon “knowledge, information and belief,” or lacks
a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned PAGADORA vs. ILAO
pleading.
The verification stated that the statements therein
In this case, the SC enumerated (not an exclusive list) were true and correct to the best of his personal knowledge
the special instances where verification is required: and honest belief. Was the verification defective? Yes. But it
(1) all pleadings filed in civil cases under the 1991 Revised can be amended. It is not a jurisdictional defect but merely a
Rules on Summary Procedure; formal defect. The petition for review in this case should not
(2) petition for review from the Regional Trial Court to be dismissed.
the Supreme Court raising only questions of law under
Rule 41, Section 2; From the FT of the case: The Court finds that indeed
(3) petition for review of the decision of the Regional the verification on page 24 of herein petitioner’s petition for
Trial Court to the Court of Appeals under Rule 42, Section review filed with the Court of Appeals – in which he attested
1; among others that the statements therein were “true and
(4) petition for review from quasi-‐judicial bodies to the correct to the best of [his] personal knowledge and honest
Court of Appeals under Rule 43, Section 5; belief” – is defective and non-‐compliant with Section 4, Rule 7
(5) petition for review before the Supreme Court under of the Rules of Court, which requires the affiant to attest the
Rule 45, Section 1; allegations in his petition to be true and correct of his
(6) petition for annulment of judgments or final orders personal knowledge or based on authentic records.
and resolutions under Rule 47, Section 4; Nevertheless, in his Motion for Reconsideration of the June
(7) complaint for injunction under Rule 58, Section 4; 8, 2004 Resolution dismissing said petition, petitioner, in a
(8) application for preliminary injunction or temporary bona fide attempt to rectify his initial mistake, has actually
restraining order under Rule 58, Section 4; attached on page 6 thereof another verification which in all
(9) application for appointment of a receiver under Rule respects complies with the requirements of the
59, Section 1; aforementioned rule.
(10) application for support pendente lite under Rule 61,
Section 1; VICENCIO vs. VILLAR
(11) petition for certiorari against the judgments, final (2012 case)
orders or resolutions of constitutional commissions
under Rule 64, Section 2; The SC said here that: A pleading, therefore, in which
the verification is based merely on the party’s knowledge and


belief – as in the instant Petition – produces no legal effect, Only the complaint requires the CNFS. If the answer has a
subject to the discretion of the court to allow the deficiency counterclaim and it is permissive, you need to attach a CNFS
to be remedied. to that permissive counterclaim. Anyway in this case, there
was no CNFS included.
In other words, the amendment is a -‐-‐-‐ right. The
court must allow the amendment. It is not a jurisdictional From the FT of the case:
error -‐-‐-‐ but discretionary upon the court. The appellate The case of UST vs. Surla was cited here: It should
courts have more powers to dismiss. not be too difficult, the foregoing rationale of the circular
aptly taken, to sustain the view that the circular in question
HEIRS OF MESINA vs. HEIRS OF FIAN has not, in fact, been contemplated to include a kind of claim
(2013 case) which, by its very nature as being auxiliary to the proceedings
in the suit and as deriving its substantive and jurisdictional
The wording in the verification was not to “his support therefrom, can only be appropriately pleaded in the
personal knowledge” but to “the best of our knowledge.” answer and not remain outstanding for independent
The RTC and the CA said that it was a defective verification. If resolution except by the court where the main case pends.
you compare that to the case of Negros Planters, the same Prescinding from the foregoing, the proviso in the second
ang gigamit “to the best of my (our) knowledge. Pero dito sa paragraph of Section 5, Rule 8, of the 1997 Rules of Civil
case na ‘to, the SC said that it was not defective verification. Procedure, i.e., that the violation of the anti-‐forum shopping
There is even no need for verification. So you can see that the rule "shall not curable by mere amendment . . . but shall be
SC is not consistent with their rulings. To be safe, just follow cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice," being
the provision. predicated on the applicability of the need for a certification
against forum-‐shopping, obviously does not include a claim
From the FT of the case: That the verification of the which cannot be independently set up.
complaint does not include the phrase “or based on
authentic records” does not make the verification defective. In the case at bar, there is no doubt that the
Notably, the provision used the disjunctive word “or.” The counterclaims pleaded by petitioners in their answers are
word “or” is a disjunctive article indicating an alternative. As compulsory in nature. The filing of a separate action by
such, “personal knowledge” and “authentic records” need petitioners would only result in the presentation of the same
not concur in a verification as they are to be taken separately. evidence as in Civil Case No. TM-‐601. Proceeding from our
ruling in Santo Tomas University Hospital, petitioners need
Also, verification, like in most cases required by the not file a certification of non-‐forum shopping since their
rules of procedure, is a formal requirement, not jurisdictional. claims are not initiatory in character, and therefore, are not
It is mainly intended to secure an assurance that matters covered by the provisions of Administrative Circular No. 04-‐
which are alleged are done in good faith or are true and 94.
correct and not of mere speculation.
UY vs. LAND BANK
Thus, when circumstances so warrant, as in the case
at hand, “the court may simply order the correction of There was this simple error here – excusable neglect
unverified pleadings or act on it and waive strict compliance lang. Sometimes, the secretaries don’t do their work
with the rules in order that the ends of justice may thereby be properly. When Atty. Uy looked at what was filed, he noticed
served.” na wala pa lang CNFS and verification so he immediately filed
a Motion for Admission. The SC said na “Okay, we will accept
PONCIANO vs. JUDGE PARANTELA your explanation.

Take note that we already looked at this In the case at bar, the apparent merits of the
Administrative Circular that says that docket fees for substantive aspects of the case should be deemed as a
compulsory counterclaims should be paid. Before that, no “special circumstance” or “compelling reason” for the
need to pay docket fees. Now, here, in this 2000 case of reinstatement of the petition. That counsel for petitioner
Ponciano, the SC ruled that if the counterclaim is compulsory, filed the “verification/certification” before receipt for the
it is not an initiatory pleading but merely a spin off of the resolution initially denying the petition also mitigates the
main case. It cannot be set up in a different action. It is barred oversight.
so there is no need for a CNFS if the answer has a compulsory
counterclaim. If it is purely an answer, no need for a CNFS.


Under Rule 7, what is the effect if walang CNFS? It
cannot be curable by mere amendment. It shall be a cause for In this case, we have an appealed case from the CA.
dismissal of the case without prejudice. But in this case, the The provision that is really applicable is not really Rule 7,
SC said: In any event, this Court has the power to suspend its Section 5 but Rule 43, Section 7. Section 7 of Rule 43 of the
own rules when, as in this case, the ends of justice would be Rules of Civil Procedure states that failure to comply with any
served thereby. of the requirements regarding the payment of the docket
and other lawful fees, the deposit for costs, proof of service
ARQUIZA vs. CA of the petition, and the contents of the documents which
should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for
Was there an existing case here? No. So the petition the dismissal thereof. This is the basis of the dismissal of the
was initiatory, wasn’t it? Why is it not initiatory? A CNFS is CA. So the CA can dismiss if any of the following grounds are
required in initiatory pleadings in actions. What we have here present. It is up to the court whether or not to allow the
is not an action. Therefore, there is no need for CNFS. belated filing. Here, the CA did not allow so sorry.

We have what we call extra-‐judicial foreclosure. Aside from that, the lack of CNFS was not the only
When a person borrows something from the bank and he defect. There were other defects that the court noticed.
gives a security (like properties), the bank can extra-‐judicially Therefore, consideration was not given. The SC said: In the
foreclosure it based on the Real Estate Mortgage. There is a case before us, there is no substantial compliance to speak of
one-‐year redemption period given to the mortgagee to allow because no certificate of non-‐forum shopping was appended
him to redeem his property. If there is no redemption within when the petition for review was filed with the Court of
the 1-‐year period, then the bank can consolidate its title. Once Appeals. The subsequent submission of said certificate on
the 1-‐year period has lapsed, the bank can also apply with the motion for reconsideration will not cure said defect. The rule
ROD the issuance of the title to his name. No need for court against forum shopping and the necessity of a certification of
proceedings for that. What if the property is not redeemed? non-‐forum shopping are basic requirements in remedial law.
The bank must file a petition for the issuance of the writ of Failure to comply with them constitutes gross negligence. So,
possession. Meaning, just ask the court to order the sheriff to this is a strict application of the rules.
drive away the mortgagor from the property. There is no
cause of action. It is only based on the right of the bank as MANDAUE GALLEON vs. ISIDTO
the owner of the property. This is procedure that is filed in
court just to get possession of the property. If you want to submit a belated CNFS, better make
sure that you have compelling reasons and special
There is no action here so no need for CNFS. You circumstances that would prompt the court to entertain the
cannot file a motion. Take note that a motion can only be case despite the non-‐submission of the CNFS.
filed if there is an existing action.
Aside from Rule 7 Section 5, AC 28-‐91 and Section 4
From the FT of the case: Such petition for the of Rule 4 of the NLRC Rules of Procedure were also
issuance of a writ of possession is filed in the form of an ex mentioned.
parte motion, inter alia, in the registration or cadastral
proceedings if the property is registered. Apropos, as an From the FT of the case:
incident or consequence of the original registration or A certificate of non-‐forum shopping is a requisite for
cadastral proceedings, the motion or petition for the issuance the perfection of an appeal, and non-‐compliance therewith
of a writ of possession, not being an initiatory pleading, shall not stop the running of the period for perfecting an
dispels the requirement of a forum-‐shopping certification. appeal.
Axiomatic is that the petitioner need not file a certification of
non-‐forum shopping since his claims are not initiatory in Administrative Circular No. 28-‐91, dated February 8,
character (Ponciano vs. Parentela, Jr., 331 SCRA 605 [2000]) 1994, issued by the Supreme Court requires that every
petition filed with the Supreme Court or the CA must be
EASTLAND vs. MORTEL accompanied by a certificate of non-‐forum shopping. Later,
Administrative Circular No. 04-‐94 was issued and made
If you look at Rule 7, Section 5, this includes effective on April 1, 1994. It expanded the certification
defective and none CNFS. It says that “it should be a cause requirement to include cases filed in court and in quasi-‐
for dismissal of the case without prejudice unless otherwise judicial agencies.
provided… upon motion and after hearing.”


BA SAVINGS BANK vs. ROGER SIA EXPERT TRAVEL vs. CA and KAL

Who signed the CNFS? Was the one who signed the What kind of proof is required to show that the
CNFS the proper party? He was the proper party but why was person who signed the CNFS was authorized? Is it okay to
it dismissed? Because there was no proof that he was submit an affidavit by the General Manager that there was a
authorized to sign. They did not attach the proof. Board Resolution? No. It is not enough. Is it substantial
compliance to submit a paper that the counsel is the resident-‐
In other words, for actions filed by natural persons, it agent of the corporation? No. It has to be a secretary’s
has to be the person himself who should sign the CNFS. If it certificate that will indicate that there was a board meeting,
the corporation, then it must be signed by the person that it was agreed that a person was authorized to sign the
authorized by the corporation to sign it. Here, we have an CNFS and file the case. The allegation that there was a board
action filed by the BA Savings Bank signed by a person… how resolution or board conference is not enough.
is anyone supposed to know if that person is authorized? You
attach the Board Resolution and a Secretary’s Certificate. Can the lawyer sign? Yes, as long as he is authorized.
What is the difference between the two? Sa Sec Cert, it is only The authority must be a secretary’s certificate or a board
the secretary who signs it; she tells everyone na these certain resolution.
persons are present during the meeting and that they agreed
to authorize this particular person. Sa Board Reso naman, all LEVIS STRAUS vs. VOGUE TRADERS
of the members of the board must sign – the ones who
attended the meeting. Normally, it is the Secretary’s The CNFS was signed by the lawyer. Vogue did not
Certificate that is submitted. submit any kind of authorization. The SC said that: The CNFS
made by Atty. Soriano, counsel of Vogue who is not
Not the officers of the corporation can sign ha but authorized by any board resolution, is defective. Atty. Soriano
the person/s authorized. If the CNFS is signed by the lawyer was an in-‐house counsel. The fact remains that no board
who is authorized, then no problem. Here, the SC allowed the resolution or even a secretary’s certificate (containing that a
belated submission of the Secretary’s Certificate just to prove board resolution was made) was presented.
that the lawyer who signed the CNFS was authorized.
CONCEPCION ANCHETA vs. METROBANK
BPI LEASING CORP. vs. CA
The CNFS was defective because it was signed by a
Why is it important that it is the party himself who lawyer. But what was filed was a petition for a writ of
shall sign? Because he has other lawyers who may have filed possession. It was not an action. The SC said that even if the
similar cases in other court. The present lawyer may not be CNFS was defective, there is no effect. The CNFS is not
aware of such fact. The difference between this case and the required.
previous case: In the previous case, they submitted belatedly
a secretary’s certificate showing that the lawyer was really PAL vs. FASAP
authorized. Here, there was none. There was an allegation
that it is the lawyer who knows – based on his personal The date of the secretary’s certificate or the board
knowledge that no other petition was filed in other tribunal resolution must be before the filing of the case. In this case,
or court. The SC said that it is not enough. You need to the filing of the petition was on January 24, 2000 but the date
submit your CNFS. of the secretary’s certificate was February. The petition was
dismissed on January 31, 2000. So they only executed the
From the FT of the case: The records are bereft of the secretary’s certificate upon knowledge that the petition was
authority of BLC’s counsel to institute the present petition dismissed. The SC said that the CNFS was still defective. Okay
and to sign the certification of non-‐forum shopping. While sana ang belated filing if it was shown that the board
said counsel may be the counsel of record for BLC, the resolution authorizing a certain person was really made kaya
representation does not vest upon him the authority to lang hindi nasama sa pag-‐file. In this case kasi, the secretary’s
execute the certification on behalf of his client. There must certificate was only made after the filing.
be a resolution issued by the board of directors that
specifically authorizes him to institute the petition and From the FT of the case: The petition filed with the
execute the certification, for it is only then that his actions Court of Appeals had a certification of non-‐forum shopping
can be legally binding upon BLC. executed by Cesar R. Lamberte and Susan Del Carmen. The
certification, however, was without proof of authority to


sign. When a motion for reconsideration was filed, a Again, this was a corporation and then the board
Secretary’s Certificate was submitted as proof that the board resolution was subsequently filed. The SC said that there is
of directors of PAL had authorized the two to execute the substantial compliance. Why? YMCA rectified its failure to
certificate. Nonetheless, the Court finds that this belated submit proof of the latter’s authority to sign the CNFS. The
submission is an insufficient compliance with the certification secretary certificate was dated December 13, 2002 but the
requirement. filing of the petition was December 27, 2002. The secretary
certificate came before the filing of the petition so it was
SHRANGRI LA vs. DGC okay for the court to belatedly file it.

If you remember this case in property, Shrangri La CEBU METRO vs. EURO-‐MED
filed a petition for the cancellation of the Shrangri La mark (October 18, 2010)
issued by the Bureau of Trademarks to DGC. DGC alleges that
the CNFS signed by Atty. Lerma, on behalf and as a counsel This also involves a corporation. The one who signed
for Shrangri La International (SLIHM), was not sufficient the CNFS was the manager of Cebu Metro. There was no
because he was not duly authorized to sign the CNFS. secretary certificate or board resolution. Cebu Metro filed a
According to DGC, SLIHM is a foreign entity based in Hong Motion for Reconsideration attaching therewith a secretary’s
Kong, the Director's Certificate executed by Mr. Madhu Rama certificate attesting to the approval of board resolution who
Chandra Rao, embodying the board resolution which authorized the manager to represent the corporation.
authorizes Atty. Lerma to act for SLIHM and execute the
certification against forum shopping, should contain the In this case, the SC said: Based on jurisprudence, the
authentication by a consular officer of the Philippines in Hong following can sign the CNFS and verification without board
Kong. resolution:
1) the Chairperson of the Board of Directors,
Merong Secretary’s Certificate dito. In this case, it (2) the President of a corporation,
was the Director’s Certificate. But there was no red ribbon. (3) the General Manager or Acting General Manager,
The issue here: Is a consular certification of the CNFS required (4) Personnel Officer, and
if the petitioner is a foreign entity? The SC said no. As long as (5) an Employment Specialist in a labor case.
it is notarized by the Notary Public in Hong Kong, there is no
need to go to the Philippine Consulate. The rationale applied in the foregoing cases is to
justify the authority of corporate officers or representatives
From the FT of the case: The certification on non-‐ of the corporation to sign the verification or certificate
forum shopping may be signed, for and in behalf of a against forum shopping, being ‘in a position to verify the
corporation, by a specifically authorized lawyer who has truthfulness and correctness of the allegations in the
personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in petition’.
such document. The reason for this is that a corporation can
only exercise its powers through its board of directors and/or From the foregoing, it is clear that Albao, as
its duly authorized officers and agents. Physical acts, like the President and Manager of Cebu Metro, has the authority to
signing of documents, can be performed only by natural sign the verification and certification of non-‐forum shopping
persons duly authorized for the purpose. even without the submission of a written authority from the
board. As the corporation’s President and Manager, she is in
Rule 7, Section 5 of the Rules of Court concerning a position to verify the truthfulness and correctness of the
the certification against forum shopping does not require any allegations in the petition. Take note of the five exceptions
consular certification if the petitioner is a foreign entity. provided in this case.
Nonetheless, to banish any lingering doubt, petitioner SLIHM
furnished this Court with a consular certification dated BOARDWALK vs. VILLAREAL
October 29, 2003 authenticating the Director's Certificate (2013)
authorizing Atty. Lerma to execute the certification against
forum shopping, together with petitioners' manifestation of This is one case wherein the SC did not consider the
February 9, 2004. belated submission of the authorization as substantial
compliance.
CHINESE YMCA vs. REMINGTON STEEL
From the FT of the case: In this case, no special power
of attorney or board resolution was attached to the Petition


showing that Lo was authorized to sign the Petition or corporation authorize Ms. Beleno to execute the required
represent Boardwalk in the proceedings. In addition, Verifications and/or Certifications of Non-‐Forum Shopping,
petitioner failed to attach to the Petition copies of the but it likewise ratified her act of filing the Petition with the
relevant pleadings and other material portions of the record. RTC.

Petitioner tried to cure these lapses by subsequently Clearly, this is not an ordinary case of belated
submitting a board resolution showing Lo's authority to sign submission of proof of authority from the board of directors.
and act on behalf of Boardwalk, as well as copies of the Petitioner-‐corporation ratified the authority of Ms. Beleno to
relevant pleadings. Now, it prays that the Court consider represent it in the Petition filed before the RTC, particularly in
these as substantial compliance with the Rules. Civil Case No. 03-‐108163, and consequently to sign the
verification and certification of non-‐forum shopping on
Concededly, this Court in several cases exercised behalf of the corporation. This fact confirms and affirms her
leniency and relaxed the Rules. However, in this case, authority and gives this Court all the more reason to uphold
petitioner committed multiple violations of the Rules which that authority.
should sufficiently militate against its plea for leniency. As will
be shown below, petitioner failed to perfect its appeal by not SPOUSES ESTARES vs. CA
filing the Petition within the reglementary period and paying
the docket and other lawful fees before the proper court. The husband here was in Africa. The SC said that the
These requirements are mandatory and jurisdictional. wife here signed for the husband and it was already
substantial compliance.
SWEDISH MATCH vs. TREASURER
(2013) The Court has also stressed that the rules on forum
shopping, which were designed to promote and facilitate the
In this case, the SC cited again the case of Cebu orderly administration of justice, should not be interpreted
Metro and enumerated the certain officers who can sign the with such absolute literalness as to subvert its own ultimate
CNFS without the need of a board resolution or a secretary’s and legitimate objective which is simply to prohibit and
certificate. penalize the evils of forum shopping.

Ms. Beleno here is the Finance Manager or Director. DANIEL ANINAO vs. ASTURIAS CHEMICALS
She is not included in the list. So the exception does not
apply to her. But the belated submission of the authority The SC here applied the rules strictly. Only 47%
included a ratification… Maybe the date of the certificate authorized the guy to sign the CNFS. Here, the SC said that
was after the date of the filing but if there was a ratification 47% is not enough to authorize that one person to sign. How
of the acts of the said person, then okay. do we know if the 53% already filed cases in other tribunals,
diba?
In this new case, there is a way. If you have an
existing secretary certificate and you merely forgot to submit From the FT of the case: In the matter of petitioners’
it, then no problem. You can just belatedly file. But if you fail non-‐compliance with the procedural requirement on forum
to execute like in PAL vs. FASAP (executed a secretary’s shopping, we find no reversible error in the appealed
certificate after filing the petition)… if there is ratification of dismissal action of the appellate court. We agree with the
the acts by the board, then no problem na. The board ratified Court of Appeals that the requirements on the filing of a
her acts. The SC said that it is enough plus she is the financial certification against forum shopping should be strictly
manager and the case involves a tax refund. The SC complied with. It bears stressing that a petition involving
considered it as substantial compliance. Don’t forget that if two or more petitioners must be accompanied by a
there is no CNFS, it must be shown that there are compelling certification of non-‐forum shopping accomplished by all
reasons and special circumstances. For defective CNFS, petitioners, or by one who is authorized to represent them;
substantial xxx. If it falls sa list under the Metro Cebu case, otherwise, the petition shall be considered as defective and,
then the officers no longer need board resolution or under the terms of Section 3, Rule 46 of the Rules of Court,
secretary’s certificate ha. may be dismissed.

From the FT of the case: A perusal of the Secretary’s Why is it in this case of Aninao, the CA dismissed motu
Certificate signed by petitioner’s Corporate Secretary Rafael proprio but in Rule 7, Section 5, it must be upon motion? The
Khan and submitted to the RTC shows that not only did the answer to this is the case of…


they are included in “any action.” Whether or not the pre-‐
ATTY. BAUTISTA vs. JUDGE CAUSAPIN proclamation case is already moot and academic, that’s
beside the point. If you strictly apply the rule, any action that
It’s very clear under Section 5 that “upon motion and has the same issues, involve the same issues filed with
after hearing.” So the Judge was not correct in dismissing it another tribunal… you should state that in your CNFS.
motu proprio. But why is it in the case of Spouses Estares,
the motu proprio dismissal was allowed? This case involves an But the SC said that even though this is required by
action filed with the RTC. It was the RTC judge which Rule 7, Section 5, the Rules does not apply to election cases.
dismissed motu proprio. The case of Estares involves Election cases are governed by OEC. Even though he did not
proceedings. It involved an appellate court. It is already state everything there as required by Section 5, liberal
established that when you are here in the trial court, the construction could still be applied.
judge does not have almost absolute power to dismiss
because we have a rule on motion to dismiss… January 22, 2015

The SC said here: This calls for the application of Rule ESPINOSA vs. CA
16, Section 6 of the Rules of Court which reads: If no motion
to dismiss has been filed, any of the grounds for dismissal When a decision is rendered against a party… In this
provided for in this Rule may be pleaded as an affirmative case, the RTC rendered a judgment against Espinosa, the
defense in the answer and, in the discretion of the court, a normal course is for that party to file an appeal which is what
preliminary hearing may be had thereon as if a motion to he did. He appealed with the CA and then with the SC. After
dismiss had been filed. The dismissal of the complaint under the SC, the party should be xxx. The court of last resort
this section shall be without prejudice to the prosecution in already rendered its decision but instead of stopping there
the same or separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in the with the SC, he filed a petition for the annulment of judgment
answer. of the RTC. Presumably, when you file a petition for the
annulment of judgment of the RTC, the judgment of RTC was
So what have been done by Judge Causapin? There not appealed.
was no motion to dismiss based on the defective CNFS. Judge
Causapin had the discretion in Civil Case No. 1387-‐G of either It is incumbent upon the petitioner here to attach
(1) setting a preliminary hearing specifically on the defect in the CNFS wherein he should have stated that he also
the plaintiffs’ certificate of non-‐forum shopping; or (2) appealed with the CA and the SC. If he has grounds for the
proceeding with the trial of the case and tackling the issue in annulment of judgment under Rule 47, he can do so but he
the course thereof. In both instances, parties are given the has to state the fact that he already made appeals. By not
chance to submit arguments and evidence for or against the stating those facts, he submitted a false CNFS. The sanction is
dismissal of the complaint. But if the case is on appeal, the indirect contempt. The lawyer who taught him what to do or
appellate courts are given the right to dismiss motu proprio. he himself could be administratively or criminally charged.
Same with petition for certiorari. So that is the difference. If
sa RTC, apply the “no motion” rule but not on CA cases. From the FT of the case: Anent the issue of forum-‐
shopping, the Court agrees with the Court of Appeals’ finding
Defective CNFS is a formal defect. Normally, formally defects that Espinosa and his present counsel, Atty. Laguilles, Jr.,
are curable by amendments. Of course, there are exceptions. violated the rules on non-‐forum shopping. Revised Circular
We also have false CNFS – it is a substantial defect. It is not No. 28-‐91 (as amended) was already in force when the
merely lack of signature or lack of authority but going against petition in CA G.R. SP No. 39206 was filed on October 11,
what is stated there in the certificate itself. The consequence 1996. Under the Circular, which has since been incorporated
of filing a false CNFS is indirect contempt without prejudice into the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, the petitioner has to
to the administrative and criminal sanctions. Let’s go to false attest that he has not commenced any other action or
CNFS cases: proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme Court,
the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency. If such
CLAUDIUS BARROSO vs. JUDGE AMPIG an action or proceeding has been instituted, the petitioner is
obliged to state the status of the same.
If you look at the statement, what is this party
certifying? That he has not commenced any action involving RMC vs. SIESENANDO SINGSON
the same issues – whether it is pending or finished. He
certifies that he did not file. The cases under election laws –


Failure to comply with the undertaking therein… to the petitioner as defendant therein is obliged to convey to
inform the court that there is already an existing or a decided the respondent Room 404.
case involving the same issues, the same parties means that
you have committed forum shopping. You have two cases. In Cases on forum shopping:
other words, there is a violation of failure to comply with the
undertaking, you can be punished by indirect contempt. But LAND CAR vs. BACHELOR EXPRESS
that also constitutes forum shopping because you already
have two cases and you did not inform the court about it. Let’s say X filed an action with RTC of Davao and the
same action (with same parties) in the RTC of Digos, are you
There are two punishable acts here – the act of saying that the RTC of Davao cannot dismiss if there is forum
forum shopping and the failure to inform the court. That’s shopping because of the doctrine of exhaustion of
why the SC here said that: We agree with the contention of administrative remedies?
the petitioner that, under Section 5, Rule 7, of the Revised
Rules of Court, a complaint may be dismissed for failure of The body involved is the only body that can dismiss
the plaintiff therein to inform the court of the filing of the the case brought before it. Just like the RTC of Davao cannot
same or similar complaint within five (5) days from such filing. dismiss the case filed in the RTC of Digos. Yes, the ground is
The same or similar complaint referred to in the rule refers to dismissal but it is to be that particular court which can dismiss
a complaint wherein the parties, causes of action, issues and the case. You cannot dismiss the case of a particular body.
reliefs prayed for, are identical to those in the first complaint.
The plaintiff may also be declared in indirect contempt of There was forum shopping here. He went to the CA.
court if he submits a false certification. He went to the Office of the President (OP). He raise the
same issues. What did the CA do? It dismissed the appeal on
In this case, there is no identity. Therefore there is the OP. That is not allowed.
forum shopping. The CNFS is not false. Unlike the previous
case (Espinosa vs. CA), it was exactly the case involving From the FT of the case: Incongruently, the appellate
exactly the same parcel of land. It’s just that Espinosa went court, while recognizing to be valid the exercise of
to the CA for the RTC decision to be annulled on the ground jurisdiction by the Office of the President, ordered the
of fraud. In the appealed case, fraud ang ground. In the dismissal of the appeal pending with the said office based on
annulment of judgment, fraud pa rin ang ground. So exactly forum shopping.
the same parties, issues, subject matters, etc.
The decision of the appellate court ordering the
From the FT of the case: But the respondent cannot dismissal of the appeal taken to the Office of the President is
be faulted for stating in his Affidavit of Non-‐Forum Shopping clearly flawed. It is the latter, not the appellate court, which
in Civil Case No. Q-‐00-‐39794 that he had not commenced any could dismiss the case pending before that office. It also
other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the behooves courts of justice, if only for reasons of comity and
CA or in any other tribunal; nor can he be charged with convenience, to shy away from a dispute until the system of
executing a falsified certification in Civil Case No. Q-‐00-‐39794 administrative redress is completed so as to give the
for stating that he had not commenced before any other administrative office every opportunity to correct its error
tribunal any initiatory pleading involving the same issues. and to properly dispose of the case. In fact, the appellate
court’s order to dismiss the appeal pending with the Office of
The petitioner was not mandated to inform the trial the President could well constitute an undue intrusion into a
court in Civil Case No. Q-‐00-‐39794 and Civil Case No. Q-‐98-‐ valid exercise of jurisdiction by the President over acts of
35444 and of CA-‐G.R. CV No. 64281. This is so because, as subordinates within that office.
admitted by the petitioner, there is no identity of the causes
of action, the parties, issues and reliefs prayed for in the two EVELYN PARADERO vs. JUDGE ABRAGAN
complaints. The subject matter of the suit in Civil Case No. Q-‐
00-‐39794 is Room 302, while that in Civil Case No. Q-‐98-‐35444 If there is a petition for certiorari on one hand and an
is Room 404. The principal issue raised in Civil Case No. Q-‐00-‐ appeal on the other, does it mean that there is automatically
39794 is whether the extrajudicial foreclosure of the real a forum shopping? The answer is no. It depends on the issue.
estate mortgage over Room 404 and the sale thereof to You have to look at the requisites of forum shopping. Forum
Allied Banking Corporation are null and void, while the shopping is committed if there is res judicata or litis
principal issue in Civil Case No. Q-‐98-‐35444 is whether or not pendencia.


In this case, there is no res judicata. In the at the issues and they constitute forum shopping… The SC in
International School case, let’s say the CA says that the this case found out that the acts of Nordic fell short of forum
decision is correct, would it make the execution moot and shopping. There was no bad faith so the SC said no problem.
academic? No. The execution still has to happen whether or But do not use this case as your benchmark because it is a
not the execution pending appeal was done with grave abuse spin off.
of discretion. Anyway, we will look at the requisites of res
judicata later. The important thing is that you know that REYES DE LEON vs. DEL ROSARIO
there is no automatic forum shopping if there are petition for
certiorari and appeal arising from the same original case. In the first case, it was plaintiff against defendant
and the action was for partition of a particular property. The
From the FT of the case: Otherwise stated, the appeal second case, it was the defendant who filed an action against
and the certiorari case dwelt on entirely different matters the plaintiff for the annulment of deed of sale of the same
that would logically preclude the finding of forum shopping. property. Even if it was P-‐D tapos D-‐P, they are still
Any ruling on the legality of the execution pending appeal in considered as the same parties. Even if the case said that the
the certiorari case would not amount to res judicata on the actions are different but it involve the same property, there is
disposition of the merits of the main case subject of the an identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for. There is
appeal precisely because the issue of the execution pending litis pendencia – two cases involving the same parties.
appeal was not among the concerns raised therein.
Litis pendentia requires the concurrence of the
NORDIC ASIA vs. CA following requisites:
1. Identity of parties, or at least such parties as those
There was still forum shopping but there was no representing the same interests in both actions;
false undertaking because Nordic Asia informed the CA of the 2. Identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the
appealed case. This case is not the general rule. reliefs being founded on the same facts; and
3. Identity with respect to the two preceding
Let me read: “Nordic, however, claim that when they particulars in the two cases, such that any judgment
filed the second case before the Court of Appeals, they that may be rendered in the pending case, regardless
divulged the other case earlier filed. Thus, by their disclosure, of which party is successful, would amount to res
they should not be considered to have committed forum adjudicata in the other case.
shopping.” That’s wrong. When all the requisites of forum
shopping are present, then there is forum shopping. Take note, hindi kailangan na ang both cases kay for
partition talaga. Kahit magkaiba basta masatisfy ang
The SC said: Ordinarily, as held by the Court, even if a requirements.
party admits in the certification of non-‐forum shopping the
existence of other related cases pending before another In the provision, there is no definition of forum
body, this fact alone does not exculpate such party who is shopping. Section 5 tells us what will happen if we do this and
obviously and deliberately seeking a more friendly forum for that, what are the effects, what are the sanctions. Where do
his case. we get the definition of forum shopping? Its requisites? We
get them from jurisprudence. So these cases assigned to you
In this case, however, after hearing the parties in oral tell you that there is a forum shopping when (refer to the list
argument and after careful study of their memoranda above):
submitted thereafter, the Court is of the view that Nordic's • Identity of parties (need not have absolute identity;
acts in this case fall short of forum shopping. Considering substantial identity is enough – there is substantial
that petitioners did inform the Court of Appeals when it filed identity of parties if there is a community of interest
the Certiorari Case of the fact of the earlier filing of the between the parties in the 1st case and the 2nd case)
Appeal Case, and considering, further, the absence of bad • Identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the
faith on petitioners' part or any deliberate intention to reliefs (if two cases are simultaneously heard and
mislead the courts, the finding that petitioners engaged in you will need to present mostly the same evidence
forum shopping should be reconsidered. or founded on the same facts)
• Identity with respect to the 2 preceding particulars in
Just because there is an undertaking that there is the two cases
another case filed does not mean that there is no forum
shopping. Normally, there is forum shopping. But if you look


COMELEC exercises quasi-‐judicial powers over cases filed
HSBC vs. CECILIA DIEZ CATALAN before it. The Bureau of Legal Affairs also exercises quasi-‐
judicial powers over cancellation cases. Administrative
The issue here is whether or not there is an identity agencies are not included here. In this case, Ursal filed an
of parties. The first case: Catalan filed it against HSBC. The affidavit letter complaint with the investigating body. It is not
second case was filed against HSBC, as the trustee of the a tribunal, a court or a quasi-‐judicial agency. Also, the City
Estate of Thompson Was there identity of parties? No. In the Council is a legislative body so anything you submit there
first case, HSBC was sued as a bank. The bank did not want to must be for legislation. If you file it with the Office of the
release the amount of the checks left to her by Thompson. Ombudsman, there is really no forum shopping even if it
The second case was for filed against HSBC as the trustee of involves the same parties, the same issues, etc.
the estate and not as a bank.
From the FT of the case: At the onset, it must be
“Identity of parties, or at least such parties as those stressed that the rule on forum-‐shopping applies only to
representing the same interests in both actions.” As a judicial cases or proceedings, and not to administrative cases.
trustee, HSBC had the role of managing the properties of the Petitioner has not cited any rule or circular on forum-‐
deceased Thompson so there is no identity of parties. shopping issued by the Office of the Ombudsman or that of
Therefore, there is no forum shopping when Catalan filed the City Council. In fact, it was only on 15 September 2003
two cases against HSBC although it involved the same that the Ombudsman, in Administrative Order No.17, S. 2003,
checks. required that a Certificate of Non-‐Forum Shopping be
attached to the written complaint against a public official or
From the FT of the case: There is no identity of employee. Supreme Court Administrative Circulars Nos. 04-‐
parties. HSBANK is not a party in the probate proceeding. 94 and 28-‐91 adverted to by petitioner mention only initiatory
HSBC TRUSTEE is only a party in the probate proceeding pleadings in a court of law when another case is pending
because it is the executor and trustee named in the before other tribunals or agencies of the government as the
Hongkong will of Thomson. HSBC TRUSTEE is representing pleadings to which the rule on forum-‐shopping applies.
the interest of the estate of Thomson and not its own
corporate interest. AMANDO SAN JUAN vs. MIGUEL ARAMBULO

LEVI STRAUSS vs. VOGUE TRADERS The SC here clarified what do you mean when two
cases filed before two different tribunals… what constitute
Levi filed a cancellation case and an infringement forum shopping. With respect to the identity of rights
case. The issues are totally different even if they involve the asserted and reliefs prayed for, look at the facts and
same parties. In Property, we discussed that if there is a circumstances of each case. Are they similar? Look at the
cancellation case filed with the Bureau of Legal Affairs, one subject matter and the issues to determine whether or not
can also file an infringement case with the RTC. There is no there are identity of rights and reliefs prayed for.
litis pendencia.
RULE 8: Manner of Making
Is there a forum shopping if one entity is an administrative
Allegations in Pleadings
body and the other is a court? Let’s check this case:

How do you make a pleading?
WACNANG vs. COMELEC

Section 1. In general. — Every pleading shall contain in a
It doesn’t matter if one case is filed before an
methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct
administrative body and the other is filed before the court. As
statement of the ultimate facts on which the party pleading
long as the requisites are present, there can be a forum
relies for his claim or defense, as the case may be, omitting
shopping.
the statement of mere evidentiary facts. (1)

If a defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent
Compare the case of Wacnang with…
provisions thereof and their applicability to him shall be

clearly and concisely stated. (n)
MANUEL LAXINA vs. OMBUDSMAN

We already know this. This is just a reiteration of what we
If you look at Rule 7, Section 5, forum shopping only
already learned under Rule 3.
applies to courts, tribunals or quasi-‐judicial agencies. The


anxiety when the pass I was riding in
If you are a defendant, you file your answer and your defense collided with the train and the driver was in
has a legal basis, not a factual basis like “I already paid the bad faith, etc… therefore, I am entitled to
loan, here is the receipt,” then you must include the pertinent moral damages.” Do not do this. You just
provision of law. You must include the applicability to the ask the court that you suffered this and
situation. that. That’s different from saying that you
are entitled of moral damages. That’s a
Ultimate facts – we already know this. As long as the conclusion of law. That’s up to the court
requisites of causes of action are present. whether or not you are entitled.

Evidentiary facts; example: In a land dispute, P filed an action MATHAY CASE
to evict D from a parcel of land that P claims he was
occupying for a longest time. In his complaint, he alleged that The complaint stated that D is holding a piece of
he has been in OCENPO for more than 50 years. D entered property in trust for P. The court said that this is a conclusion
the property and started planting coconut trees and of fact. Therefore, it should not be stated.
therefore, P suffered damages. That is already enough to
state a cause of action. That’s all he need to allege in the Section 2. Alternative causes of action or defenses. — A
complaint. party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or
defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in one cause
What are the evidentiary facts that need not be stated in the of action or defense or in separate causes of action or
complaint? If he enters the property in 1967 and after he defenses. When two or more statements are made in the
entered, he started planting the grass and cleaned it. He alternative and one of them if made independently would be
started planting coconut trees in 1970, he attached pictures – sufficient, the pleading is not made insufficient by the
these are just evidentiary facts which need not be stated in insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.
the complaint. They merely bolster one’s cause of action. (2)
That come later. The pictures of the trees – you can present
them later. Do not make the complaint more complicated by We learned under Rule 6 that there are many different ways
including all of these details. of denying – specific denial (negative defense) and defense
of confession and avoidance (affirmative defense).
If you make a complaint, it must be in a methodical and
logical form. Dean emphasized that the best exercise is your Now, how many defenses can you bring up in your answer? If
exam. When you are faced with a problem, you have to argue you are making a negative defense: “No, I did not borrow
in a methodical and logical manner. Wag yung chopsuey. money from P. In fact, I do not know him”… Can you put a
*Atty. S. talks about exams in lawschool* second defense that says “Granting arguendo that I
borrowed money from P, I already paid for my loan. Here is
Only the ultimate facts should be stated in the complaint – the receipt.”?
those which are essential to one’s cause of action or defense.
Don’t they contradict each other? Can the defendant do that?
What else should not be stated? Yes. Under Section 2, a party may set forth two or more
• Facts presumed by law statements of a claim or defense alternatively or
o Example: In breach of contract of carriage, hypothetically, either in one cause of action or defense or in
when a passenger is insured or dies, there is separate causes of action or defenses.
that automatic presumption of negligence
on the part of the carrier. If you are the So you can have alternative defenses. You can state a
plaintiff, you don’t have to state that the negative defense in paragraph 1 and an affirmative defense in
driver was negligent. That is not required paragraph 2. You are not asking the court to xxx.
because of the automatic presumption. All
you need to state is: “I’ m a passenger of Also causes of action: Passenger of a bus sues the driver and
this bus and I’m injured.” the operator. The cause of action against the driver is culpa
• Conclusions of fact and law aquiliana and the cause of action against the operator is culpa
o Example: Plaintiff says that he is entitled to contractual. In one action for damages, you can have these
moral damages. Do not tell the court that “I two causes of action. You can ask the court to order the
have sleepless nights, serious anxiety, moral driver to pay or the carrier.


Diba the defenses contradict each other? But this is not
“When two or more statements are made in the alternative prohibited. The defendant here cannot be brought to the
and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, court for perjury. All the defenses are admitted. This is what
the pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of we call a shot gun answer.
one or more of the alternative statements.”
Related to this particular provision are provisions that we
Let’s say we have two causes of action for culpa aquiliana and already took up:
breach of contract… and the culpa aquiliana cause of action • Rule 2, Section 5: A party may in one pleading assert,
is sufficient and the breach of contract is not sufficient like in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of
there was an accident but the passenger was not injured. So action as he may have against an opposing party.
kulang. For a cause of action for breach of contract to arise, • Rule 3, Section 6: On permissive joinder of parties –
the passenger must either die or injured or in other cases, he when two persons may be joined as plaintiffs or
is not delivered at his decision on time. Yung allegations ng defendants jointly or alternatively
passenger would deem like there is really no cause of action • Rule 3, Section 13: Where the plaintiff is uncertain
for breach of contract kasi nakarating din siya sa destination against who of several persons he is entitled to
niya and there were no injuries. Will the complaint be relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in
insufficient or defective because one of causes of action was the alternative, although a right to relief against one
insufficient? No. under Section 2, the pleading is not made may be inconsistent with a right of relief against the
insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the other.
alternative statements.
Aside from those basic principles under Sections 1 and 2,
In other words, the complaint cannot be dismissed on the what should you allege in your pleading? We have Section 3.
ground of failure to state a cause of action because one of
cause of action is not complete. There is still no failure cause Section 3. Conditions precedent. — In any pleading a general
of action kasi may isa pa na complete cause of action. That is averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions
why it is always advisable to have alternative causes of action precedent shall be sufficient. (3)
and alternative defenses.
Let’s say that the case is for collection for a sum of money.
If we look at the case, we can have action for rescission, You just allege there that you already went there to barangay
annulment, etc. You are not asking for everything. You are for conciliation. You just generally aver and attach the
only asking for one kaya alternative. In case, you can’t have certificate. Or if the action requires arbitration between
“this”, at least you have “that.” Also for defenses, you put all banks and you have done it already, just allege that you P
your defenses on the table right away when you file your already underwent arbitration and that it failed to settle the
answer. issues.

Example: P was about to board a bus. The bus suddenly sped Just allege those so that the court will know that you already
up so he fell. He was injured. What is the cause of action complied with all the conditions.
against the carrier? Is there already a contract of carriage? He
is not sure. Or Culpa aquiliana because of the negligent act of How do you allege the performance or occurrence of all
the driver? Was P already a passenger? P can sue the carrier conditions? General averments. You don’t have to specify
for both – action for damages based on breach of contract of that on a certain date, you went to DARAB, you sat down and
carriage and culpa aquiliana pursuant to Article 2180 of the the lawyer was present, you were not able to settle so you
Civil Code. went back again, etc. No need to do that. Just mention that
you are already finished.
Example: P files an action against D to collect an unpaid loan.
The basic allegation is that D obtained a sum of money and Section 4. Capacity. — Facts showing the capacity of a party
did not pay it. In D’s answer, he can say: to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be
§ “I never borrowed money from P. In fact I don’t sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an
know him.” organized association of person that is made a party, must
§ “Assuming that I received money from P, it was not a be averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal
loan but a birthday gift and therefore a donation.” existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or
§ “Assuming that the money I received money from P be sued in a representative capacity, shall do so by specific
as a loan, I already paid for it.”


denial, which shall include such supporting particulars as are
peculiarly within the pleader's knowledge. (4) January 23, 2015

If we look at the complaint, it is always stated there that “P There’s a discussion in your Transcription regarding
of legal age…” If you don’t put it, the pleading is insufficient. corporations. If a corporation is sued, it has to be averred in
the pleading that the corporation was duly organized under
How many kinds of parties to we have? Natural persons and the Philippine laws. What if the corporation is a foreign
juridical persons. If it is a natural person, you have to allege corporation?
that you are of legal age. If you are juridical person, you have
to put “a corporation duly organized under the Philippine Can a foreign corporation sue? What do you have to aver in
laws.” your pleading if you are representing a foreign corporation?
You have to determine first if the corporation is doing
What do you have to aver? business in the Philippines or not. If the corporation is a
• Capacity of the party to sue or be sued foreign corporation, then you put “a corporation existing
o Examples: “Plaintiff is X of legal age and a under the laws of the Philippines.”
resident of XX city.”; “Defendant is a
corporation duly organized and existing Can a foreign corporation sue? What did you learn in
under the laws of the Philippines.” Property?
• Authority of the party to sue or be sued in a A foreign corporation can sue if it is not doing in the
representative capacity Philippines. What you have to aver is the registration in that
o Examples: “XYZ Corporation, represented foreign country. If it is doing business Philippines, you cannot
by X.”; “Labor Union Employees, sue if it is not registered. So a foreign corporation doing
represented by President.” business here must be registered. It must have the license to
• The legal existence of an organized association of do business here – and you have to aver that in your pleading
person that is made a party by saying “That this corporation is existing and duly
authorized under the laws of France and is doing business in
Under Section 4, what you have to specifically deny? A party the Philippines pursuant to a license issued by etc.”
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 A party who denies the legal existence of this foreign
representative capacity, shall do so by specific denial, which corporation must do so by means by specific denial.
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
Denial of “Legal existence of any party” constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with
Example: The complaint says “Plaintiff of legal age.” The particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, or other condition
defendant, in his answer, can say “I specifically deny of the mind of a person may be averred generally. (5a)
paragraph 1 that plaintiff is of legal age. In truth and in fact,
he is only 15 years old.” FAME:
• Fraud
Denial of “Capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a • Accident
representative capacity” • Mistake
Example: Defendant denies paragraph 2 of the complaint that • Excusable negligence
Mr. X was authorized to represent the corporation. The
secretary’s certificate or board resolution is nowhere to be FAME is one of the grounds for new trial. If you want to ask
found. for new trial, you have to show that you were not able to
present evidences because of Fraud or AME.
What should be included in the specific denial?
Supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader's “In all averments of fraud or mistake the circumstances
knowledge. You cannot just allege, you must have supporting constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with
particulars. So if you allege that the plaintiff is only 15 years particularity.”
old, you present the birth certificate. You have to describe with particularity the fraud committed
against you. What if mistake is you emphasis? You cannot just


say that “I made a mistake. I was not able to file the Illustration: D wants the court to dismiss the case filed by P
complaint on this date.” This is not enough. You have to state against D because D claims that there was already a judgment
what kind of mistake and the reasons for such. rendered by another court long time ago. Can D say “There is
already another judgment involving the same parties and
“Malice, intent, knowledge, or other condition of the mind of issues rendered by the RTC of Makati”? Is this sufficient? Yes.
a person may be averred generally.” The law presumes that the judgment is valid and that there is
It is enough that they may be alleged generally. If you say a presumption that the court which rendered the decision
that this person intends to do this to you… You don’t have to has jurisdiction over the subject matter.
state it with particularity. Intent is a creation of the mind.
Section 9. Official document or act. — In pleading an official
Remember our discussion in Property? Yung bad faith? You document or official act, it is sufficient to aver that the
have to describe bad faith. Does it fall under fraud, mistake or document was issued or the act done in compliance with
malice, intent? We will see that in the cases. law. (9)

What Must Be Stated with Particularity Let’s say the Sanggunian made a resolution and you want to
1. Averments of fraud or mistake invoke it in your pleading, you can just aver that it was issued
2. Circumstances constituting fraud or mistake by the Sanggunian in compliance with the law. Again, this is
just pleading the official document. The proving part is a
What May Be Averred Generally different story.
1. Malice
2. Intent To summarize:
3. Knowledge or other condition of the mind of a • What may be averred generally:
person o Performance of conditions precedent
o Conditions of the mind
Section 6. Judgment. — In pleading a judgment or decision o Intent
of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-‐judicial o Malice
tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the o Judgments (foreign or domestic)
judgment or decision without setting forth matter showing o Official documents or acts
jurisdiction to render it. (6) • What must be made with particularity:
o Capacity to sue and be sued
Let’s say the US Court orders X to pay Y P1M. Now, X has no o Authority to sue or be sued in a
properties and money in the US. Y finds out that X has money representative capacity
and properties here in the Philippines. So Y files an action for o Legal existence of an organized association
enforcement of the foreign judgment here in the Philippines. of person that is made a party
o Fraud
What does Section 6 say? In pleading a judgment of a foreign o Mistake
court, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without
setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it. So it is Section 7. Action or defense based on document. —
enough that you aver that there is a judgment of a foreign Whenever an action or defense is based upon a written
court. instrument or document, the substance of such instrument
or document shall be set forth in the pleading, and the
However, we are talking here of pleading. We are not talking original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the pleading
of proving. When you reach 4th year, you will learn that for a as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the
foreign judgment to be enforced here in the Philippines, it pleading, or said copy may with like effect be set forth in the
must be proven. The procedure for proving is different. Here, pleading. (7)
we are just talking on how to present it in the pleading. You
don’t have to explain everything that the foreign court which This talks about actionable documents. What is an actionable
renders the judgment has jurisdiction over it. That already document? It is one which is the basis or the foundation of
falls under “proving” and not “pleading.” Proving is not done the cause of action or a defense of a party, not merely an
in the complaint. It is done during trial so a general averment evidence thereof. Not every document needed in trial is an
is sufficient in pleading a judgment. actionable document. Not every action needs an actionable
document.


If it is actionable, it must be pleaded in the manner
Let’s say we have X who crosses the street. While crossing mentioned in Section 7. Also, in Section 8, one must validly
the street, he was hit by a car. He has a police report about contest the genuineness of the document.
what happened. Is the police report an actionable document?
NO. How to Plead an Actionable Document:
1. The substance of such instrument or document shall
Compare that with this: X borrowed money from Y evidenced be set forth in the pleading – the original or a copy
by a promissory note. X promised to pay Y on November thereof shall be attached in the pleading
2013. Now it’s January 2014 and X was not able to pay so Y 2. Said copy may with like effect be set forth in the
sued X. Is the promissory note an actionable document? YES. pleading – no need to attach; copy verbatim

The promissory note is the basis or foundation of his cause of What is the effect if you do not plead your actionable
action. The police report is not the foundation – it is merely document in accordance with Section 7?
an evidence of the accident. The opposing party may move to dismiss the pleading.

What are the rules when the action or defense is based on an What is the effect of compliance of Section 7?
actionable document? Let us go back to that illustration The opposing party must follow the procedure of Section 8 if
involving the promissory note in an action for sum of money. he wants to contest said actionable document.

Rules Whenever An Action or Defense is Based upon a We have here now a complaint for a sum of money. Then, the
Written Instrument or Document substance of the promissory note is also here. There is an
attachment (Annex A) which is a copy of the promissory
1. The substance of such instrument or document shall be note. If you are the defendant, how do you contest this
set forth in the pleading AND actionable document?
You have to put there in the complaint that
D borrowed money from me (P) and promised to pay Section 8. How to contest such documents. — When an
on April 2014 as stated in a promissory note and action or defense is founded upon a written instrument,
signed by D. You describe what is there in the copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading as
document. provided in the preceding section, the genuineness and due
2. The original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted
pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies
part of the pleading OR them, and sets forth what he claims to be the facts, but the
Normally, in the complaint, this is what is requirement of an oath does not apply when the adverse
called an annex – what you attached in the pleading. party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or
3. Said copy may with like effect be set forth in the when compliance with an order for an inspection of the
pleading original instrument is refused. (8a)
You may copy the promissory note in
verbatim. How to Contest an Actionable Document:
The adverse party must:
You plead it by stating the substance of the instrument or 1. Under oath, specifically deny the document (the denial
document. Then, you attach a copy of it OR you copy must be verified), and
everything and put it in your pleading. The best way is to 2. Set forth what he claims to be the facts
attach the copy of that actionable document. That is how you
plead an actionable document. If you are the defendant, in your answer, you must
specifically deny the actionable document. It must be under
What is the purpose of the distinction between actionable oath. Meaning, the answer must be verified. You must set
and non-‐actionable document? forth what you claim to be the facts. You can say that “I
If the document is not actionable, there is no need to follow specifically deny the genuineness of that promissory note
Section 7. Like in our example earlier, you don’t even have to because the signature there is not mine. In fact, here is my
mention the police report in your pleading. You only present signature. I will attach a specimen of my signature.” That
it during trial as evidence. There is no need to include it in the denial in an answer must be under oath. If you are the
complaint. defendant of an action based on an actionable document,
your answer must be verified.


When the Requirement of an Oath Does Not Apply Is the defendant deemed that he has admitted that he still
1. When the adverse party does not appear to be a party has a debt to the plaintiff?
to the instrument No, you are not admitting the liability but only the
Example: P filed a complaint for breach of genuineness and due execution of the promissory note.
contract against D. Before P was able to file
the action, X died. So the parties in the
contract are P and X. P filed an action What is being admitted? Even if he says in his answer that the
against D, the heir of X. D noticed that the promissory note is forged, balewala yun. He is admitting that
signature of X in the contract was forged. the promissory note is genuine and that he was the one
Does D have to verify his answer in order to executed it. The genuineness and due execution of the
deny the contract allegedly signed by X? actionable document but the following are deemed admitted
Does his answer need to be verified in order (as cited by the SC in the case of Hiberred – check the
to deny the genuineness and due execution enumeration below).
of the contract? No because D is not a party
to the instrument. He was not the one who Facts that are deemed admitted when the genuineness and
signed the contract. due execution of an actionable document is admitted
Section 8 says that if you don’t (Hibberd vs. Rhode 22 P 476)
specifically deny under oath, you are 1. The party whose signature it bears signed it. If
deemed to have admitted the genuineness signed by another, it was signed for him and
and due execution of the instrument. with his authority.
Nothing else. Yun lang. 2. At the time it was signed, it was in words and
2. When compliance with an order for inspection of the figures exactly as set out in the pleading of the
original instrument is refused party relying upon it.
Before the defendant files his answer, he Let’s say in his answer he said that granting
asks the plaintiff “May I see the original arguendo that I borrowed money from him,
promissory note?” Sabi ng plaintiff, I did not borrow P1M but only P100,000.
“Ayoko.” He does not have specifically deny Even if he says that in his answer, he is
under oath. He may specifically deny but deemed to have admitted that he owe P1M
hindi na kailangan na under oath. which was exactly as set out in the pleading
of the party relying upon it.
January 28, 2015 3. The document was delivered.
4. The formal requisites of law, such as seal,
Let’s continue with “denying the genuineness and due acknowledgement (notarization) or revenue
execution” of an actionable document. Let’s say we have a stamp which it lacks, are waived by it.
promissory note. The amount is let’s say P1M payable on
September 20, 2013 with 6% interest per month; signed by D Defenses no longer allowed when genuineness and due
payable to P. If the defendant, in his answer, says that “I execution of actionable document is admitted: Such
never borrowed money from D. In fact, I do not know P. defenses as that the signature is a forgery; or that it was
Therefore, the promissory note is not valid. It is forged. I did unauthorized, as in the case of an agent signing for his
not sign it. That’s not my signature. But granting arguendo principal, or one signing in behalf of a partnership, or of a
that I borrowed money from him, I really do not owe him corporation; or that, in the ease of the latter, that the
anything because I already paid for that loan by giving him my corporation was not authorized under its charter to sign the
car.” instrument; or that the party charged signed the instrument
in some other capacity than that alleged in the pleading
We learned under Rule 8, Section 8 that to deny the setting it out; or that it was never delivered are cut off by the
genuineness and due execution of the promissory note, the admission of its genuineness and due execution. (Note: Taken
answer must be verified and under oath. There are two from the FT of Hibberd vd. Rhode).
defenses diba – specific denial that he didn’t borrow so the
promissory note is forged and even if he borrowed, it was Defenses that may be interposed despite admission of the
already paid by giving the car. What if the answer was not genuineness and due execution of an actionable document
verified and under oath? Was there a specific denial? Yes but (Hibberd vs. Rhode 22 P 476):
it was not verified. 1. Payment


2. Want or illegality of consideration an answer. When the answer is filed, the issues are joined.
3. Fraud The case will be set for pre-‐trial so go to the next step. But
4. Mistake there is an option for the plaintiff to file a reply but it is not
5. Compromise compulsory. However, there are instances when the filing of
6. Statute of Limitation the reply is not compulsory.
7. Estoppel
8. Duress Even if you don’t file a reply, it’s okay. You won’t lose
9. Minority anything. The effect of not filing a reply is that all the
10. Imbecility allegations in the answer are deemed denied by the plaintiff.
These are not deemed admitted. We will go to that in the succeeding provisions.

Just remember in your heads that what are deemed admitted But if the defendant anchors his defense on an actionable
are ONLY the genuineness and due execution of the document like sa example natin, diba may promissory note
actionable document – not other things that which have which is an actionable document of the plaintiff? Let’s say the
nothing to do with the GaDE of the actionable document. defendant files his answer and attached to it is a receipt that
was allegedly signed by the plaintiff wherein it was stated
The general rule is that not all pleadings have to be verified. that P received P1M from D. Is the receipt an actionable
There are some complaints that need not be verified but if document? Yes. His defense of payment is anchored in that
the complaint is anchored in an actionable document, in receipt. If the plaintiff does not file a verified reply, he is
order to contest the genuineness and due execution of the deemed to have admitted the genuineness and due
actionable document attached with the complaint, the execution of the receipt. That’s why this time, he needs to file
defendant must file a verified answer. And the defendant a verified reply. The most popular response of the plaintiff is
must specifically deny. that the signature is forged. Definitely, it has to do something
with the genuineness and due execution of the instrument.
When denial under oath not required
1. When the adverse party does not appear to be a Section 10. Specific denial. — A defendant must specify each
party to the instrument material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not
In the example we already looked at: X admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the
borrowed money from P. X did not pay. substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his
There was a promissory note signed by X. X denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an
died so P sued D, the heir or administrator averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and
of the estate of X. In his answer, D need not material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a
have his answer verified because he cannot defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
admit the due execution and genuineness of form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made to
a document in which he is not a party. the complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect
2. When compliance with an order for an inspection of of a denial. (10a)
the original instrument is refused
Sabihin niya na “Uy, patingin ng actionable How do you specifically deny a material allegation in the
document mo be.” And the plaintiff will say complaint?’
“no.”
3. When the document to be denied is not classified as 1. Defendant must
an actionable document but merely an evidentiary a. specify each material allegation of fact
matter the truth of which he does not admit
There are so many complaints that have lots b. set forth the substance of the matters
of attachments – A to Z. Does it mean that upon which he relies to support his denial [whenever
you have to verify your answer for all the practicable]
attachments? No, only actionable
documents. If evidentiary documents, then If the complaint has 4 paragraphs… How do
no need. you specifically deny? You place in paragraph 1 that
defendant denies the allegation in paragraph 2 of the
Ordinarily, the filing of a reply is not compulsory. The basic complaint which states that D is a resident of Davao
pleadings are complaint and answer. Let’s go to a very basic city when in fact xxx. That’s the first part (1a). Then
case: The plaintiff files the complaint and the defendant files he must set forth the substance of the matters upon


which he relies to support his denial (1b). So you say 3. Where a defendant is without knowledge or
“defendant specifically denies the allegation in information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
paragraph 2 that he is a resident of Davao city, in of a material averment made to the complaint -‐-‐ he
fact, he is a resident of Tagum city and this is his shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a
specific address as indicated in his driver’s license.” denial
Whenever practicable lang.
Illustration: In paragraph 4 of the complaint, the
What if you don’t do it that way if you are plaintiff says “After I saw the defendant and his
the defendant? All you say is that defendant denies family living in the property, I went to the police
the allegation in paragraph 2. So you only have station in Tibungco and informed them that there are
general denial. But if the defendant says “Defendant strangers living in my property.”
specifically denies the allegation in paragraph 2” is
that enough? No. That is still a general denial even if How can the defendant deny that? Malay ba
may word na “specifically deny.” niya na nagpunta na pala si plaintiff sa police. So he
will just say in his answer “the defendant has no
2. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
averment -‐-‐-‐ he shall specify so much of it as is true as to the truth of the allegation in paragraph 4.” It is
and material and shall deny only the remainder always best to deny each and every allegation in the
complaint. Tirahin mo talaga yan.
Let’s say in paragraph 3 of the complaint,
the plaintiff says “On September 20, 2010, when I Illustration: P filed an action against D. He was
went to my property in Tibungco, I saw the walking along the pedestrian lane. Suddenly D was
defendant there and he even built a bahay kubo hit by P and P fell sustaining injuries. P filed an action
where he and his family actually lived. for damages based on culpa aquiliana asking for
actual damages for the injuries sustained, for moral
How do you do the second mode of specific damages kay napahiya siya.
denial? The defendant can say “I admit the allegation
in paragraph 3 that I am living on that parcel of land Can the defendant in his answer say in his
in Tibungco and I have a bahay kubo there but I answer that “the defendant has no knowledge or
specifically deny that the parcel of land belongs to information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
the plaintiff because I inherited the land from my of the allegation in the complaint”? Of course not.
grandfather.” So you deny a portion of the allegation The defendant can only use the 3rd mode if he really
and you admit a portion of it. does not know what the plaintiff is talking about. If
the plaintiff describes a situation wherein the
In the discussion here, it says that defendant was around, the defendant cannot use
sometimes an allegation may consist of two or more the 3rd mode. How should D deny the said allegation?
parts. You can deny part of it and admit the other He can say “Defendant specifically denies the
part. allegation of the plaintiff that I hit her with my
motorcycle, in fact the light was green, she
Illustration: P alleges that D is in possession of a jaywalked and so she threw herself in the
property in bad faith. D can admit that he is in motorcycle.” So mode 1 ang gamitin, not mode 3.
possession of the property but deny that he
possesses it in bad faith. The third mode can be used as a specific
denial if the defendant has absolutely no idea what
Now, there is this discussion on negative the plaintiff is talking about.
pregnant. If the defendant says “I deny the entire
paragraph 2” but in truth in fact he is only denying Section 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed
the qualification… According to Dean and some admitted. — Material averment in the complaint, other than
authors, this is called a negative pregnant. If the those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be
allegation consists of many parts, you specifically deemed admitted when not specifically denied. Allegations
state whether you accept or deny certain parts. of usury in a complaint to recover usurious interest are
deemed admitted if not denied under oath. (1a, R9)


Specific allegations: did not file a reply, so he is deemed to admit that his interest
“Material allegations in the complaint deemed admitted rate is 30% and that it is usurious.
when not specifically denied”
It is incumbent upon the defendant to specifically deny each Rules on Denial and Admission
and every paragraph in the complaint because what you do General rule: Material averments in the complaint shall be
not deny, you are deemed to have admitted it. Just like in our deemed admitted when not specifically denied.
example in paragraph 1 that the defendant resides in Davao Exceptions: Instances when averments in the complaint are
city then okay. Bakit mo pa pakikialaman yan, diba? not deemed admitted even when not specifically denied:
a. Amount of unliquidated damages
But if there are allegations in the complaint that should be b. Immaterial averments
denied but you did not, then wala na. If you forgot to deny a Example: After I went to the police station
certain paragraph that is a material averment which could (refers to the example re: property in
destroy your defense, then sorry nalang. Tibungco) to report the incident, I went to
the beach and saw my friend there. Does
What is the only exception? that have to be denied? No more na. It’s
The amount unliquidated damages. immaterial. You don’t have to deny it.
c. Evidentiary matters because parties are only
There are 6 kinds of damages – MENTAL. Only liquidated obliged to aver ultimate facts
damages are deemed admitted. In the example that we Only ultimate facts ang i-‐deny.
talked about earlier, si P was walking along the road and she d. Conclusions of fact and law
was hit by the motorcycle so she sustained injuries causing No need to admit those which should not be
her to spend for doctor’s fees, hospitalization bills, in the complaint.
medication amounting to P170,000. Then she’s asking for
moral damages for P200,000 so P370,000 then sa RTC na. Section 12. Striking out of pleading or matter contained
What if the defendant did not specifically deny all those therein. — Upon motion made by a party before responding
allegations in the complaint? He didn’t know to deny through to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by
general denial. All he denied was the fact that the plaintiff these Rules, upon motion made by a party within twenty
was hit, that the plaintiff was embarrassed to everyone, that (20) days after the service of the pleading upon him, or upon
the plaintiff suffered injuries… But he is not deemed to have the court's own initiative at any time, the court may order
admitted the fact that she incurred so much. any pleading to be stricken out or that any sham or false,
redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter
What is deemed admitted? Let’s change the facts. P was a be stricken out therefrom. (5, R9)
passenger of a plane. Inside her suitcase was something
that’s breakable. He checked in her suitcase and upon arrival This is actually the first thing that you can file if you are a
at destination, the breakable item was broken. Before that, defendant. Before filing a motion to dismiss or answer, you
she made sure that there is a “fragile” sticker on the suitcase. can file this – motion to strike a pleading or parts thereof.
According to her, the value of the item in the suitcase What can you strike out? It says here “pleading xxx any sham
amount to P500,000 so she filed a complaint for damages or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous
based on breach of contract of carriage. Everything there will matter.”
be admitted including the amount liquidated damages – the
stipulation in the ticket that if your luggage is destroyed, we If there is a paragraph there in the complaint that is
will only be liable $20 per kilo. Liquidated damages are those scandalous, then the defendant can file a motion to strike out
that will be paid by the party in case there is a breach of the a part of the pleading. He can do so before responding to a
contract. Liquidated damages are available only when there is pleading which is within the 15-‐day period to file an answer. If
a contract. That is the only one deemed admitted but the there is no responsive pleading is permitted, meaning the
other damages are not deemed admitted (refers to MENTA scandalous matter came out in the reply… diba there is no
damages). more responsive pleading kay last na yan? You can file a
motion to strike the pleading or a portion thereof within 20
Allegations of usury in a complaint to recover usurious days from date of service.
interest – deemed admitted if not denied under oath. If in the
defense of the defendant, he says that the interest rate Take note that it is not only upon motion. The court may
charged by P is usurious because it is 30% tapos the plaintiff motu proprio strike out a pleding or a portion of it if any of
these grounds are present:


a. Sham or false Therefore, the capacity of Nenita to sue cannot be
b. Redundant questioned.
c. Immaterial
d. Impertinent But then, does Nenita have the capacity to sue? Yes,
e. Contains a scandalous matter maybe not as an administrator. But she is a co-‐owner of the
properties in the estate. Under Article 487, any one of the co-‐
What if the pleading is unsigned? The effect is that it is owners may bring an action in ejectment. The SC said: Hence,
tantamount to being a sham. So if defendant finds out na assuming that respondent failed to submit the proper
wala diay nakapirma si plaintiff, then he can file a motion to documents showing her capacity to sue in a representative
strike out the sham pleading. capacity for the estate of her deceased husband, the Court, in
the interest of speedy disposition of cases, may deem her
MARIE JAO vs. CHINA BANKING capacitated to prosecute the ejectment case as a real party-‐
in-‐interest being a co-‐owner of the subject property
The SC said here that the allegations of fraud were considering that the trial court has jurisdiction over the
particular enough. Granting arguendo that the allegations subject matter and has also acquired jurisdiction over the
were not particular enough, it is not a ground for dismissal on parties, including respondent Nenita S. Concepcion.
the ground of failure to state a cause of action. In stating a
cause of action, all you need are the ultimate facts – the From the FT of the case: Although a Motion to
elements of the cause of action. The recourse of the party Dismiss or a Motion for Bill of Particulars cannot be availed of
here is to file a motion for a bill of particulars. to challenge the capacity of the party under the Rules on
Summary Procedure, the Defendant–Appellant should have
From the FT of the case: On the contrary, we find in at least SPECIFICALLY DENIED such capacity of the party in
paragraph 15 of the Complaint -‐-‐ which states that the Answer, which should have included such supporting
respondent ‘connived and conspired’ with Spouses Gan to particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader’s knowledge.
effect the questioned mortgage -‐-‐ a statement of the The case records clearly disclosed that no such specific denial
ultimate fact that respondent participated in the fraudulent was made by the appellant and this court believes that the
mortgage of the property. Ultimate facts refer to the lower court had carefully and dutifully taken into account the
principal, determinative, constitutive facts upon the applicable rules particularly Section 4 of the Revised Rules on
existence of which the cause of action rests. The term does Summary Procedure, in relation to Section 4, Rule 8 of the
not refer to details of probative matter or particulars of Rules of Court and pertinent jurisprudence, before rendering
evidence which establish the material elements. The words the assailed decision dated April 8, 2003.
‘connived and conspired’ may seem to respondent general
and indefinite, but vagueness is not a ground for a motion to ASSOCIATED BANK vs. MONTANO
dismiss, the proper recourse being a motion for a bill of
particulars. What do you mean by particularizing fraud, mistake?
In forcible entry, we have FISTS. If you say in your complaint
SORIENTE vs. ESTATE OF CONCEPCION that “I was removed from my property through stealth
(period)”, that is not enough. You say “In the middle of the
The issue here is the denial of the capacity of a night, through stealth, the defendant entered the property
person to sue. When a person dies, normally he leaves an and put up a house there (period).” So don’t just use the
estate. Who can sue in behalf of the estate? Normally, it is the term – describe in one sentence what was the force,
administrator who is court appointed or assigned by the intimidation, stealth, etc. You do not need a long paragraph
deceased in his will. If that person who files an action on describing every detail basta just describe.
behalf of the person is not court appointed, there is lack of
capacity to sue. LUISTRO vs. CA

The wife of the deceased here was the one who filed This case is an illustration of the failure of the
a case in behalf of the estate. According to the other party, complaint to allege with particularity the fraudulent acts or
Soriento, she questioned the capacity to sue of the wife machinations of used by the party to convince Luistro to
Nenita. How can she specifically deny the capacity of the enter into the contract. It is not enough to mention there
party to sue? According to this case, he should have filed an that by fraudulent words or machinations, Luistro was tricked
answer and specifically denied the capacity of Nenita to sue into entering the contract. You have to explain the
which should have supporting particulars. She didn’t do that. machinations – why you were convinced in signing the


contract. Take note that it depends in the situation. You don’t by the insurance company to the shipper. It is an actionable
really need to explain in detail. document. Without it, there is no cause of action. The
insurance company failed to attach the marine insurance
Again, the complaint falls short of the requirement policy.
that fraud must be stated with particularity. There is clearly
no basis for the allegation that petitioner only signed the LEDDA vs. BPI
Contract because of fraud perpetrated by respondent. (2012)

TIU vs. PB COM We have a collection suit filed by BPI against Ledda.
Ledda is a BPI cardholder. She was sued by BPI for unpaid
The actionable document attached here was a surety credit card obligations. According to the complaint, Ledda
agreement. What was attached was a copy. If you attach a was issued a pre-‐approved credit card. When you issue a
copy of the original, it must be a faithful reproduction credit card, there is a paper which states the terms and
thereof. This means, the copy must be exactly the same with conditions of your card. So the credit card package which
the original – anything less, anything more, the copy is included the terms and conditions governing the use of the
considered a tampered document. The original copy did not credit card, was delivered at Ledda’s residence on July 1,
tell the phrase “in his personal capacity” but the copy had. It 2005. After the said date, Ledda used the credit card for
is as if there was no attachment because it was not a faithful various purchases of goods and services and cash advances.
reproduction.
Ledda defaulted in the payment of her credit card
Section 7 was not followed because the copy obligation, which BPI claimed in their complaint amounted to
attached was not a faithful reproduction but they asked to P548,143.73 per statement of account. Consequently, BPI
substitute the attached copy with the original. Is this sent letters to Ledda demanding the payment of such
allowed? The SC said yes. We will go in Rule 10 later. You can amount, representing the principal obligation with 3.25%
amend. Under our rules, you can replace the tampered copy finance charge and 6% late payment charge per month.
with the faithful reproduction. Despite BPI’s repeated demands, Ledda failed to pay her
credit card obligation. That’s why BPI filed an action for
From the FT of the case: The pertinent rule on collection.
actionable documents is found in Section 7, Rule 8 of the
Rules of Court, which provides that when the cause of action According to Ledda, the paper containing the terms
is anchored on a document, its substance must be set forth, and conditions governing the use of the credit card is an
and the original or a copy thereof “shall” be attached to the actionable document which should have been pleaded as
pleading as an exhibit and deemed a part thereof. such. Attached in the complaint were the statements, proof
of purchases but wala yung paper (yung sa credit card
With respect to PBCOM’s right to amend its package). The issue is whether or not the said document is an
complaint, including the documents annexed thereto, after actionable document. Of course, not.
petitioners have filed their answer, Section 3, Rule 10 of the
Rules of Court specifically allows amendment by leave of In this case, the complaint is an action for collection
court. of sum of money arising from Ledda’s default in her credit
card obligation with BPI. BPI’s cause of action is primarily
EASTERN SHIPPING vs. PRUDENTIAL based on Ledda’s (1) acceptance of the BPI credit card, (2)
usage of the BPI credit card to purchase goods, avail services
If the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated, the and secure cash advances, and (3) non-‐payment of the
shipper can sue the carrier for breach of contract of carriage. amount due for such credit card transactions, despite
But court cases take a long time. So what is faster? The demands.
shipper can collect from the insurance company. Under the
laws on insurance, the insurance company can run after the In other words, BPI’s cause of action is not based
carrier even if it does not have a contract with them. only on the document containing the Terms and Conditions
accompanying the issuance of the BPI credit card in favor of
What is the basis for suing the carrier? The marine Ledda. Therefore, the document containing the Terms and
insurance policy which indicates there that the insurance Conditions governing the use of the BPI credit card is not an
company has the right of subrogation. That is the basis for actionable document contemplated in Section 7, Rule 8 of
filing a collection case against the carrier for the amount paid


the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. As such, it is not required by specifically denied petitioner’s allegations regarding the loan
the Rules to be set forth in and attached to the complaint. documents, as respondent’s Answer shows that he failed to
specifically deny under oath the genuineness and due
FILTEX & VILLANUEVA vs. CA execution of the promissory note and its concomitant
documents. Therefore, respondent is deemed to have
From the FT of the case: We rule in the affirmative. As admitted the loan documents and acknowledged his
correctly noted by the respondent, the Answer with obligation with petitioner; and with respondent’s implied
Counterclaim and Answer, of Filtex and Villanueva, admission, it was not necessary for petitioner to present
respectively, did not contain any specific denial under oath of further evidence to establish the due execution and
the letters of credit, sight drafts, trust receipts and authenticity of the loan documents sued upon.
comprehensive surety agreement upon which SIHI’s
Complaint was based, thus giving rise to the implied TITAN CONSTRUCTION vs. DAVID
admission of the genuineness and due execution of these
documents. In 1970, Martha and David purchased a lot in Quezon
city. They constructed there a conjugal home. Thereafter, the
Under Sec. 8, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, when an separated de facto and no longer communicated with each
action or defense is founded upon a written instrument, other. Sometime in 1995, Manuel discovered that Martha
copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading as (one who stayed in the house) sold the property to Titan
provided in the preceding section, the genuineness and due Construction for P1.5M. Thus, Manuel filed a complaint for
execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless annulment of the contract and reconveyance of the property
the adverse party, under oath, specifically denies them, and against Titan.
sets forth what he claims to be the facts.
In Titan’s answer with counterclaim, Titan claimed
PERMANENT SAVINGS vs. VELARDE that it relied on an SPA dated January 4, 1995 signed by
Manuel which authorized Martha to sell the property. So they
You do not just have to file a verified answer (under attached the SPA allegedly signed by Manuel in their answer.
oath). You must specifically deny the genuineness and due But Manuel filed a reply which was unverified. Manuel
execution of the document itself. How do you make specific claimed that the SPA was spurious and the signature
denial? You can follow the rules under Section 10 -‐ specify purporting to be his was a forgery. Hence, Martha was
each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does without authority.
not admit. If he wants to deny the genuineness and due
execution of the promissory note, he must state which part Issue: Is Manuel deemed to have admitted the
there he does not admit. He can also set forth the substance veracity or the GaDE of the SPA relied upon by Titan when it
of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial like purchased the property from Martha? Yes. Even if he
his signature in the note was forged. specifically denied the genuineness and due execution of the
instrument, he did not do so under oath. His reply was not
He did not specifically deny the genuineness and due verified. This case is an example of the exception to the rule
execution of the promissory note. He just said that assuming that a reply need not be filed. Here, the defense in the
that it exists and it bears my signature, it does not really state answer was grounded on an actionable document which was
our real intention. He went into the intrinsic aspect of the the SPA.
promissory note. When we talk about GaDE, we are talking
about the formal or extrinsic validity. Whether or not there CUA vs. WALLEM SHIPPING
was intention, that’s not our business for it does not involve (2012)
GaDE.
November 12, 1990: Cua filed an action for damages
What should have been done: The defendant must against Wallem before the RTC. Cua sought the payment of
declare under oath that he did not sign the document or that P2M damages for the damage caused to the shipment of
it is otherwise false or fabricated. This is an example of the Brazilian soybeans consigned to him. Wallem was the ship
denial being under oath but there was really no specific agent – the carrier. Wallem filed a motion to dismiss that the
denial. goods were delivered to Cua on August 16, 1989 but the
action for damages was instituted on November 12, 1990. This
From the FT of the case: Clearly, both the trial court case falls under COGSA which involves foreign trade of
and the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that respondent goods.


could have stated in her pleadings that she verbally informed
The vessel came from abroad and place of the respondent of the need for the repairs, or wrote him a
destination was Manila. Under the COGSA, the prescriptive letter. She could have stated his response, and how it was
period for filing a complaint against the carrier for damage or conveyed, whether verbally or in writing. She could have
destruction of the goods is 1 year from the date of delivery. If stated when the consent was solicited and procured. These,
you look at the dates, nagprescribe na ang act. Wallem filed a she failed to do. Ergo, the petitioner is deemed to have
motion to dismiss alleging that the action has prescribed. admitted the material allegations in the complaint.

Cua opposed the motion alleged that on August 10, January 29, 2015
1990, before the end of the one year period, there was a
telex message where Wallem agreed to extend the period to EQUITABLE vs. CAPISTRANO
file a suit for 90 days. A copy of the telex was allegedly (2012)
attached to the opposition to the motion to dismiss filed by
Cua. The issue illustrated here is how to make a specific
denial. Note: This was the case assigned by Atty. S but no one
Issue: Did Wallem admit the agreement to extend reported so she did not discuss it.
the period to file a claim? Meaning, the telex? The telex pala
was allegedly to be attached to the complaint of Cua. But in From the FT of the case: An answer to the complaint
the motion to dismiss, Wallem said that the action had may raise a negative defense which consists in defendant’s
prescribed. specific denial of the material fact that plaintiff alleges in his
complaint, which fact is essential to the latter’s cause of
According to the SC, yes. Wallem admitted the action. Specific denial has three modes.
agreement extending the period to file the claim. Although
the complaint was clearly filed beyond the 1 year period, Cua Thus:
alleged in the complaint that Wallem agreed to extend the 1) The defendant must specify each material
period to file the action up to November 12, 1990 and he allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and
attached the telex. So Wallem failed to specifically deny of his whenever practicable set forth the substance of the matters
agreement to extend the period to file the action. He merely on which he will rely to support his denial;
filed a motion to dismiss and referred to the lapse of the 1 2) When the defendant wants to deny only a part or
year period. There was failure to specifically deny under oath. a qualification of an averment in the complaint, he must
Therefore, that telex is enough. specify so much of the averment as is true and material and
deny the remainder; and
From the FT of the case: Since the COGSA is the 3) When the defendant is without knowledge and
applicable law, the respondents’ discussion to support their information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a
claim of prescription under Article 366 of the Code of material averment made in the complaint, he shall so state
Commerce would, therefore, not constitute a refutation of and this shall have the effect of a denial.
Cua’s allegation of extension. Given the respondents’ failure
to specifically deny the agreement on the extension of the But the rule that applies when the defendant wants
period to file an action, the Court considers the extension of to contest the documents attached to the claimant’s
the period as an admitted fact. complaint which are essential to his cause of action is found
in Section 8, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court. To determine
TERANA vs. DE SAGUN whether or not respondent Mrs. Capistrano effectively
denied the genuineness and due execution of ECI’s
There is such a thing called affirmative defense. In actionable documents as provided above, the pertinent
this case, she admitted that she demolished the house she averments of the complaint and defendant Capistrano’s
was renting… So, admitting the material allegations in the answer are here reproduced.
complaint but would make her liable. What is that? Like
consent. It says here “one must set forth the substance of In substance, ECI’s allegations, supported by the
the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. attached documents, are that Mrs. Capistrano applied
through Mrs. Redulla for a credit card and that the former
According to the SC, she merely alleged that consent used it to purchase goods on credit yet Mrs. Capistrano
was given; how and why, she did not say. If indeed consent refused to pay ECI for them. On the other hand, Mrs.
were given, it would have been easy to fill in the details. She


Capistrano denied these allegations “for lack of knowledge”
as to their truth. Example: P files a case for collection against D. In his answer,
D did not raise the defense of payment. During the trial, D
This mode of denial is by itself obviously ineffectual attempted to prove that the loan has already been paid by
since a person must surely know if he applied for a credit card him. Can he do so? The answer is no. He must have alleged in
or not, like a person must know if he is married or not. He his answer or motion to dismiss that he already paid the loan.
must also know if he used the card and if he did not pay the He cannot do so for the first time during trial.
card company for his purchases. A person’s denial for lack of
knowledge of things that by their nature he ought to know is What is the purpose of this rule?
not an acceptable denial. To prevent surprises so the defendant and the plaintiff has to
lay their cards down on the table. The plaintiff needs to
How do you plead? The answer is Rule 8. What are the establish his cause his action in the complaint so the
different ways of pleading? Pleading as a verb is discussed in defendant can know how to defend himself. He has to
Rule 8. What if there is a failure to plead? We have Rule 9. present the defenses so the plaintiff can prepare how to
rebut them.
RULE 9: Effect of Failure to Plead
The second part of rule 9 regarding the exceptions is a new
Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded. — Defenses provision. Before, there were no exceptions in the sense that
and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or the court shall dismiss. Rule 9, Section 1 is not saying that if
in the answer are deemed waived. However, when it these things are not brought up in the answer, the defenses
appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that can be raised later (?). It is only saying that the court can
the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that dismiss.
there is another action pending between the same parties
for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior However, despite the fact that Section 1 is not saying that the
judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss 4 grounds can be raised at any time after filing the answer
the claim. (2a) and the motion to dismiss, jurisprudence says: “These four
can be raised at any time, before or after trial, and even on
Who is rule 9 referring to? What party to a case is this rule appeal.” Despite the ruling in the case of Tiham vs.
referring to? Defendant. Sibonghanoy wherein the SC said that lack of jurisdiction can
be raised even for the first time on appeal but it was not
General rule: Defenses or objections not pleaded in a motion allowed by reason of laches.
to dismiss or in an answer are deemed waived.
But the general rule is: Even if not found in Section 1, these
In other words, if you are the defendant, all the defenses that grounds (1-‐4) may be raised even after filing the motion to
you can use against the plaintiff, whether or not they are dismiss or answer. Why? For number 1, lack of jurisdiction
consistent against each other, make sure to mention it. over the subject matter – the court has really no authority to
Allege them in your answer or your motion to dismiss. If you try the case. For numbers 2 and 3, we have many provisions
don’t, you can no longer raise them later. saying that the effect of forum shopping is dismissal. For
number 4, if the action has prescribed, it should not be
But there are exceptions under Rule 9. It says: “However, existing anymore so the complaint will be dismissed.
when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on
record xxx.” When the court can see in the pleadings that: In the case of Logronio, the SC said that being a defense in
1. The court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, equity, laches need not be specifically pleaded. In its
2. There is another action pending between the same initiative, the court may consider it in order to prevent
parties for the same cause (litis pendencia) inequity.
3. The action is barred by a prior judgment or by
statute of limitations (res judicata) Under the 1964 Rules, failure to state a cause of action may
4. Prescription also be raised at any time but under the 1997 Rules, we only
have four grounds.
What can the court do?
The court can dismiss motu proprio. The court shall dismiss if What about forum shopping? We already learned under Rule
it sees from the pleading or evidence on record. 7, Section 5 that if a party commits forum shopping, then
there must be dismissal. In fact, both cases pa nga must be


dismissed diba? In the case of Villaluz vs. Cruz, the issue here
is may the court take cognizance of the issue of forum If you look at Rule 16, Section 1, failure to comply
shopping if the same is not pleaded. The answer is no. Since X with the condition precedent is a ground for dismissal.
did not raise it at the first opportunity to the RTC but raised it However, the grounds there are only applicable if the
only 2 years after, his appeal should have been denied defendant filed a motion to dismiss. Section 1 of Rule 9 is
outright. So forum shopping is not included here. You have to implying that the court cannot motu proprio dismiss a case
raise it early. even if there is a ground for a motion to dismiss. Like in this
case, there is a failure to comply with the barangay
Section 2. Compulsory counterclaim, or cross-‐claim, not set conciliation.
up barred. — A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-‐claim,
not set up shall be barred. (4a) The only time when the court can motu proprio
dismiss the complaint is when any of the four grounds under
We already discussed this extensively when we looked at Rule 9, Section 1 is present. Even on the ground of forum
Rule 6. shopping, if walang motion to dismiss, the court cannot
dismiss it.
VILLANUEVA vs. CA
ANUNCIACION vs. BOCANEGRA
This provision only refers to a situation wherein the
defendant fails to allege certain defenses in his motion to Section 1 says that if you do not raise your defenses
dismiss or answer. But this does not mean that if he complied or objections in your motion to dismiss or answer, they are
with Rule 9, Section 1, he does not need to comply with the deemed waived. Do not include the four grounds we
succeeding rules. Other things have to be presented so it is discussed. After a motion to dismiss is filed and the court
not enough that you comply with R9S1 and use it as a defense rules by denying it, it means that the case will go on. What is
for not complying with the other rules. the next step? File an answer, not a supplemental motion to
dismiss. Actually that’s not allowed.
KATON vs. PALANCA
A supplemental motion to dismiss should not be filed
The SC said here that if prescription or lack of if you are talking about your defenses or objections. There
jurisdiction clearly appears from the complaint filed, the can be motions to dismiss after but they do not pertain the
action may be dismissed motu proprio by the CA even if the defenses or objections. There may be grounds that may be
case was elevated for review on different grounds. arise later but they are not supplemental motion to dismiss
but individual motion to dismiss. You cannot file a
Here, there’s a petition for certiorari with different supplemental motion to dismiss because you forgot to
grounds invoked. The prescription was not invoked but it include grounds that you should have included. The grounds
could be a ground for the court for the dismissal motu that are supposed to be alleged in the motion to dismiss are
proprio. those found in Rule 16. If not alleged, that’s it. Well, you can
allege it in your answer but not in a supplemental motion to
From the FT of the case: Under Section 1 of Rule 9 of dismiss.
the Rules of Court, defenses and objections not pleaded
either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed From the FT of the case: Applying the foregoing rules
waived, except when (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject (R9S1), respondents’ failure to raise the alleged lack of
matter, (2) litis pendentia, (3) res judicata and (4) prescription jurisdiction over their persons in their very first motion to
are evident from the pleadings or the evidence on record. In dismiss was fatal to their cause. They are already deemed to
the four excepted instances, the court shall motu proprio have waived that particular ground for dismissal of the
dismiss the claim or action. complaint. The trial court plainly abused its discretion when
it dismissed the complaint on the ground of lack of
What the CA referred to as residual prerogatives jurisdiction over the person of the defendants. Under the
were the general residual powers of the courts to dismiss an Rules, the only grounds the court could take cognizance of,
action motu proprio upon the grounds mentioned in Section 1 even if not pleaded in the motion to dismiss or answer, are:
of Rule 9 of the Rules of Court and under authority of Section (a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; (b) existence
2 of Rule 1 of the same rules. of another action pending between the same parties for the
same cause; and (c) bar by prior judgment or by statute of
AQUINO vs. AURE limitations.


Eventually, the court rendered a decision finding
TOSHIBA vs. CIR Glodel liable. In many cases in Transporation Laws, the
contract entered into between Columbia and Glodel is a
To simplify, this a petition for refund. Toshiba contract of carriage. Even if Glodel was a customs broker, it
wanted a refund for tax payment. The commissioner of the entered into the contract as a carrier because it offered or
BIR enumerated its defenses. Eventually, the CTA rendered a volunteered to transfer the goods between the customs
decision in favor of Toshiba. BIR refunded the amount. Then, warehouse and the warehouse of Columbia. Glodel was held
the CIR said that there is an issue on tax exemptions and liable as a carrier for the loss and damage.
export sales. Can they be raised after the judgment? No. But
this is a tax case and therefore, the rules do not apply directly Glodel now wanted to file an action for contribution
but suppletorily. and indemnity against Loadmaster. Glodel claims that the
goods were damaged on board the truck of Loadmaster on
Although these are factual objections or defenses the way to Columbia’s warehouse. Is Glodel allowed to file an
not found in Rule 16, Section 1, but the general rule under action for collection against Loadmaster? The answer is no.
Rule 9, Section 1 is still applicable. It is axiomatic in pleadings There was a contract of carriage between Glodel and
and practice that no new issue in a case can be raised in a Loadmaster ha. Can Glodel filed a case based on the contract
pleading which by due diligence could have been raised in between them?
previous pleadings. Do not raise something new mid-‐case
especially if it is a defense or objection. Even if Glodel was not the owner of the goods, it
was the shipper so ano? Can Glodel still file? No na because of
FINANCIAL vs. FORBES PARK Rule 9, Section 2. Both of Glodel and Loadmaster were sued.
Each defendant, panigurado, should file a crossclaim na
From the FT of the case: The instant case is barred against the other one. Otherwise, if only one defendant is
due to Forbes Park’s failure to set it up as a compulsory found liable like in this case si Glodel lang, then it could no
counterclaim in Civil Case No. 16540, the prior injunction suit longer file a separate action against Loadmaster because of
initiated by Financial Building against Forbes Park. Section 2.

A compulsory counterclaim cannot be the subject of Section 3. Default; declaration of. — If the defending party
a separate action but it should instead be asserted in the fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the court
same suit involving the same transaction or occurrence, shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the
which gave rise to it. defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the
defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall
LOADMASTERS vs. GLODEL proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such
relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its
Columbia is a consignee of 132 bundles of electric discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such
copper items from abroad. When the cargo comes from reception of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of
abroad, it is not directly released to the consignee. It has to court. (1a, R18)
pass through the customs. Normally, the consignee hires the (a) Effect of order of default. — A party in default
services of a customs broker who will facilitate the release of shall be entitled to notice of subsequent proceedings but
the items. The customs broker will again volunteer to the not to take part in the trial. (2a, R18)
consignee if the consignee would like him to deliver the (b) Relief from order of default. — A party declared
goods to the warehouse. So Columbia agreed to have the in default may at any time after notice thereof and before
goods delivered. It entered into a contract with Glodel. judgment file a motion under oath to set aside the order of
default upon proper showing that his failure to answer was
Glodel did not have its own transport vehicles so it due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence and
hired the services of Loadmasters which is a trucking that he has a meritorious defense. In such case, the order of
company to deliver the goods to Columbia’s warehouse. default may be set aside on such terms and conditions as the
Unfortunately, upon arrival at the warehouse, some of the judge may impose in the interest of justice. (3a, R18)
copper goods were missing and damages. Columbia collected (c) Effect of partial default. — When a pleading
from the insurance company. Columbia was able to collect asserting a claim states a common cause of action against
from R&B Insurance which later filed an action for collection several defending parties, some of whom answer and the
against Glodel and Loadmasters as the subrogee of Columbia. 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. (4a, R18). submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may be
(d) Extent of relief to be awarded. — A judgment delegated to the clerk of court.”
rendered against a party in default shall not exceed the After hearing, the court declares him in default. The court
amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor shall render judgment granting the claimant (plaintiff) such
award unliquidated damages. (5a, R18). relief as his pleading may warrant. If the action is accion
(e) Where no defaults allowed. — If the defending publiciana and the plaintiff in his complaint prays that the
party in an action for annulment or declaration of nullity of defendant be ordered to vacate, then the court will render
marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court judgment to order the defendant to vacate… unless the
shall order the prosecuting attorney to investigate whether court in its discretion requires the claimant to submit
or not a collusion between the parties exists, and if there is evidence. If the court will require him to do so, he has to
no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it present the evidence. The evidence will be presented not
that the evidence submitted is not fabricated. (6a, R18) necessarily with the court but it can be delegated to the clerk
of court.
Section 3 is one of the most important provisions in Civil
Procedure. There are two orders when a defendant is declared in default:
1. Order of default – declaration that the D is in default
According to this provision, “If the defending party fails to 2. Judgment of default – where the court will render
answer within the time allowed therefor, the court shall, the judgment granting the plaintiff the relief as the
upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the pleading may warrant
defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the
defending party in default.” Between the order of default and the judgment of default,
many things could happen. Meaning, even if there is an order
What are the steps to declare a defending party in default? of default, it does not necessarily follow that there would be
1. The defendant fails to answer within the time a judgment of default. Section 9, paragraph 3 is quite long.
allowed therefore (normally 15 days from the receipt
of the summons with the attached complaint; not 15 Take note that when we talk about defending party, we are
days from the filing of the complaint) not talking only about the defendant. It is not only the
2. If the plaintiff knows that the defendant did not file defendant who can be declared in default. What about the
his answer, he must file a Motion to Declare defendant in a counterclaim? The plaintiff himself? If he does
defendant in default where the plaintiff must show not file an answer in the counterclaim, he can also be
proof of such failure declared in default because he is the defending party in a
When a defendant files his answer, counterclaim.
he must serve a copy of the answer to the
plaintiff like if 20 days has already lapsed Declaration of default is primarily only for Rule 9 if the
and P did not receive an answer yet, then defendant fails to file an answer. There are other rules
obviously, D did not file an answer. wherein the defendant may not comply – like he did not
What is the proof that D did not file attend a trial when he is required to do so. Can he be
an answer? He can go to the court and look declared in default for not attending the trial? No, there is a
at the file there. different sanction under Rule 18. Again, the defendant can be
3. The plaintiff must serve a copy of the Motion to declared in default under Rule 9 for its failure to file an
Dismiss to the defendant answer within the prescribed period.
4. There must be a hearing on the Motion
As a general rule, motions have to be heard. Bar Question: If the defendant is declared in default, is he
5. After the hearing is conducted, court will declare the considered to have admitted the allegations in the complaint
defending party in default to be true and correct?
Answer: Yes. If you do not make a specific denial of the
It is not that simple to declare a defendant in default. These allegations in the complaint, you are deemed to have
steps have to be followed. The implication here is that a court admitted the allegations. Lalo na if you do not file an answer.
cannot motu proprio declare a defendant in default. All the allegations in the complaint of the plaintiff are
deemed true and correct as admitted by the defendant.
“Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment
granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may warrant, The reception of evidence is what we call as ex-‐parte
unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to


reception. Ex-‐parte means that only one party and the other From April 1 to April 7, the only thing can be filed is
party is not required. Under Rule 30, Section 9: an answer. No supplemental motion, 2nd supplemental
Section 9. Judge to receive evidence; delegation to motion or motion for reconsideration. If the answer is not
clerk of court. — The judge of the court where the filed by this time and the motion for reconsideration was filed
case is pending shall personally receive the evidence on April 6, the plaintiff can now file a motion to declare
to be adduced by the parties. However, in default or defendant in default. After filing a motion to dismiss, you can
ex parte hearings, and in any case where the parties no longer file the MR.
agree in writing, the court may delegate the
reception of evidence to its clerk of court who is a Again, the court cannot declare the defendant in default
member of the bar. The clerk of court shall have no motu proprio. It is very clear that under the rules, there must
power to rule on objections to any question or to the be a motion. Just like forum shopping, the court cannot
admission of exhibits, which objections shall be dismiss an action on the ground that the CNFS is defective. It
resolved by the court upon submission of his report must be a upon a motion of the party.
and the transcripts within ten (10) days from
termination of the hearing. (n) Supposed D filed an answer filed an answer but failed to
appear, may he be declared in default? No.
Reception of evidence is during trial where the parties would
present their evidence. This is normally done in front of the How do we distinguish an order of default from judgment of
judge. Section 9 of Rule 30 is the basis for the second default?
paragraph of Section 3 of Rule 9. If the plaintiff or claimant
here is allowed to present evidence ex-‐parte, it can be done Order of default Judgment of default
in front of the clerk of court. But again this reception of Issued by the court on P’s Rendered by the court
evidence ex-‐parte is not really a requirement. If the judge is motion for failure of D to file following a default order or
satisfied with the pleading of the defendant, then the judge his responsive pleading after it received, ex parte, P’s
can render a judgment of xxx. seasonably evidence
Interlecutory order Final order
RAMIREZ vs. CA Not appealable Appealable

May a defendant be declared in default while a If D files an answer but did not furnish a copy of the answer
motion to dismiss or a motion for a bill of particulars remains to P, can P move to declare D in default?
pending and not disposed of? Let’s say the summons and the Yes, because the answer is deemed to have not been legally
complaint was received by the defendant on March 1, 2010. filed. It was not in accordance with the Rules of Court. Even if
The period to file an answer is 15 days from receipt so the there is an answer filed in court, the rule provides that the
answer should be filed on March 16, 2010. However, a motion defendant must serve a copy to the opposing party which is
to dismiss was filed on March 10, 2010. If the answer is not the plaintiff. If you file and you did not serve a copy, it is as if
filed on March 16, 2012, can the defendant be declared in you did not file. (Gonzales vs. Francisco)
default? No. The period to file an answer was suspended by
the filing of the motion to dismiss. Y has to wait for the What is the effect if the defendant is declared in default?
resolution of the court on the motion to dismiss. A party in default shall be entitled to notice of subsequent
proceedings but not to take part in the trial.
If the court resolves the motion to dismiss on April 1,
2010, when should the defendant file his answer? April 7, If the defendant is declared in default, what can he do?
2010. By the way, the fresh period rule does not apply. The Nothing. Can he go to court and attend? Yes. Can his lawyer
period rule is applicable only in appeals. Because the motion participate? No. He is entitled to be notified so that he can
to dismiss was filed in March 10, 6 days nalang ang balance. attend the proceedings as a spectator. He cannot take part in
the trial. He cannot object the evidence presented by the
This is not the time to file a motion to declare the plaintiff. Wala na siyang magawa. He is deemed to have
defendant in default because there is a pending motion to admitted all the allegations of the plaintiff. He loses his
dismiss. What other motions can be filed in between the standing in court.
complaint and the answer? Motion to strike out a pleading
for being sham; Motion for a bill of particulars.


If the defendant is declared in default, is that it? Wala na the court shall try the case against all upon the answers thus
siyang magawa? He has a remedy: He can ask the court to lift filed and render judgment upon the evidence presented.
the order of default.
Situation:
Relief from order of default: A party declared in default may 1. There are several defending parties
at any time after notice thereof and before judgment file a 2. The pleading asserting a claim states a common
motion under oath to set aside the order of default upon cause of action against them
proper showing that his failure to answer was due to fraud, It’s not this: D1 is being sued for culpa
accident, mistake or excusable negligence and that he has a aquiliana, D2 for collection of sum of money,
meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may D3 for quieting of title. Iba-‐iba diba? Under
be set aside on such terms and conditions as the judge may Section 3C, there is a common cause of
impose in the interest of justice. action against them.
3. Some D’s file their answer while some do not
How to file order of default:
§ How? File a motion to set aside the order of default. Effect: The court shall try the case against all D’s upon the
§ When? At any time after notice thereof and before answers filed (by D’s who answered) and render judgment
the judgment of default. upon the evidence presented.
§ Form of the motion – Must be under oath (verified).
As a general rule, motions need not be The answer of the defendant (like D1 was the only party who
verified and under oath so a motion can be signed by filed an answer) can be used as D2 and D3’s answer because
a counsel. But a motion to lift order of default can be there’s a common cause of action against them. Even if D2
signed by a counsel but it must be verified by the and D3 are declared in default and did not participate in the
party himself. proceedings, they can be benefited from the answer of D1.
§ Grounds: The court will render judgment upon the evidence presented.
a. His failure to answer was due to fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable negligence If the court, after appreciating the evidence, determines that
(FAME) D1 is not liable, the court cannot say that D2 and D3 is liable
b. He has meritorious defense because there’s a common cause of action against them.
It is not enough na may FAME ha. It
must be shown na may meritorious defense. To apply the principle, there must be a common cause of
action. If there is no common cause of action, while there
What is the effect if the motion to lift order of default is may be a trial, the answer of D1 may only for him. After the
granted? trial, D1 might be absolved from liability but the defaulting
The order of default may be set aside on such terms and defendant D2 may be held liable because D1’s answer may
conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice. not apply to D2.

Will he regain his full standing in court? That is not what IMSON vs. CA
Section 3b says. He is not entitled to that. He is only entitled (Bar exam question)
to what the judge may impose in the interest of justice. If the
judge will say “You will regain your standing in court but you Imson was driving a Toyota Corolla. He was bumped
have to do this and that…” So he can regain his standing but by a truck causing injuries to Imson and destroying his car.
there may be conditions as the judge may impose. Just take Imson filed an action for damages against the driver, bus
note that FAME should be the reason why the defendant did owner and insurance company. The insurance company filed
not file his answer. You will not be asked for the particulars of an answer but the driver and owner of the bus did not so
FAME here. You will be asked when we reach Rule 47. they were declared in default.

Section 3C talks about effect of partial default. Can there be Subsequently, Imson and the insurance company
partial default? Yes. What if we have D1, D2 and D3. Only D1 entered into a compromise agreement where he was paid
filed an answer so D2 and D3 can be declared in default. P7,000. The case against the insurance company was
eventually dismissed because of the compromise agreement.
Effect of partial default: When a pleading asserting a claim So the bus company and the driver also filed a motion to
states a common cause of action against several defending dismiss arguing that since they are all indispensable parties
parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, with the same cause of action, the dismissal of the case


against the insurance company should also be likewise result vague because a judgment involving a party declared in
to the dismissal of the case against them. default does not say whether or not there was presentation
of evidence ex-‐parte. We are only talking about the opinion
Issue: Was there a common cause of action against of our legal luminaries.
them? No. What are the causes of action? Culpa aquiliana
under Article 2176 for the driver and culpa aquiliana under Where no defaults allowed: If the defending party in an
Article 2180 for the bus company. Their defenses are action for annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage or
different. The insurance company’s liability is based on the for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the
insurance contract. prosecuting attorney to investigate whether or not a
collusion between the parties exists, and if there is no
Extent of relief to be awarded: A judgment rendered against collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that
a party in default shall not exceed the amount or be different the evidence submitted is not fabricated.
in kind from that prayed for nor award unliquidated damages.
There are cases where despite non-‐filing of an answer, the
We already know that if the defendant does not file a motion defendant cannot be declared in default. These are petitions
to lift the order of default… or even if he files and the judge for
is not persuaded of the presence of FAME or that he has a § Annulment
meritorious defense, then the judgment of default may be § Declaration of nullity of marriage
rendered. § Legal separation
In these cases, you do not file a motion to declare the
Unliquidated damages cannot be awarded because the other defendant in default.
party must be given an opportunity to rebut the allegations
regarding the amount of damages. But in a judgment of What if D failed to file an answer? Can he be declared in
default, the plaintiff is allowed to present evidence ex-‐parte default?
so siya lang. That’s why it’s better for the plaintiff not to have The court shall order the prosecuting attorney to investigate
the defendant declared in default. whether or not a collusion between the parties exist.

Why is it that we have Section 3D? Why can’t a judgment of January 30, 2015
default exceed the amount of the relief prayed for? What are
the two reasons why the defendant did not file an answer? 1. DIAZ vs. DIAZ
He deliberately did not file an answer because he knows that
he will not win the case. Wala talaga siyang defense. 2. He After the motion to dismiss was dismissed, Diaz filed
may have a meritorious answer but he was not able to file an a petition for certiorari. So the plaintiffs filed a motion to
answer because of FAME. declare them in default. Was the motion granted? So they
were already declared in default and the plaintiffs were
What if his reason for not filing is the first one? That is the allowed to present evidence ex parte. What did they do after
reason why this rule came about so that the defendant can the defendants were declared in default? They filed a motion
choose whether or not to participate in the proceedings. If he for reconsideration. Is that the proper procedure?
is okay with what the plaintiff is asking for, then he will not
file an answer na because he is oaky with what the plaintiff is What should the defendant do if declared in default?
asking and he knows the amount na. If we didn’t have this, File a motion to lift order of default. Here, the defendants did
there’s a possibility that the court will award more to the not follow the rules. They filed an MR so another petition for
plaintiff so kawawa naman si defendant. For damages, again, certiorari. Is that how a civil complaint prosper? No, follow
this is the same with our discussion under Rule 8 on the rules. The rule under Section 9 is you can file a motion to
unliquidated damages. The only thing that the court can dismiss. If it is denied, file your answer within the balance of
award are liquidated damages – those already fixed by the the period. If not, you can be declared in default. If you are
agreement of the parties. declared in default, you file a motion to lift order of default.
The procedure they followed was not proper. Therefore, the
According to Justice Herrera, the exception on unliquidated court was correct in declaring them in default.
damages will not apply when the court requires the plaintiff
to present ex-‐parte. If the court requires the plaintiff to VIRON vs. PANTRANCO
present evidence on the damages he is asking for, then the
court should award the unliquidated damages. This is quite


What is the ground for declaring the defendant in If he did not know of the judgment rendered against
default? Failure to file an answer. You have to distinguish him within the 15-‐day period, he can file a petition for relief
between “as in default” and “default.” One can only be under Rule 38. The period there is longer. This can only be
declared in default if he fails to file an answer. What availed of if he did not know the judgment. In this case, it was
happened in this case was that the defendant failed to clear that the defendants knew of the judgment so it became
appear during the pre-‐trial. Before the 1997 Rules, if you final.
failed to appear, you can be declared as in default and not
really in default. Parang in default lang but they removed that Certiorari can only be availed of if there is grave
already. That’s no longer included in Rule 18. abuse of discretion on the part of the court and there is no
other speedy xxx. If he failed to avail of the petition for relief,
My point is: If at the time when the declaration “as he cannot file a petition for certiorari.
in default” can be done, the remedy is not to file a motion to
lift order of default. The default was not really in default but ACANCE vs. CA
only as in default. This means na wala ka during sa trial so you
cannot participate. There will still be trial on the merits of the Take note that one can only be declared in default if
case. It will be an ex-‐parte hearing but only for that day. he does not file an answer within 15 days from service of
Tomorrow, on the next hearing, if he appears, he can summons. When you talk of service of summons, it has to be
participate again. proper. The Acances here are residents of a foreign country
and the proper way of serving summons is extra-‐territorial. In
Unlike when he is declared in default, he loses his this case, they were not served summons extra-‐territorially.
standing his court unless he filed a motion to lift order of Therefore, the period for filing an answer never started to
default. Again, the point of this case is: One can only be run. Thus, they cannot be declared in default.
declared in default if he does not file an answer. In this case,
the defendant filed an answer. He did not attend the pre-‐trial February 4, 2015
hearings and the remedy is under Rule 18 not under Rule 9.
SABLAS vs. SABLAS
OOAMINAL vs. CASTILLO
There are three principles in this case:
Take note that a court can only declare a defendant 1. If there is no motion, there can be no declaration
in default if he fails to file an answer. The thing is the answer of default.
was admitted. Take note that the motion to declare 2. If there is no motion to declare defendant in
defendant in default is discretionary upon the court. So, the default, the answer can still be admitted even if
court can either deny the motion or grant the motion. By not filed on time.
admitting the answer filed late, that is tantamount to denying In practice, if an answer or anything
the motion to declare the defendant in default. The court can is filed in court, the one who will receive the
no longer turn around and say that “Ay o nga pala late ang answer but the receiving clerk, not the clerk
answer.” of court or the judge. Ilagay niya lang
diretso sa records. He will not look at the file
CEREZO vs. TUAZON kung kelan naserve ang summons, etc. Even
if the answer was filed 10 days late, as long
A defendant declared in default before judgment of as there is no motion to declarate the
default can file a motion to lift order of default on the ground defendant in default, then the defendant
of FAME and meritorious defense. What if the defendant did cannot be declared in default. The
not file a motion to lift the order of default? Of course, he will important thing: the time and date.
lose the case and the judgment will be rendered against him. 3. A declaration of default can no longer be made if
Before the judgment will become final (within 15 days from the answer is already admitted.
the receipt of the judgement), he can file a motion for new Admitted – there is already a stamp
trial on the ground of FAME so that he will be allowed to by the receiving clerk that the answer was
present evidence. Aside from a motion for new trial, he can received.
appeal the judgment. This time, he is not asking to present
evidence but to file memorandum, brief, etc. This is better UNITED OVERSEAS BANK vs. ROSEMOOR
because he will no longer present evidence.


Annulment of foreclosure sale and annulment of real What the plaintiff filed was a motion for reception of
estate mortgage – same thing daw. The judge did not grant evidence ex-‐parte. This was allowed by the court. It’s as if
an additional relief in doing so. It’s a very simple case. that the defendant was declared in default. The SC here said
that no that is wrong. You follow the procedure – you do not
From the FT of the case: In the same breadth, go directly to reception of evidence. One must file a motion
Overseas Bank cannot contend that it was denied its day in to declare a defendant in default first and the court will then
court when it was declared in default for such was the legal order the reception of evidence ex-‐parte. The court here did
and logical consequence of its obstinate refusal to file an not follow the proper procedure, therefore PNOC should not
Answer despite the Bulacan RTC’s directive. Undeniably, have been allowed to present evidence ex-‐parte because
when Overseas Bank deliberately opted to file a Motion for Santos was not declared in default. There was no motion.
Reconsideration of the Order dated 13 May 2002, of the
Bulacan RTC denying its Motion to Dismiss, instead of filing DAVID vs. JUDGE FRUELDA
an Answer, it assumed the risk of losing its standing in court
and it cannot simply excuse itself from the adverse Take note that when you allege fraud, accident,
consequence of its chosen procedural course. mistake or excusable negligence, you have to allege that with
particularity. In this case, the fame was not even mentioned.
MONZON vs. RELOVA When you file a motion to lift or set aside a order of default,
the motion must be verified and make allegations that you
Default is only declared when the defendant fails to were not able to file your answer because of FAME. You have
file a responsive pleading. But there are still other instances to particularize the FAME. You don’t even have to make a
when the party may feel the effects of default – meaning as long story about the fraud, etc. Show the court that you have
in default – parang in default. a meritorious defense. Show the defenses that could actually
rebut the allegations in the complaint.
According to Justice Regalado, the effects of default
are followed only in three instances: (1) when there is an A motion to lift order of default should not be a one-‐
actual default for failure to file a responsive pleading; (2) page motion wherein you will just copy Rule 9, Section 3B.
failure to appear in the pre-‐trial conference; and (3) refusal to Here, there were so many defects in the motion – it was
comply with modes of discovery under the circumstance in unverified and no allegations of meritorious defense. If one
Sec. 3(c), Rule 29. receives a motion to declare him in default, the defendant
can file an opposition before he is declared in default. He can
Failure to appear during the scheduled trial date is allege the FAME and the meritorious defense. Unfortunately,
not one of the instances wherein the party will feel the David did not include it in his opposition that is why he was
effects of default. If one does not appear, the other party can declared in default.
present evidence. You are not there so you cannot object. In
this case, there was an ex-‐parte presentation of evidence. We From the FT of the case: The motion was not under
will discuss more of this when we reach the other rules. oath. There was no allegation that petitioner’s failure to file
an Answer or any responsive pleading was due to fraud,
From the FT of the case: In the case at bar, petitioner accident, mistake, or excusable negligence. Petitioner merely
had not failed to file her answer. Neither was notice sent to stated that declarations of default are frowned upon, that he
petitioner that she would be defaulted, or that the effects of should be given the opportunity to present evidence in the
default shall be imposed upon her. “Mere non-‐appearance of interest of substantial justice, and that he has meritorious
defendants at an ordinary hearing and to adduce evidence defenses. Unfortunately, his claim that he has meritorious
does not constitute default, when they have already filed defenses is unsubstantiated. He did not even state what
their answer to the complaint within the reglementary evidence he intends to present if his motion is granted.
period. It is error to default a defendant after the answer had
already been filed. It should be borne in mind that the policy BDO vs. TANSIPEK
of the law is to have every litigant’s case tried on the merits
as much as possible; it is for this reason that judgments by After a party is declared in default, you do not file a
default are frowned upon.” motion for reconsideration of the order. The remedy is to file
a motion to set aside the order of default under Section 3B.
SANTOS vs. PNOC So the procedure taken here was wrong from the very
beginning.


From the FT of the case: Respondent Tansipek’s stopped to wait for the answer. The case will continue. That’s
remedy against the Order of Default was erroneous from the how it is in these cases.
very beginning. Respondent Tansipek should have filed a
Motion to Lift Order of Default, and not a Motion for But in this case, she did not file an answer but only a
Reconsideration, pursuant to Section 3(b), Rule 9 of the motion to dismiss contending the lack of jurisdiction of the
Rules of Court. A Motion to Lift Order of Default is different RTC over the complaint for declaration of nullity. According
from an ordinary motion in that the Motion should be to her, the jurisdiction belongs to the Sharia Court. Even if the
verified; and must show fraud, accident, mistake or excusable motion was filed, the case will continue. If she wanted to be
neglect, and meritorious defenses. The allegations of (1) heard, then she should have participated. Now, she is
fraud, accident, mistake or excusable neglect, and (2) of contending that she was denied due process.
meritorious defenses must concur.
From the FT of the case: However, she opted to file,
SAN PEDRO vs. HEIRS OF ENAÑO on April 10, 2001, a ‘Motion to Dismiss,’ instead of filing an
Answer to the complaint. The filing of said motion suspended
The mistake here was committed by the court by the period for her to file her Answer to the complaint. Until
denying the motion to withdraw, the motion to dismiss, the said motion is resolved by the Respondent Court with finality,
motion to admit answer and granting the motion to declare it behooved the Respondent Court to suspend the hearings
defendant in default in the same order at the same time. of the case on the merits. The Respondent Court, on April 19,
2001, issued its Order denying the ‘Motion to Dismiss’ of the
What the court should have done is to declare the Petitioner. Under Section 6, Rule 16 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
defendant in default first and admit the answer OR admit the Procedure [now Section 4], the Petitioner had the balance of
answer and not declare the defendant in default – not rule on the period provided for in Rule 11 of the said Rules but in no
both of them at the same time. Even if the defendant filed case less than five (5) days computed from service on her of
the answer late, he was waiting for the ruling of the court the aforesaid Order of the Respondent Court within which to
with respect to the motion to dismiss which never came. file her Answer to the complaint: x x x41 (Emphasis supplied.)

From the FT of the case: Petitioner correctly points Estrellita obviously misappreciated Macias. All we
out that the rule is that a defendant's answer should be pronounced therein is that the trial court is mandated to
admitted where it is filed before a declaration of default and suspend trial until it finally resolves the motion to dismiss
no prejudice is caused to the plaintiff. Indeed, where the that is filed before it. Nothing in the above excerpt states
answer is filed beyond the reglementary period but before that the trial court should suspend its proceedings should the
the defendant is declared in default and there is no showing issue of the propriety or impropriety of the motion to dismiss
that defendant intends to delay the case, the answer should be raised before the appellate courts.
be admitted.
OTERO vs. ROGER TAN
In the case at bar, it is inconsequential that the trial (2012)
court declared petitioner in default on the same day that
petitioner filed its Answer. As reflected above, the trial court What can be appelaed? Is it the order of default or
slept on petitioner’s Motion to Dismiss for almost a year, just the judgment by default? The judgment of default. The order
as it also slept on respondents’ Motion to Declare petitioner of default is interlocutory. If a defendant is declared in
in Default. It was only when petitioner filed a Motion to default, the remedy is file a motion to set aside the order of
Withdraw Motion to Dismiss and to Admit Answer that it default. If it is granted, he can present evidence. Therefore,
denied the Motion to Dismiss, and acted on/granted the court will see both sides and render a decision.
respondents’ Motion to Declare petitioner in Default. This is
procedurally unsound. What if the defendant was declared in default and he
did not file a motion to lift order of default and a judgment of
JULIANO-‐LLAVE vs. RP default was rendered against him? What is his remedy? He
can file a motion for new trial wherein he can be allowed to
In actions for annulment for annulment of marriage, present evidence. But if he does not file a motion for new
declaration of nullity of marriage and legal separation, the trial and he appeals, then he can do so. But he cannot appeal
defendant cannot be declared in default even if he did not file the order of default. He can only appeal the judgment by
an answer. But it doesn’t mean that the case will be stalled or default.


What is the judgment? The judgment is dependent pleading, irrespective of whether the motion for its
on what the plaintiff presented. If he appeals, he can no admission, if necessary, is denied by the court. (6a)
longer present his own evidence. He can only question the
propriety of the judgment – whether or not the court erred in Under Rule 1, Section 5, let’s say in the complaint, it is stated
rendering the judgment. That is why it is important for a X vs. Y and it was filed on June 10. An amended complaint
defendant declared in default to ensure that he can present was filed wherein X wanted to included Z so X vs. Y and Z on
evidence by filing a motion to lift order of default or file a June 15. As to Y, the complaint was filed on June 10. But
motion for new trial. Otherwise, if he files an appeal, he can there’s no retroactive effect for amendment. Meaning, the
only question the judgment but not present evidence. amended complaint will not make Z a defendant on June 10.
The complaint against Z was only filed on June 15.
RULE 10: Amended and Supplemental Pleadings Amendments are prospective. They don’t have retroactive
effects.
Section 1. Amendments in general. — Pleadings may be
amended by adding or striking out an allegation or the name What is the policy of the law on amendments?
of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a Amendments to pleadings are favored and should be liberally
party or a mistaken or inadequate allegation or description allowed in order to:
in any other respect, so that the actual merits of the a. determine every case as far as possible on its actual
controversy may speedily be determined, without regard to merits without regard to technicalities
technicalities, and in the most expeditious and inexpensive b. speed up the trial of case
manner. (1) c. prevent unnecessary expenses

How Pleadings are Amended Here in Civil Procedure, we talk about technicalities. We are
1. By adding or striking out: not talking about the merits of the case but don’t forget that
§ an allegation, or the substantive issues are really more important than the
§ the name of any party, or technicalities of the procedure. The right to amend one’s
pleading is a technicality. It doesn’t have to do with the
2. By correcting: substantive aspects. But if the amendment is very
§ a mistake In the name of the party substantial, then of course it should be allowed.
§ a mistaken or inadequate allegation or
description Section 2. Amendments as a matter of right. — A party may
amend his pleading once as a matter of right at any time
Let’s say in paragraph 1 of the complaint, it says that the before a responsive pleading is served or, in the case of a
plaintiff is of legal age and a resident of No. 5, Sta. Ana reply, at any time within ten (10) days after it is served. (2a)
Avenue, Davao city. So what if the address is actually the
address of the defendant? He can amend it. If there’s a Even if the courts should be liberal in accepting amendments,
missing number, he can add it. If the name is wrong, he can amendments are not allowed 100% of the time. There are
correct it. amendments which are a matter of right as provided by
Section 2. According to it, a party may amend his pleading
Why is amendment allowed? once as a matter of right at any time before a responsive
So that the actual merits of the case be speedily determined pleading is served or, in the case of a reply, at any time within
without regard to technicalities in the most expeditious and ten (10) days after it is served.
practical manner.
How many times may a party amend his pleading as a matter
Take note that amendment has no retroactive effect. As a of right? Only once.
matter of fact, before reaching rule 10, there are provisions
where amendments have already been touched upon, one of How many times may a party amend his pleading? As many
which is Rule 1, Section 5: Commencement of action. times as the court will allow him. This means that the second
Section 5. Commencement of action. — A civil action amendment must be with leave of court – motion to file
is commenced by the filing of the original complaint second amendment. The first amendment is a matter of right
in court. If an additional defendant is impleaded in a but it must be filed before the responsive pleading is filed.
later pleading, the action is commenced with regard
to him on the dated of the filing of such later Refer to our example earlier: The complaint was filed on June
10, the amended complaint was filed on June 15. Is the


amendment on June 15 a matter of right? What do you mean
by “amendment as a matter of right?” Yes. Before the Except as provided in the Section 2 (meaning as long as the
answer is served on the plaintiff. Do you think the plaintiff on responsive pleading is not yet served), substantial
June 15 already has the answer of the defendant? For as long amendments may be made only upon leave of court. But that
as the plaintiff does not receive the answer of the defendant, is an exception. As a general rule, substantial amendments
he can amend. must be made upon leave of court.

There are times when the plaintiff is in Davao and the “But such leave may be refused if it appears to the court that
defendant is in Manila. Let’s say the complaint was filed on the motion was made with intent to delay.”
June 10, it was served via registered mail. The answer was Again, when you ask for a leave of court, the court has the
mailed by the defendant on July 10 – one month after. The discretion whether to grant your motion or not.
plaintiff decides to amend his complaint in July 11 but he did
not yet receive the answer of the defendant on the said date. “Orders of the court upon the matters provided in this
Is the amendment still a matter of right? Yes. Even though section shall be made upon motion filed in court, and after
the defendant has already filed, the counting is not from the notice to the adverse party, and an opportunity to be heard.”
time of filing but of the service. So if the plaintiff has not yet You have to file a motion for a leave of court before you can
received the answer, he can still amend. file an amended pleading. You also need to notify the parties.
There must be a hearing on the motion.
This is the same with reply. The defendant can amend his
answer for as long as there is no reply. Reply is optional ha. Don’t forget that when it comes to substantial amendments,
Let’s say that on August 10, the defendant filed his answer. the general rule is that it can only be made when there is a
Let’s say November na, can the defendant amend his answer leave of court. The only exception is before the responsive
as a matter of right? Yes because the reply has not yet been pleading is served.
served. But in cases of a reply, if you want to amend it, you
have to amend it within 10 days from service of reply of the To put it differently, substantial amendment is:
defendant. You have to look at the date the defendant 1. A matter of right
received your reply. 2. A matter of judicial discretion

When a pleading may be amended as a matter of right: Steps:
1. Complaint by P – before the answer is served 1. File a motion
2. Answer by D – before the reply is served 2. Serve a copy to the adverse party
3. Reply by P – within 10 days from service of Reply 3. Hearing on the motion must be scheduled
to D
Ground for the court to deny the motion for leave to file
What type of amendment may be made as a matter of right? amendment: If the court feels that the purpose for the
Both formal and substantial. amendment is to delay the proceedings.

Let’s say on June 10, X filed a complaint for sum of money We already know that courts must be liberal in granting
against Y. On June 15, he changes everything. He changes the amendments. However, there are limitations or exceptions to
amount, the dates, interest rates, etc. Can he do that? Yes. It the liberal policy in allowing amendments:
is a substantial amendment and he can do it as a matter of 1. When the purpose of the amendment is to delay
right for as long as he did not receive the answer of the the proceedings (Section 1)
defendant. 2. When the amendment is for the purpose of
making the complaint confer jurisdiction upon
Section 3. Amendments by leave of court. — Except as the court
provided in the next preceding section, substantial 3. When the amendment is for the purpose of
amendments may be made only upon leave of court. But curing a premature or non-‐existing cause of
such leave may be refused if it appears to the court that the action
motion was made with intent to delay. Orders of the court
upon the matters provided in this section shall be made Can you amend your complaint if it does not state a cause of
upon motion filed in court, and after notice to the adverse action? Yes. Let’s say you have a complaint and you have your
party, and an opportunity to be heard. (3a) narration. You realize that you failed to mention the violation.


I have a cause of action but I did not state it properly so I can A formal amendment can be done anytime but the
amend my complaint. requirement under section: That no prejudice is caused
thereby to adverse party.
Failure to state a cause of action is different from non-‐
existent cause of action. A non-‐existent cause of action is no Section 5. Amendment to conform to or authorize
cause of action in the first place. There is yet no delict or presentation of evidence. — When issues not raised by the
wrong commited by the defendant (Limpangco vs. pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of
Mercado). For example, D borrowed money from P payable the parties they shall be treated in all respects as if they had
on August 2015. D, apparently went to Hong Kong to work as been raised in the pleadings. Such amendment of the
a domestic helper and she came back here for a vacation pleadings as may be necessary to cause them to conform to
lang. When P found out, he said na he will file a case na the evidence and to raise these issues may be made upon
against D kay baka mawala na tomorrow. So he filed a case motion of any party at any time, even after judgment; but
today, February 4, 2015. He said na in case D will not come failure to amend does not effect the result of the trial of
back from Hong Kong, he must pay his debt of P1M. There’s these issues. If evidence is objected to at the trial on the
no cause of action noh. Can it be cured by amendment? No. It ground that it is not within the issues made by the
is not curable by amendment. pleadings, the court may allow the pleadings to be amended
and shall do so with liberality if the presentation of the
It’s different in cases involving Imperfect cause of action. A merits of the action and the ends of substantial justice will
delict or wrong has already been committed and alleged in be subserved thereby. The court may grant a continuance to
the complaint, but the cause of action is incomplete (Alto enable the amendment to be made. (5a)
Surety vs. Aguilar). It is curable by amendment.
This is the important provision here – Rule 10, Section 5.
Section 4. Formal amendments. — A defect in the Remember Rule 9, Section 1?
designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded. —
typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a
court at any stage of the action, at its initiative or on motion, motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed
provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the adverse waived. Xxx
party. (4a)
Under R9S1, this means that you cannot raise the objections
Formal amendments that may summarily be corrected by the or defenses anymore. But look at Section 5, the first sentence
court at its initiative or on motion: says: When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with
1. Defects in the designation of the parties the express or implied consent of the parties, they shall be
2. Other clerical errors treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the
pleadings.
When may the court summarily correct said errors? At any
stage of the action. May issues not raised in the pleadings be raised in court
during trial?
You know lawyers love to cut and paste. It happens to me all Absolutely not. General rule: (Rule 9, Section 1) No because
the time like I place “Counsel for the accused” tapos yun defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to
pala, civil case. This can be corrected by the court. Clerical dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived.
errors can be corrected at any stage of the action at its
initiative. Pwede motu proprio or upon motion. What if same issues are raised without the objection of the
other party? When you become lawyers, you should know the
In your notes, there are examples of substantial amendments rules. For example, P filed an action for sum of money against
and formal amendments. Now, I don’t want to go through D. Now D in his answer said that “I did not borrow money
them one by one because we’re pressed by time. Just take from him. I don’t know him.” That’s all D said in his defense.
note of what jurisprudence says about amendments. We will Now what if during trial, D somehow produces a receipt that
not discuss what are substantial and formal because it will he already paid the loan and P’s lawyer did not object? The
require us to go to the merits of the case. What is important lawyer of P should have raised an objection by saying that the
for me is that you know the rule – when a formal amendment said defense has already been waived. He did not raise it in
or substantial amendment can be made. his answer or motion to dismiss. He cannot present evidence
on payment because he did not raise it in the answer. BUT
Section 5 of Rule 10 says:


Exception: (Rule 10, Section 5) When issues not raised by the the presentation of the merits of the action and the ends of
pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the substantial justice will be subserved thereby.” In other
parties they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been words, parang nabalewala na ang Rule 9, Section 1. It’s not
raised in the pleadings. the end of the world if you fail to raise your defenses or
objections because we have Rule 10, Section 5. But take note
What will you do after raising the defense of payment? You that this is not a matter of right. It depends on the court
amend your pleading to conform with what was raised. discretion. If the court deems that to allow the amendment
Amend the pleading to include the payment. The rule would serve the ends of substantial justice, then yes. If not,
provides that “Such amendment of the pleadings as may be then sorry.
necessary to cause them to conform to the evidence and to
raise these issues may be made upon motion of any party at “The court may grant a continuance to enable the
any time xxx” amendment to be made.”
The court may say “Oh sige defendant, I’m giving you time to
The defendant was able to present the receipt that can prove amend your answer.” Even if the plaintiff’s lawyer objected.
payment. He can file the motion to amend his answer to
include the defense of payment. When can he file the Two possible scenarios when the issues not raised in the
motion? At any time, even after judgment. He just wants to pleading are presented during trial:
make his pleading conform to the evidence that he 1. The opposing party does not object so he is deemed
presented. to have given his consent
2. The opposing party objects to the issues being raised
“…but failure to amend does not effect the result of the trial using Rule 9, Section 1 as a ground
of these issues.”
st
What if he does not file a motion to amend his pleading? Does 1 scenario: When the opposing party does not object during
it mean that the defense of payment raised during trial will be the trial when D presents an issue that was not raised in his
deleted? No. It does not affect the result of the trial. The answer, the remedy of D is to file a motion for leave of court
defense of payment will be appreciated by the court. to amend his answer so that it will conform to the evidence
presented. The period to file the motion is any time even
Two kinds of amendment under Rule 10, Section 5 after the judgment. The effect is that the issues presented
1. Amendment to authorize presentation of evidence shall be treated as though they have been raised in the
2. Amendment to conform to evidence presented pleading. What is the effect of failure to amend? It does not
(Meaning the evidence has already been affect the result of the trial on the issues.
presented without objections from the
other party) 2nd scenario: If the opposing party objects… The effect is that
it depends upon the court. It may allow the defendant to
Amendment to authorize presentation of evidence amend the pleadings and it shall do so with liberality. The
Scenario: A certain issue was not raised by D in his answer or court can always say “sustained” after nag-‐object si plaintiff’s
motion to dismiss. lawyer. This means that sorry nalang si defendant, Rule 9
Remedy of D: He may file a motion for leave of court to Section 1 will prevail. If the court does not see any need to
amend his answer so that he may present said issue during allow the amendment, then it can sustain the objections.
the trial. He can file that in order to present the issue during Section 5 of Rule 10 does not give the defendant to raise
the trial – not after the judgment. issues again. The ground must be so persuasive. The court
must be persuaded.
What if the adverse party does not oppose this motion for
leave of court to amend his answer? According to the What happens the court orders the amendment? The court
provision, the court may grant the motion and D may amend may grant continuance.
his answer and such defense may be treated as though they
have been raised in the pleading. Section 6. Supplemental pleadings. — Upon motion of a
party the court may, upon reasonable notice and upon such
Let’s say the plaintiff’s lawyer objected to the presentation of terms as are just, permit him to serve a supplemental
the evidence of payment…Section 5 provides that “If pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences or events
evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not which have happened since the date of the pleading sought
within the issues made by the pleadings, the court may allow to be supplemented. The adverse party may plead thereto
the pleadings to be amended and shall do so with liberality if within ten (10) days from notice of the order admitting the


supplemental pleading. (6a) pleadings that stand by side by side. To make the allegations
complete, you have the original complaint and the
This is different from amendments. What if during the trial, supplemental pleading.
something happens that is related to the trial… It’s like in
your Crim Pro, supervening events. The party involved may As to filing of amended complaint, it could be a matter of
file a motion for leave of court to file a supplemental right or judicial discretion. It depends on the period that it is
pleading. filed. It depends if it is formal or substantial. But a
supplemental pleading is always a matter of judicial
Procedure in filing supplemental pleading” discretion.
1. File a motion for leave of court to file supplemental
pleading Let’s go to the rules of filing.
2. Serve a copy of the motion on the adverse party
3. Hearing on the motion Rules applicable to 1st distinction: Amended pleading (Rule 1,
4. File supplemental pleading within 10 days from the Section 10)
order admitting the same (Motion is granted) Situation: The pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a
cross-‐claim
There are two filing here ha: File the motion and if granted, Effect: He may set up the counterclaim or cross-‐claim by
you can file the supplemental pleading. A supplemental amendment
pleading is never a matter of right. It must always have leave When it can be done: Before judgment
of court. Unlike amendments, you can file amendments as a Pre-‐requisite: Leave of court
matter of right before the responsive pleading is served. But Grounds to be involved:
a supplemental pleading must be filed always with leave of § Failure was through oversight, inadvertence, or
court. excusable neglect; or
§ Justice requires it
When may the court allow the filing of a supplemental
pleading? P vs. D. D files an answer but he fails to include his
Upon such terms as are just. Any reason under the sun that compulsory counterclaim. The rule is that if it is not set up, it
the court deems just. is barred. Can D amend his answer to include the
counterclaim as a matter of right? Can he do that? Let’s say he
A pleading cannot be considered a supplemental pleading if it files his answer on August 8. Yes, provided he does not
does not involve transactions, occurrences or events which receive the reply from the plaintiff.
have happened since the day the pleading sought to be
supplemental. Under Rule 11, Section 10: Even if he fails to do so within that
period before he receives the reply… Let’s say on the 15th day
What must be contained in the pleadings? he receives the reply of the plaintiff and he realized na he has
Transactions, occurrences or events which have happened a compulsory counterclaim, is that the end for him because
after the filing of the complaint. he was not able to amend his answer as a matter of right? No.
R11S10 provides that he may set up the counterclaim or cross-‐
An amended pleading supersedes the original pleading. claim by amendment. He is only barred from filing a separate
Illustration: On June 10, the complaint is X vs. Y and the action but if the proceeding is still taking place, he can amend
allegations are only as regards Y. On June 15, Z is included as his answer to include the counterclaim or the cross-‐claim. He
defendant. Should X forget the allegations as to Y? Of course can do this before judgment. But there must be a leave of
no. He must include it in his amended pleading. If he only court because it is not a matter of right. He already received
puts there in his amended complaint against Z, then Y the reply.
disappears in the complaint because the amended complaint
will supersede the old complaint. That’s why diba – the court So if you fail to file your cross-‐claim or counterclaim with the
will not talk about the original complaint anymore but the answer, the rule is that you can still file an amended answer
amendment complaint. with counterclaim before you received the reply. If the reply
has been served upon you, you can still file an amended
If you have a supplemental pleading, you only raise the answer as long as you file a motion for leave of court to
transactions, events or occurrences which happened only amend your answer and this is granted by the court.
after the pleading was filed. So, in addition lang to the
allegations of the original complaint. So there are two What about supplemental pleading?


Situation: A counter claim or cross-‐claim either: pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends. However,
§ Matured or admissions in superseded pleadings may be received in
§ acquired by a party evidence against the pleader, and claims or defenses alleged
When it happened: After serving his therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be
pleading deemed waived.
Effect: He may present said counterclaim or
cross-‐claim by supplemental pleading Let’s recap what we have learned:
When it can be done: Before judgment § An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that
it amends (original pleading)
Let’s say P filed a complaint against D. D filed his answer on § Admissions in superseded (original) pleadings may
August 8. On September 8, P filed a reply. Suddenly, there be received in evidence against the pleader
arose an action for cross-‐claim or counterclaim. Siguro may Let’s say in the answer of D, he made an
nag-‐mature na loan, whatever. But it happened after he filed admission “Yes, I borrowed money but
his answer. According to Rule 11, Section 9: He may present already paid the plaintiff.” But then he filed
said counterclaim or cross-‐claim by supplemental pleading. an amended answer and he says that “I
So instead of an amended answer, he can file a supplemental never borrowed money from the pleading.”
answer setting up his cross-‐claim or counterclaim but again But since he already said otherwise in this
there must be leave of court. original pleading, that can be used as an
evidence against him.
This time, if he files a supplement, there must be leave of § Claims and defenses alleged in the original pleading
court. Look at this situation: He filed his answer on August 8. but not incorporated in the amended pleading shall
His counterclaim matured on August 10. What can he do? He be deemed waived
can file an amended answer – iinclude na niya lahat because
when he filed his amended answer with counterclaim, February 11, 2015
nagmature na eh – he already has a cause of action. He does
not need the permission of the court. He does not have to file LEONARDO ANDRES vs. SERAFIN CUEVAS
a motion because he is not filing a supplemental answer but
an amended answer because it is still a matter of right. The CNFS was defective because only one of the
petitioners signed it. It was filed on March 27. What is the
But if he files a supplemental answer because tanga siya for effect if the CNFS is defective? It is a ground of dismissal. You
not knowing that he can file an amended answer, then he have to relate Rule 7, Section 5 and its effects and other rules.
cannot file a supplemental answer without asking permission Under Rule 10, Section 2, you can amend your pleading as a
from court. matter of right provided you do that before the service of the
responsive pleading.
If it’s a matter of right, mag-‐amended answer talaga but if it
is already way beyond the period, meaning he received the Here, we have a petition filed on March 27 and on
reply for the plaintiff, he has to go through the process of March 30, an amended petition was filed. Obviously, any
filing a motion for leave of court to file supplemental responsive pleading could not have been received by that
pleading (answer.) It can be done before judgment. time. So despite the fact that the CNFS was defective, it could
still be amended because of Rule 10. The court has to accept
Section 7. Filing of amended pleadings. — When any that because it is a matter of right.
pleading is amended, a new copy of the entire pleading,
incorporating the amendments, which shall be indicated by A party may amend his pleading once whether a new
appropriate marks, shall be filed. (7a) cause of action or change of theories… as a matter of right.
As long as it is within the period provided under Section 2.
Take note: A new copy of the entire pleading incorporating
the amendments. You have to repeat everything that you NOCUM vs. TAN
wrote in the original pleading and then you put the
amendments. If it’s a matter of right, no need because the Is the amendment formal or substantial? Formal.
court will just ignore the first pleading. Was the amended here a matter of right? Matter of judicial
discretion. Since it is no longer a matter of right, can a formal
Section 8. Effect of amended pleadings. — An amended amendment be made without leave of court?


If you look at Section 3: Except as provided in the his pleading whether a new cause of action or change in
next preceding section, substantial amendments may be theory is introduced. Again, the motion is not the responsive
made only upon leave of court. What if it’s a formal pleading contemplated under the law.
amendment? Can you amend without leave of court? If you
(plaintiff) want to make a formal amendment after the From the FT of the case: Rule 10, Section 2 clearly
complaint has been served, can you just amend? shows that before the filing of any responsive pleading, a
party has the absolute right to amend his pleading,
In other words, no motion for leave of court is regardless of whether a new cause of action or change in
required before the responsive pleading is served. After the theory is introduced. It is settled that a motion to dismiss is
responsive pleading, there must be a motion. Both formal not the responsive pleading contemplated by the Rule.
and substantial amendments need motion after the receipt Records show that petitioners had not yet filed a responsive
of the responsive pleading. The court will now determine, pleading to the original complaint in Civil Case No. 371. What
upon the filing of the motion, if the amendment is formal or they filed was a motion to dismiss. It follows that
substantial. If it is formal, the court may lax in granting or respondent, as a plaintiff, may file an amended complaint
allowing the amendment to be made at any age. If it is even after the original complaint was ordered dismissed,
substantial, specially if it tries to confer jurisdiction upon a provided that the order of dismissal is not yet final, as in this
court which originally did not have one… But in this case, the case.
court has jurisdiction. It’s just a question of venue.
BIGLANG AWA vs. PTC
From the FT of the case: Petitioners argue that they
filed, as a matter of right pursuant to Section 2 of Rule 10 in If the amendment is substantial, the court does have
relation to Section 2 of Rule 1 of the Rules of Court, their to grant the motion for leave of court to admit amendment.
Amended Petition containing a new verification and Of course, we have this liberal policy but in this case, what
certification of non-‐forum shopping signed by all of them was the reason why the amendment was denied? It altered
within the reglementary period under Section 4 of Rule 65 of the causes of action.
the Rules of Court. Petitioners’ argument is well-‐taken.
When can you alter the cause of action? Before the
Under this provision (R10S2), a party is given the responsive pleading is served. If you do that after, the
right to file an amended pleading within the time and upon defendant already answered the complaint based on your
the conditions specified and without the necessity of complaint… Even though there is a liberal policy, the court
obtaining leave of court since a party may amend his pleading has discretion to deny the motion. Here, the SC said that the
once, whether a new cause of action or change in theory is RTC decided not to allow the amendment because it is
introduced, as a matter of right at any time before a substantial.
responsive pleading is served.
LIMBAUAN vs. ACOSTA
BAUTISTA vs. MAYA-‐MAYA COTTAGES
If you noticed, even if amendment is a matter of
Remember the list of pleadings under Rule 6. A right, normally the lawyers would still file a motion to admit
motion is not a pleading. Therefore, as long as the responsive amended complaint. Just to show respect to the court. This is
pleading has not been served upon the party amending, then a way of escaping humungous docket fees.
he can amend his pleading as a matter of right. In this case,
there was already a motion to dismiss. There was a dismissa. From the FT of the case: Moreover, upon the advice
The dismissal becomes final after 15 days. of the MTC, respondent sent another demand letter dated
March 7, 1996 to petitioner, this time giving the latter fifteen
If the ground for dismissal is failure to state cause of (15) days within which to vacate the subject property and
action, it’s very easy to amend the pleading to make it state a when petitioner still refused, respondent was compelled to
cause of action. Before the end of the 15-‐day period, one can file a Motion to Approve Attached Amended Complaint. The
file an amended complaint. said motion was rightly granted by the MTC in accordance
with Section 2, Rule 10 of the Revised Rules of Court.
In this case, there was a motion to admit amended
complaint. That’s fine. Even though it’s a matter of right… Under this provision, a party has the absolute right
The court here admitted the amended complaint. The SC said to amend his pleading whether a new cause of action or
yes. The SC said that the party has absolute right to amend change in theory is introduced, at any time before the filing


of any responsive pleading. Undoubtedly, when respondent trial court must have acquired jurisdiction over the case in the
filed his Amended Complaint on May 16, 1996, no responsive first instance.
pleading had yet been filed by petitioner, thus, the MTC
validly admitted the said amended complaint. PPA vs. WG&A

SPOUSES TIRONA vs. JUDGE ALEJO Can you amend your complaint twice, thrice or
more? Sure. Just file a motion for leave of court to admit the
Take note that if it is ejectment case, you have to amendment. The first amendment is a matter of right. If you
look at the allegations to determine the jurisdiction. Let’s say want to do it again, you have to file a motion.
the fish pond here is worth P2M, it is within the RTC. But
certain allegations would put the case within the jurisdiction The SC here applied the liberal policy because that is
of the MTC if it becomes a forcible entry case. the general rule. The RTC here, instead of applying Rule 10,
Section 3, applied the old rules which says that: After the case
In this case, it was stated there that the defendant is set for hearing, substantial amendments may be made only
enters into the property through FISTS but it prior possession upon leave of court. But such leave may be refused if it
was not alleged so it is not a forcible entry case. It becomes appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to
an ordinary ejectment case – accion publiciana and therefore delay the action or that the cause of action or defense is
you look at the value of the property. Originally, under the substantially altered. Orders of the court upon the matters
original complaint, the MTC has no jurisdiction. provided in this section shall be made upon motion filed in
court, and after notice to the adverse party, and an
A motion to dismiss was filed but the MTC did not opportunity to be heard.
rule on it. It continued with the trial and rendered a decision
when it had no authority to do so. It was only in the RTC If you look at Section 3 in the present rules, it does
where they filed the motion to amend. The SC said na hindi not say “cause of action or defense is substantially altered.”
na pwede because the court that rendered judgment has no Can you alter your cause of action after the filing of an
jurisdiction over it. If you had amended your complaint in the answer? It depends, if it is not intended for delay, if it does
MTC, then it would have been okay. not confer jurisdiction to the court. The particular phrase was
removed by the present Section 3. In this case, the SC said
From the FT of the case: The policy in this jurisdiction that even you altered your cause of action, the court should
is that amendments to pleadings are favored and liberally be liberal in allowing the amendment. You can alter your
allowed in the interests of substantial justice. Thus, cause of action but again, this is discretionary.
amendments of the complaint may be allowed even if an
order for its dismissal has been issued so long as the motion From the FT of the case: Interestingly, Section 3, Rule
to amend is filed before the order of dismissal acquired 10 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure amended the former
finality. rule in such manner that the phrase "or that the cause of
action or defense is substantially altered" was stricken-‐off
Note, however, that it is not a hard and fast rule. An and not retained in the new rules. The clear import of such
amendment is not allowed where the court has no amendment in Section 3, Rule 10 is that under the new rules,
jurisdiction over the original complaint and the purpose of "the amendment may (now) substantially alter the cause of
the amendment is to confer jurisdiction upon the court, or action or defense." This should only be true, however, when
where the action originally pleaded in the complaint was despite a substantial change or alteration in the cause of
outside the jurisdiction of the court. action or defense, the amendments sought to be made shall
serve the higher interests of substantial justice, and prevent
We have carefully perused petitioners’ proposed delay and equally promote the laudable objective of the rules
amendments and found them to include the allegation that which is to secure a “just, speedy and inexpensive disposition
petitioners were in prior physical possession of the disputed of every action and proceeding.”
fishponds before said possession was allegedly disturbed.
Clearly, the purpose is to sidestep the RTC ruling that MeTC TIU vs. PB COM
had no jurisdiction over their complaints and allow the
inferior court to acquire jurisdiction. This we cannot allow. We already discussed this. It involves a substantial
Where the court of origin had no jurisdiction over the original amendment. The party here wants to attach the faithful
complaint in the first place, amendments may not be had. It reproduction of xxx.
is axiomatic that before an amendment can be permitted, the


The SC here said: The granting of leave to file It was the court itself that ordered the amendment –
amended pleading is a matter particularly addressed to the this is allowed by Section 4. Clerical and typological error,
sound discretion of the trial court; and that discretion is defect in the designation of the parties –etc. If the other
broad, subject only to the limitations that the amendments party files a motion to dismiss and the RTC will say “That’s
should not substantially change the cause of action or alter fine. Plaintiff, amend your complaint.” That will not prejudice
the theory of the case, or that it was not made to delay the the defendant. So this is allowed Section 5. No need for a
action. motion to amend one’s complaint if already ordered by the
court.
Nevertheless, as enunciated in Valenzuela, even if
the amendment substantially alters the cause of action or SPOUSES MERCADER vs. DPB
defense, such amendment could still be allowed when it is
sought to serve the higher interest of substantial justice; In other words, the agreement regarding the lease
prevent delay; and secure a just, speedy and inexpensive purchase option was a supervening event. Therefore, what
disposition of actions and proceedings. should have been filed was to file a supplemental pleading in
addition to the original pleadings which did not even state
LISAM ENTERPRISES vs. BANCO DE ORO anything about lease purchase options.

Was there an answer filed in this case? Yes, filed on Since they entered into some kind of amicable
September 25. Anyway, the SC discussed here when should settlement, what should have been done was to file a
the courts be liberal about admitting amended complaints supplemental pleading so that it would be on record. But was
despite the service of the responsive pleading. a supplemental pleading filed in this case? What can be
violated here? Even if a supplemental pleading was not filed,
According to the SC: This liberality is greatest in the Rule 10 Section 5 could still be applied because whatever
early stages of a lawsuit, especially in this case where the happened during the pre-‐trial… Therefore, even if a
amendment was made before the trial of the case, thereby supplemental pleading was not filed, they can still file an
giving the petitioners all the time allowed by law to answer amended complaint or answer depending on the party to
and to prepare for trial. As you can see, the amended conform with what happened during the pre-‐trial.
complaint was filed before the dismissal became final. So
there is no trial yet. It is no longer a matter of right but it The SC said: Assuming arguendo that the
should be allowed. The liberal policy should be greatest at MERCADERs failed to file the supplemental pleading,
this particular stage when there is no presentation of evidence relative to the lease-‐purchase option may be
evidence yet of both parties. legitimately admitted by the trial court in conformity with
Section 5, Rule 10.
From the FT of the case: Since, as explained above,
amendments are generally favored, it would have been more This provision envisions two scenarios — first, when
fitting for the trial court to extend such liberality towards evidence is introduced on an issue not alleged in the
petitioners by admitting the amended complaint which was pleadings and no objection was interjected and second, when
filed before the order dismissing the original complaint evidence is offered again, on an issue not alleged in the
became final and executory. It is quite apparent that since pleadings but this time an objection was interpolated. We are
trial proper had not yet even begun, allowing the amendment concerned with the second scenario.
would not have caused any delay.
In Co Tiamco v. Diaz, the Court held that "when
Moreover, doing so would have served the higher evidence is offered on a matter not alleged in the pleadings,
interest of justice as this would provide the best opportunity the court may admit it even against the objection of the
for the issues among all parties to be thoroughly threshed adverse party, where the latter fails to satisfy the court that
out and the rights of all parties finally determined. Hence, the admission of the evidence would prejudice him in
the Court overrules the trial court's denial of the motion to maintaining his defense upon the merits, and the court may
admit the amended complaint, and orders the admission of grant him a continuance to enable him to meet the new
the same. situation created by the evidence.

ZOSIMO GODINEZ vs. CA Of course, the court, before allowing the evidence,
as a matter of formality, should allow an amendment of the
pleading, . . . And, furthermore, where the failure to order an


amendment does not appear to have caused surprise or In this case, the missing allegation is how
prejudice to the objecting party, it may be allowed as a dispossession was effected. If there is no allegation of FISTS,
harmless error. Well-‐known is the rule that departures from can still this be repaired during the proceedings? Yes. You can
procedure may be forgiven where they do not appear to have prove in court by presenting evidence that the possession
impaired the substantial rights of the parties." was made through FISTS. This is what happened here. Since
the plaintiff was allowed to present evidence to that effect
Here, there is no violation of Section 5. If you do not and there is no objection on the part of the defendant, then
avail of Section 6, okay pa rin if you apply Section 5. Section 5 of Rule 10 can come in to play. The pleading can be
amended to conform to the evidence presented.
PEF vs. PII
Trial on the merits was conducted without objection
The plaintiff PEF filed a motion to amend the from Ayson. She did not challenge the statement of issues
complaint to conform to the evidence because they were proffered by Enriquez. The trial brought to light the true
able to present evidence during the trial. What did the RTC do nature of the right of possession of Enriquez over the
in relation to the motion to amend the complaint? The RTC property, and the circumstances surrounding her
denied the motion and dismissed the case for whatever dispossession. Even if the original did not vest jurisdiction on
ground. the MTC because it looked like accion publiciana or accion
reinvindicatoria or no allegations how the dispossession took
According to the SC: The RTC issued an order of place, since it was proven during trial, the defect was cured.
dismissal instead of granting the motion to amend to
conform to the evidence already presented pursuant to What if there was no amendment of the complaint?
Section 5 of Rule 10. It should be stressed that amendment Would that render the court to not have jurisdiction? No. It’s
was sought after PEF had already presented evidence. PII did very clear under Section 5, Rule 10. Failure to amend does not
not raise any objection when PEF presented any evidence. affect the trial of the issues. The issues presented shall be
Hence, as provided for Section 5 of Rule 10: When issues not treated in all respects as though they have been raised in the
raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied pleadings. It doesn’t matter if she amend or not. The issues
consent of the parties they shall be treated in all respects as if are deemed included already in the pleading.
they had been raised in the pleadings.
AZOLLA FARMS vs. CA and SAVINGS BANK
So the RTC should have allowed PEF to amend its
complaint to conform to the evidence that it was able to Take note that in this case, there was an objection on
present – the evidence that was not stated in its original the part of the defendant when the plaintiff tried to present
pleading. It is very clear that the PII failed to oppose when evidence which was not stated in the original pleading. But
the evidence at the time it was presented in court. The said we have Rule 10, Section 5. It says that even if there are
failure is fatal to their cause inasmuch as whatever perceived objections interposed by the opposing party, the court may
defect the complaint had was cured by the introduction of allow the amendment of the pleading and shall do so with
PEF’s evidence proving actual loss sustained by PEF due to liberality.
payment made by it to PNB.
The SC said: In cases where an objection is made, the
Thus, the contention of respondents that the court may nevertheless admit the evidence where the
amendment would introduce a subsequently acquired cause adverse party fails to satisfy the court that the admission of
of action as there was none at the time the original complaint the evidence would prejudice him in maintaining his defense
was filed, is untenable. What is the ground for dismissal? upon the merits, and the court may grant him a continuance
Failure to state a cause of action. But PII allowed PEF to to enable him to meet the new situation created by the
present evidence and suddenly, there was a cause of action. evidence.

LOLITA AYSON vs. MARINA ENRIQUEZ Here, the RTC agreed thereto and admitted the
amended complaint. On this score, it should be noted that
Remember the earlier case where there was no courts are given the discretion to allow amendments of
allegation of the prior possession and the MTC still tried the pleadings to conform to the evidence presented during the
case? When the RTC discovered that there was no allegation, trial. The rule on amendment need not be applied rigidly,
the case was dismissed. So too late to amend. particularly where no surprise or prejudice is caused the
objecting party. So this provision is giving the RTC the


discretion whether or not to allow the amendment over the
objection of the adverse party. But the court may grant According to the rule, if the evidence is objected to,
continuance or postponement. the court may allow the pleadings to be amended. The court
has the discretion, despite the objection, to allow the
CAGUNGUN vs. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK pleading to be amended. The interpretation in Cagungun is
that the pleading should be amended – the decision of the
There was evidence presented that was not alleged court is whether or not to sustain the objection or overrule it.
in the pleading but the other party objected to such. The case If it is overruled, the court will accept the amendment.
continued. What happens to the evidence presented
objected to by the other parties? Can it be considered by the In this case, the SC allowed the presentation of the
court trying the case? No. Why? Because Rule 10, Section 5 evidence despite the objection. Alangan naman hindi nila i-‐
says that the court must order an amendment. There was an accept?
objection here, it was on record.
From the FT of the case: In the present case, despite
Let’s say the court over-‐ruled the objection, still. The failure of the respondent to raise the defense of payment in
rule says that an amendment must be made. That is its answer, the trial court cannot be faulted for admitting the
emphasized by the SC in this case. If no amendment is made, testimonial and documentary evidence of respondent to
the evidence objected to cannot be appreciated by the court. prove payment, over the objection of petitioner. The trial
Unlike the situation when there is no objection, the remedy court's action is in consonance with Section 5, Rule 10 of the
of the defendant if you look at Section 5… he may file a Rules of Court.
motion for leave of court to amend his answer. He may ha, it
doesn’t he must. If he does not, since there is no objection, The cases of Cagungun and Royal Cargo different
then the evidence presented can be appreciated by the court rulings. Do not ask me what is the correct answer. I’m not the
in rendering decision. But if there is an objection, the court Supreme Court. I’m merely presenting them.
may allow the amendments of the pleading and shall do so
with liberality. February 12, 2015

It is thus clear that when there is an objection on PANGANIBAN vs. SPOUSES ROLDAN
the evidence presented because it is not within the issues
made by the pleadings, an amendment must be made before There is no objection here so there is no need for
accepting such evidence. If no amendment is made, the amendment. There’s no issue as to situation wherein the
evidence objected to cannot be considered. adverse party does not object. If there is no amendment, as
long as the evidence is presented during trial, then the
In the case before us, the trial court, there being an evidence can be admitted and appreciated by the court in
objection on the evidence being presented by respondent, making its decision.
failed to order the amendment of the complaint. There is a
fault on the part of the RTC. If the court does not order the From the FT of the case: In the case at bench, since
amendment, the party must file a motion for leave of court to there was no dispute that no objection was interposed by
allow the amendment in order to conform with the evidence appellee to the presentation of the evidence, the same
citing Section 5 – especially if the objection was overruled. should have been admitted by the court a quo, consonant
with Section 5, Rule 10 and the rule on liberal construction
Thus, we are constrained not to consider evidence under Section 2, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court.
regarding the P30,000.00 and P118,000.00 allegedly
withdrawn from their accounts. With this ruling, it follows APT vs. CA
that the outstanding loan of petitioners in the amount of
P58,297.16 remains unpaid. What then is the solution if a supplemental pleading
is not the proper thing to file? When can amendment be
ROYAL CARGO vs. DFS SPORTS made? Generally speaking, at any time before judgment.
What is the remedy that the parties here could have taken
Take note that this is one of the cases that I specially instead of filing the supplemental pleading before judgment?
place there because the ruling is in conflict with the Motion for leave of court to amend the original complaint.
Cagungun ruling. So what is correct? Well, it really depends Even if there are different causes of action.
on the interpretation of the court of Rule 10, Section 5.


We already discussed in the previous cases where in Just don’t forget the term “germane to, and are in
the SC said that substantial amendments which change the fact, intertwined.” This was mentioned again by the SC in this
cause of action or defense of the party may be allowed in case. The SC here applied the strict application Section of 6.
certain cases. So the remedy in this case is to file motion for
leave of court to amend the original complaint. Who knows if According to the SC: Admittedly, in Leobrera v. Court
the court will agree, noh? Of course, another option is to file of Appeals, we held that a supplemental pleading must be
another complaint but you will need to pay again docket fees based on matters arising subsequent to the original pleading
and back to the start. Here, the SC applied Section 6 on a related to the claim or defense presented therein, and
strict manner because of the different causes of action. founded on the same cause of action. We further stressed
therein that a supplemental pleading may not be used to try a
In the case of Leobrero, the Court ruled that when new cause of action.
the cause of action stated in the supplemental complaint is
different from the cause of action mentioned in the original However, in Planters Development Bank v. LZK
complaint, the court should not admit the supplemental Holdings and Development Corp., we clarified that, while a
complaint. matter stated in a supplemental complaint should have some
relation to the cause of action set forth in the original
Anyway, the case of Leobrera v. Court of Appeals is pleading, the fact that the supplemental pleading technically
always cited in different cases when supplemental pleadings states a new cause of action should not be a bar to its
are the issue. The partner case is: allowance but only a matter that may be considered by the
court in the exercise of its discretion. In such cases, we
PLANTER’s DEVELOPMENT BANK vs. LZH HOLDINGS stressed that a broad definition of “cause of action” should
be applied.
Whatever alleged in the supplemental pleading must
be intertwined and related with whatever is alleged in the SUPERCLEAN vs. CA
original pleading. It does not need to be directly related but it
should not be separate and distinct from the main complaint. Superclean is a supplier of janitorial services. It tried
It should be germane and intertwined. to supply services to HDMF. There were bidders in this case
and Superclean was the lowest bidder but HDMF refused to
The SC said: As its very name denotes, a honor the award. In November 19, 1989 (before the 1990
supplemental pleading only serves to bolster or adds contract), Superclean filed a complaint for mandamus against
something to the primary pleading. A supplement exists side HDMF to compel the government entity to comply with
by side with the original. It does not replace that which it whatever it has to do. 1990 passed and the case was still
supplements. Moreover, a supplemental pleading assumes pending.
that the original pleading is to stand and that the issues
joined with the original pleading remained an issue to be tried In 1991, Superclean is no longer entitled to that 1990
in the action. It is but a continuation of the complaint. Its contract so it filed a supplemental complaint in 1991 alleging
usual office is to set up new facts which justify, enlarge or that because the contract of service was for 1990, the
change the kind of relief with respect to the same subject belated decision of the case rendered the case moot and
matter as the controversy referred to in the original academic without it obtaining relief. Now, instead of asking
complaint. HDMF to comply with the contract, it is now asking for
damages – unrealized profits, exemplary damages, etc.
The parties may file supplemental pleadings only to
supply deficiencies in aid of an original pleading, but not to Issue: Is the filing of the supplemental complaint
introduce new and independent causes of action. Here, the proper in order to seek a different relief in view of
SC said that the allegations in the original complaint are developments rendering the original relief impossible of
germane and intertwined so the supplemental pleading was attainment.
rightfully admitted by the RTC.
Obviously, you have a supervening event in the
ADA vs. BAYLON sense that the contract period elapsed. So there is no point in
(2012) asking the court to order HDMF to enter into the contract.
The SC here ruled in the negative.


The Supreme Court said: The transaction, occurrence was the amount. The second amended complaint modified
or event happening since the filing of the pleading, which is the period in the original complaint – instead of November to
sought to be supplemented, must be pleaded in aid of a January gi-‐change to October to January. Is that allowed? Can
party's right or defense as the case may be. But in the case at the second amended complaint modify the allegations in the
bar, the supervening event is not invoked for that purpose original complaint? Of course no.
but to justify the new relief sought.
The second amended complaint can only modify the
The supervening event must be related to what is allegations in the amended complaint. If the complaint did
stated in the original complaint not to aid the new cause of not modify the period there in the original complaint… The
action. To begin with, what was alleged as a supervening rules provides: xxx claims or defenses alleged therein not
event causing damage to petitioner was the fact that the incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed
year for which the contract should have been made had waived. Again, the amended complaint will amend the
passed without the resolution of the case. Only incidentally original complaint. If you don’t amend anything in the original
was it claimed that because of the award of a contract for complaint, you can no longer complain kasi deemed waive na
janitorial services, on a month-‐to-‐month basis to a third party, – carried over na yan.
petitioner failed to realize profits.

RULE 11: When to File Responsive Pleadings
What should be done? As ruled: Be that as it may, the

so-‐called Supplemental Complaint filed by petitioner should
This is a very very easy rule. Dates lang ito lahat.
simply be treated as embodying amendments to the original

complaint or petitioner may be required to file an amended
Section 1. Answer to the complaint. — The defendant shall
complaint. In other words, even if the caption says
file his answer to the complaint within fifteen (15) days after
“Supplemental Complaint” and there is a leave of court, the
service of summons, unless a different period is fixed by the
Court said that don’t be so strict. If it looks like an
court. (la)
amendment, then the pleading is amendment. The SC here

said that Superclean filed a supplemental pleading because of
When do you file your answer?
a supervening event and hence, it could pass as an
15 days after the service of summons.
amendment.

When the defendant receives the summons and he signs his
MERCADO vs. SPOUSES ESPINA
name there, then that is when the 15-‐day period will start.

Count 15 days from that. The exception is if a different period
You have a complaint here. The defendant, instead
is fixed by the court. If the court will say na you only have 5
of filing an answer, filed a motion to dismiss which was
days, then wala ka ng magawa.
denied. If such is the case, the defendant should file an

answer. Otherwise, he will be declared in default.
Section 2. Answer of a defendant foreign private juridical
What happened here is that after the motion to entity. — Where the defendant is a foreign private juridical
dismiss was denied, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. entity and service of summons is made on the government
Can the motion to dismiss be filed in that amended official designated by law to receive the same, the answer
shall be filed within thirty (30) days after receipt of
complaint? Yes. An amended complaint supersedes the
original complaint so there is no circumvention of the rules. summons by such entity. (2a)

Supposed to be, under the rules, motion to dismiss If the defendant is a foreign private juridical entity (foreign
then answer then the trial will continue. But since there was corporation), the period is longer. It is not 15-‐days. But “the
an amended complaint, then a motion to dismiss that answer shall be filed within thirty (30) days after receipt of
amended complaint can also be filed. summons by such entity.”

SPOUSES VILLUGA vs. KELLY HARDWARE Section 2 is related to Rule 14. The defendant is outside the
(2012) country so it is given 30 days after the receipt of summons.
There are two ways of serving summons to private foreign
In this case, we have the complaint which has an corporations, in relation to Rule 14:
allegation that from this period to this period, Villuga bought § If served to the resident agent: period to answer is
construction materials. In the amended complaint, the issue only 15 days


§ If made on the government official designated by Let’s go to: where filing of the amended complaint is not a
law to receive: period to answer is 30 days matter of right. On July 1, the defendant received a copy of
This government official will be the one who the summons. In July 16, he files his answer. Now, the
will forward it to the foreign entity. The plaintiff wants to amend his complaint so he files a motion
government official here is the Secretary of for leave of court to amend the complaint on July 20. The
the DTI (generally speaking) but the law defendant shall answer the amended complaint within ten
may designate any other official (like if the (l0) days from notice of the order admitting the same.
entity is an insurance company, then
Insurance Commissioner or if the company When should the defendant file an answer to the amended
is a foreign bank, the Bangko Sentral). complaint here? When do you start counting the 10 days?
When the filing of an amended pleading is not a matter of
Section 3. Answer to amended complaint. — When the right but a matter of discretion, you file a motion for leave of
plaintiff files an amended complaint as a matter of right, the court to admit the amended complaint. This means that you
defendant shall answer the same within fifteen (15) days attach your amended complaint already – do not wait for the
after being served with a copy thereof. court to say yes or no tapos dun ka na mag-‐file ng amended
Where its filing is not a matter of right, the complaint. Therefore, when the court says na granted, then
defendant shall answer the amended complaint within ten the defendant must answer within 10 days from the receipt
(l0) days from notice of the order admitting the same. An of the order granting the motion to amend the complaint.
answer earlier filed may serve as the answer to the amended
complaint if no new answer is filed. There will be no more step 1, step 2 or step 3. File the motion
This Rule shall apply to the answer to an amended for leave of court to admit an amended complaint. With the
counterclaim, amended cross-‐claim, amended third (fourth, motion, naka-‐attach na ang amended complaint. The motion
etc.)—party complaint, and amended complaint-‐in-‐ will be served to the defendant so nasa kanyan na yun. He
intervention. (3a) already has a copy and he waits for the court to say
“Granted” and 10 days from that he must file his answer to
Let’s say P filed a complaint on June 10. The summons is the amended complaint.
received by D on July 1. When should D file his answer? July
16. The question is: Is the defendant required to answer all
amended complaints? It depends. According to the provision,
The plaintiff filed an amended complaint as a matter of right. an answer earlier filed may serve as the answer to the
When is the plaintiff allowed as a matter of right? Before he amended complaint if no new answer is filed. Remember that
receives the responsive pleading. The defendant here under the second situation, the filing of the amended
received the summons on July 1. He has 15 days until July 16 complaint is not a matter of right. It means that the answer
to file the answer. has already been served to the plaintiff. The defendant says
“there’s nothing new in the amended complaint – it’s just a
Itong si plaintiff, he realized na he forgot to include matter of clerical error, refining of the errors. Bakit pa ako
something in the original complaint, can he amend as a magpa-‐file ng answer?” Is that allowed? Again, under Section
matter of right on July 15? Yes. 3, the answer earlier filed may serve as an answer to the
amended complaint. If he is just going to say the same thing
Can the plaintiff amend as a matter of right on July 5? Yes. on his first answer, then never mind – don’t waste paper,
The defendant has not yet filed an answer. He served a copy effort and time.
of the amended complaint on the defendant who received it
on July 10. Originally, defendant was supposed to file his This provision shall apply to the answer to an amended
answer on July 16. Since he received an amended complaint, counterclaim, amended cross-‐claim, amended third (fourth,
does he need to file an answer to the complaint and then to etc.)—party complaint, and amended complaint-‐in-‐
the amended complaint? No need. intervention. The period is 10 days within the notice of the
order of the court admitting the amended counterclaim,
The defendant can apply Section 3: “When the plaintiff files amended cross-‐claim, etc.
an amended complaint as a matter of right, the defendant
shall answer the same within fifteen (15) days after being Section 4. Answer to counterclaim or cross-‐claim. — A
served with a copy thereof.” He is given an additional. counterclaim or cross-‐claim must be answered within ten
Instead of July 16, July 25 na. Automatic yan. (10) days from service. (4)


A counterclaim or cross-‐claim must be answered within ten
(10) days from service, not 15 days. Who normally files a reply? The plaintiff. The period is 10 days
from the service of the answer.
What if the plaintiff does not answer the counterclaim of the
defendant? According to Dean, the plaintiff can be declared Section 7. Answer to supplemental complaint. — A
on default on the counterclaim especially if the counterclaim supplemental complaint may be answered within ten (10)
has a cause of action totally different from that of the days from notice of the order admitting the same, unless a
complaint. different period is fixed by the court. The answer to the
complaint shall serve as the answer to the supplemental
What happens to the case? The plaintiff files a case against complaint if no new or supplemental answer is filed. (n)
the defendant. The defendant files a counterclaim against the
plaintiff. The plaintiff does not answer the counterclaim. He What about supplemental complaint? We already discussed
can be declared in default if the defendant files a motion to this. If a supplemental complaint is filed, there is a new
declare the counter-‐defendant in default. What happens to matter that is alleged that is germane or intertwined to the
the original there? It will still be there. It’s just that in the main action. Since it is a new matter, it is best to answer the
counterclaim, the plaintiff will be declared in default. He will supplemental pleading within 10 days from the notice of the
lose his standing in court insofar as the counterclaim is order admitting the same.
concerned. The defendant can present evidence ex-‐parte on
the counterclaim unless the plaintiff files a motion to lift or This is the same with amendments. If you want to file a
set aside order of default alleging that his failure to answer supplemental pleading, you file a motion for leave of court to
was due to FAME and that he has a meritorious defense to admit a supplemental complaint and you attach your
the counterclaim. supplemental complaint. Therefore, the defendant already
has a copy of the supplemental complaint. He will just wait
Are there instances when the plaintiff may not answer the for the order from the court admitting the supplemental
counterclaim and he will not be declared in default? Yes. complaint and when he receives it, he will start counting ten
When the counterclaim is so intertwined to the main action. days from said date to file his answer unless a different
That if the plaintiff will answer, it will only be a repetition of period is fixed by the court.
what he stated in the complaint.
But the answer to the original complaint shall serve as an
A common example here is collision of vehicles – P filed a answer to the supplemental complaint if no new answer is
complaint for damages against D for culpa aquiliana saying filed.
that the latter was negligent. Sabi ni P na it was D who was
negligent. Then D will file a counterclaim saying na it was P Section 8. Existing counterclaim or cross-‐claim. — A
who was negligent. Does P need to file an answer to the compulsory counterclaim or a cross-‐claim that a defending
counterclaim of D? No. Uulitin niya lang yung allegations niya party has at the time he files his answer shall be contained
in the complaint eh. therein. (8a, R6)

Section 5. Answer to third (fourth, etc.)-‐party complaint. — Section 9. Counterclaim or cross-‐claim arising after answer.
The time to answer a third (fourth, etc.)—party complaint — A counterclaim or a cross-‐claim which either matured or
shall be governed by the same rule as the answer to the was acquired by a party after serving his pleading may, with
complaint. (5a) the permission of the court, be presented as a counterclaim
or a cross-‐claim by supplemental pleading before judgment.
If there is a 3rd party complaint, etc., the period to answer is (9, R6)
within 15 days after service of summons.
Section 10. Omitted counterclaim or cross-‐claim. — When a
Basis: Section 1. Answer to the complaint. — The defendant pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-‐claim
shall file his answer to the complaint within fifteen (15) days through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or
after service of summons, unless a different period is fixed by when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up the
the court. counterclaim or cross-‐claim by amendment before
judgment. (3, R9)
Section 6. Reply. — A reply may be filed within ten (10) days
from service of the pleading responded to. (6) Section 11. Extension of time to plead. — Upon motion and


on such terms as may be just, the court may extend the time o Exception: Unless service upon the party
to plead provided in these Rules. himself is ordered by the court
The court may also, upon like terms, allow an
answer or other pleading to be filed after the time fixed by v Section 3. Manner of filing.
these Rules. (7) The filing of pleadings, appearances,
motions, notices, orders, judgments and all other
-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐ Transcription incomplete: As of February 24, 2015 papers shall be made by presenting the original
February 18, 2015 copies thereof, plainly indicated as such, personally
February 19, 2015 to the clerk of court or by sending them by
February 20, 2015 registered mail.
February 25, 2015 In the first case, the clerk of court shall
February 26, 2015 endorse on the pleading the date and hour of filing.
February 27, 2015 In the second case, the date of the mailing
Exam date: February 28, 2015 of motions, pleadings, or any other papers or
payments or deposits, as shown by the post office
From the PPT of Atty. S (NO TSN): stamp on the envelope or the registry receipt, shall
be considered as the date of their filing, payment, or
RULE 13 : Filing and Service of Pleadings, deposit in court.
The envelope shall be attached to the
Judgments and Other Papers record of the case. (1a)

v Section 1. Coverage.
v Two modes of filing and filing date
This Rule shall govern the filing of all
o Personal – When the clerk of court endorses
pleadings and other papers, as well as the service
on the pleading the date and hour of filing
thereof, except those for which a different mode of
o Registered mail – On the date of the
service is prescribed. (n)
mailing, as shown by the post office stamp

on the envelope or the registry receipt. The
v Coverage:
envelope shall be attached to the record of
• Rule 13 shall govern the: the case.
o Filing of all pleadings and other papers,
and v Section 4. Papers required to be filed and served.
o Service thereof Every judgment, resolution, order, pleading
• Rule 13 shall not govern: subsequent to the complaint, written motion, notice,
o Those for which a different mode of appearance, demand, offer of judgment or similar
service is prescribed papers shall be filed with the court, and served upon
the parties affected. (2a)
v Section 2. Filing and service, defined.
Filing is the act of presenting the pleading or v What has to be filed and served
other paper to the clerk of court. o Judgments
Service is the act of providing a party with a o Resolutions
copy of the pleading or paper concerned. o Orders
If any party has appeared by counsel, o Pleadings subsequent to the complaint
service upon him shall be made upon his counsel or o Written motions
one of them, unless service upon the party himself is o Notices
ordered by the court. o Appearances
Where one counsel appears for several o Demands
parties, he shall only be entitled to one copy of any o Offers of Judgment
paper served upon him by the opposite side. (2a) o Similar papers

v Service when a party has appeared by counsel v Do judgments have to be filed?
o General rule: Service upon the party shall be Yes. Rule 36, Section 1:
made upon his counsel or one of his A judgment or final order determining the
counsels merits of the case shall be in writing personally and


directly prepared by the judge, stating clearly and residence, if known, with postage fully prepaid, and
distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based, with instructions to the postmaster to return the
signed by him, and filed with the clerk of the court. mail to the sender after ten (10) days if undelivered.
If no registry service is available in the
v Section 5. Modes of service. locality of either the senders or the addressee,
Service of pleadings motions, notices, service may be done by ordinary mail. (5a; Bar
orders, judgments and other papers shall be made Matter No. 803, 17 February 1998)
either personally or by mail. (3a)
v Section 8. Substituted service.
v Modes of service on the adverse party If service of pleadings, motions, notices,
o Personally resolutions, orders and other papers cannot be
o By mail made under the two preceding sections, the office
o Substituted service and place of residence of the party or his counsel
being unknown, service may be made by delivering
v Section 6. Personal service. the copy to the clerk of court, with proof of failure of
Service of the papers may be made by both personal service and service by mail. The
delivering personally a copy to the party or his service is complete at the time of such delivery. (6a)
counsel, or by leaving it in his office with his clerk or
with a person having charge thereof. If no person is v Substituted Service
found in his office, or his office is not known, or he o When it can be availed of – If pleadings,
has no office, then by leaving the copy, between the motions, notices, resolutions, orders and
hours of eight in the morning and six in the evening, other papers cannot be made personally or
at the party's or counsel's residence, if known, with a through mail.
person of sufficient age and discretion then residing o Reason – The office and place of residence
therein. (4a) of the party or his counsel being unknown.
o How made – By delivering the copy to the
v How personal service is made clerk of court, with proof of failure of both
o By delivering personally a copy to the party personal service and service by mail.
or his counsel, or
o By leaving a copy in his office with:
RULE 14: Summons
§ His clerk, or

§ The person having charge thereof
v Section 6. Service in person on defendant.
o By leaving the copy, between the hours of
Whenever practicable, the summons shall
eight in the morning and six in the evening,
be served by handling a copy thereof to the
at the party's or counsel's residence, if
defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and
known
sign for it, by tendering it to him. (7a)
§ With a sufficient person of age and

discretion then residing therein
v How service in person is effected

o By handing a copy thereof to D in person, or
v Requisites for personal service in the residence of
o By tendering it to him – if D refuses to
party or his counsel
receive and sign for it
o No person is found in his office, or

o His office is not known, or
v
o He has no office
Rule 13, Section 6 Rule 14, Section 6
Note:
Personal service of Service in person of
Service should be made on the counsel
pleadings and other summons
pursuant to Rule 13, Section 2.
papers

v Section 7. Service by mail. May be made on the Must be done on D
Service by registered mail shall be made by lawyer or EE of the himself
depositing the copy in the post office in a sealed lawyer
envelope, plainly addressed to the party or his
counsel at his office, if known, otherwise at his v Section 7. Substituted service.


If, for justifiable causes, the defendant him by the officer having the management of such
cannot be served within a reasonable time as jail or institution who is deemed deputized as a
provided in the preceding section, service may be special sheriff for said purpose. (12a)
effected (a) by leaving copies of the summons at the
defendant's residence with some person of suitable v Service upon prisoners
age and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by o By the officer having the management of
leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular such jail or institution
place of business with some competent person in o Such officer is deemed deputized as a
charge thereof. (8a) special sheriff for said purpose

v Substituted service of summons v Section 10. Service upon minors and incompetents.
o By leaving copies of the summons at D’s When the defendant is a minor, insane or
residence with some person of: otherwise an incompetent, service shall be made
§ Suitable age and discretion upon him personally and on his legal guardian if he
§ Then residing therein, or has one, or if none his guardian ad litem whose
§ By leaving the copies at D’s office appointment shall be applied for by the plaintiff. In
or regular place of business with the case of a minor, service may also be made on his
some competent person in charge father or mother. (l0a, 11a)
thereof
v Service upon minors and incompetents
v Condition: If, for justifiable causes, the defendant o Service shall be made upon:
cannot be served within a reasonable time as § Him personally and on his legal
provided in the preceding section. guardian if he has one
§ Or if none his guardian ad litem
v whose appointment shall be
Rule 13, Section 8 Rule 14, Section 7 applied for by the plaintiff
Substituted service of Substituted service of § In the case of a minor, service may
pleadings and other summons also be made on his father or
paper mother
Made on the clerk of Made on the residence
court or office of D with v Section 11. Service upon domestic private juridical
person of competent entity.
age and discretion When the defendant is a corporation,
(equivalent to personal partnership or association organized under the laws
service of pleadings) of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service
may be made on the president, managing partner,
v Section 8. Service upon entity without juridical general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or
personality. in-‐house counsel. (13a)
When persons associated in an entity
without juridical personality are sued under the v Service upon private domestic corporation – upon
name by which they are generally or commonly the following officers:
known, service may be effected upon all the o President or CEO
defendants by serving upon any one of them, or o Managing partner – in partnerships
upon the person in charge of the office or place of o General manager (not branch manager, area
business maintained in such name. But such service manager or regional manager)
shall not bind individually any person whose o Corporate secretary (not secretary, typist)
connection with the entity has, upon due notice, o Treasurer (not cashier)
been severed before the action was brought. (9a) o In-‐house counsel (not legal counsel)

v Section 9. Service upon prisoners. v Section 12. Service upon foreign private juridical
When the defendant is a prisoner confined entities.
in a jail or institution, service shall be effected upon When the defendant is a foreign private
juridical entity which has transacted business in the


Philippines, service may be made on its resident v Section 14. Service upon defendant whose identity
agent designated in accordance with law for that or whereabouts are unknown.
purpose, or, if there be no such agent, on the In any action where the defendant is
government official designated by law to that effect, designated as an unknown owner, or the like, or
or on any of its officers or agents within the whenever his whereabouts are unknown and cannot
Philippines. (14a) be ascertained by diligent inquiry, service may, by
leave of court, be effected upon him by publication
v How service made on FC doing business in the RP in a newspaper of general circulation and in such
o On its resident agent designated in places and for such time as the court may order.
accordance with law for that purpose, or (16a)
o On the government official designated by
law to that effect (if there be no such agent) v Q: What kind of action is this applicable to?
o On any of its officers or agents within the A: Any action.
Philippines
Q: What kind of defendant is contemplated under
v Amendment to Section 12: Rule 14, Section 2 applies Section 14?
only to foreign corporations doing business in the A: D must be within the country and:
RP. (AM 11-‐3-‐6-‐SC Amendment of Section 12, Rule 14 o xxx
on Service upon Foreign Private Judicial Entity March o xxx
15, 2011)
v Section 15. Extraterritorial service.
v Mode of service (must be with leave of court) by: When the defendant does not reside and is
o Personal service – counsel through the not found in the Philippines, and the action affects
appropriate court in the foreign country the personal status of the plaintiff or relates to, or
with the assistance of the DFA the subject of which is, property within the
o Publication – once in a newspaper of Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a
general circulation in the country where D lien or interest, actual or contingent, or in which the
may be found and by serving a copy of the relief demanded consists, wholly or in part, in
summons and the court order by registered excluding the defendant from any interest therein,
mail at the last known address of D or the property of the defendant has been attached
o Facsimile or any other recognized electronic within the Philippines, service may, by leave of court,
means that could general proof of service, be effected out of the Philippines by personal service
o Such other means – as the court may deems as under section 6; or by publication in a newspaper
proper of general circulation in such places and for such
time as the court may order, in which case a copy of
v Section 13. Service upon public corporations. the summons and order of the court shall be sent by
When the defendant is the Republic of the registered mail to the last known address of the
Philippines, service may be effected on the Solicitor defendant, or in any other manner the court may
General; in case of a province, city or municipality, or deem sufficient. Any order granting such leave shall
like public corporations, service may be effected on specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less
its executive head, or on such other officer or than sixty (60) days after notice, within which the
officers as the law or the court may direct. (15) defendant must answer. (17a)

v Service upon public corporations v Defendant contemplated:
o Does not reside in the RP
Defendant Who can be Served o Not found in the RP
RP SolGen
Province, city or Executive head, or on v Rule 14, Section 15 is Applicable to An Action:
municipality such other officer or o That affects the personal status of the P, or
officers as the law or the o Which relates to or the subject of which is
court may direct property within the RP:


§ in which the defendant has or § Affidavit of the printer, his
claims a lien or interest, actual or foreman or principal clerk,
contingent, or or of the editor, business
§ in which the relief demanded or advertising manger
consists, wholly or in part, in § Attach a copy of the
excluding the defendant from any publication
interest therein, or o For registered mail
§ the property of the defendant has § xxx
been attached within the § xxx
Philippines
v Section 20. Voluntary appearance.
v How Service of Summons May Be Effected The defendant's voluntary appearance in
o Must be with leave of court the action shall be equivalent to service of summons.
o Service must be effected OUT in the RP The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds
either: aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
§ By personal service as under defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary
Section 6 or appearance. (23a)
§ By publication; or
§ In any other manner the court may v Effect of Defendant’s Voluntary Appearance in the
deem sufficient Action: It shall be equivalent to the service of
summons.
v How service of summons by publication effected
o Publication – The summons must be Q: What if D includes in a motion to dismiss of other
published in a newspaper of general grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over his
circulation in such places and for such time person?
as the court may order, AND A: It shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance
o Registered mail – A copy of the summons
and order of the court shall be sent by
registered mail to the last known address of
the defendant.

v What is contained in the order granting leave to
effect summons by publication
It shall specify the reasonable time, which
shall not be less than 60 days after notice, within
which D must answer.

v Q: What is the difference between Section 14 and
Section 15?
A: In Section 14, D is in the country but his exact
whereabouts is unknown. In Section 15, he is really
out of the country and is no longer residing here.

v Section 16. Residents temporarily out of the "Consider that you radiate. At all times.
Philippines. Consider that what you’re feeling right now is rippling outward
When any action is commenced against a into a field of is-‐ness that anyone can dip their oar into.
defendant who ordinarily resides within the You are felt. You are heard. You are seen.
Philippines, but who is temporarily out of it, service If you were not here, the world would be different.
may, by leave of court, be also effected out of the Because of your presence, the universe is expanding.”
Philippines, as under the preceding section. (18a) —Danielle LaPorte

v Proof of Service – Two Affidavits (Section 19)
o Publication: Love. Love. Love.

Civil Procedure 2nd Exam 2014 - Atty. Suarez (Cutie)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Civil Procedure 2nd Exam 2014 - Atty. Suarez (Cutie)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

You might also like