II.

RULES 1 to 5

A. Actions: Commencement (Sections 3 and 5, R-1)

Cases:
1. Alday vs. FGU Insurance– 350 SCRA
2. Mercado vs. CA, 569 SCRA
3. Proton Pilipinas vs. Banque Nationale de Paris, 460 SCRA
4. Ruby Shelter Builders vs. Formaran, 578 SCRA 283
5. St. Louis University vs. Cobarrubias, 626 SCRA 649 *
6. Gipa vs. Southern Luzon Institute, 726 SCRA, June 18, 2014 *
7. Sy-Vargas vs. Estate of Ogsos, 805 SCRA (2016)
8. Camaso vs. TSM Shipping Inc., 807 SCRA (2016)

B. One suit for one action (Sec.3,R-2)

Splitting a single cause of action (Sec. 4, R-2)
Joinder of Causes of action (S-5. R-2)
Dynamic Builders vs. Presbitero, 755 SCRA 90 (2015)
- No injunction against national govt projects

C. Parties to Civil Actions (S-1,R-3)

Joinder of Parties (S-6, 7, R-3)
Indispensable and Necessary Parties (S-7,8, R-3)
Class Suit (S-12, R-3)
Juana Complex Homeowners Asso. Vs. Fil-Estate, 667 SCRA 440,
March, 5 2012
Death or Separation of a Party (S-16,17,18, R-3)
Transfer of Interest (S-19, R-3)
Contractual Money Claims (S-20, R-3)

Cases:
1. Relucio vs. Lopez, 373 SCRA 578
2. De Castro vs CA 386 SCRA 301 *
3. Orquiola vs CA – 389 SCRA 461
4. China Banking Corp., vs Oliver – 390 SCRA 263 *
5. David vs. Paragas, Jr. 751 SCRA 648 *
6. Land Bank vs. Cacayuran, 757 SCRA, April 22, 2015 *
7. Lotte Phils. Co. Inc. vs. De la Cruz – 464 SCRA 591
8. Carabeo vs. Dingco, 647 SCRA 200 *
9. De la Cruz vs, Joaquin – 464 SCRA 576
10. Navarro vs. Escobido, 606 SCRA 1
11. Divinagracia vs. Parilla, 753 SCRA 87
12. Enrique vda de Santiago vs. Vilar, 857 SCRA (2017)

D. Venue of Actions: real actions, personal actions

Cases:
1. Pacific Consultants International Asia vs. Schonfeld - 516 SCRA
 2. Biaco vs. Countryside Rural bank – 515 SCRA 106
3. BPI Savings Bank vs. Sps. Yujuico – 763 SCRA 486 (7/2015)
4. Planters Dev. Bank vs. Ramos, 840 SCRA (2017)

E. Summary Procedure vs. Small Claims Suit

- What are their salient characteristics
- How to determine if the case is summary or under small claims
- OCA 45-2019: increased amount of small claims to P400,000
Case:
A.L. Ang Network Inc. vs. Mondejar, 714 SCRA (1/28/14)
- A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC: Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts Effective
April 11, 2022

- Note: starting Rule 6, note the substantial/formal amendments.

III. RULE 6: Kinds of Pleadings (Sections 1-13)

A. Pleadings: Complaint, Answer, Counterclaim, Cross-claim, Reply, Third-Party

Complaint, Counter-counterclaim, Rejoinder
- Compulsory vs. Permissive counterclaim

B. Defenses: Negative, Affirmative, Negative Pregnant

Cases:
1. Alba vs. Malapajo – 780 SCRA 534
2. Lim Teck Chuan vs. Uy -752 SCRA 268
3. Metrobank vs. CPR Promotions -760 SCRA 59
4. Valdez vs. Dabon – 775 SCRA 1
5. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan – 406 SCRA 190
6. Caneland Sugar Corp. vs. Alon – 533 SCRA 28
 REM REV 1 NOTES: RULES 1-6

ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

An ordinary civil action is one by which It is also civil action and governed by the
one party sues another, based on a rules for ordinary action but because of its
cause of action, to enforce or peculiar nature, it is subject to the specific
protect a right, or to prevent or rules prescribed for them, particularly Rule
redress a wrong, whereby the 62 to Rule 71, depending on the special
defendant has performed an act or civil action involved.
omitted to do an act in violation of the
rights of the plaintiff. It is also governed by ordinary civil
actions, subject to specific rules (Rules 62-
An ordinary civil action is one which is 71) for special civil actions. (Rule 1, Sec.
governed by the rules for ordinary 3[a][2]
civil actions.
The purpose is primarily The purpose of a special proceeding is to
compensatory. establish a status, a right or a particular
fact. (Rule 1, Sec. 3[c])

Jurisdiction over the res

There are two sets of classification of actions:

Jurisdiction over real action personal action

the res action in rem action in personam

Real Action v. Personal Action

Real Action
It is an action affecting title to or
possession of real property, or
interest therein. [Sec. 1, Rule 4]
Real actions shall be commenced and
tried in the proper court which has
jurisdiction over the area wherein the
real property involved, or a portion
thereof is situated.
Founded on privity of real estate
Example: An action for recovery of
possession of real property, quieting of enforcement of a contract, or the recovery of
title or removal of clouds, action for
specific performance for the delivery of
Personal Action
It refers to all other actions which are not
real actions. [Sec. 2, Rule 4]
All other actions may be commenced and
tried, at the plaintiff’s election:
Where the plaintiff or any of the principal
plaintiffs resides, or
Where the defendant or any of the principal
defendants resides, or
In case of a non-resident defendant,
where he may be found.
Founded on privity of contract.
Example: An action which seeks to
damages
real property.

KINDS OF REAL ACTIONS

LOCAL
As to Venue:
i.e., its venue depends upon the
location of the property involved in
the litigation. It is filed in the court
where the property or any part thereof is
situated. An example of such action is
recovery of real property.
As to Privity of Contract:
No privity of contract and the action is
founded on privity of estate only.
(Riano, 2014)
TRANSITORY
its venue depends upon the residence of
the plaintiff or the defendant at the
option of the plaintiff. An example of such
action is recovery of sum of money.
Founded on privity of contract between
the parties whether debt or covenant.
(Paper Industries Corporation of the
Philippines v. Samson, supra.)

4 DISTINCTIONS
Action in rem vs. Action in personam –
Action in rem Action in personam Action quasi in rem
Definition Action against the An action which seeks Names a person as
As to whom thing or res itself, toenforce personal defendant, but its
directed instead of against the rights and obligations object is to subject
person brought against the that person's interest
person. in a property to a
corresponding lien or
obligation.
Jurisdiction NOT a prerequisite to NECESSARY for the NOT a prerequisite to
over the confer jurisdiction on court to validly try and confer jurisdiction on
person the court, provided that decide the case which the court, provided that
the latter has can be made through the latter has
jurisdiction over the res, service of summons jurisdiction over the res.
notice however, shall Notice however, shall
still be published for still be published for
due process due process
How Jurisdiction over the res Jurisdiction is acquired Jurisdiction over the res
jurisdiction is acquired either: through: is acquired either(a) by
is acquired (a) by the seizure of (a) VALID service of the seizure of the
the property under summons property under legal
legal process, (b) voluntary process, whereby it is
whereby it is brought appearance brought into actual
into actual custody of custody of the law, or
the law, or (b) as a result of the
(b) as a result of the institution of legal
 institution of legal proceedings, in which
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
the power of the court is recognized and made
recognized and made effective.
effective.

Binding The decision is binding Any judgment therein is Judgments therein are
effect of as against the whole binding only upon the binding only upon the
decisions world. parties properly parties who joined in
impleaded. the action.
Example Petition for adoption, Action for a sum of Attachment,
annulment of money; action for -  foreclosure of
marriage, or correction damages mortgage,
of entries in the birth -  Action for declaration -  action for partition
certificate. of nullity of title and -  action for accounting
-  Probate of a will recovery of ownership
-  Land registration case of real property;
reconveyance; action
for ejectment; action
for specific
performance; action
for injunction.

II. RULES 1 to 5
A. Actions: Commencement (Sections 3 and 5, R-1)

Section 3. Cases governed. – These Rules shall govern the procedure to be observed
in actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings.

(a)  A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.

A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are governed by the rules for
ordinary civil actions, subject to the special rules prescribed for a special civil action.

(b)  A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or
omission punishable by law.

(c)  A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a

right, or a particular fact.

Section 4. In what cases not applicable. – These Rules shall not apply to election
cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other
cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character and
whenever practicable and convenient.

Section 5. Commencement of action. – A civil action is commenced by the filing

of the original complaint in court {and as cited by Jurisprudence by timely and
correct payment of docket fees}. If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later
pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such
later pleading, irrespective of whether the motion for its admission, if necessary, is
denied by the court.

- An ordinary civil action is one which is governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions.

Q: What are the kinds of actions?

A: Rule 1, Sec. 3
Civil action Criminal action Special proceeding
Definition One which party sues One which the States Remedy by which a
another for the prosecutes a person for party seeks to establish
enforcement or an act or omission a status, a right, or a
protection of a right, or punishable by law. (Sec. particular fact. (Sec.
the prevention or 1(b), Rule 1) 1(c), Rule 1)
redress of a wrong.
(Sec. 3, Rule 1)
Governed Rules of ordinary civil Rules 110 to 127 of the Rule 72 to 109 of the
by actions, subject to the Revised Rules of Rules of Court and rules
specific rules prescribed
Criminal Procedure and on ordinary civil actions
for a special civil action;
the rules on ordinary in suppletory character
Governed by Rules 1-71 civil procedure in
suppletory character
Basis of Every ordinary action Arises from a violation Establishes a status, a
action must be based on a of an act or omission right or a particular fact
cause of actions punishable by law
Nature Adversarial since it Adversarial and Generally, non-
involves two contending prosecutorial in nature adversarial, except
parties when there is an
oppositor/respondent
How it will Filing a complaint/ Filing a complaint or Filing a petition before
be petition/ statement of information before the the court and the timely
commenced claims before the clerk court or if it requires and correct payment of
of court and the timely preliminary investigation docket and other lawful
and correct payment by filing an affidavit- fees
of the corresponding complaint before the
docket fees prosecutor’s office for
purposes of preliminary
investigation
Parties Plaintiff and defendant State and accused One party called
petitioner except in
 some instances, i.e.
oppositor in the probate
of the will.

Cases:
Alday vs. FGU Insurance– 350 SCRA
TOPIC: KINDS OF COUNTERCLAIMS AND ITS RELATION TO PAYMENT OF
DOCKET FEES
DOCTRINE: Don’t limit the principal action, such as the complaint, third party complaint,
intervention to require the payment of docket fees because even appeals and
permissive counterclaims require docket fees as well. Be careful with counterclaim there
must be a distinction, only permissive counterclaim requires docket fees if it’s a
compulsory counterclaim having arose from the same transaction is waived, you cannot
bring that as a separate action, because if not filed it will be deemed waived but in
permissive counterclaims, it is allowed to be filed as a separate action, but if you file it in
the same action you are making a way not to pay docket fees.

Mercado vs. CA, 569 SCRA

TOPIC: COUNTERCLAIM IN RELATION TO DOCKET FEES
DOCTRINE: Payment of docket fees is not necessary for a court to acquire
jurisdiction over the subject matter of a compulsory counterclaim.

Proton Pilipinas vs. Banque Nationale de Paris, 460 SCRA

TOPIC: ON WHEN DOES A COURT’ ACQUIRE JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER
DOCTRINE: It is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate initiatory
pleading, but the payment of the prescribed docket fee, which vests a trial court with
jurisdiction over the subject-matter or nature of the action. Where the filing of the
initiatory pleading is not accompanied by payment of the docket fee, the court may allow
payment of the fee within a reasonable time but in no case beyond the applicable
prescriptive or reglementary period.

It shall not be considered filed until and unless the filing fee prescribed therefor is paid.
However, insufficient payment of docket fees, if not meant to defraud the
government, will not warrant dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

Ruby Shelter Builders vs. Formaran, 578 SCRA 283

TOPIC: DOCKETS FEES ON REAL ACTIONS
DOCTRINE: The docket fees under Section 7(a), Rule 141, in cases involving real
property depend on the fair market value of the same: the higher the value of the real
property, the higher the docket fees due. In contrast, Section 7(b)(1), Rule 141 imposes
a fixed or flat rate of docket fees on actions incapable of pecuniary estimation.
A real action indisputably involves real property. The docket fees for a real action would
still be determined in accordance with the value of the real property involved therein; the
only difference is in what constitutes the acceptable value. In computing the docket fees
for cases involving real properties, the courts, instead of relying on the assessed or
estimated value, would now be using the fair market value of the real properties (as
stated in the Tax Declaration or the Zonal Valuation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue,
whichever is higher) or, in the absence thereof, the stated value of the same.

St. Louis University vs. Cobarrubias, 626 SCRA 649 *

TOPIC: Timely payment of the correct docket fees is not limited to the principal action
but even on appeals
DOCTRINE: The right to appeal is a mere statutory right. All the requirements for an
appeal must be strictly complied with. Hence, payment in full of docket fees within
the prescribed period is not only mandatory, but also jurisdictional. It is an
essential requirement, without which, the decision appealed from would become final
and executory as if no appeal has been filed.

Gipa vs. Southern Luzon Institute, 726 SCRA, June 18, 2014 *
TOPIC: CORRECT PAYMENT OF DOCKET FEES
DOCTRINE: Payment of the full amount of docket fees within the prescribed period is
not a mere technicality of law or procedure but a jurisdictional requirement. Those who
seek exemption from the application of the rule have the burden of proving the
existence of exceptionally meritorious reasons warranting such departure.

Sy-Vargas vs. Estate of Ogsos, 805 SCRA (2016)

TOPIC: PERMISSIVE COUNTERCLAIM
DOCTRINE:
A counterclaim is permissive if it does not arise out of or is not necessarily connected
with the subject matter of the opposing party's claim. It is essentially an independent
claim that may be filed separately in another case.

The nature of a counterclaim is determinative of whether or not the counterclaimant is

required to pay docket fees. The rule in permissive counterclaims is that for the trial
court to acquire jurisdiction, the counterclaimant is bound to pay the prescribed docket
fees. On the other hand, the prevailing rule with respect to compulsory counterclaims is
that no filing fees are required for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction over the subject
matter.

Camaso vs. TSM Shipping Inc., 807 SCRA (2016)

TOPIC: TOPIC: FAILURE TO PAY DOCKET FEES; ITS EFFECTS WITHOUT THE
FAULT OF THE APPELANT. – EARNEST EFFORT TO COMPLY CONSTITUTES A
GROUND FOR REINSTATEMENT AS AN XPN TO RULE
DOCTRINE: The failure to pay the required docket fees per se should not necessarily
lead to the dismissal of a case. It has long been settled that while the court acquires
jurisdiction over any case only upon the payment of the prescribed docket fees, its non-
payment at the time of filing of the initiatory pleading does not automatically cause its
dismissal provided that:
(a) the fees are paid within a reasonable period; and
(b) there was no intention on the part of the claimant to defraud the government.

===============================================================

B. One suit for one action (Sec. 3, R-2)

Section 3. One suit for a single cause of action. – A party may not institute more than
one suit for a single cause of action. (3a)

The cause of action and the right of action are the two sides of the same coin.
ACTION - An action is a formal demand of one’s legal right in a court of justice in
a manner prescribed by the court or by the law. It is governed by ordinary rules.
CAUSE OF ACTION RIGHT OF ACTION
A cause of action refers to the delict or whereas right of action refers to the
wrong committed by the defendants right of the plaintiff to institute the
action.
The delict or wrongful act or omission The right to relief granted by law to a
committed by the defendant in violation of party to institute an action against a
the primary rights of the plaintiff. person who has committed a delict or
wrong against him.
A cause of action is determined by the Right of action is determined by the
pleadings; substantive law.
CAUSE: EFFECT:
Cause of action is the basis for a right The right of action is triggered or is
of action to exist. the result of having a cause of action

Requisites of a right of action:

(a) The existence of a legal right in favor of the plaintiff;
(b) A correlative legal duty of the defendant to respect such right; and
(c) An act or omission by such defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff
with a resulting injury or damage to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an
action for the recovery of relief from the defendant.

Although the first two elements may exist, a cause of action arises only upon the
occurrence of the last element, giving the plaintiff the right to maintain an action in
court for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief.

A complaint whose cause of action has not yet accrued cannot be cured by an
amended or supplemental pleading alleging the existence or accrual of a cause of
action during the pendency of the action.
Bases of cause of action
A cause of action stems from the sources of obligations under Art. 1157 of the CC
a. Law,
b. Contract,
c. Quasi-contract,
d. Acts and omissions punishable by law, or
e. Quasi-delict [Sagrada Orden etc v. NACOCO, G.R. No. L- 3756 (1952)]

Failure to state a cause of action

Distinguish: Failure of the Complaint to State a Cause of Action and Lack of Cause of
Action
The cause of action must unmistakably be alleged in the complaint, such that all the
elements required by substantive law must clearly appear from a mere reading of the
complaint. [1 Riano 240, 2014 Bantam Ed.]

Failure to state a cause of action is no longer a ground for a motion to dismiss under the
Amended Rules. It is, however, one of the enumerated Affirmative Defenses that must
be set out in the Answer or else it is deemed waived. [Sec 12, Rule 8]

The complaint must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts
constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. The focus is on sufficiency, not veracity, of
the material allegations. [Anchor Savings Bank v. Furigay, G.R. No. 191178 (2013)]

Failure to State Cause of Action Lack of Cause of Action

Refers to the insufficiency of the Refers to a situation where the evidence
allegations in the pleading. (the failed to prove the cause of action.
allegations does not amount to any (insufficiency of evidence to establish the
actionable wrong) cause of action)
The proper remedy when there is a failure
to state a cause of action is to allege the
The proper remedy when the complaint is
same as an affirmative defense in the
not based on a cause of action is to file a
Answer. [Sec. 12(4), Rule 8] (Dismissal
Demurrer of Evidence. Rule 33
based on procedural ground, hence, may
be refiled, and appeal is not the remedy)
Made after questions of fact have been
Can be made at the earliest stages of an
resolved on the basis of stipulations,
action
admissions, or evidence presented.
Dismissal due to the failure to state a
Dismissal on the ground of lack of cause of
cause of action does constitute res
action is a decision on the merits
judicata.

Test of the sufficiency of a cause of action

The test of sufficiency of a cause of action rests on whether, hypothetically admitting
the facts alleged in the complaint to be true, the court can render a valid
judgment upon the same, in accordance with the prayer in the complaint . [Heirs of
Maramag v. Maramag, G.R. No. 181132 (2009)]

However, there is no hypothetical admission of the veracity of the allegations if

a. The falsity of the allegations is subject to judicial notice;
b. The allegations are legally impossible;
c. The allegations refer to facts which are inadmissible in evidence;
d. By the record or document in the pleading, the allegations appear unfounded; or
e. There is evidence which has been presented to the court by stipulation of the parties
or in the course of hearings related to the case [Heirs of Maramag v. Maramag, G.R.
No. 181132 (2009)]

Splitting of cause of action vs. Joinder of causes of action

SPLITTING OF CAUSE OF ACTION JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION
It is the practice of dividing one cause of Assertion of as many causes of action as
action into different parts and making a party may have against another in one
each part the subject of a separate pleading alone. (Sec. 5, Rule 2)
complaint. (Bachrach v. Icaringal, 68 Phil.
287)
Prohibited. A party may not institute more Encouraged. No sanction against non-
than one suit for a single cause of action. joinder of separate causes of action since
(Sec. 3, Rule 2) a plaintiff needs only a single cause of
action to maintain an action.
It causes multiplicity of suits and double It minimizes multiplicity of suits and
vexation on the part of the defendant. inconvenience on the parties.
(Riano, 2014)
The filing of one (litis pendentia) or a No adverse effect on the action.
judgment upon the merits in any one (res
judicata) is available as a ground for the
dismissal of the others. (Sec. 4, Rule 2)

Joinder of cause of action vs. Joinder of parties

JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION JOINDER OF PARTIES
It refers to the procedural device whereby It may be employed when there are
a party who asserts various claims various causes of actions that accrue in
against the same or several parties, file favor of one or more plaintiffs against one
all his claims against them in a single or more defendants i.e. there is plurality
complaint. of parties.
It will not necessarily involve a joinder of It may or may not be involved in a joinder
parties. of causes of actions. (Riano, 2014)
Merely permissive, as evidenced by the Indispensable parties – required to be
use of the word “may” instead of “shall.” joined either as plaintiffs or defendants.
(Sec. 5, Rule 2; Riano, 2014) (1999 BAR) (Sec. 7, Rule 3)
 Necessary party – one who is not
indispensable but ought to be joined if
complete relief is to be accorded, or for a
complete determination or settlement of
the action. (Sec. 8, Rule 3)

Splitting a single cause of action (Sec. 4, R-2)

Section 4. Splitting a single cause of action; effect of. – If two or more suits are
instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon
the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. (4a)

The act of instituting two or more suits on the basis of the same cause of action [Sec. 4,
Rule 2], or splitting a single cause of action, is prohibited by the Rules. Such is
referred to as “splitting a single cause of action”. A party may not institute more than
one suit for a single cause of action. [Sec. 3, Rule 2]

Tests to determine a “single” cause of action

The tests to ascertain whether two suits relate to a single or common cause of action
are:
a. Whether the same evidence would support and sustain both causes of action (Same
Evidence Test);
b. Whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the
other; and
c. Whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time of filing of the first
complaint. [Umale v. Canoga Park Development Corp., G.R. No. 167246 (2011)]

Plaintiff's remedy if other reliefs not included in the complaint: Amendment

In the event that a plaintiff has omitted to include in the complaint one or several other
reliefs to which he may be entitled, the proper remedy of the plaintiff is not to institute
another or several other actions – instead he should move to amend the complaint to
include the omitted relief or reliefs [Bayang v. CA, G.R. No. L-53564 (1987)]

Dismissal as effect of splitting of cause of action

The filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for
the dismissal of the others [Sec. 4, Rule 2]

The defendant facing a complaint which is infirm due to the plaintiff splitting causes of
action may either allege the infirmity as an Affirmative Defense in his Answer [Sec. 5(b),
Rule 6], or file a Motion to Dismiss on the following grounds:
a. There is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause [Sec.
12 (a)(2), Rule 15], or
b. The cause of action is barred by a prior judgment. [Sec. 12 (a)(3), Rule 15]
Such violates the policy against multiplicity of suits, whose primary objective is to avoid
unduly burdening the dockets of the court [Dynamic Builders & Construction Co Inc v.
Presbitero, Jr. G.R. No. 174202 (2015)]
Umale v. Canoga Park Development Corp., G.R. No. 167246, July 20, 2011, 654
SCRA 155
DOCTRINE: As a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, litis pendentia refers to a
situation where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same cause
of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and vexatious. LITIS PENDENTIA
EXISTS WHEN THE FOLLOWING REQUISITES ARE PRESENT:
(a) Identity of the parties in the two actions;
(b) Substantial identity in the causes of action and in the reliefs sought by the parties;
and
(c) The identity between the two actions should be such that any judgment that may be
rendered in one case, regardless of which party is successful, would amount to res
judicata in the other.

The practice of splitting a single cause of action is discouraged because: (VICUM)

1. Leads to vexatious litigation
2. Operates as an instrument of harassment;
3. Clogs the court dockets;
4. Generates unnecessary expenses to the parties; and
5. It breeds multiplicity of suits (1 RIANO, supra at 180).

General Rule: A contract embraces only one cause of action because it may be
violated only once even if it contains several stipulations

Exception: Contracts divisible in nature. A contract to do several things at several

times is divisible in its nature. This kind of obligation authorizes successive actions and
a judgment recovered for a single breach does not bar a suit for a subsequent breach.
Example: Promissory note payable in several installments so long as there is no
acceleration clause.
Exception to the Exception: If at the time of the bringing of suit, several installments
are already due, all must be included as integrating a single cause of action, otherwise
those not included would be barred.

Joinder of Causes of action (S-5, R-2)

It is the process of uniting two or more demands or rights of action in one action.

Ordinary – Ordinary Allowed 1. 2 collections of sum of money between the same

parties
Note:
1. If the claims in all 2. P, a Manila resident, filed a complaint against D,
the causes of action a resident of Iloilo City, in the RTC of Manila. The
are principally for complaint joins 2 causes of action: one for
recovery of money, collection of P2.5M and the other for title to real
the aggregate property in Iloilo City with an assessed value of
amount claimed P500,000, both causes of action being unrelated to
shall be the test of each other. Was there a proper joinder of causes
jurisdiction. (S5 R2). of action?
 2. Where the causes A. Yes. Where the causes of action are between the
of action are between same parties but pertain to different venues or
the same parties but jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC
pertain to different provided one of the causes of action falls within the
venues or jurisdiction of the RTC and the venue lies therein.
jurisdictions, the (S5[c] R2). Here the sum of money case falls within
joinder may be the jurisdiction of the RTC of Manila and the venue
allowed in the RTC lies therein.
provided one of the The fact that the causes of action are unrelated to
causes of action falls each other does not affect the propriety of the
within the jurisdiction
joinder of causes of action. There is no need to
of the RTC and the
venue lies therein. comply with the rule on joinder of parties since the
causes of action are between the same parties.
Ordinary – Special Not allowed In a series of related transactions, P lent
P200,000 to D which is unsecured and another
P300,000 secured by a real estate mortgage
over a land with an assessed value of P75,000.
D defaulted in the payment of both loans. P filed
a complaint with the RTC joining his action to
recover P200,000 and another for foreclosure of
mortgage. Is the joinder of actions proper? A.
No. Under S5 R2, the joinder of causes of action
shall not include special civil actions. Here the
action for foreclosure is a special civil action.
Hence its joinder is improper.
Special – Special Allowed mandamus and prohibition

Section 5. Joinder of causes of action. – A party may in one pleading assert, in the
alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing
party, subject to the following conditions:
(a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of
parties;
(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special
rules;
(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided
one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies
therein; and
(d) Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money,
the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. (5a) [Totality Rule]

Joinder of causes of action – a party may in one pleading assert in the alternative or
otherwise as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party subject
to the following conditions:
a. the part joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties
b. the joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules
c. where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the
causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein; and
d. where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction

Note: The absence of unity of problems is no longer a bar to joinder of causes of action.
The present rule removed the restriction of venue, jurisdiction, and causes of action
arising from money, the same nature or character or similar transactions. The only
grounds to refuse joinder of causes of action are:
(1) the rules on joinder of parties which requires that
(a) the claims arise from the same or series of transactions, and
(b) there is a common question of law or fact;
(2) it must not be cognizable by different tribunals; and,
(3) joinder of ordinary and special civil actions. The restriction on joinder of parties does
not apply where the parties are the same although the causes of action are separate
and distinct from one another.

Joinder of causes of action

It is the assertion of as many causes of action as a party may have against another in
one pleading alone. [Sec. 5, Rule 2] It is the process of uniting two or more demands or
rights of action in one action. [1 Riano 187, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

Rationale
To avoid a multiplicity of suits and to expedite disposition of litigation at minimum cost.
[Ada v. Baylon, G.R. No. 182435 (2012)]
Rule merely permissive
The rule however is purely permissive as there is no positive provision of law or any rule
of jurisprudence which compels a party to join all his causes of action and bring them at
one and the same time. [Nabus v. CA, G.R. No. 91670 (1991)]

Requisites
a. The plaintiff asserts numerous causes of action in one pleading b. The causes of
action are against the opposing party
c. The party joining the causes of action complies with the rules on joinder of parties
under Sec 6, Rule 3, and
d. The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules.

Where causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the
causes of action are within that court’s jurisdiction and venue lies therein. [Sec. 5, Rule
2]

Totality Rule applies in Joinder of Actions

Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction
Misjoinder of causes of action
There is misjoinder of causes of action when conditions for joinder under Section 5,
Rule 2 are not met. [Perez v. Hermano, G.R. No. 147417 (2005)]
An erroneously joined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on the initiative of
the court, be severed and proceeded with separately. Misjoinder is not a ground for
dismissal of an action [Sec. 6, Rule 2]

Subject to waiver
If there is no objection to the improper joinder or the court did not motu proprio direct a
severance, then there exists no bar in the simultaneous adjudication of all the
erroneously joined causes of action, as long as the court trying the case has jurisdiction
over all of the causes of action therein notwithstanding the misjoinder [Ada v. Baylon,
G.R. No. 182435 (2012)]

If the court has no jurisdiction to try the misjoined action, then it must be severed.
Otherwise, adjudication rendered by the court with respect to it would be a nullity. [Ada
v. Baylon, G.R. No. 182435 (2012)]

A claim on a promissory note against three defendants may not be joined with a claim
under another promissory note against two of the defendants for there is a misjoinder of
parties, the third defendant in the first cause of action not having an interest in the
second cause of action. (1 Moran, p. 195, 1995 Ed., cited in 1 Herrera, p. 325, 2000 Ed.
and 1 Herrera, p. 499, 2007 Ed.)

Problem based on Riano’s Civil Procedure:

D is the debtor of C for P350T due on January 5, 2008. D likewise owes C P350T due
on February 13, 2008. Both debts are evidenced by distinct promissory notes. D has not
paid the debts despite demand. Each debt is a separate cause of action because each
is the subject of different transaction. However, under the rule on joinder of causes of
action, C may file a single suit against D for the collection of both debts, despite the
claims being actually separate causes of actions and having arisen out of different
transactions.

Assume that aside from the above claims, C as lessor also wants to eject D from the
apartment occupied by D as lessee. May the action be joined with the claims for
money? No. An action for ejectment is a special civil action. This kind of action cannot
be joined with ordinary actions. The joinder does not include special civil actions or
those actions governed by special rules. The rule is clear: ―The joinder shall not
include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules. (Sec. 5 (b), Rule 2,
Rules of Court) Confusion in the application of procedural rules would certainly arise
from the joinder of ordinary and special civil actions in a single complaint.

Supposing C’s lawyer still filed in one complaint the money claims and complaint for
ejectment, what should be done? D cannot file a motion to dismiss because misjoinder
of causes of action is not a ground for dismissal of an action. (Sec. 6, Rule 2) On motion
of D or on the initiative of the court, the causes of action can be severed and proceeded
with separately. Since the ejectment complaint is outside the jurisdiction of the RTC,
upon severance it will have to be dismissed, not because of misjoinder of causes of
action, but because of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit.

CASE
Dynamic Builders vs. Presbitero, 755 SCRA 90 (2015)
- No injunction against national govt projects

TOPIC: Splitting of a Cause of Action

DOCTRINE: Rule 2, Section 3 of the Rules of Court provides that a party may not
institute more than one suit for a single cause of action. Moreover, Section 4 discusses
the splitting of a single cause of action in that if two or more suits are instituted on the
basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any
one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. The splitting of a cause of
action violates the policy against multiplicity of suits, whose primary objective is to avoid
unduly burdening the dockets of the courts.

There is nothing in Republic Act No. 8975 or in Presidential Decree No. 1818 that
allows the simultaneous availment of legal remedies before the Regional Trial Court and
this court. Republic Act No. 8975, even when read with Presidential Decree No. 1818,
does not sanction the splitting of a cause of action in order for a party to avail itself of
the ancillary remedy of a temporary restraining order from this court.

On Injunction: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) can issue injunctive relief against
government infrastructure projects, even those undertaken by local governments,
considering that the prohibition in Section 3 of Republic Act (RA) No. 8957 only
mentions national government projects.

RELATED LAW on Dynamic Case.

Republic Act 8975

Section 3. Prohibition on the Issuance of Temporary Restraining Orders,
Preliminary Mandatory Injunctions. – No court, except the Supreme Court, shall
issue any temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction or preliminary mandatory
injunction against the government, or any of its subdivisions, officials or any person or
entity, whether public or private acting under the government direction, to restrain,
prohibit or compel the following acts:
(a) Acquisition, clearance and development of the right-of-way and/or site or location of
any national government project;
(b) Bidding or awarding of contract/ project of the national government as defined under
Section 2 hereof;
(c) Commencement prosecution, execution, implementation, operation of any such
contract or project;
(d) Termination or rescission of any such contract/project; and
(e) The undertaking or authorization of any other lawful activity necessary for such
contract/project.

This prohibition shall apply in all cases, disputes or controversies instituted by a private
party, including but not limited to cases filed by bidders or those claiming to have rights
through such bidders involving such contract/project. This prohibition shall not apply
when the matter is of extreme urgency involving a constitutional issue, such that unless
a temporary restraining order is issued, grave injustice and irreparable injury will arise.
The applicant shall file a bond, in an amount to be fixed by the court, which bond shall
accrue in favor of the government if the court should finally decide that the applicant
was not entitled to the relief sought.

In after due hearing the court finds that the award of the contract is null and void, the
court may, if appropriate under the circumstances, award the contract to the qualified
and winning bidder or order a rebidding of the same, without prejudice to any liability
that the guilty party may incur under existing laws.

==============================================================

C. Parties to Civil Actions (S-1, R-3)

Section 1. Who may be parties; plaintiff and defendant. – Only natural or juridical
persons, or entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action. The term “plaintiff”
may refer to the claiming party, the counter-claimant, the cross-claimant, or the third
(fourth, etc.)-party plaintiff.

The term “defendant” may refer to the original defending party, the defendant in a
counterclaim, the cross-defendant, or the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant.

WHO ARE THE PARTIES IN A CIVIL ACTION

Plaintiff Defendant
May refer to the claiming May refer to the original
party, counter- claimant, defending party, the
cross-claimant, or third- defendant in a intervene. – A person who
party plaintiff. counterclaim, the cross-
[Sec. 1, Rule 3] defendant, or the third
(fourth, etc.)-party
defendant. [Sec. 1, Rule 3]
HB: Includes co-defendant
and 3rd/4th/5th party
defendant
Also includes an unwilling
co-plaintiff - any party who
Intervenor
RULE 19 INTERVENTION
Section 1. Who may
has a legal interest in the
matter in litigation, or in the
success of either of the
parties, or an interest
against both, or is so
situated as to be adversely
affected by a distribution or
other disposition of
property in the custody of
the court or of an officer
thereof
 should be joined as plaintiff
but whose consent cannot - may, with leave of
be obtained. He may be court, be allowed to
made a defendant and the intervene in the action.
reason therefore shall be
stated in the complaint. The court shall consider
[Sec. 10, Rule 3] whether or not the
intervention will unduly
delay or prejudice the
adjudication of the rights of
the original parties, and
whether or not the
intervenor’s rights may be
fully protected in a
separate proceeding.

Who can be parties in a civil action (R3, S1)

1. Natural persons [Sec. 2. Juridical persons [Sec. 3. Entities authorized by
1, Rule 3] 1, Rule 3] law [Sec. 1, Rule 3]
a human being as a. The State and its a. A corporation by
distinguished from a political subdivisions estoppel is precluded from
juridical person (as a b. Other corporations, denying its existence, and
corporation) created by institutions and entities for the members are liable as
operation of law public interest or public general partners [Sec. 21,
purpose, created by law, Corporation Code]
a. Must be of legal age and and
with capacity to sue (Art. c. Corporations, b. A partnership with
37, Civil Code) partnerships, and capital of at least P3,000
associations for private which fails to comply with
b. Husband and wife shall interest or purpose to the registration
sue and be sued jointly which the law grants a requirements is liable as a
(Rule 3, Sec. 4) judicial personality, partnership to third
separate and distinct from persons [Arts. 1768, 1772,
c. Minor or incompetent — that of each shareholder, Civil Code]
with the assistance of the partner, or member
father, mother, guardian, [Art. 44, Civil Code] c. The estate of a
or if he has none, a deceased person is a
guardian ad litem (Rule 3, juridical entity that has a
Sec. 5) personality of its own
[Nazareno v. C.A., G.R.
d. Non-resident No. 138842 (2000), citing
Limjoco v. Intestate Estate
of Fragrante, G.R. No. L-
 770 (1948)]

d. A legitimate labor union

may sue and be sued in its
registered name [Art.
251(e), Labor Code]

e. The Roman Catholic

Church may be a party; as
to its properties, the
Archbishop of diocese to
which they belong may be
a party [Barlin v. Ramirez,
G.R. No. 2832 (1906);
Versoza v. Fernandez,
G.R. No. 32276 (1930)]
f. A dissolved corporation
may prosecute and defend
suits by or against it
provided that the suits
(i) occur within three (3)
years after its dissolution,
and
(ii) the suits are in
connection with the
settlement and closure of
its affairs [Sec. 139,
Revised Corporation Code]

Who may be parties

Real parties in interest (R3, S2)
The party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party
entitled to the avails of the suit [Sec. 2, Rule 3]

Nature of interest
The interest must be real, which is a present and substantial interest, as distinguished
from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest.
[Rayo v. Metrobank, G.R. No. 165142 (2007)] It should be material and direct, as
distinguished from a mere incidental interest [Mayor Rhustom Dagadag v. Tongnawa,
G.R. No. 161166-67 (2005)]

Why necessary to determine the real party in interest

General rule: Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real
party in interest.
Exception: Unless otherwise provided by law or the Rules. [Sec. 2, Rule 3]
If the suit is not brought in the name of or against the real party-in-interest, the
defendant must set out in his answer as an Affirmative Defense the ground that the
complaint “states no cause of action.” [Sec 12, Rule 8]

Spouses as parties
General rule: Husband and wife shall sue and be sued jointly. Exception: As provided
by law. [Sec. 4, Rule 3]

Remedies for the Plaintiff

1. Amendment of pleadings [Alonso v. Villamor, G.R. No. L-2352 (1910)]; or
2. Complaint may be deemed amended to include the real party-in-interest [Balquidra v.
CFI Capiz, G.R. No. L-40490 (1977)]

When real party-in-interest bound despite not being formally impleaded

As an exception, the real litigant may be held bound as a party even if not formally
impleaded, provided he had his day in court. [Albert v. University Publishing Co., G.R.
No. L- 9300 (1958)]

Representatives as parties (R3, S3)

A representative may be a trustee of an express trust, a guardian, an executor or
administrator, or a party authorized by law or the ROC. [Sec. 3, Rule 3]

Beneficiary to be included in the title of the case

Where the action is allowed to be prosecuted or defended by a representative or
someone acting in a fiduciary capacity, the beneficiary shall be included in the title of
the case and shall be deemed to be the real party in interest. [Sec. 3, Rule 3]

Minor or incompetent person as party

A minor or a person alleged to be incompetent may sue or be sued, with the assistance
of his father, mother, guardian, or if he has none, a guardian ad litem. [Sec. 5, Rule 3]

Joinder of Parties (S-6, 7, R-3)

Section 6. Permissive joinder of parties. – All persons in whom or against whom any
right to relief in respect to or arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions
is alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, may, except as
otherwise provided in these Rules, join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one
complaint, where any question of law or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all such
defendants may arise in the action; but the court may make such orders as may be just
to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being embarrassed or put to expense in
connection with any proceedings in which he may have no interest.

Joinder of cause of action vs. Joinder of parties

JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION JOINDER OF PARTIES
It refers to the procedural device whereby It may be employed when there are
a party who asserts various claims various causes of actions that accrue in
against the same or several parties, file favor of one or more plaintiffs against one
 all his claims against them in a single
complaint.
It will not necessarily involve a joinder of
parties.
Merely permissive, as evidenced by the
use of the word “may” instead of “shall.”
(Sec. 5, Rule 2; Riano, 2014) (1999 BAR)
or more defendants i.e. there is plurality
of parties.
It may or may not be involved in a joinder
of causes of actions. (Riano, 2014)
Indispensable parties – required to be
joined either as plaintiffs or defendants.
(Sec. 7, Rule 3)
Necessary party – one who is not
indispensable but ought to be joined if
complete relief is to be accorded, or for a
complete determination or settlement of
the action. (Sec. 8, Rule 3)

Indispensable and Necessary Parties (S-7,8, R-3)

Indispensable Parties Necessary Parties
An indispensable party is one whose A necessary party is not one who is
interest in the subject matter of the suit indispensable but, rather, one who ought to
and the relief sought are so inextricably be joined as a party if complete relief is to be
intertwined with the other parties that his accorded as to those already parties, or for a
legal presence as a party to the complete determination or settlement of the
proceeding is an absolute necessity. claim subject of the action. [Sec. 8, Rule 3]
Must be joined under any and all
May be joined whenever possible
conditions
Presence is mandatory, he must be joined
Presence is NOT mandatory because his
because the court cannot proceed without
interest is separable from that of the
him.
indispensable party.
No final determination can be had of a
Final decree can be had in a case even
case without his presence.
without a necessaryparty.

Indispensable and Necessary Parties (S-7,8, R-3)

Section 7. Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties. – Parties in interest without
whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs
or defendants.

Indispensable parties (R3, S7)

A real party-in-interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action
[Sec. 7, Rule 3]

An indispensable party is one whose interest in the subject matter of the suit and the
relief sought are so inextricably intertwined with the other parties that his legal presence
as a party to the proceeding is an absolute necessity. [Benedicto-Munoz v. Cacho-
Olivares, G.R. No. 179121 (2015)]

A party is not indispensable if his interest in the controversy or subject matter is distinct
and divisible from the interest of the other parties and will not necessarily be prejudiced
by a judgment which does not complete justice to the parties in court. [Benedicto-Munoz
v. Cacho-Olivares, G.R. No. 179121 (2015)]

Necessary parties (R3, S8)

A necessary party is not one who is indispensable but, rather, one who ought to be
joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a
complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action. [Sec. 8, Rule 3]

MISJOINDER AND NON-JOINDER OF PARTIES

The Rules prohibit the dismissal of a suit on the ground of non-joinder or misjoinder of
parties and allows the amendment of the complaint at any stage of the proceedings,
through motion or on order of the court on its own initiative. (Sec. 11, Rule 3; Republic.
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154, July 15, 2003)

However, when the order of the court to implead an indispensable party goes
unheeded, the court may order the dismissal of the case. The court is fully clothed with
the authority to dismiss a complaint due to the fault of the plaintiff as when, among
others, he does not comply with the order of the court. (Riano, 2014, citing Sec. 3, Rule
17; Plasabas v. CA, G.R. No. 166519, March 21, 2009)

MISJOINDER OF PARTIES NON-JOINDER OF PARTIES

He or she is made a party to an action He or she is supposed to be joined but is
although he should not be impleaded. not impleaded in the action.
If there is a claim against a party Whenever in any pleading in which a
misjoined, the same may be severed and claim is asserted a necessary party is not
proceeded with separately. (Sec. 11, joined, the pleader shall set forth his
Rule 3) name, if known, and shall state why he is
omitted. Should the court find the reason
unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion
of the omitted necessary party if
jurisdiction over his person may be
obtained. (Sec. 9, Rule 3)
Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is a ground for the dismissal of an action.
Parties may be dropped or added by the court on motion of any party or motu proprio
at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. (Sec. 11, Rule 3) (2015,
2017 BAR)

However, even if neither is a ground for dismissal of the action, the failure to obey the
order of the court to drop or add a party is a ground for the dismissal of the complaint
based on the failure of the plaintiff to comply with a court order. (Sec. 3, Rule 17;
Riano, 2014)
Section 9. Non-joinder of necessary parties to be pleaded. – Whenever in any
pleading in which a claim is asserted a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall
set forth his name, if known, and shall state
why he is omitted. Should the court find the reason for the omission unmeritorious, it
may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person
may be obtained.

The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be
deemed a waiver of the claim against such party.

The non-inclusion of a necessary party does not prevent the court from proceeding in
the action, and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of
such necessary party.

Section 10. Unwilling co-plaintiff. – If the consent of any party who should be joined
as plaintiff can not be obtained, he may be made a defendant and the reason therefor
shall be stated in the complaint.

Section 11. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. – Neither misjoinder nor non-
joinder of parties is ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added
by order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage of the
action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be
severed and proceeded with separately.

Class Suit / Quasi parties (S-12, R-3)

Class Suit Derivative Suit Citizen Suit

A class suit is filed
regarding a controversy of
common or general
interest in behalf of many
persons so numerous that
it is impracticable to join all
as parties, a number which
the court finds sufficiently
representative who may
sue or defend for the
benefit of all (Sec. 12, Rule
3)
It is filed by sufficient
number of parties for the
benefit of all.
A derivative suit is a suit A citizen suit is an action
in equity that is filed by a filed by any Filipino citizen
minority shareholder in in representation of others,
behalf of a corporation to including minors, or
redress wrongs committed generation not yet born, to
against it, for which the enforce rights and
directors refuse to sue, the obligations under
real party-in-interests environmental laws. (Sec.
being the corporation itself 5, Rule 2, Part II of A.M.
(Lint vs. Lim-Yu, G.R. No. No. 09-6-8-SC)
138343, Feb. 19, 2001)
It is filed by a minority It is filed by any Filipino
stockholder for and in citizen
behalf of the corporation

Class Suit (S-12, R-3)

Section 12. Class suit. – When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common
or general interest to many persons so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as
parties, a number of them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and
representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the
benefitt of all. Any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his
individual interest.

Requisites of a Class Suit

a. Subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to many
persons;
b. The persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join them all as parties;
c. The court finds a number of them sufficiently numerous and representative of the
class as to fully protect the interests of all concerned; and
d. The representative sues or defends for the benefit of all. [Sec. 12, Rule 3]

Only general interest in the subject matter of litigation required

A class suit does not require a commonality of interest in the questions involved in the
suit. What is required by the Rules is a common or general interest in the subject matter
of the litigation [Mathay v. Consolidated Bank & Trust Company, G.R. No. L-23136
(1974)]

Right to intervene
In a class suit, any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his
individual interest [Sec. 12, Rule 3]
No dismissal upon the instance of plaintiff or due to compromise
A class suit shall not be dismissed or compromised without the approval of the court
[Sec. 2, Rule 17]

Examples of Class Suits

1. Taxpayer’s suit
A taxpayer's suit or a stockholder's derivative suit is in the nature of a class suit,
although subject to the other requisites of the corresponding governing law especially
on the issue of locus standi [1 Regalado 99, 2010 Ed.]

2. Derivative suit
A derivative suit is an action brought by a stockholder on behalf of the corporation to
enforce corporate rights against the corporation’s directors, officers or other insiders.
Under the Revised Corporation Code, the directors or officers, as provided under the
by- laws, have the right to decide whether or not a corporation should sue. Since these
directors or officers will never be willing to sue themselves, or impugn their wrongful or
fraudulent decisions, stockholders are permitted by law to bring an action in the name of
the corporation to hold these directors and officers accountable. In derivative suits, the
real party in interest is the corporation, while the stockholder is a mere nominal party
[Ang v. Ang, G.R. No. 201675 (2013)]
Alternative Defendants
Where the plaintiff is uncertain against whom of several persons he is entitled to relief,
he may join any or all of them in the alternative, although a right to relief against one
may be inconsistent with a right to relief against the other [Sec. 13, Rule 3]

CASE:
Juana Complex Homeowners Asso. Vs. Fil-Estate, 667 SCRA 440, March, 5 2012
TOPIC: CLASS SUIT
DOCTRINE: DOCTRINE: DEFINITION OF A CLAS SUIT
Section 12, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court defines a class suit, as follows: Sec. 12. Class
suit. When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to
many persons so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties, a number of
them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully
protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all.

REQUISITES OF A CLASS SUIT

Any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.
The necessary elements for the maintenance of a class suit are:
1) the subject matter of controversy is one of common or general interest to many
persons;
2) the parties affected are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all to court;
and
3) the parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of the
class and can fully protect the interests of all concerned

Death or Separation of a Party (S-16,17,18, R-3)

Section 16. Death of party; duty of counsel. – Whenever a party to a pending action
dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to
inform the court within thirty (30) days after such death of the fact thereof, and to give
the name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel
to comply with this duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.

The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without
requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a
guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.

The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear
and be substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.

If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one
so named shall fail to appear within the specified period, the court may order the
opposing party, within a specified time, to procure the appointment of an executor or
administrator for the estate of the deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for
and on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if
defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs.
Section 17. Death or separation of a party who is a public officer. – When a public
officer is a party in an action in his official capacity and during its pendency dies,
resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the action may be continued and maintained
by or against his successor if, within thirty (30) days after the successor takes office or
such time as may be granted by the court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by any
party that there is a substantial need for continuing or maintaining it and that the
successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or continue the action of his
predecessor. Before a substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected, unless
expressly assenting thereto, shall be given reasonable notice of the application therefor
and accorded an opportunity to be heard.

Section 18. Incompetency or incapacity. – If a party becomes incompetent or

incapacitated, the court, upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be continued
by or against the incompetent or incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or
guardian ad litem.

Duty of counsel upon death of client

a. Inform court of such fact within 30 days after the death; and
b. Give the name and address of the legal representative. [Sec. 16, Rule 3]

Effect of failure to comply

Failure to comply is a ground for disciplinary action [Sec. 16, Rule 3]
Action of court upon notice of death

Upon receipt of notice, the court shall determine if the claim is extinguished by
such death. a. Claim does not survive: substitution would not be ordered
b. Claim survives: the court shall order the legal representative of the deceased to
appear and be substituted for him within 30 days [Sec. 16, Rule 3] [1 Riano 286, 2014
Bantam Ed., suggesting Aguas v. Llemos, G.R. No. L-18107 (1962)]

Survival of Action
Survival depends on the nature of the action and the damage sought
Actions that survive Actions that do not survive
The wrong complained of affects primarily The injury complained of is personal to the
and principally property and property person
rights
Injuries to the person are merely Property and property rights affected are
incidental [Cruz v. Cruz, G.R. No. 173292 incidental [Cruz v. Cruz, G.R. No. 173292
(2010)] (2010)]
Actions to recover real and personal Action for support, annulment of marriage,
property from the estate; actions to legal separation [1 Riano 291, 2014 Bantam
enforce a lien thereon; and actions to Ed.]
recover damages for an injury to person
or property [Sec. 1, Rule 88; Aguas v.
Llemos, G.R. No. L- 18107 (1962)]

Court may order the opposing party, within a specific time, to procure the
appointment of an administrator or executor of the estate in the ff. cases
a. No legal representative is named; or
b. The one so named fails to appear within the specified period. [Sec. 16, Rule 3]

Substitution: Summons not necessary

The substitute defendant need not be summoned. The order of substitution shall be
served upon the parties substituted for the court to acquire jurisdiction over the
substitute party [Ferreria v. Vda de Gonzales, G.R. No. L- 11567 (1986)]

Effect of failure to order substitution

Results in failure to acquire jurisdiction over the representative or heirs of the deceased
party. Consequently, any judgment rendered against such deceased party shall be null
and void for lack of jurisdiction over the persons of the legal representative or of the
heirs upon whom the trial and the judgment would be binding [The Heirs of Vda. De
Haberer v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. Nos. L-42699 to L-2709 (1981)]

Rule in case of death or separation of party who is a public officer

The action may be continued or maintained by or against his successor [Sec. 17, Rule
3]
Requisites:
a. A public officer is a party to an action in his official capacity;
b. During the pendency of the action, he dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold
office;
c. Within 30 days after the successor takes office or such time as may be granted by the
court, any party shows to the satisfaction of the court, that
1. there is a substantial need for continuing or maintaining such action; and
2. the successor adopts or continues his predecessor’s action, or threatens to do so
d. Before a substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected shall be given
reasonable notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard
UNLESS he expressly assents thereto [Sec. 17, Rule 3]

Transfer of Interest (S-19, R-3)

Section 19. Transfer of interest. – In case of any transfer of interest, the action may
be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the
person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with
the original party.
Contractual Money Claims (S-20, R-3)
Section 20. Action on contractual money claims. – When the action is for recovery
of money arising from contract, express or implied, and the defendant dies before entry
of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending at the time of such death,
it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final
judgment. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the
manner especially provided in these Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a
deceased person.

Action on contractual money claims

Shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final
judgment [Sec. 20, Rule 3]

Requisites
a. Action is for recovery of money,
b. The claim arose from express or implied contract, and
c. Defendant dies before the entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was
pending. [Sec. 20, Rule 3]

Effect
If the plaintiff obtains a favorable judgment, said judgment shall be enforced following
the procedure provided for in the ROC for prosecuting claims against the estate of a
deceased person [Sec. 20, Rule 3] He/She is not supposed to file a motion for the
issuance of an order and writ of execution of the judgment [1 Riano 201, 2014 Bantam
Ed.]

Cases:
Relucio vs. Lopez, 373 SCRA 578
TOPIC: CAUSE OF ACTION, INDISPENSABLE PARTY AND REAL PARTY IN
INTEREST

DOCTRINE: A real party in interest is one who stands, to be benefited or injured

by the judgment of the suit. A petitioner who is not a real party in interest, cannot
be an indispensable party nor a necessary party.

An indispensable party are without rule, there can be no final determination of the
case in contrast a necessary party is one without rule, there can be no complete
determination of the case.

De Castro vs CA 386 SCRA 301 *

TOPIC: XPN TO THE GENERAL RULE ON INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
DOCTRINE:
GR: If any of the indispensable parties have not been included, the judgment in that
case is null and void not only as to those who were excluded but even to those who
were included.
XPN: De Castro vs. CA

Orquiola vs CA – 389 SCRA 461

TOPIC: STRANGERS TO A CASE, EFFECTS.
DOCTRINE: No man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and
strangers to a case are not bound by any judgment rendered by the court. In the same
manner, a writ of execution can be issued only against a party and not against one who
did not have his day in court. Only real parties in interest in an action are bound by the
judgment therein and by writs of execution and demolition issued pursuant thereto. In
our view, the spouses Victor and Honorata Orquiola have valid and meritorious cause to
resist the demolition of their house on their own titled lot, which is tantamount to a
deprivation of property without due process of law.

China Banking Corp., vs Oliver – 390 SCRA 263 *

TOPIC: INDISPENSABLE PARTY IN RELATION TO A PARTY IN INTEREST, THIRD
PARTY CLAIM
DOCTRINE: A party is not indispensable to the suit if his interest in the controversy or
subject matter is distinct and divisible from the interest of the other parties and will not
necessarily be prejudiced by a judgment which does complete justice to the parties in
court. A party is also not indispensable if his presence would merely permit complete
relief between him and those already parties to the action, or will simply avoid multiple
litigation.

David vs. Paragas, Jr. 751 SCRA 648 *

TOPIC: ABSENCE OF AN INDISPENSABLE PARTY - EFFECT
DOCTRINE: The joinder of indispensable parties is mandatory. The presence of
indispensable parties is necessary to vest the court with jurisdiction, which is the
authority to hear and determine a cause, the right to act in a case.·

Time and again, the Supreme Court (SC) has held that the absence of an indispensable
party renders all subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to
act, not only as to the absent parties but even to those present.

Land Bank vs. Cacayuran, 757 SCRA, April 22, 2015 *

TOPIC: RULE AND REMEDY WHEN AN INDISPENSABLE PROPERTY WAS NOT
IMPLEADED. – NON JOINDER OF AN INDISPENSABLE PARTY
DOCTRINE: It must be stressed that the failure to implead any indispensable party to a
suit does not necessarily result in the outright dismissal of the complaint. In Heirs of
Mesina v. Heirs of Fian, Sr., 695 SCRA 345 (2013), the Court definitively explained that
in instances of non-joinder of indispensable parties, the proper remedy is to implead
them and not to dismiss the case: The non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a
ground for the dismissal of an action. At any stage of a judicial proceeding and/or at
such times as are just, parties may be added on the motion of a party or on the initiative
of the tribunal concerned. If the plaintiff refuses to implead an indispensable party
despite the order of the court, that court may dismiss the complaint for the plaintiff’s
failure to comply with the order. The remedy is to implead the nonparty claimed to be
indispensable.

Lotte Phils. Co. Inc. vs. De la Cruz – 464 SCRA 591

TOPIC: RULE AND REMEDY FOR NON JOINDER OF INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
DOCTRINE: Non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a ground for the dismissal of an
action and the remedy is to implead the non-party claimed to be indispensable. Parties
may be added by order of the court on motion of the party or on its own initiative at any
stage of the action and/or such times as are just. If the petitioner refuses to implead an
indispensable party despite the order of the court, the latter may dismiss the
complaint/petition for the petitioner/plaintiff's failure to comply therefore.

Carabeo vs. Dingco, 647 SCRA 200 *

TOPIC: Nature of Actions that Survives and of Actions that do not Survive
DOCTRINE: In the causes of action which survive, the wrong complained of affects
primarily and principally property and property rights, the injuries to the person being
merely incidental, while in the causes of action which do not survive, the injury
complained of is to the person, the property and rights of property affected being
incidental.

De la Cruz vs, Joaquin – 464 SCRA 576

TOPIC: Substitution of Parties
DOCTRINE:
When a party to a pending action dies and the claim is not extinguished, the Rules of
Court require a substitution of the deceased. The procedure is specifically governed by
Section 16 of Rule 3.

The rule on the substitution of parties was crafted to protect every party’s right to due
process. The estate of the deceased party will continue to be properly represented in
the suit through the duly appointed legal representative. Moreover, no adjudication can
be made against the successor of the deceased if the fundamental right to a day in
court is denied.

Formal substitution by heirs is not necessary when they themselves voluntarily appear,
participate in the case, and present evidence in defense of the deceased.

Strictly speaking, the rule on the substitution by heirs is not a matter of jurisdiction, but a
requirement of due process; Mere failure to substitute for a deceased plaintiff is not a
sufficient ground to nullify a trial court’s decision;

Navarro vs. Escobido, 606 SCRA 1

TOPIC: Co Owners in Relation to Indispensable Parties
DOCTRINE: In sum, in suits to recover properties, all co-owners are real parties in
interest. However, pursuant to Article 487 of the Civil Code and relevant jurisprudence,
any one of them may bring an action, any kind of action, for the recovery of co-owned
properties. Therefore, only one of the co-owners, namely the co-owner who filed the suit
for the recovery of the co-owned property, is an indispensable party thereto. The other
co- owners are not indispensable parties. They are not even necessary parties, for a
complete relief can be accorded in the suit even without their participation, since the suit
is presumed to have been filed for the benefit of all co-owners.

Divinagracia vs. Parilla, 753 SCRA 87

TOPIC: Absence of indispensable parties in a complaint for judicial partition
DOCTRINE:
Co-Heirs; All the coheirs and persons having an interest in the property are
indispensable parties; as such, an action for partition will not lie without the joinder of
the said parties. With regard to actions for partition, Section 1, Rule 69 of the Rules of
Court requires that all persons interested in the property shall be joined as defendants,
viz.: SEC. 1. Complaint in action for partition of real estate. A person having the right to
compel the partition of real estate may do so as provided in this Rule, setting forth in his
complaint the nature and extent of his title and an adequate description of the real
estate of which partition is demanded and joining as defendants all other persons
interested in the property. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) Thus, all the coheirs
and persons having an interest in the property are indispensable parties; as such, an
action for partition will not lie without the joinder of the said parties.

Co-Ownership; In actions for partition, the court cannot properly issue an order to divide
the property, unless it first makes a determination as to the existence of co-ownership.
The court must initially settle the issue of ownership, which is the first stage in an action
for partition. Indubitably, therefore, until and unless this issue of co-ownership is
definitely and finally resolved, it would be premature to effect a partition of the disputed
properties.

The non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a ground for the dismissal of an action.
At any stage of a judicial proceeding and/or at such times as are just, parties may be
added on the motion of a party or on the initiative of the tribunal concerned. If the
plaintiff refuses to implead an indispensable party despite the order of the court, that
court may dismiss the complaint for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order. The
remedy is to implead the nonparty claimed to be indispensable.

Enrique vda de Santiago vs. Vilar, 857 SCRA (2017)

TOPIC: Widow of the original party-plaintiff as an Indispensable Party
DOCTRINE: Failure to participate in the proceedings before the court constitutes a
denial of constitutional right to due process. Hence, failure to implead a person as an
indispensable party rendered all the proceedings before the court null and void for want
of authority to act.

==============================================================
 D. Venue of Actions: real actions, personal actions

RULE 4 VENUE OF ACTIONS

Section 1. Venue of real actions. – Actions affecting title to or possession of real
property, or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which
has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is
situated.

Forcible entry and unlawful detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the
municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a
portion thereof, is situated.

Section 2. Venue of personal actions. – All other actions may be commenced and
tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant
or any of the principal defendants resides, or in the case of a nonresident defendant
where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.

Section 3. Venue of actions against nonresidents. – If any of the defendants does

not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal status
of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant located in the Philippines, the action
may be commenced and tried in the court of the place where the plaintiff resides, or
where the property or any portion thereof is situated or found.

Section 4. When Rule not applicable. – This Rule shall not apply-
(a) In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or
(b) Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the
exclusive venue thereof.

Jurisdiction over the territory

Jurisdiction over In Civil Cases, venue refers to place where action is filed.
the territory
In Criminal Cases venue is jurisdictional.
Basis:
It determines not only the place where the criminal action is to
be instituted, but also the court that has the jurisdiction to try and
hear the case.
The reason for this rule is two-fold.
1. First, the jurisdiction of trial courts is limited to well-defined
territories such that a trial court can only hear and try cases
involving crimes committed within its territorial jurisdiction.
2. Second, laying the venue in the locus criminis is grounded on
the necessity and justice of having an accused on trial in the
municipality of province where witnesses and other facilities for
 his defense are available.

Jurisdiction versus Venue – 4 WAYS

JURISDICTION VENUE
1. The authority to hear and The place where the case is to be heard or tried
determine a case
2. A matter of substantive law A matter of procedural law
3. Establishes a relation between the Establishes a relation between plaintiff and
court and the subject matter defendant, or petitioner and respondent
4. Fixed by law and cannot be May be conferred by the act or agreement of the
conferred by the parties parties
5. Ground for motu proprio dismissal Not a ground for a motu proprio dismissal except
in summary procedure
6. Not waivable GR: (in civil cases) Maybe waived
XPN:
1. where a specific rule or law provides –
unlawful detainer (MTC);
2. contrary to public policy (Sweet lines vs.
Teves)
3. When what is being assailed is the
authenticity of the contract (Briones vs. CA)

Venue in Civil Cases vs. Venue in Criminal Cases

Venue in Civil Cases Venue in Criminal Cases
In civil cases, venue is only procedural Venue in criminal cases is jurisdictional since
and for the purpose of convenience of the it is conferred by the penal statute.
parties.
In civil cases venue is conferred by Rule Venue in criminal cases is conferred by the
4 and may be agreed upon by the parties. provision of law.
Improper venue in civil cases can be Improper venue in criminal cases is a ground
raised as an affirmative defense in the for a motion to quash the complaint or
answer under Sec. 12, Rule 8. information on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the offense charged.
In case of denial of the affirmative In case of denial of the motion to quash on
defenses in the answer, it shall not be the the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the
subject of a motion for reconsideration or offense charged the remedy is to proceed
petition for certiorari, prohibition or with the arraignment.
mandamus, but may be among the
matters to be raised on appeal after a
judgment on the merits (Sec. 12, Rule 8
of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997
Rules on Civil Procedure 1 (A.M. No. 19-
10-20)
In civil cases, issue of venue can be Venue in criminal cases cannot be waived
waived for failure to object and raise it as since it is jurisdictional since and conferred
an affirmative defense in the answer. by the penal statute
(Sec. 1, Rule 9)

Venue (Rule 4)
Venue
- refers to the place where a civil action may be tried; in civil cases, it essentially
concerns a rule of procedure which looks primarily at the convenience of the litigants.
[Gumabon, et al. v. Larin, G.R. No. 142523, (2001)]

Venue relates only to the place of trial or the geographical location in which an action or
proceeding should be brought. It is intended to accord convenience to the parties and
does not equate to the jurisdiction of the court. [Dolot v. Paje, G.R. 199199 (2013)]

Choosing the venue of an action is not left entirely to a plaintiff’s caprice; the matter is
regulated by the ROC. [Ang v. Sps. Ang, G.R. No. 186993 (2012)]

On dismissal based on improper venue

Improper venue is no longer one of the grounds for a motion to dismiss under the
Amended Rules. However, the ground of the venue being improperly laid is one of
those that may be set as an Affirmative Defense in the answer. The failure to raise the
affirmative defense in the answer will constitute a waiver of such. [Sec 12, Rule 8]
However, the court may make a motu proprio dismissal for improper venue, inter alia, in
actions covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure [Sec. 4], Rule of Procedure for
Small Claims cases [Sec. 9], and in ejectment cases. [Sec. 5, Rule 70]

Rule on Venue in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC:

RULE ON DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE NULLITY OF VOID MARRIAGES AND
ANNULMENT OF VOIDABLE MARRIAGES (Sec. 4) (DNM), Sec. 2 (c), Section 4.
Venue. - The Petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the
petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to the date of
filing. Or in the case of non-resident respondent, where he may be found in the
Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.

A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC (Rule on Legal Separation)

Sec 2 (c) Venue. - The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city
where the petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to
the date of filing "or in The case of a non-resident respondent, where he may be found
in the Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.

Venue on Adoption
As amended by Republic Act No. 11642, or the Domestic Administrative Adoption
and Alternative Child Care Act was enacted on January 6, 2022
Upon effectivity of RA 11642, courts may no longer receive or accept petitions for
domestic adoption. Jurisdiction over domestic adoption cases shall now be with the
newly created National Authority for Child Care (NACC), a quasi-judicial agency
attached to the Department of Social Welfare and Development.

Real Action v. Personal Action

Real Action Personal Action
It is an action affecting title to or It refers to all other actions which are not
possession of real property, or real actions. [Sec. 2, Rule 4]
interest therein. [Sec. 1, Rule 4]
Real actions shall be commenced and All other actions may be commenced and
tried in the proper court which has tried, at the plaintiff’s election:
jurisdiction over the area wherein the Where the plaintiff or any of the principal
real property involved, or a portion plaintiffs resides, or
thereof is situated. Where the defendant or any of the principal
defendants resides, or
In case of a non-resident defendant, where
he may be found.
Founded on privity of real estate Founded on privity of contract.
Example: An action for recovery of Example: An action which seeks to recover
possession of real property, quieting of personal property, enforcement of a contract,
title or removal of clouds, action for or the recovery of damages
specific performance for the delivery of
real property.

Venue of real actions (R4, S1)

Actions affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be
commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein
the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.

The rule, in its simplified form, means that if the action is real, the action is local, as
opposed to transitory, and the venue is the place where the real property involved, or
any portion thereof, is situated. [1 Riano 151, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the municipal court
of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is
situated. [Sec. 1, Rule 4]

COMMENT:
A REAL ACTION is local. The venue is the place where the real property or any portion
thereof is located.

If property is located at the boundaries of two places

File case in either place at the option of the plaintiff.

When the case involves two properties located in two different places:
1. If the properties are the object of the same transaction, file it in any of the two places;
and
2. If they are the subjects of two distinct transactions, separate actions should be filed in
each place unless properly joined.

Where the subject-matter of the action involves various parcels of land situated in
different provinces, the venue is determined by the singularity or plurality of the
transactions involving said parcels of land. Thus, where said parcels are the objects of
one and the same transaction, the venue is in the court of any of the provinces wherein
a parcel of land is situated. [1 Regalado 118, 2010 Ed., citing El Hogar Filipino v. Seva,
G.R. No. 36627 (1932)]

Venue of personal actions (R4, S2)

All other actions may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal
plaintiff’s resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or
in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be found, at the election of the
plaintiff.

COMMENT:
Venue of Personal Actions
A personal action is transitory. It is filed:
1. Where the PLAINTIFF or any of the principal plaintiffs resides;
2. Where the DEFENDANT or any of the principal defendants resides; or
3. In case of a NON-RESIDENT DEFENDANT, the action may be brought in the place
where he may be found.
Note: All at the ELECTION of the Plaintiff.

Residence should be viewed or understood in its popular sense, meaning the

personal, actual or physical habitation of a person, actual residence or place of abode
(Raymond vs. CA G.R. No. 80380, Sept. 28, 1988)

Nominal Party – one which is included in a lawsuit because of his technical connection
with the matter of dispute but with no right to recover (i.e. sheriff or trustee holding title
to a real property).

Means of Waiving Venue:

1. Failure to object via motion to dismiss;
2. Affirmative relief sought in the court where the case is filed;
3. Affirmative defense in an answer;
4. Voluntary submission to the court where the case is filed;
5. Laches

All other actions may be commenced and tried, at the plaintiff’s election:
a. Where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or
b. Where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or
c. In case of a non-resident defendant, where he may be found. [Sec. 2, Rule 4]
The plaintiff or the defendant must be residents of the place where the action has been
instituted at the time the action is commenced [Ang v. Sps. Ang, G.R. No. 186993
(2012)]

Definition of residence
The term “resides” as employed in the rule means the place of abode, whether
permanent or temporary, of the plaintiff or defendant, as distinguished from “domicile”
which denotes a fixed permanent residence to which, when absent, one has the
intention of returning. [Dangwa Transportation Company v. Sarmiento, G.R. No. L-
22795 (1977)]

The residence of a person is his personal, actual or physical habitation or his actual
residence or place of abode, which may not necessarily be his legal residence or
domicile provided he resides therein with continuity and consistency [Boleyley v.
Villanueva, G.R. No. 128734 (1999)]

A corporation cannot be allowed to file personal actions in a place other than its
principal place of business unless such place is also the residence of a co-plaintiff or
defendant. [Davao Light v. CA, G.R. No. 111685 (2001)]

Irene Marcos-Araneta v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 154096, August 22, 2008
VELASCO, JR., J.:
Doctrine: The Supreme Court ruled that under Sec. 2 Rule 4 of the Rules of Court
provides that the Venue of Personal Actions may be commenced and tried where the
plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiff resides or where the defendant or where the
principal defendants reside or in the case of non-residents defendants where he may be
found, at the election of the plaintiff. The law is quite clear that if there are more that one
plaintiff, the residence of the principal plaintiff shall be the basis for determining the
proper venue. In the case at bar, Since Irene is the principle plaintiff in the complaint in
light with the said Rule the subject of the civil case should commence at the residences
of Irene at Makati City making it the proper venue and not at Batac, Ilocos Norte.

Residence of a juridical entity

Hyatt Elevators and Escalators Corp. v. Goldstar Elevators Phils., 473 SCRA 705
PANGANIBAN, J.:
A corporation, however, has no residence in the same sense in which this term is
applied to a natural person. This is precisely the reason why the Court in Young Auto
Supply Company v. Court of Appeals ruled that "for practical purposes, a corporation is
in a metaphysical sense a resident of the place where its principal office is located as
stated in the articles of incorporation."

Venue of actions against non-residents (R4, S3)

If any of the defendants does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the
action affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant
located in the Philippines, the action may be commenced and tried in the court of the
place where the plaintiff resides, or where the property or any portion thereof is situated
or found.

COMMENT:
1. Non-resident found in the Philippines
a. For personal actions – where the plaintiff resides; and
b. For real actions – where the property is located;

2. Non-resident not found in the Philippines – An action may be filed only when the
case involves:
a. Personal status of plaintiff – Venue: where the plaintiff resides; and
b. Any property of said defendant located in the Philippines – Venue: where the property
or any portion thereof is situated or found.

Requisites for venue agreement to be valid:

1. In writing; and
2. Executed by the parties before the filing of the action;
3. There must be exclusivity as to the selection of the venue

The mere stipulation on the venue of an action, however, is not enough to preclude
parties from bringing a case in other venue.

In the absence of restrictive words (e.g. only solely, exclusively in this court, in no other
court save, particularly, nowhere else but/except), the stipulation should be deemed as
merely an agreement on an additional forum, not as limiting venue. If the language is
restrictive, the suit may be filed only the place agreed upon by the parties.

When the rules on venue do not apply (R4, S4)

(a) In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or
Examples:
1. Quo warranto proceedings commenced by the SolGen
- The action may be brought in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or in a
Regional Trial Court in the City of Manila.

2. Petition for a continuing writ of mandamus

The petition shall be filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction over the
territory where the actionable neglect or omission occurred or with the Court of Appeals
or the Supreme Court.

3. Civil and criminal action for damages in written defamation

Note that for written defamations, the default venue would be the place where the
libelous article is first published or where any of the offended parties reside
{a} In case that the offended party is a public officer, the proper venue would be
either where he holds office at the time of the commission of the crime, or the place
where the libelous article is first published [Art. 360, RPC]

(b) Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action
on the exclusive venue thereof.
- To be binding, the parties must have agreed on the exclusive nature of the venue of
any prospective action between them. The agreement of parties must be restrictive and
not permissive
- In the absence of qualifying or restrictive words (e.g. “only/solely/exclusively in such
court”), venue stipulation is merely permissive; that is, the stipulated venue is in addition
to the venue provided for in the rules.

4. Jurisprudence

VOID Contrary to Public Policy (Sweet Lines vs. Teves, G.R. No. 28324, May 19,
1972)
- When the stipulation as to venue in a passenger ticket of a vessel would be contrary to
public policy of making courts accessible to all who may have need of their service, the
stipulation is void and unenforceable.

WHEN WHAT IS BEING ASSAILED IS THE VALIDITY OF THE CONTRACT ITSELF

Briones v. CA, G.R. No. 204444, January 14, 2015 PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:
- In this case, the venue stipulation found in the subject contracts is indeed restrictive in
nature, considering that it effectively limits the venue of the actions arising therefrom to
the courts of Makati City. However, it must be emphasized that Briones's complaint
directly assails the validity of the subject contracts, claiming forgery in their execution.
Given this circumstance, Briones cannot be expected to comply with the aforesaid
venue stipulation, as his compliance therewith would mean an implicit recognition of
their validity. Hence, pursuant to the general rules on venue, Briones properly filed his
complaint before a court in the City of Manila where the subject property is located.

Cases:
1. Pacific Consultants International Asia vs. Schonfeld - 516 SCRA
TOPIC: AGREEMENT ON VENUE
DOCTRINE:
Requisites for venue agreement to be valid:
1. In writing; and
2. Executed by the parties before the filing of the action;
3. There must be exclusivity as to the selection of the venue

Venue stipulations in a contract do not, as a rule, supersede the general rule set forth in
Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court in the absence of qualifying or restrictive words.
The settled rule on stipulations regarding venue, as held by this Court in the vintage
case of Philippine Banking Corporation v. Tensuan, 230 SCRA 413 (1994), is that while
they are considered valid and enforceable, venue stipulations in a contract do not, as a
rule, supersede the general rule set forth in Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court in the
absence of qualifying or restrictive words.

They should be considered merely as an agreement or additional forum, not as limiting

venue to the specified place. They are not exclusive but, rather permissive. If the
intention of the parties were to restrict venue, there must be accompanying language
clearly and categorically expressing their purpose and design that actions between
them be litigated only at the place named by them.

2. Biaco vs. Countryside Rural bank – 515 SCRA 106

TOPIC: The nature of the action whether the action is in personam, in rem, or quasi in
rem
DOCTRINE: The question of whether the trial court has jurisdiction depends on the
nature of the action, i.e., whether the action is in personam, in rem, or quasi in rem. The
rules on service of summons under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court likewise apply
according to the nature of the action.
1. An action in personam is an action against a person on the basis of his personal
liability.
2. An action in rem is an action against the thing itself instead of against the person.
3. An action quasi in rem is one wherein an individual is named as defendant and the
purpose of the proceeding is to subject his interest therein to the obligation or lien
burdening the property.

A judicial foreclosure proceeding is an action quasi in rem. As such, jurisdiction over the
person of petitioner is not required, it being sufficient that the trial court is vested with
jurisdiction over the subject matter.

3. BPI Savings Bank vs. Sps. Yujuico – 763 SCRA 486 (7/2015)
TOPIC: VENUE OF REAL AND PERSONAL ACTIONS
DOCTRINE: It is basic that the venue of an action depends on whether it is a real or a
personal action. The determinants of whether an action is of a real or a personal nature
have been fixed by the Rules of Court and relevant jurisprudence. According to Section
1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, a real action is one that affects title to or possession of
real property, or an interest therein. Thus, an action for partition or condemnation of, or
foreclosure of mortgage on, real property is a real action. The real action is to be
commenced and tried in the proper court having jurisdiction over the area wherein the
real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated, which explains why the action is
also referred to as a local action. In contrast, the Rules of Court declares all other
actions as personal actions. Such actions may include those brought for the recovery of
personal property, or for the enforcement of some contract or recovery of damages for
its breach, or for the recovery of damages for the commission of an injury to the person
or property. The venue of a personal action is the place where the plaintiff or any of the
principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants
resides, or in the case of a nonresident defendant where he may be found, at the
election of the plaintiff, for which reason the action is considered a transitory one.

In civil proceedings, venue is procedural, not jurisdictional, and may be waived by the
defendant if not seasonably raised either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer.
Section 1, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court thus expressly stipulates that defenses and
objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed
waived. As it relates to the place of trial, indeed, venue is meant to provide convenience
to the parties, rather than to restrict their access to the courts. In other words, unless the
defendant seasonably objects, any action may be tried by a court despite its being the
improper venue

4. Planters Dev. Bank vs. Ramos, 840 SCRA (2017)

TOPIC: PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF STIPULATIONS ON VENUE
DOCTRINE:
The general rules on venue admit of exceptions in Section 4 thereof, i.e., where a
specific rule or law provides otherwise, or when the parties agreed in writing before the
filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof. Stipulations on venue, however, may
either be permissive or restrictive. Written stipulations as to venue may be restrictive in
the sense that the suit may be filed only in the place agreed upon, or merely permissive
in that the parties may file their suit not only in the place agreed upon but also in the
places fixed by law. In the absence of qualifying or restrictive words, the stipulation
should be deemed as merely an agreement on an additional forum, not as limiting
venue to the specified place.

E. Summary Procedure vs. Small Claims Suit

What are their salient characteristics

Ordinary Summary Procedure Small Claim

Basis: Rules on Expedited Procedure in the First Level Courts
As to nature Civil Only Civil and Criminal Civil
As to Allowed Allowed Not Allowed
Counsel’s
Assistance
As to Purpose To provide a speedy To provide a speedier
and inexpensive and inexpensive
disposition of cases disposition of money
that are defined to be claims of small
included in the cases amounts
for Summary
procedure
As to where 1. Metropolitan Trial Courts
filed (only in 2. Municipal Trial Courts in Cities
lower courts) 3. Municipal Trial Courts
4. Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
The (1) over civil actions CIVIL CASES 1. The threshold
following are and probate (a) Forcible entry amount in small
the proceedings, testate and unlawful detainer claims cases is now
significant and intestate, cases, regardless of One Million Pesos
amendments including the grant of the amount of (PHP1,000,000.00),
made provisional remedies damages or unpaid regardless of whether
in proper cases, rentals sought to be the case is filed within
where the value of the recovered. Where or outside Metro
personal property, attorney’s fees are Manila. This covers
estate, or amount of awarded, the same claims or demands for
the demand does not shall not exceed One money owed under
exceed Two million Hundred Thousand any of the following:
pesos Pesos (₱100,000.00). (a) Contract of
(P2,000,000.00), (b) All civil actions, Lease;
exclusive of interest, except probate (b) Contract of
damages of whatever proceedings, Loan and other
kind, attorney’s fees, admiralty and credit
litigation expenses, maritime actions, and accommodations;
and costs, the amount small claims cases (c) Contract of
of which must be falling under Rule IV Services; or
specifically alleged. hereof, where the (d) Contract of
(b) in admiralty and total amount of the Sale of personal
maritime actions plaintiff’s claim does property, excluding
where the demand or not exceed Two the recovery of the
claim does not Million Pesos personal property,
exceed Two million (₱2,000,000.00), unless it is made
pesos exclusive of interest, the subject of a
(P2,000,000.00).” damages of whatever compromise
(c) in in all civil kind, attorney’s fees, agreement between
actions which involve litigation expenses the parties.
title to, or possession and costs. 2. Recovery of
of, real property, or (c) Complaints for personal property,
any interest therein damages where the unless it is made
where the assessed claim does not subject of a
value of the property exceed Two Million compromise
or any interest therein Pesos agreement between
does not exceed (₱2,000,000.00), the parties, are
Four hundred exclusive of interest excluded from the
thousand pesos and costs. operation of the new
(P400,000.00) (d) Cases for Rules. Nevertheless,
exclusive on interest, enforcement of the enforcement of
damages of whatever barangay amicable barangay amicable
kind, attorney’s fees, settlement settlement
litigation expenses agreements and agreements and
and costs: Provided, arbitration awards arbitration awards
That in cases of land where the money where the money
not declared for claim exceeds One claim does not
taxation purposes, the Million Pesos exceed One Million
value of such property (₱1,000,000.00), Pesos
shall be determined provided that no (PHP1,000,000.00)
by the assessed execution has been are included, provided
value of the adjacent enforced by the that no execution has
lots. barangay within six been enforced within
(6) months from the six (6) months from
date of the settlement the settlement date or
or date of receipt of receipt of award or
the award or from the the date when the
date the obligation obligation becomes
stipulated or adjudged due and demandable.
in the arbitration 3. Joinder of two
award becomes due or more separate
and demandable, small claims against a
pursuant to Section defendant is allowed,
417, Chapter VII of provided that the total
Republic Act No. amount claimed does
7160, otherwise not exceed One
known as The Local Million Pesos
Government Code of (PHP1,000,000.00).
1991. 4. If more than
(e) Cases solely five (5) claims are
for the revival of filed by one party
judgment of any within the calendar
Metropolitan Trial year, additional filing
Court, Municipal Trial fee of Five Hundred
Court in Cities, Pesos (PHP500.00)
Municipal Trial Court, shall be paid for every
and Municipal Circuit claim filed after the
Trial Court, pursuant fifth (5th) claim and
to Rule 39, Section 6 an additional One
of the Rules of Court. Hundred Pesos
(f) The civil (PHP100.00) or a
aspect of a violation total of Six Hundred
of Batas Pambansa Pesos (PHP600.00)
Blg. 22 (the Bouncing for every claim filed
Checks Law), if no after the tenth (10th)
criminal action has claim and another
been instituted One Hundred Pesos
therefor. Should a (PHP100.00) or a
criminal action be total of Seven
later instituted for the Hundred Pesos
 same violation, the (PHP700.00) for
civil aspect shall be every claim filed after
consolidated with the the fifteenth (15th)
criminal action and claim, progressively
shall be tried and and cumulatively
decided jointly under 5. Service of
the Rule on Summary summons through the
Procedure. plaintiff is allowed if it
All other cases not is returned unserved
included herein shall by the sheriff or
be governed by the proper court officer, or
regular rules of if it shall be served
procedure. outside the judicial
region of the court
where the case is
CRIMINAL CASES
pending. If the plaintiff
The following criminal misrepresents that
cases shall be the defendant was
governed by the Rule served, the case shall
on Summary be dismissed with
Procedure: prejudice and the
(a) Violations of plaintiff shall be
traffic laws, rules and declared in indirect
regulations; contempt and/ or be
(b) Violations of meted a fine of Five
the rental law; Thousand Pesos
(c) Violations of (PHP5,000.00).
municipal or city 6. If a case is
ordinances; dismissed without
(d) Violations of prejudice for failure to
Batas Pambansa Blg. serve summons, it
22 (the Bouncing may now be re-filed
Checks Law); and with a fixed filing fee
(e) All other of Two Thousand
criminal cases where Pesos (PHP2,000.00)
the penalty prescribed within one year from
by law for the offense notice of dismissal.
charged is 7. Any amount
imprisonment not pleaded in
exceeding one (1) counterclaim in
year, or a fine not excess of One Million
exceeding Fifty Pesos
Thousand Pesos (PHP1,000,000.00)
(₱50,000.00), or both, shall be deemed
regardless of other waived.
imposable penalties, 8. The period to
 set the hearing was
accessory or
increased to sixty (60)
otherwise, or of the
calendar days in
civil liability arising
small claims cases
therefrom. In offenses
where one of the
involving damage to
defendants reside or
property through
hold business outside
criminal negligence
the judicial region of
under Article 365 of
the court. Otherwise,
the Revised Penal
the hearing shall be
Code, this Rule shall
set within thirty (30)
govern where the
calendar days.
imposable fine does
9. The hearing
not exceed One
will still be held in one
Hundred Fifty
(1) day, with the
Thousand Pesos
judgment to be
(₱150,000.00).
rendered strictly
If the prescribed within twenty-four (24)
penalty consists of hours from its
imprisonment and/or termination.
a fine, the prescribed 10. The Small
imprisonment shall be Claims Forms have
the basis for also been updated
determining the and improved for
applicable procedure. ease of use, with
All other cases not translations in
included herein shall Filipino.
be governed by the The conduct of
regular rules of videoconferencing
procedure. hearings using
Microsoft Teams for
both summary
Arraignment and pre- proceedings and
trial shall be small claims cases is
scheduled and allowed at any stage
conducted in of the proceedings. If
accordance with warranted, the first
the Revised level courts may also
Guidelines for make use of
Continuous Trial of alternative platforms
Criminal Cases. or instant messaging
applications with
In cases of appeal, video call features for
any judgment, final their
order, or final videoconferencing
resolution of the first hearings.
level courts on
 summary procedure The new Rules shall
may be appealed to take effect on 11 April
the appropriate 2022 and shall apply
Regional Trial Court prospectively. Cases
(RTC) exercising currently pending
jurisdiction over the before the first and
territory under Rule second level courts
40 for civil cases and will remain with and
Rule 122 for criminal be decided by those
cases. The judgment same courts, in
of the RTC on the accordance with the
appeal shall be final, applicable rules at the
executory, and time of their filing.
unappealable.
Prohibited Will not apply to a civil1. Criminal actions
Cases case where the are excluded such as
plaintiff's cause of cases for libel and
action is pleaded in slander which grant
the same complaint the accused the right
with another cause of to be heard and
action subject to the present evidence.
ordinary procedure; However, the civil
nor to a criminal case aspect of a claim for
where the offense damages may be
charged isheard as a small
necessarily related to claim if reserved or
another criminal case instituted separately
subject to the ordinary prior to the filing of
procedure. the criminal case.
2. civil cases which
cannot be filed as
small claims
regardless of amount
Prohibited The following pleadings, motions, or petitions
pleadings shall not be allowed in cases governed by
and motions. these Rules:
(a) In civil cases, a motion to dismiss the
complaint or the statement of claim, and
in criminal cases, a motion to quash the
complaint or information, except on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter or failure to comply with
the requirement of barangay conciliation,
pursuant to Chapter VII, Title I, Book III of
Republic Act No. 7160;
(b) Motion to hear and/or resolve affirmative
 defenses;
(c) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(d) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration
of a judgment on the merits, or for
reopening of proceedings;
(e) Petition for relief from judgment;
(f) Motion for extension of time to file
pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
(g) Memoranda;
(h) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or
prohibition against any interlocutory order
issued by the court;
(i) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(j) Dilatory motions for postponement. Any
motion for postponement shall be
presumed dilatory unless grounded on
acts of God, force majeure, or physical
inability of a counsel or witness to
personally appear in court, as supported
by the requisite affidavit and medical
proof;
(k) Rejoinder;
(l) Third-party complaints;
(m) Motion for and Complaint in
Intervention;
(n) Motion to admit late judicial affidavit/s,
position papers, or other evidence, except
on the ground of force majeure or acts of
God;
(o) Motion for judicial determination of
probable cause in criminal cases.
Initiatory Complaint, Permissive Complaint Statement of Claim
Pleading Counterclaim, Third
Party Complaint,
Complaint in
Intervention
Responsive Answer Answer Response
Pleadings
Reply Not prohibited Prohibited Prohibited
Joinder of Not prohibited Not prohibited Not prohibited, as
Causes of long as the total
Action amount does not
exceed One Million
Pesos
(PHP1,000,000.00)
SALIENT POINTS
Summary Procedure
1) only applicable in the lower court
there is no the summary procedure
before RTC or Family Court. Don’t
get confused some lawyers would
say ah summary lang yan if it is RTC
he is talking loosely it is not really
summary, what the trial lawyers call
as summary before the RTC ang ibig
sabihin ex parte presentation of
evidence, but it is not covered under
summary procedure because
summary procedure applies only in
lower court.
2) There is no trial in summary
procedure, when we say trial but the
judgment in summary procedure is
still judgment on the merit don’t get
confused, not simply because there
was no trial, what we are talking trial
here is actual presentation of
evidence in court mas lalo na ngayon
it is even more pronounce because
evidence is already part of the
contents of the pleadings. So walang
trial dun, a good illustration is
unlawful detainer or forcible entry
under Rule 70, it is specifically
provided under 7691 that cases of
unlawful detainer or forcible entry
generally known as ejectment cases
are covered by the Rules on
Summary Procedure, walang trial
dyan, presentation only or submission
of position papers and thereafter
judgment must be rendered,
summary procedure no trial unlike in
small claims that the court may
conduct summary hearing pero yung
Small Claim
Don’t confuse the small claims with
summary procedure, you may be
confronted of a problem that first thing
you need to decide is, is this covered by
summary procure or small claim.
1) Remember that summary procedure
applies in both civil and criminal
cases but small claims applies only
in civil cases, walang small claims
sa criminal cases.
2) It is only for sum of money, specific
performance can never fall under
small claims. It is only for sum of
money and the claim is always based
on a contract whether written or
unwritten, contract of loan - small
claims, contract of services – small
claims, contract of lease – kapag
money claim it may fall under small
claim, but the important thing you
should remember in small claim is the
ceiling of the claimable amount which
is P400,000.00 in excess it is not
anymore small claim. Pero dipende
yan ha don’t be confused with
consolidation, joinder of small claim
should not be confused of
consolidation under Rule 31, iba yan,
because there is also a joinder of
small claim. The joinder of small
claim is required that it must be the
same parties, plaintiff and defendant,
yan ang joinder dyan unlike the
joinder you studied in Rule 2 and
don’t confuse that with consolidation
and severance, ibang klase din yun
3) Unang una titingnan nyo P400,000 ba
yan kung above P400,000.00 cannot
 provision is “may” conduct summary
hearing, it is not mandatory.
3) The time, the prescriptive period is
much shorter than a regular
procedure, the period to file
answer is 10 days from valid
service of summon and the period
to submit it is 30 days, and the
period to render judgment from
submission. Take note that the
mediation and conciliation proceeding
as well in summary procedure, so
even in ejectment cases you are
brought to the Philippine Mediation
Center for possible amicable
settlement. So that changes the 30-
30 days period because before
mediation and conciliation proceeding
is another 30 days extendible for
another 30 day although now with SC
circular that is no longer extendible
unless for a very compelling reason,
I’m talking of non-summary cases
before the RTC which are also
brought before the mediation and
conciliation proceeding.
4) There are prohibited pleading. So
be careful if you are confronted of a
case of unlawful detainer, ito malimit
ilabas sa bar, panglito, kapag
kinonfront ka ng ejectment case kung
minsan ibabased nila on not Rule 70
but on what based on Rent Control
Law, under the Rent Control Law,
there are also grounds there for
ejectment under the Rent Control
Law, you better look into the latest,
on the Rent Control Law, the last time
I checked nasa P10,000 pa lang, I
don’t know now, you better need to
be anymore small case, kasi civil
lang ito so collection palagi, sum of
money.
4) While in summary lawyers are
allowed in small claims lawyers are
not allowed. So kapag presentation
pa lang ng problem nakalagay dun
plaintiff by counsel, cannot be small
claims anymore, ang confusing kasi
ngayon dinagdagan nila ang small
claims ngayon to P400,000.00 but
they did not increase the
P200,000.00 and P100,000.00 in
summary procedure.
So may option ngayon you can either
file summary procedure or small
claims, so there is an option on the
part of the plaintiff, but the court also
under the small claim rule the court
can also, hindi dismiss ha, walang
dismissal, archival or refer it back to
the executive judge for proper
disposition. Kapag dumating yan sa
excuetive judge ang gagawin ng
executive judge ay small claim ito
bakit nasa summary procedure, so
ano mangyayari ito ang walang
jurisprudence, if there is a lawyer, you
need to say the judge to say lawyer
disqualified ka kasi small claims ito,
wala tayong jurisprudence dyan. But
the judge should explain to the
parties that small claim is much better
than summary procedure. Because in
small claim remember the judgment if
we are in expeditious resolution,
small claim is much better than
summary procedure, because in
small claim from submission kelan ba
judgment, sa summary 30 days, dito
check it kung magkano na yung 24 hours, within a day kaya
rental billing sa ngayon. napakaganda ng small claims na yun.
Unfortunately, it is not often avail of.
Another distinction are the terms used, in
small claims tingnan nyo agad ung
presentation of the problem kapag yung
nakalagay dyan complaint ay di small
claims yan, statement of claim walang
answer but response nakalagay dyan.
 How to determine if the case is summary or under small claims
OCA 45-2019: increased amount of small claims to P400,000

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 45-2019

SUBJECT : AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 2 AND OF A.M. NO. 08-8-7-SC OR THE

REVISED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES

In accordance with the 26 February 2019 Resolution in A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC or The
Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases, the Court En Banc RESOLVED to
AMEND Sections 2 and 8 of the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims the full
text of which is reproduced as follows:

Section 2. Scope. - These Rules shall govern procedure in actions before

the Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), Municipal Trial Courts in Cities
(MTCCs), Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs) and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
(MTCTs) for payment of money where the value of the claim does not
exceed the jurisdictional amount of these courts under Republic Act
No. (R.A.) 7691 (Four Hundred Thousand Pesos [P400,000.00] for the
MeTCs and Three Hundred Thousand Pesos [P300,000.00] for the
MTCCs, MTCs, and MCTCs), exclusive of interest and costs.

xxxx

Section 8. Joinder of Claims. Plaintiff may join in a single statement of

claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant provided that
the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest and costs, does not
exceed the jurisdictional amount of the concerned court under R.A.
7691 (Four Hundred Thousand Pesos [P400,000.00] for the MeTCs
and Three Hundred Thousand Pesos [P300,000.00] for the MTCCs,
MTCs, and MCTCs). (Amendments in bold)

The appropriate Small Claims Forms are likewise amended to reflect the
increased threshold amount of P400,000.00 for the MeTCs.

The amendments to Sections 2 and 8 of the Revised Rules of Procedure for

Small Claims Cases were published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Manila
Bulletin on 15 March 2019, and the same will take effect on 1 April 2019.

Strict compliance is enjoined.

21 March 2019
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC: Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts Effective April
11, 2022

RULES ON EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS

A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC
RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5(5), Article VIII of the Constitution, the Supreme Court
is vested with the power to promulgate rules concerning the pleading, practice, and
procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and
legal assistance to the underprivileged;
WHEREAS, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 11576, which expanded the
jurisdictional amount cognizable by the First Level Courts in civil cases to Two Million
Pesos (₱2,000,000.00) and the jurisdictional amount for recovery of real property with
the assessed value to Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (₱400,000.00);
WHEREAS, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 10951, which adjusted the value of
property and damage on which a penalty is based, and the fines imposed under Act No.
3815, otherwise known as The Revised Penal Code, As Amended;
WHEREAS, the 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure and the 2016 Revised
Rules on Small Claims Cases were promulgated to simplify and expedite proceedings,
taking into account the recent developments in procedural and substantive law and
jurisprudence, as well as technological advancements;
WHEREAS, considering the passage of R.A. Nos. 11576 and 10951, there is a need to
recalibrate, reconcile, and harmonize the coverage of the 1991 Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure and 2016 Revised Rules on Small Claims Cases to efficiently
attain their objectives;
WHEREAS, through Memorandum Order No. 70-2021 dated 16 August 2021 and 31
August 2021, as amended by Memorandum Order No. 116-2021 dated 29 November
2021, the Committee on the Revision of the Rules on Summary Procedure and Small
Claims Cases was reorganized to review the rules and study proposals received by the
Court.
 RULES ON EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS

RULE I APPLICABILITY

Section 1. Coverage. – These Rules shall govern the expedited procedures in the
Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities (MTCCs), the
Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs), and the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTCs), for the
following cases falling within their jurisdiction:

A. CIVIL CASES
(1) Summary Procedure Cases, as follows:
(g) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, regardless of the amount of
damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are
awarded, the same shall not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(₱100,000.00).
(h) All civil actions, except probate proceedings, admiralty and maritime actions,
and small claims cases falling under Rule IV hereof, where the total amount
of the plaintiff’s claim does not exceed Two Million Pesos (₱2,000,000.00),
exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses and costs.
(i) Complaints for damages where the claim does not exceed Two Million Pesos
(₱2,000,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs.
(j) Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and
arbitration awards where the money claim exceeds One Million Pesos
(₱1,000,000.00), provided that no execution has been enforced by the
barangay within six (6) months from the date of the settlement or date of
receipt of the award or from the date the obligation stipulated or adjudged in
the arbitration award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Section
417, Chapter VII of Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as The Local
Government Code of 1991.
(k) Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit
Trial Court, pursuant to Rule 39, Section 6 of the Rules of Court.
(l) The civil aspect of a violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (the Bouncing
Checks Law), if no criminal action has been instituted therefor. Should a
criminal action be later instituted for the same violation, the civil aspect shall
be consolidated with the criminal action and shall be tried and decided jointly
under the Rule on Summary Procedure.
All other cases not included herein shall be governed by the regular rules of
procedure.

(2) Small Claims Cases, as defined hereunder, where the claim does not exceed One
Million Pesos (₱1,000,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs.
 A “small claim” is an action that is purely civil in nature where the claim or relief
raised by the plaintiff is solely for the payment or reimbursement of a sum of money. It
excludes actions seeking other claims or reliefs aside from payment or reimbursement
of a sum of money and those coupled with provisional remedies.
The claim or demand may be:
(a) For money owed under any of the following:
1. Contract of Lease;
2. Contract of Loan and other credit accommodations;
3. Contract of Services; or
4. Contract of Sale of personal property, excluding the recovery of the personal
property, unless it is made the subject of a compromise agreement between
the parties.
(b) The enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration
awards, where the money claim does not exceed One Million Pesos
(₱1,000,000.00), provided that no execution has been enforced by the barangay
within six (6) months from the date of the settlement or date of receipt of the
award or from the date the obligation stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration
award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Section 417, Chapter VII of
Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as The Local Government Code of
1991.

B. CRIMINAL CASES
The following criminal cases shall be governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure:
(1) Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
(2) Violations of the rental law; Rules I–II
(3) Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
(4) Violations of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (the Bouncing Checks Law); and
(5) All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense
charged is imprisonment not exceeding one (1) year, or a fine not exceeding Fifty
Thousand Pesos (₱50,000.00), or both, regardless of other imposable penalties,
accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom. In offenses
involving damage to property through criminal negligence under Article 365 of the
Revised Penal Code, this Rule shall govern where the imposable fine does not
exceed One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (₱150,000.00).
If the prescribed penalty consists of imprisonment and/or a fine, the prescribed
imprisonment shall be the basis for determining the applicable procedure.
All other cases not included herein shall be governed by the regular rules of
procedure.

Sec. 2. Non-applicability. – These Rules shall not apply to civil cases where the
plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the same complaint with another cause of action
subject to the regular procedure; nor to criminal cases where the offense charged is
necessarily related to another criminal case subject to the regular procedure.

RULE II GENERAL COMMON PROVISIONS

Section 1. Applicability of the regular rules. – The regular procedure prescribed in the
Rules of Court shall apply to the cases covered by these Rules where no specific
provision is found herein. It shall also apply in a suppletory manner even if there is a
specific provision found in these Rules, but only in so far as not inconsistent. In case of
inconsistency, these Rules shall prevail.

Sec. 2. Prohibited pleadings and motions. – The following pleadings, motions, or

petitions shall not be allowed in cases governed by these Rules:
(p) In civil cases, a motion to dismiss the complaint or the statement of claim, and in
criminal cases, a motion to quash the complaint or information, except on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter or failure to comply with the
requirement of barangay conciliation, pursuant to Chapter VII, Title I, Book III of
Republic Act No. 7160;
(q) Motion to hear and/or resolve affirmative defenses;

(r) Motion for a bill of particulars;

(s) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment on the merits, or for
reopening of proceedings;
(t) Petition for relief from judgment;
(u) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
(v) Memoranda;
(w) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order
issued by the court;
(x) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(y) Dilatory motions for postponement. Any motion for postponement shall be
presumed dilatory unless grounded on acts of God, force majeure, or physical
inability of a counsel or witness to personally appear in court, as supported by
the requisite affidavit and medical proof;
(z) Rejoinder;
(aa) Third-party complaints;
(bb) Motion for and Complaint in Intervention;
(cc) Motion to admit late judicial affidavit/s, position papers, or other evidence,
except on the ground of force majeure or acts of God;
(dd) Motion for judicial determination of probable cause in criminal cases.

Sec. 3. Videoconference. – As far as practicable, and if the court finds that the conduct
of a videoconference hearing will be beneficial to the fair, speedy and efficient
administration of justice, the court, on its own initiative or upon motion, may set the case
for a videoconference hearing at any stage of the proceedings.

Sec. 4. Service pursuant to international convention. – Service made pursuant to the

Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in
Civil or Commercial Matters shall be valid, and the period to answer shall commence
from receipt of the document served.
Rule II
RULE III THE RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE

A. CIVIL CASES
Section 1. Pleadings and verification.– The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the
complaint, compulsory counterclaim, cross-claim pleaded in the answer, and reply, as
provided in Section 8 of this Rule.
All pleadings shall be verified.
Sec. 2. Form and contents of pleadings. – All pleadings submitted under this Rule shall
comply with Rule 7 of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
All cases requiring prior referral to barangay conciliation must contain a statement of
compliance, pursuant to Chapter VII, Title I, Book III of Republic Act No. 7160. Where
there is no showing of compliance with such requirement, the complaint shall be
dismissed without prejudice, on the court’s own initiative or upon motion by the
defendant, and may be re-filed only after the requirement has been complied with.
Sec. 3. Complaint. – The complaint shall state the following:
(a) The names of the affiants whose judicial affidavits will be presented to prove the
plaintiff’s claim. The judicial affidavits shall be attached to the complaint and form
an integral part thereof. Judicial affidavits not attached to the complaint shall not
be considered;
(b) The summary of the statements in the judicial affidavits;
(c) The documentary and other object evidence in support of the allegations in the
complaint; and
(d) Whether the plaintiff consents to service by electronic means or facsimile and, if
so, the plaintiff’s e-mail addresses or facsimile numbers for such purpose.
Sec. 4. Summons. – Within five (5) calendar days from receipt of a new civil case, if the
court determines that the case falls under this Rule, the court shall direct the Branch
Clerk to issue summons to the defendant, stating clearly that the case shall be
governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure.
However, if from an examination of the allegations in the initiatory pleading and such
evidence as may be attached thereto, a ground for the outright dismissal of the case is
apparent, the court may dismiss the case on its own initiative. These grounds include
lack of subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue, lack of legal capacity to sue, litis
pendentia, res judicata, prescription, failure to state a cause of action, non-submission
of a certification against forum shopping, and lack of compliance with a condition
precedent such as absence of barangay conciliation, among others.
A patently erroneous determination to avoid the application of the Rule on Summary
Procedure is a ground for disciplinary action.

Sec. 5. Filing and service. – The rules on filing and service of pleadings under Rule 13
and service of summons under Rule 14 of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure shall be applicable to cases under this Rule, unless inconsistent.

Sec. 6. Answer. – Within thirty (30) calendar days from service of summons, the
defendant shall file an answer to the complaint and serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff.
The answer shall state the following:
(a) The names of the affiants whose judicial affidavits will be presented to prove the
defendant’s allegations. The judicial affidavits shall be attached to the answer
and form an integral part thereof. Judicial affidavits not attached to the answer
shall not be considered;
(b) The summary of the statements in the judicial affidavits;
(c) The documentary and other object evidence in support of the allegations in the
answer; and
(d) Whether the defendant consents to service by electronic means or facsimile and,
if so, the defendant’s e-mail addresses or facsimile numbers for such purpose.
Affirmative defenses not pleaded in the answer shall be deemed waived, except for
lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata, and prescription.
Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims not asserted in the answer shall be
considered barred.

Sec. 7. Counterclaims within the coverage of this Rule. – If at the time the action is
commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the
coverage of this Rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same
transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim; (c) does not require
for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another
pending action, the claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the answer; otherwise, the
defendant shall be barred from suing on such counterclaim.
The defendant may also elect to file a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not
arise out of the same transaction or occurrence, provided that the amount and nature
thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket and other legal
fees are paid. Rule III
Any amount pleaded in a counterclaim in excess of Two Million Pesos
(₱2,000,000.00), excluding interests and costs, shall be deemed waived.
Sec. 8. Reply. – All new matters alleged in the answer shall be deemed controverted.
The plaintiff may file a reply to a counterclaim only when an actionable document is
attached to the answer. The reply shall be filed within ten (10) calendar days from
receipt of the answer.

Sec. 9. Effect of failure to answer. – Should the defendant fail to answer the complaint
within the period provided, the court, on its own initiative, or upon manifestation by the
plaintiff that the period for filing an answer has already lapsed, shall render judgment as
may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and its attachments, limited to
what is prayed for therein.
The court may reduce the amount of damages and attorney’s fees claimed for being
excessive or otherwise unconscionable.

Sec. 10. Preliminary Conference; notice. – Within five (5) calendar days after the last
responsive pleading is filed, the Branch Clerk of Court shall issue a Notice of
Preliminary Conference, which shall be held within thirty (30) calendar days from the
date of filing of such last responsive pleading. The rules on pre-trial under Rule 18 of
the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure shall be applicable to the
Preliminary Conference, unless inconsistent.
The Notice of Preliminary Conference shall include the dates respectively set for:
(a) Preliminary Conference (within thirty [30] calendar days from the filing of the last
responsive pleading);
(b) Court-Annexed Mediation (within an inextendible period of thirty [30] calendar
days from date of referral for mediation); and
(c) Judicial Dispute Resolution, in the court’s discretion (within an inextendible
period of fifteen [15] calendar days from notice of failure of the Court-Annexed
Mediation).
Non-appearance at any of the foregoing settings shall be deemed as non-
appearance at the Preliminary Conference and shall merit the same sanctions under
Section 12 of this Rule.

Sec. 11. Preliminary Conference Brief. – The parties shall file with the court and serve
on the adverse party in such a way as to ensure receipt, at least three (3) calendar days
before the scheduled Preliminary Conference, their respective Preliminary Conference
Briefs, which shall contain, among others:
(a) A summary of admitted facts;
(b) A summary of disputed facts and proposals for stipulations on the same;
(c) A statement of factual and legal issues; and
(d) A list of testimonial, object, and other documentary evidence offered in support of
the party’s claims or defenses, and their markings, if any.
 Failure to submit a Preliminary Conference Brief within the period given shall merit
the same sanction as non-appearance at the Preliminary Conference.

Sec. 12. Appearance at Preliminary Conference. – It shall be the duty of the parties and
their counsel to appear at the Preliminary Conference, Court-Annexed Mediation, and
Judicial Dispute Resolution, if the latter is ordered by the court. The non-appearance of
a party and/or counsel may be excused only for acts of God, force majeure, or duly
substantiated physical inability.
A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized
through a Special Power of Attorney or a board resolution, as the case may be, to: (1)
enter into an amicable settlement, (2) to submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution, and (3) to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents. An
authority which fails to include all these acts shall be ineffective and the party
represented shall be deemed absent.
The failure despite notice of the plaintiff and/or his or her counsel to appear at the
Preliminary Conference shall be a cause for the dismissal of the complaint. The
defendant who appears in the absence of the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment on
the counterclaim, in accordance with Section 9 of this Rule. All cross-claims shall be
dismissed.
If a sole defendant and/or his or her counsel fail to appear at the Preliminary
Conference, the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment in accordance with Section 9 of
this Rule. This Rule shall not apply, however, where one of two or more defendants
sued under a common cause of action and who had pleaded a common defense, shall
appear at the Preliminary Conference.

Sec. 13. Preliminary Conference Order. – Immediately after the preliminary conference
and the issues having been joined, the court shall issue a Preliminary Conference Order
referring the parties to the mandatory Court-Annexed Mediation, and Judicial Dispute
Resolution, which shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of A.M. No. 19-
10-20-SC or the 2020 Guidelines for the Conduct of the Court-Annexed Mediation
(CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) in Civil Cases.
The court may, in the same Preliminary Conference Order, declare the case
submitted for judgment if, on the basis of the pleadings and their attachments, as well
as the stipulations and admissions made by the parties, judgment may be rendered
without the need of submission of position papers. In this event, the court shall render
judgment within thirty (30) calendar days from issuance of the order. The court’s order
shall not be the subject of a motion for reconsideration or a petition for certiorari,
prohibition, or mandamus, but may be among the matters raised on appeal after a
judgment on the merits.
If the court, however, deems the submission of position papers still necessary, it
shall require the parties, in the Preliminary Conference Order, to submit their respective
position papers within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of such order. No other
judicial affidavits or evidence will be admitted even if filed with the position papers.
Sec. 14. Rendition of judgment. – Within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt by the
court of the Mediator’s Report or the JDR Report on the parties’ failure to reach an
amicable settlement, the court shall render judgment.
However, should the court find it necessary to clarify certain material facts, it may,
during the said period, issue an order specifying the matters to be clarified, and require
the parties to submit additional judicial affidavits or other evidence on the said matters,
within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of said order. Judgment shall be rendered
within fifteen (15) calendar days after the receipt of the last clarificatory judicial
affidavits, or the expiration of the period for filing the same.
The court shall not resort to the clarificatory procedure to gain time for the rendition
of the judgment.

B. CRIMINALCASES

Section 1. How commenced; filing and service. – The filing of criminal cases governed
by the Rule on Summary Procedure shall either be by complaint or by information.
The complaint or information shall be accompanied by the judicial affidavits of the
complainant and of his or her witnesses, in such number of copies as there are
accused, plus one (1) copy for the court.
The complaint or information and other submissions of the parties may be filed with
the court and served on the adverse party/ies, and judgments, resolutions, orders, and
other court processes may be served to the parties, electronically with their consent, in
accordance with the prevailing Rules and other Court issuances.

Sec. 2. Duty of court; judicial affidavits. –

(a) If commenced by complaint. – On the basis of the complaint and the judicial
affidavits and other evidence accompanying the same, the court may dismiss the
case outright for lack of probable cause, and order the release of the accused if
in custody.
(b) If commenced by information. – When the case is commenced by information, or
is not dismissed pursuant to paragraph (a), the court shall issue an order which,
together with copies of the resolution of the investigating officer and the judicial
affidavits and other evidence submitted by the prosecution, shall require the
accused to submit a judicial counter-affidavit and the judicial affidavits of his or
her witnesses, as well as any other evidence in his or her behalf, within fifteen
(15) calendar days from receipt of the order. The accused shall serve copies
thereof on the private complainant and the public prosecutor within the same
period.
Except on rebuttal, no witness shall be allowed to testify unless his or her judicial
affidavit was submitted in accordance with this provision. The judicial affidavit shall take
the place of the direct testimony of a witness.
 However, instead of judicial affidavits, the prosecution may submit the written sworn
statements of the complainant and/or the witnesses prepared by the law enforcement
agents assigned to the case, or the affidavits submitted to the public prosecutor during
preliminary investigation. If the prosecution chooses this option, the prosecutor shall not
be allowed to ask additional direct examination questions of the complainant and/or the
witnesses, except for meritorious reasons. The sworn statements and affidavits shall
stand as the direct testimony of the affiants, supplemented by additional direct
examination if allowed by the court.

Sec 3. Determination of probable cause. – Upon receipt of the accused’s judicial

counter-affidavit and/or the judicial affidavits of his or her witnesses, or the lapse of the
period given for the submission thereof, the court shall determine if probable cause
exists to hold the accused for trial.
If the court finds that no probable cause exists, it shall order the dismissal of the
case and the immediate release of the accused, if in custody.
If the court finds that probable cause exists, the court shall set the case for
arraignment and pre-trial.
For detained accused, if the period for submission of judicial affidavits and other
evidence by the accused has not yet lapsed and no submission has been made on the
date set for the arraignment and pre-trial, the court may proceed with the arraignment if
the accused waives the court’s consideration of his or her judicial counter-affidavit
and/or the judicial affidavits of his or her witnesses in the determination of probable
cause, without waiver of the admission of such judicial counter-affidavit and/or the
judicial affidavits of his or her witnesses within a fresh period of ten (10) calendar days
from the date of the arraignment and the pre-trial.

Sec. 4. Arrest. – The court shall not issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused in
criminal cases governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure, except for failure to
appear despite notice, whenever required by the court. Release of the person arrested
shall either be on bail, or on his or her own recognizance, or that of a responsible citizen
acceptable to the court.
If the warrant of arrest could not be served on the accused because he or she could not
be located, the court shall issue an order archiving the case once the law enforcement
agency entrusted with the service of the warrant of arrest files a return to that effect, or
after six (6) months from the issuance of the warrant of arrest, there being no return
filed by the law enforcement agency.

Sec. 5. Arraignment and pre-trial. –

(a) Upon receipt of the case, the court shall set the arraignment and pre-trial within
ten (10) calendar days for detained accused and thirty (30) calendar days for non-
detained accused.
 The notice of arraignment and pre-trial shall require the attendance of the accused
and his or her counsel and all defense witnesses, the private complainant and his or her
witnesses, the public prosecutor and private prosecutor, where allowed, as well as the
law enforcement agents assigned to the case.
Before arraigning the accused, the court shall inquire into the possibility of a plea
bargain between the parties. If there is no plea bargain, the court shall arraign the
accused on the original charge and enter his or her plea in the record.
If the accused pleads guilty to the original charge, the court shall forthwith sentence him
or her.
If the accused offers to plead guilty to a lesser offense, the consent of the public
prosecutor and the private complainant, or the law enforcement agent assigned to the
case in victimless crimes, shall be secured, unless the latter are absent despite notice,
in which case the consent of the public prosecutor shall suffice.
(b) After arraignment, the court shall conduct the Pre-Trial Conference in
accordance with the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases.
No admission by the accused shall be used against him or her unless reduced into
writing and signed by the accused and the defense counsel. The signatures of the
accused and the defense counsel either on the Pre-Trial Order or the Minutes of the
Pre-Trial Conference, which embodies such admissions, shall suffice.

Sec. 6. Trial and offer. – At the trial, the testimonies of witnesses shall consist of the
duly subscribed written statements given to law enforcement agents, or the affidavits or
counter-affidavits submitted before the investigating officer, or their judicial affidavits,
subject to cross, re-direct, and re-cross examination questions.
Should any affiant fail to testify, his or her affidavit shall not be considered as
competent evidence for the party presenting the affidavit, but the adverse party may
utilize the same for any admissible purpose.
Except on rebuttal, no witness shall be allowed to testify unless his or her affidavit
was previously submitted to the court in accordance with Section 2 hereof.
The prosecution shall have sixty (60) calendar days to complete its evidence
presentation. On the last day of its presentation of evidence, the public prosecutor shall
orally offer the prosecution evidence. The defense counsel shall then make his or her
oral comments on the offer, and thereafter, the court shall orally resolve the offer of
evidence of the prosecution. The ruling shall be embodied in the written order the court
will issue thereafter.
The defense shall also have sixty (60) calendar days to complete its evidence
presentation. On the last day of its presentation of evidence, the defense counsel shall
orally offer the defense evidence. The public prosecutor shall then make his or her oral
comments on the offer, and thereafter, the court shall orally resolve the offer of
evidence of the defense. The ruling shall be embodied in the written order the court will
issue thereafter.
 If the prosecution decides to present rebuttal evidence, it shall have fifteen (15)
calendar days from the court action on the offer of defense evidence to complete the
same.
A motion for postponement of any trial date shall be presumed dilatory and denied
outright, unless grounded on acts of God, force majeure, or duly substantiated physical
inability of the counsel or witness. Any postponement granted by the court for the
authorized causes shall not extend the period for presentation of a party’s evidence.
The party who sought the postponement shall only have the remaining trial dates
assigned to him or her to complete his or her evidence presentation.

Sec. 7. Judgment. – The court shall render and promulgate the judgment not later than
thirty (30) calendar days from the court’s action on the last presenting party’s offer of
evidence.

C. APPEALS IN SUMMARY PROCEDURE

Section 1. Ordinary appeal. – Any judgment, final order, or final resolution in a
Summary Procedure case may be appealed to the appropriate Regional Trial Court
exercising jurisdiction over the territory under Rule 40 for civil cases and Rule 122 for
criminal cases, of the Rules of Court. The appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of
appeal, together with proof of payment of the appeal fees, with the court that rendered
the judgment, order or resolution appealed from, within fifteen (15) calendar days from
receipt of the same.

Sec. 2. Remedy from judgment on appeal. – The judgment of the Regional Trial Court
on the appeal shall be final, executory, and unappealable.

RULE IV THE RULE ON SMALL CLAIMS

Section 1. Scope. – This Rule shall govern the procedure in actions before the
Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), Municipal Trial Courts in Cities (MTCCs), Municipal
Trial Courts (MTCs) and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTCs) for payment or
reimbursement of a sum of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One
Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00).
Rule IV
Sec. 2. Objectives. –
(a)  To protect and advance the constitutional right of persons to a speedy
disposition of their cases;
(b)  To provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the disposition of small
claims cases; and
(c)  To introduce innovations and best practices for the benefit of the
underprivileged.
Sec. 3. Definition of terms. – For purposes of this Rule:
(a)  Plaintiff refers to the party who initiated a small claims action. The term includes
a defendant who has filed a counterclaim against a plaintiff;
(b)  Defendant is the party against whom the plaintiff has filed a small claims action.
The term includes a plaintiff against whom a defendant has filed a claim, or a person
who replies to the claim;
(c)  Person is an individual, corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership,
association, or other juridical entity endowed with personality by law;
(d)  Individual is a natural person;
(e)  Motion means a party’s request, written or oral, to the court for an order or other
action. It
shall include an informal written request to the court, such as a letter;
(f)  Good cause means circumstances sufficient to justify the requested order or
other action, as determined by the judge;
(g)  Affidavit means a written statement or declaration of facts that are sworn to or
affirmed to be true;
(h)  Business of lending refers to any lending activity pursued with regularity;
(i) Business of banking refers to the business of lending funds obtained in the form
of deposits.

Sec. 4. Commencement of small claims action. – A small claims action is commenced

by filing with the court an accomplished Statement of Claim/s with Verification and
Certification Against Forum Shopping, Splitting a Single Cause of Action, and
Multiplicity of Suits (Form 1-SCC) and duly certified photocopies of the actionable
document/s subject of the claim, affidavits of witnesses, and other evidence to support
the claim, with as many copies thereof as there are defendants. No evidence shall be
allowed during the hearing which was not attached to or submitted together with the
Statement of Claim/s, unless good cause is shown for the admission of additional
evidence.
The plaintiff must state in the Statement of Claim/s if he/she/it is engaged in the
business of lending, banking and similar activities, and the number of small claims
cases filed within the calendar year regardless of judicial station.
For juridical entities, a board resolution or secretary’s certificate authorizing the
person to file the claim must be attached to the Statement of Claim/s. (Per Resolution
dated 15 March 2022, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC.)
No formal pleading, other than the Statement of Claim/s described in this Rule, is
necessary to initiate a small claims action.
Sec. 5. Venue for small claims cases. – The regular rules on venue shall apply.
However, if the plaintiff is engaged in the business of lending, banking and similar
activities, and has a branch within the municipality or city where the defendant resides
or is holding business, the Statement of Claim/s shall be filed in the court of the city or
municipality where the defendant resides or is holding business. If there are two (2) or
more defendants, it shall be filed in the court of the city or municipality where any of
them resides or is holding business, at the option of the plaintiff.

Sec. 6. Joinder of claims. – Plaintiff may join in a single statement of claim one or more
separate small claims against a defendant provided that the total amount claimed,
exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00).

Sec. 7. Affidavits. – The affidavits submitted under this Rule shall state only facts of
direct personal knowledge of the affiants or based on authentic records, which are
admissible in evidence.
A violation of this requirement shall subject the party, and the counsel who assisted
the party in the preparation of the affidavits, if any, to appropriate disciplinary action.
The inadmissible affidavit(s) or portion(s) thereof shall be expunged from the record.
The non-submission of the required affidavits will cause the immediate dismissal of
the claim or counterclaim.

Sec. 8. Payment of filing fees. – The plaintiff shall pay the docket and other legal fees
prescribed under Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court, unless allowed to litigate as
an indigent. Exemption from the payment of filing fees shall be granted only by the
Supreme Court.
However, if more than five (5) small claims are filed by one party within the calendar
year, regardless of the judicial station, an additional filing fee of Five Hundred Pesos
(P500.00) shall be paid for every claim filed after the fifth (5th) claim, and an additional
One Hundred Pesos (P100.00) or a total of Six Hundred Pesos (P600.00) for every
claim filed after the tenth (10th) claim, and another One Hundred Pesos (P100.00) or a
total of Seven Hundred Pesos (P700.00) for every claim filed after the fifteenth (15th)
claim, progressively and cumulatively.
If a case is dismissed without prejudice under Section 12(f), and is re-filed within one
(1) year from notice of dismissal, the plaintiff shall pay a fixed amount of Two Thousand
Pesos (P2,000.00) as filing fee, inclusive of the One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) fee
for service of summons and processes.
If the plaintiff is engaged in the business of lending, banking, and similar activities,
the amount of filing and other legal fees shall be the same as those applicable to cases
filed under the regular rules of procedure.
A claim filed with a motion to sue as indigent (Form 6-SCC) shall be referred to the
Executive Judge for immediate action in case of multi-sala courts. If the motion is
granted by the Executive Judge, the case shall be raffled off or assigned to the court
designated to hear small claims cases. If the motion is denied, the plaintiff shall be
given five (5) calendar days within which to pay the docket fees, otherwise, the case
shall be dismissed without prejudice. In no case shall a party, even if declared an
indigent, be exempt from the payment of the One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) fee for
service of summons and processes.

Sec. 9. Dismissal of the claim. – After the court determines that the case falls under this
Rule, it may, from an examination of the allegations of the Statement of Claim/s and
such evidence attached thereto, on its own initiative, dismiss the case outright on any of
the following grounds:
(a)  The court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter;
(b)  There is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause;
(c)  The action is barred by prior judgment;
(d)  The claim is barred by the statute of limitations;
(e)  The court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defendant;
(f)  Venue is improperly laid;
(g)  Plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
(h)  The Statement of Claim/s states no cause of action;
(i)  That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with; and
(j)  Plaintiff failed to submit the required affidavits, as provided in Section 7 of this

Rule.
The order of dismissal shall state if it is with or without prejudice.
If, during the hearing, the court is able to determine that there exists a ground for
dismissal of the Statement of Claim/s, the court may, on its own initiative, dismiss the
case even if such ground is not pleaded in the defendant’s Response (Form 3-SCC).
If plaintiff misrepresents that he/she/it is not engaged in the business of lending,
banking, or similar activities when in fact he/she/it is so engaged, the Statement of
Claim/s shall be dismissed with prejudice and plaintiff shall be meted the appropriate
sanctions, including citation for direct contempt.
However, if the case does not fall under this Rule, but falls under summary or
regular procedure, or if the case is filed under summary or regular procedure but falls
under this Rule, the case shall not be dismissed. Instead, the case shall be re-docketed
under the appropriate procedure, and returned to the court where it was assigned,
subject to payment of any deficiency in the applicable regular rate of filing fees.

Sec. 10. Summons and Notice of Hearing. – If no ground for dismissal is found, the
court shall forthwith issue Summons (Form 2-SCC) within twenty-four (24) hours from
receipt of the Statement of Claim/s, directing the defendant to submit a verified
Response.
The Summons to be served on the defendant shall be accompanied by a copy of the
Statement of Claim/s and documents submitted by plaintiff, and a blank Response Form
(Form 3-SCC) to be accomplished by the defendant.
The court shall also issue a Notice of Hearing (Form 4-SCC) to both parties,
directing them to appear before it on a specific date and time for hearing, with a warning
that no unjustified postponement shall be allowed, as provided in Section 20 of this
Rule. A blank Special Power of Attorney (Form 7-SCC) shall be attached to the Notice
of Hearing.
The Notice of Hearing shall accompany the Summons and shall contain: (a) the date
of the hearing, which shall not be more than thirty (30) calendar days from the filing of
the Statement of Claim/s, or not more than sixty (60) calendar days if one of the
defendants resides or holds business outside the judicial region; and (b) the express
prohibition against the filing of a motion to dismiss or other prohibited motions under
Section 2, Rule II.

Sec. 11. Electronic filing and service. – The service of court issuances and filings by the
plaintiff/s and defendant/s may be made through e-mail, facsimile, and other electronic
means. Notices may also be served through mobile phone calls, short messaging
service (SMS), or instant messaging (IM) software applications. The consent to, and
chosen mode of, electronic service and notice shall be indicated in the Statement of
Claim/s or Response, as the case may be.

Sec. 12. Service of Summons. –

(a)  The Summons and Notice of Hearing must be issued within twenty-four (24)
hours from receipt of the Statement of Claim/s.
The Summons, together with the Notice of Hearing, shall be served by the sheriff,
his or her deputy, or other proper court officer within ten (10) calendar days from
issuance. Within five (5) calendar days from such service, the Officer’s Return shall be
filed with the court with a copy furnished to the plaintiff at the given address/es of
record.
(b)  If Summons is returned without being served on any or all of the defendants, the
court shall order the plaintiff or his or her representative to serve or cause the service of
Summons.
(c)  In cases where Summons is to be served outside the judicial region of the court
where the case is pending, the court may order the plaintiff or his or her representative
to serve or cause the service of Summons.
(d)  If the plaintiff is a juridical entity, it shall notify the court, in writing, and name its
authorized representative therein, attaching a board resolution or secretary’s certificate
thereto, as the case may be, stating that such representative is duly authorized to serve
the Summons on behalf of the plaintiff.
(e)  If the plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served with Summons, and
it is later proved that no Summons was served, the case shall be dismissed with
prejudice, the proceedings shall be nullified, and the plaintiff shall be declared in indirect
contempt under Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, and/or be meted a fine in the amount of
Five Thousand Pesos (₱5,000.00).
(f)  In both instances under paragraphs (b) and (c), the plaintiff shall inform the court
within thirty (30) calendar days from notice if said Summons was served; otherwise, the
Statement of Claim/s shall be dismissed without prejudice as to those who were not
served with Summons. This is not a ground to archive the case. The case, however,
may be re-filed within one (1) year from notice of dismissal, subject to payment of
reduced filing fees under Section 8 hereof.

Sec. 13. Response. – The defendant shall file with the court and serve on the plaintiff a
duly accomplished and verified Response (Form 3-SCC) within a non-extendible period
of ten (10) calendar days from receipt of Summons. The Response shall be
accompanied by certified photocopies of documents, as well as affidavits of witnesses
and other evidence in support thereof. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing
which was not attached to or submitted together with the Response, unless good cause
is shown for the admission of additional evidence.

Sec. 14. Effect of failure to file response. – Should the defendant fail to file his/her/its
Response within the required period, and likewise fail to appear on the date set for
hearing, the court shall render judgment within twenty-four (24) hours from the
termination of the hearing, as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Statement of
Claim/s and its attachments.
Should the defendant fail to file his/her/its Response within the required period but
appear on the date set for hearing, the court shall ascertain what defense he/she/its has
to offer, which shall constitute his/her/its Response, proceed to hear the case on the
same day as if a Response has been filed and, thereafter, render judgment within
twenty-four (24) hours from the termination of the hearing. If the defendant relies on
documentary evidence to support his/her/its defense, the court shall order him/ her/it to
submit original copies of such documents within three (3) calendar days from the
termination of the hearing and, upon receipt thereof or expiration of the period to file, the
court shall render judgment within twenty-four (24) hours.

Sec. 15. Counterclaims within the coverage of this Rule. – If at the time the action is
commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a) is within the
coverage of this Rule, exclusive of interest and costs; (b) arises out of the same
transaction or event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim; (c) does not require
for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and (d) is not the subject of another
pending action, the claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the Response; otherwise,
the defendant shall be barred from suing on such counterclaim.
The defendant may also elect to file a counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not
arise out of the same transaction or occurrence, provided that the amount and nature
thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket and other legal
fees are paid.
Any amount pleaded in a counterclaim in excess of One Million Pesos
(P1,000,000.00), excluding interests and costs, shall be deemed waived.

Sec. 16. Availability of forms; assistance by court personnel. – The Clerk of Court or
other court personnel shall provide such assistance as may be requested by a plaintiff
or a defendant regarding the availability of forms and other information about the
coverage, requirements, as well as procedure, for small claims cases.
Plaintiff shall be given copies of Forms 1-SCC (Statement of Claim/s), 1-A-SCC
(Other Plaintiffs or Defendants) for additional plaintiffs or defendants, if any, and 1-B-
SCC (Plaintiff’s Information Sheet).
The Branch Clerk of Court must ensure that there should be, at least, one (1)
hearing day every week devoted to Small Claims, with a minimum of five (5) cases
scheduled per hearing day. Cases with the same party-plaintiff may all be set on the
same date for facility in the preparation of notices and judgments. The court should post
a notice of its Small Claims hearing day conspicuously at the Branch and at the Office
of the Clerk of Court.

Sec. 17. Appearance. – The parties shall personally appear on the designated date of
hearing.
Appearance through a representative must be for a valid cause. The representative
of an individual-party must not be a lawyer. Juridical entities shall not be represented by
a lawyer in any capacity.
The representative must be authorized under a Special Power of Attorney (Form 7-
SCC), board resolution or secretary’s certificate, as the case may be, to enter into an
amicable settlement of the dispute and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts
and of documentary exhibits.

Sec. 18. Appearance of attorneys not allowed. – No attorney shall appear in behalf of or
represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the plaintiff or defendant.
If the court determines that a party cannot properly present his/her/its claim or
defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual
who is not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter’s consent.
Sec. 19. Non-appearance of parties. – Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall be cause
for the dismissal of the Statement of Claim/s without prejudice. The defendant who
appears in the absence of the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment on the counterclaim.
Failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same effect as failure to file a
Response under Section 14 of this Rule. This shall not apply where one of two or more
defendants who are sued under a common cause of action and have pleaded a
common defense appears at the hearing.
Failure of both parties to appear shall cause the dismissal with prejudice of both the
Statement of Claim/s and the counterclaim.

Sec. 20. Postponement when allowed. – A request for postponement of a hearing may
be granted only upon proof of the physical inability of the party to appear before the
court on the scheduled date and time. A party may avail of only one (1) postponement.

Sec. 21. Duty of the court. – At the beginning of the court session, the judge shall read
aloud a short statement explaining the nature, purpose and the rule of procedure of
small claims cases.

Sec. 22. Hearing. – At the hearing, the judge shall first exert efforts to bring the parties
to an amicable settlement of their dispute. Settlement discussions must be conducted in
strict confidentiality.
Any settlement or resolution of the dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by
the parties, and immediately submitted to the court for approval at the hearing (Form 9-
SCC). The court shall render judgment based on the compromise agreement within
twenty-four (24) hours, and furnish copies thereof to the parties (Form 10-SCC).
If at any time before or at the hearing, a compromise agreement is submitted, signed
by both parties, but only one (1) or neither party appears to confirm it, the court shall
issue an order directing the non-appearing party/ies to confirm the compromise
agreement within three (3) calendar days from notice thereof; otherwise, it shall be
deemed confirmed.
If efforts at settlement fail, the court shall immediately proceed to hear the case in an
informal and expeditious manner and, thereafter, render judgment within twenty-four
(24) hours from termination of the hearing.

Sec. 23. Resort to alternative videoconferencing platform. – Should the hearing be done
through videoconferencing, the court shall require the parties to participate through the
use of the Court- prescribed videoconferencing platform. However, if any of the
participants communicates his or her difficulty in accessing or using the said
videoconferencing platform, the court may allow the use of alternative
videoconferencing platforms or instant messaging (IM) applications with video call
features, provided that the following conditions are met:
 (a)  The court shall use either its official e-mail address or cell phone number to
access the alternative videoconferencing platform or instant messaging (IM) application;
(b)  The parties shall use the e-mail address or cellphone number they indicated in
their Statement of Claim/s or Response, as the case may be, to access the alternative
videoconferencing platform or instant messaging (IM) application; and
(c)  The court shall maintain a record and transcription of the proceedings.

Sec. 24. Decision. – After the hearing, the court shall render its decision based on the
facts established by the evidence, within twenty-four (24) hours from termination of the
hearing (Form 11-SCC). The refund of the remaining balance from the Sheriff’s Trust
Fund (STF), subject to accounting and auditing procedures, shall be included in the
decision.
The decision shall immediately be entered by the Clerk of Court in the court docket
for civil cases and a copy thereof forthwith served on the parties.
The decision shall be final, executory and unappealable.

Sec. 25. Execution. – When the decision is rendered and proof of receipt thereof is on
record, execution shall issue (Forms 13-SCC, 13-A-SCC, or 13-B-SCC) upon ex parte
motion of the winning party (Form 12-SCC). However, a decision based on compromise
shall not be covered by the requirement of proof of receipt.

Sec. 26. Certification of documents. – All documents attached to the Statement of

Claim/s or Response that are required to be certified, except public or official
documents, shall be certified by the signature of the plaintiff or defendant concerned.

Sec. 27. Non-applicability. – The rules on mediation and judicial dispute resolution shall
not apply, as the parties may enter into compromise at any stage of the proceedings.

RULE V EFFECTIVITY
The Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts shall take effect on 11
April 2022 and shall prospectively apply only to cases filed from the said date of
effectivity. Those pending cases covered by these Rules, which are currently before the
second and first level courts, shall remain with and be decided by those same courts
based on the rules applicable at the time those cases were filed.

Case:
A.L. Ang Network Inc. vs. Mondejar, 714 SCRA (1/28/14)
TOPIC: RULE OF PROCEDURE IN SMALL CLAIMS CASES – JUDGMENT
DOCTRINE: Considering the final nature of a small claims case decision, the remedy of
appeal is not allowed, and the prevailing party may, thus, immediately move for its
execution. Nevertheless, the proscription on appeals in small claims cases, similar to
other proceedings where appeal is not an available remedy, does not preclude the
aggrieved party from filing a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
Verily, a petition for certiorari, unlike an appeal, is an original action designed to correct
only errors of jurisdiction and not of judgment. Owing to its nature, it is therefore
incumbent upon petitioner to establish that jurisdictional errors tainted the MTCC
Decision. The RTC, in turn, could either grant or dismiss the petition based on an
evaluation of whether or not the MTCC gravely abused its discretion by capriciously,
whimsically, or arbitrarily disregarding evidence that is material to the controversy.

Note: starting Rule 6, note the substantial/formal

amendments.

III. RULE 6: Kinds of Pleadings (Sections 1-13)

Pleading Definition Example

Complaint The complaint is the A file a case against B & C before the
pleading alleging the Regional Trial of Manila for Collection of
plaintiff's cause or causes Sum of Money for non-payment of the
of action loan they obtained from A.
Answer is a pleading in which a Negative defense:
defending party sets forth B specifically denies the allegation of A.
his defenses the truth of the matter being he never
secured any loan from A because he
does not even know the A.
Affirmative defense:
B admits that he borrowed money from A
but he already paid for it.
Counterclai any claim which a B in his answer set up counterclaims for
m defending party may have P100,000 as damages and P30,000 as
against an opposing party attorney’s fees as a result of the
baseless filing of the complaint, as well
as for P350,000 as the balance of the
purchase price of the 10 units of air
conditioners he sold to A.
Compulsory is one which, being the counterclaim for damages and
Counterclai cognizable by the regular attorney’s fees arising from the baseless
m courts of justice, arises out filing of the complaint is a compulsory
of or is connected with the counterclaim
transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject So, if B has a claim against A which
 matter of the opposing arises out of the same transaction or
party's claim and does not series of transaction or occurrence which
require for its adjudication is the subject matter of the claim of A,
the presence of third then he may raise it in his Answer as a
parties of whom the court compulsory counterclaim
cannot acquire jurisdiction
Permissive if it does not arise out of or the counterclaim of B for P350,000 as
Counterclai is not necessarily the balance of the purchase price of the
m connected with the subject 10 units of air conditioners he sold to A is
matter of the opposing a permissive counterclaim
party's claim. It is
essentially an independent So, if B has a claim against A which does
claim that may be filed not out of the same transaction or series
separately in another case of transactions or occurrence which is the
subject matter of the claim of A, then he
may raise it in his Answer as a
permissive counter
Crossclaim is any claim by one party A filed a case against B & C before the
against a co-party arising Regional Trial for Collection of Sum of
out of the transaction or Money for non-payment of the loan they
occurrence that is the obtained from A.
subject matter either of the B can file a crossclaim against C for his
original action or of a share in the payment of sum of money
counterclaim therein. Such paid to A for the purpose of contribution
cross- claim may include a because the loan was given to both of
claim that the party against them and divided by 500,000 each, so
whom it is asserted is or why should B paid 1M when he did not
may be liable to the cross- benefit for 1M but only 500,000 so the
claimant for all or part of a purpose is for contribution.
claim asserted in the
action against the cross- Note: B as a defendant in the main action
claimant. becomes the plaintiff as far as C is
concern in the crossclaim
Third-party is a claim that a defending If B has a claim against a third person D
complaint party may, with leave of not a party to the original action in
court, file against a person connection with the claim of A, then he
not a party to the action, may with leave of court file a third-party
called the third (fourth, complaint against the said third person D
etc.)-party defendant for for contribution, indemnity, subrogation
contribution, indemnity, or any other relief, in respect of his
subrogation or any other opponent's claim.
relief, in respect of his or
her opponent's claim B files a third-party complaint for a
collection of sum of money against D, for
D being as the surety or guarantor of B
for his loan against A.
Counter- A counterclaim may be Counter-counterclaim: if A also has a
counter asserted against an claim against B in connection with the
claim original counter claimant. counterclaim of B which arises out of the
same transaction or series of transaction
A cross-claim may also be which is the subject matter of the
filed against an original counterclaim of B, then A can raise the
cross-claimant. same as a counter-counterclaim.
Counter-cross-claim: if C also has a
claim against B in connection with the
latter's cross-claim (B), then he can raise
it in his Answer to the cross-claim as a
counter cross-claim.
Reply is a pleading, the office or A can file a reply to new matters alleged
function of which is to by B in his answer with compulsory
deny, or allege facts in counterclaim. A can specifically denies
denial or avoidance of new par. 2, the truth being that the present
matters alleged in, or action is well-founded in fact and in law,
relating to actionable filed being in good faith to protect and
documents attached to an vindicate the rights of the Plaintiff being
answer. If a party does not violated by the defendant; therefore,
file such reply, all the new there is no basis whatsoever for the
matters alleged in the Defendant to recover damages,
answer are deemed attorney’s fees nor expenses of litigation
controverted from the Plaintiff.
Note: An actionable
document is a written
document that’s the basis
of one’s cause of action or
defense, ex. contract of
sale, contract of loan,
An “actionable document”
is a written instrument or
document on which an
action or defense is
founded. It may be
pleaded in either of two
ways:
(1) by setting forth the
substance of such
document in the pleading
and attaching the
document thereto as an
annex, or
(2) by setting forth said
document verbatim in the
pleading.
Rejoinder In the event of an
actionable document
attached to the reply, the
defendant may file a
rejoinder if the same is
based solely on an
actionable document.
Therefore, the rejoinder is
limited to said actionable
document.
Note: An actionable
document is a written
document that’s the basis
of one’s cause of action or
defense, ex. contract of
sale, contract of loan,
An “actionable document”
is a written instrument or
document on which an
action or defense is
founded. It may be
pleaded in either of two
ways:
(1) by setting forth the
substance of such
document in the pleading
and attaching the
document thereto as an
annex, or
(2) by setting forth said
document verbatim in the
pleading.

Parties in civil cases What pleadings emanate

A - Plaintiff a) Complaint
b) Reply (if there is actionable document)
c) Counter-counterclaim
d) Answer to counterclaim (pero may condition)
(permissive)
o mandatory -
o not mandatory
e) Answer to complaint intervention
B - Defendant Against the plaintiff:
a) Answer to the complaint
b) Rejoinder (if there is actionable document)
c) Counterclaim
 Against the co-defendant:
a) Crossclaim
b) Counter-cross-claim
c) Answer to the complaint of third-party defendant
d) Reply
e) 3rd party compliant
f) Rejoinder
C - Co-defendant a) Answer to the original complaint by plaintiff,
b) cross-claim against defendant,
c) 3rd/4th/5th party complaint
D - 3rd party defendant a) Answer to the 3rd party complaint;
b) Counterclaim against 3rd party plaintiff or original plaintiff
* 4th or 5th party c) Rejoinder
defendant d) 4th/5th party complaint
E - Intervenor (Rule a) Complaint in intervention
19) b) Answer in intervention (joins the defendant)

A. Pleadings:
Complaint, Answer, Counterclaim,
- Compulsory vs. Permissive counterclaim
Cross-claim, Reply, Third-Party Complaint, Counter-counterclaim, Rejoinder

RULE 6KINDS OF PLEADINGS

Section 1. Pleadings defined. – Pleadings are the written statements of the respective
claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.

Section 2. Pleadings allowed. – The claims of a party are asserted in a complaint,

counterclaim, cross- claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-
intervention.

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

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

actionable document to the answer.

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

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

Section 5. Defenses. – Defenses may either be negative or affirmative.

(a)  A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the
pleading of the claimant essential to his or her cause or causes of action.

(b)  An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically
admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless
prevent or bar recovery by him or her.

The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment,

illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any
other matter by way of confession and avoidance.

Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint,
specifically, that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is
another action pending between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action
is barred by a prior judgment.

Section 6. Counterclaim. – A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may

have against an opposing party.

Section 7. Compulsory counterclaim. – A compulsory counterclaim is one which,

being cognizable by the regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the
transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim
and does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court
cannot acquire jurisdiction.

Such a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount
and the nature thereof, except that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court,
the counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of the amount.

A compulsory counterclaim not raised in the same action is barred, unless

otherwise allowed by these Rules.

Section 8. Cross-claim. – A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party

arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the
original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may cover all or part of the
original claim.

Section 9. Counter-counterclaims and counter-cross-claims. – A counterclaim may

be asserted against an original counter-claimant.

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

Section 10. Reply. – All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed
controverted. If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new
matters so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental
complaint. However, the plaintiff may file a reply only if the defending party
attaches an actionable document to his or her answer.

A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in

denial or avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.

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

Section 11. Third, (fourth, etc.)-party complaint. – A third (fourth, etc.)-party

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

The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and the court
shall require the defendant to institute a separate action, where:

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

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

Section 13. Answer to third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint. – A third (fourth, etc.)-
party defendant may allege in his or her answer his or her defenses, counterclaims or
cross-claims, including such defenses that the third (fourth, etc.)-party plaintiff may have
against the original plaintiff’s claim.

In proper cases, he or she may also assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in
respect of the latter’s claim against the third-party plaintiff.

COMMENT:
Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the
parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.

Rule 8 Section 1: In general

Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct
statement of the ultimate facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or
defenses, as the case may be, omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts.
If a defense on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof and their applicability to
him shall be clearly and concisely stated.
The rules define pleadings as a written statement or allegations of the cause or
defenses submitted to the court for judgment, in other words, we don’t recognize in our
system oral pleadings. The pleadings must always be in writing. And the rule also
directs the pleader the manner by which these pleadings are crafted. So in Rule 8, we
find the provision which says that, the pleadings must contain allegations presented in
methodical and logical form. That is, in concise and direct language, stating the cause
of action or defenses. The message given by these requirements, is that a lawyer is
presumably skilled in crafting documents, in a methodical and logical manner. And since
you have taken up several units in English, you must remember that in writing
compositions, the unwritten rule is that a great composition is one that embodies the
use of imagination. So even if the rules require that the allegations should be stated in a
concise and direct manner, you should always leave to the court or to the other party,
the use of his imagination when he reads your pleading.

The rule also require that when a pleader drafts a pleading, he should not relate a story
to the court. He should divide the pleadings into paragraphs, to make it short and
simple. And the rules also require that the pleading must be dated. The pleading must
also be signed either by the lawyer, or by his client, or both of them. When it is the
lawyer who signs the pleading, he submits a certification that he has read the pleading,
there are enough grounds to support it, and that it is not intended to delay the
adjudication of the dispute. But when it is a client who signs the pleading, the client
does not make this certification.

Purpose of Pleadings
1. To apprise the court of the rival claims in a judicial controversy submitted for trial and
decision;
2. To indicate fairly the nature of the claims and defenses of both parties; and
3. To present, define and narrow the issues, to limit the proof to be submitted in the trial
and form the foundation of proof to be submitted during the trial as well as advice a
party to what his adversary would rely on as a cause of action or defense.

Pleadings are necessary to invoke the jurisdiction of the court. They determine whether
the issue presented to be tried is of law or of fact.

A motion to dismiss is NOT a pleading. HOWEVER, there are motions that actually
seek judgment like a motion for judgment on the pleadings (Rule 34) and motion for
summary judgment (Rule 35)

All pleadings shall be liberally construed so as to do substantial justice. In cases there

are ambiguities in the pleadings, the same must be construed most strongly against the
pleader and that no presumptions in his favor are to be indulged in.

Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form a plain, concise and direct
statement of the ultimate facts, omitting the statement of mere evidentiary facts.
Ultimate facts refer to those which directly form the basis if the right sought to be
enforced or the defense relied upon. If the ultimate facts are NOT alleged, the cause of
action would be insufficient.

Evidentiary facts refer to those which are necessary to prove the ultimate fact or which
furnish evidence of the existence of some other facts.

Test to distinguish conclusion of law from statement of facts If from the facts in
evidence, the result can be reached by the process of natural reasoning adopted in the
investigation of truth; it becomes an ultimate fact to be found as such.

If, on the other hand, resort must be had to artificial processes of the law in order to
reach a final determination, the result is a conclusion of law.
Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the
parties, submitted to the court for appropriate judgment [Sec. 1, Rule 6]

Pleadings Motion
Purpose is to submit a claim or defense Application for relief other than
Purpose
for appropriate judgment [Sec. 1, Rule 6] by a pleading [Sec. 1, Rule 15]
Relief Judgment, which by its character finally Other reliefs that are not
Sought disposes of the case included in a judgment

Ultimate facts are essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. A fact is
essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action
insufficient [Remitere v. Montinola, G.R. No. L-19751 (1966)].

Prior to the Amended Rules, evidentiary facts were supposed to be omitted from
pleadings, as these matters should be presented during trial. However, the contents of
pleadings are no longer limited to ultimate facts since under Sec. 6, Rule 7, the
witnesses, summaries of their testimonies, their judicial affidavits, and documentary and
object evidence should already be included in the pleading. Likewise, Sec. 1 of Rule 8
also states that every pleading must contain the ultimate facts, including the evidence
on which the party pleading relies.

Kinds of pleadings (R6, S2)

a. Complaint (R6, S3)

Rule 6, Sec. 3: Complaint. — The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's cause
or causes of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be
stated in the complaint. (3a)

The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff’s or claiming party’s cause or causes
of action. [Sec. 3, Rule 6]
Note: Counterclaims, cross-claims, third-party complaints, and complaints-in-
intervention are kinds of complaints. [Sec. 2, Rule 6]
Function
1. To inform the defendant clearly and definitely of the claims made against him so that
he may be prepared to meet the issues at trial.
2. To inform the defendant of all material facts on which the plaintiff relies to support his
demand.
3. To state the theory of a cause of action which forms the basis of the plaintiff's claim of
liability [Tantuico v. Republic, G.R. No. 89114 (1991)]

Facts alleged in the complaint are judicial admissions that bind the plaintiff and may be
the basis to dismiss the complaint [Luzon Development Bank v. Conquilla, G.R. No.
163338 (2005)].

Allegations of the complaint determine the nature of the cause of action and the body or
court which has jurisdiction over the action [Ching vs Subic Bay Golf and Country Club,
Inc, G.R. No. 174353 (2014)]

b. Answer (R6, S4)

Rule 6, Sec. 4: Answer. — An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth
his defenses. (4a)
An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his or her defenses.
[Secs. 2 and 4, Rule 6]

c. Counterclaim (R6, S6)

Rule 6, Sec. 6: Counterclaim. — A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party
may have against an opposing party. (6a)

What is a counterclaim?
A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing
party (Section 12, Rule 15, Rules of Court as amended by A.M. 19-10-20-SC)

Why are counterclaims allowed?

They are generally allowed in order to avoid a multiplicity of suits and to facilitate the
disposition of the whole controversy in a single action, such that the defendant's
demand may be adjudged by a counterclaim rather than by an independent suit.
(Lafarge Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp., G.R. No. 155173, November 23,
2004)

How raised?
1. By including it in the Answer - A compulsory counterclaim or a cross- claim that a
defending party has at the time he or she files his or her answer shall be contained
therein.
2. By filing after the Answer - Omitted Compulsory Counterclaim - If a counterclaim
already existed at the time of the filing of the answer and the defendant fails to raise it, it
shall generally be barred. [Sec. 7, Rule 6]
However, an exception to this would be a counterclaim by amendment before judgment,
when the counterclaim was not set up due to oversight, inadvertence, or excusable
neglect. [Sec. 10, Rule 11]
- Compulsory Counterclaim arising after Answer - A counterclaim, which either matured
or was acquired by a party after serving his answer may, with permission of the court,
be presented as a counterclaim by supplemental pleading before judgment. [Sec. 9,
Rule 11]

What are its limitations?

The only limitations to this principle are:
that the court should have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the counterclaim, and
that it could acquire jurisdiction over third parties whose presence is essential for its
adjudication (Lafarge Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp.)

Kinds of counterclaims:
Compulsory vs. Permissive counterclaim
Compulsory Counterclaim Permissive Counterclaim
A compulsory counterclaim, which a party Not subject to the rule on compulsory
has at the time the answer is filed, shall be counterclaims. Hence, it may be set up as
contained in the answer [Sec. 8, Rule 11] an independent action and will not be
because a compulsory counterclaim not barred if not contained in an answer to the
raised in the same action shall be barred, complaint.
unless otherwise allowed by these rules.
[Sec. 7, Rule 6]
NOT an initiatory pleading Initiatory pleading
It is barred if not set up in the action. This It is NOT barred even if not set up in the
is also known as a “set-off.” action. This is also known as “recoupment.”

Said certifications are NOT required Should be accompanied by a certification

because it is not initiatory in character.
Failure to answer a compulsory
counterclaim is not a cause for a default
declaration.
Not Required to pay docket fees
against forum shopping and, whenever
required by law, also a certificate to file
action issued by the Lupong
Tagapamayapa .
Must be answered by the party against
whom it is interposed, otherwise he may be
declared in default as to the counterclaim
Required to pay docket fees

1. Compulsory - A compulsory counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the

regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its
adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction
(Lafarge Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp.)
It is compulsory in the sense that it is within the jurisdiction of the court, does not require
for its adjudication the presence of third parties over whom the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction, and will be barred in the future if not set up in the answer to the complaint in
the same case (Bungcayao v. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings, G.R. No. 170483, April
19, 2010).

2. Permissive - A counterclaim is permissive if it does not arise out of or is not

necessarily connected with the subject matter of the opposing party's claim. It is
essentially an independent claim that may be filed separately in another case (Lafarge
Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp).

What are the criteria to determine whether the counterclaim is compulsory or

permissive?
● The criteria to determine whether the counterclaim is compulsory or permissive are as
follows:
1. Are issues of fact and law raised by the claim and by the counterclaim largely the
same? Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant’s claim, absent the
compulsory rule?
2. Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff’s claim as well as
defendant’s counterclaim?
3. Is there any logical relations between the claim and the counterclaim?
A positive answer to all four questions would indicate that the counterclaim is
compulsory (Bungcayao v. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings, G.R. No. 170483, April 19,
2010).

● The "compelling test of compulsoriness" characterizes a counterclaim as

compulsory if there should exist a "logical relationship" between the main claim and the
counterclaim. There exists such a relationship when conducting separate trials of the
respective claims of the parties would entail substantial duplication of time and effort by
the parties and the court; when the multiple claims involve the same factual and legal
issues; or when the claims are offshoots of the same basic controversy between the
parties (Lafarge Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp).

Why do we need to know the distinctions?

1. Determination of the nature of counterclaim is relevant for purposes of compliance to
the requirements of initiatory pleadings. In order for the court to acquire jurisdiction,
permissive counterclaims require payment of docket fees, while compulsory
counterclaims do not (Villanueva-Ong v. Enrile, G.R. No. 212904, November 22, 2017).
[Note must be taken of OCA Circular No. 96-2009 entitled "Docket Fees For
Compulsory Counterclaims," dated August 13, 2009, where it was clarified that the rule
on imposition of filing fees on compulsory counterclaims has been suspended. Such
suspension remains in force up to this day (Villanueva-Ong v. Enrile, G.R. No. 212904,
November 22, 2017)]
2. A compulsory counterclaim does not require a certificate of non-forum shopping
because a compulsory counterclaim is not an initiatory pleading. (Cruz-Agana v. Judge
Santiago-Lagman, G.R. No. 139018, April 11, 2005). A permissive counterclaim, on the
other hand, require a certificate of non-forum shopping because it is considered an
initiatory pleading.

3. Compulsory counterclaims should be set up in the same action; otherwise, they

would be barred forever (Lafarge Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp).
Permissive counterclaim, even if not set up in the same action, is not barred. You can
file a separate action.

Example of compulsory counterclaim:

Counterclaims seeking moral, actual and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees
against the respondent on account of their malicious and unfounded complaint (Lafarge
Cement Corp. v. Continental Cement Corp).

Example of permissive counterclaim:

Bungcayao, Sr. v. Fort llocandia Property Holdings and Development Corp. cited by
respondent, is starkly different from the factual circumstances obtaining at the case at
bar. In that case, petitioner Manuel C. Bungcayao, Sr. sought the annulment of a Deed
of Assignment, Release, Waiver and Quitclaim, on the ground of the lack of authority of
petitioner's son to represent him thereon. For their part, respondent prayed, as
counterclaims to the complaint, that petitioner be required to: 1) return the amount of
₱400,000 from respondent, 2) to vacate the portion of the respondent's property he
(petitioner) was occupying, and 3) to pay damages because his (petitioner) continued
refusal to vacate the property caused tremendous delay in the planned implementation
of Fort Ilocandias expansion projects. In that case, We ruled that the recovery of
possession of the property is a permissive counterclaim, while being an offshoot of the
basic transaction between the parties, will not be barred if not set up in the answer to
the complaint in the same case. This is because the title of respondent to the disputed
property therein was actually recognized by the administrative authorities. Necessarily,
respondent will not be precluded from asserting its right of ownership over the land
occupied by petitioner in a separate proceeding. In other words, respondent's right
therein can be enforced separately and is distinct from the legal consequences of the
Deed of Assignment, Release, Waiver and Quitclaim executed between the parties
therein (Villanueva-Ong v. Enrile, G.R. No. 212904, November 22, 2017).

Failure to pay docket fees

●The rule in permissive counterclaim is that for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction, the
counterclaimant is bound to pay the prescribed docket fees. Any decision rendered
without jurisdiction is a total nullity and may be struck down at any time, even on appeal
before this Court. In this case, respondent did not dispute the non-payment of docket
fees. Respondent only insisted that its claims were all compulsory counterclaims. As
such, the judgment by the trial court in relation to the second counterclaim is considered
null and void without prejudice to a separate action which respondent may file against
petitioner (Bungcayao v. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings, G.R. No. 170483, April 19,
2010).
● Failure to pay the required docket fees, per se, should not necessarily lead to the
dismissal of the permissive counterclaim. It has long been settled that while the court
acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon the payment of the prescribed docket
fees, its non-payment at the time of filing of the initiatory pleading does not
automatically cause its dismissal provided that: (a) the fees are paid within a reasonable
period; and (b) there was no intention on the part of the claimant to defraud the
government.

Effect on the counterclaim when the complaint is dismissed (R17, S2)

Rule 17, Sec. 2. Dismissal upon motion of plaintiff. – Except as provided in the
preceding section, a complaint shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff's instance save
upon approval of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems
proper. If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon him
of the plaintiff's motion for dismissal, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint. The
dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his
counterclaim in a separate action unless within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
motion he manifests his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same
action. Unless otherwise specified in the order, a dismissal under this paragraph shall
be without prejudice. A class suit shall not be dismissed or compromised without the
approval of the court.

Rule 17, Sec. 3. Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff. – If, for no justifiable cause, the
plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief on the
complaint, or to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply
with these Rules or any order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion
of the defendant or upon the court's own motion, without prejudice to the right of the
defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or in a separate action. This
dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise
declared by the court.

Effect on counterclaim when complaint is dismissed

The dismissal of the complaint shall be without prejudice to the prosecution in the same
or separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in the answer in the following cases
1. Dismissal under Sec. 2, Rule 17 – where the plaintiff files a motion to dismiss the
case, after the defendant had filed a responsive pleading
2. Dismissal under Sec. 3, Rule 17 – where the complaint is dismissed due to the fault
of the plaintiff

VYE’s comment: The right to prosecute the counterclaim is available if the dismissal is
upon motion of the plaintiff or due to the fault of the plaintiff. In both instances, the
dismissal of the complaint shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to
prosecute his counterclaim in a separate action unless...he manifests his preference to
have his counterclaim resolved in the same action.
d. Cross-claim (R6, S8)
Rule 6, Sec. 8: Cross-claim. – A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-
party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the
original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross- claim may include a claim that
the party against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross-claimant for all or
part of a claim asserted in the action against the cross-claimant.

Crossclaim v. Counterclaim v. Third-party Complaint

Crossclaim Counterclaim Third-party Complaint
Against whom A claim against a co- A claim against an Against a person not a
filed party opposing party party to the action
As to basis of Must arise from the May or may not arise Similar to a cross-
claim transaction or out of the subject matter claim in that the third-
occurrence that is the of the complaint. It may party plaintiff seeks to
subject matter of the be compulsory or recover from another
original complaint or permissive. person some relief in
counterclaim. respect to the opposing
party’s claim.
As to necessity Leave of court is NOT Leave of court is NOT
of Leave of required. required.
Court

May a plaintiff file a cross-claim against his co-plaintiff?

Yes, the rules simply refer to a party against a co-party.

May a third-party defendant file a cross claim against the plaintiff?

Yes, under Sec. 13, Rule 6, ―In proper cases, the (third-party defendant) may also
assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of the latter’s claim against
the third- party plaintiff.

A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction
or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim
therein. Such cross- claim may cover all or part of the original claim. [Sec. 8, Rule 6]

Existing Cross-claim - A cross-claim that a defending party has at the time he or she
files his or her answer shall be contained therein. [Sec. 8, Rule 11]

However, an exception to this would be a cross-claim by amendment before

judgment, when the counterclaim was not set up due to oversight, inadvertence, or
excusable neglect. [Sec. 10, Rule 11]

Cross-claim arising after Answer - A cross- claim, which either matured or was
acquired by a party after serving his answer may, with permission of the court, be
presented as a cross-claim by supplemental pleading before judgment. [Sec. 9, Rule
11]

When a cross-claim is proper

1. It arises out of the subject matter of the complaint.
2. It is filed against a co-party.
3. The cross-claimant stands to be prejudiced by the filing of the action against him
[Londres v. CA, G.R. No. 136427 (2002)]

Improper cross-claims
1. Where the cross-claim is improperly allowed, the remedy is certiorari [Malinao v.
Luzon Surety, G.R. No. L-16082 (1964)]
2. The dismissal of a cross-claim is unappealable when the order dismissing the
complaint becomes final and executory [Ruiz, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 101566 (1993)]
3. A cross-claim is not allowed after declaration of default of cross-claimant. To allow
the cross-claim to remain would be tantamount to setting aside the order of default the
cross- claimant, who had been previously declared default, would re- obtain a standing
in court as party litigant [Tan v. Dimayuga, G.R. No. L-15241 (1962)]

e. Third (fourth, etc.) party complaints (R6, S11)

A third (fourth, etc.) party complaint is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of
court, file against a person not a party to the action, called the third (fourth, etc.)-party
defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his or
her opponent's claim. [Sec. 11, Rule 6]

Requisites
1. The party to be impleaded must not yet be a party to the action
2. The claim against the third-party defendant must belong to the original defendant
3. The claim of the original defendant against the third-party defendant must be based
upon the plaintiff's claim against the original defendant,
4. The defendant is attempting to transfer to the third-party defendant the liability
asserted against him by the original plaintiff [Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc. v.
Paras, G.R. No. 161909 (2012)], and
5. The court grants leave of court for the filing of the same [Sec. 11, Rule 6]

When the third (fourth, etc.) party complaint will not be granted leave, and the
court will require the filing of a separate action:
1. Where matters extraneous to the issue in the principal case are raised, or
2. Where a new and separate controversy would be introduced in the action. [Sec. 11,
Rule 6]

Tests to Determine whether the Third-Party Complaint is in Respect of Plaintiff’s

Claim:
1. Whether it arises out of the same transaction on which the plaintiff’s claim is based,
or although arising out of another or different transaction, is connected with the plaintiff’s
claim;
2. Whether the third-party defendant would be liable to the plaintiff or to the defendant
for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against the original defendant; and
3. Whether the third-party defendant may assert any defenses which the third-party
plaintiff has or may have to the plaintiff’s claim (Asian Construction & Dev’t. Corp. v. CA,
G.R. No. 160242, May 17, 2005).

When shall a third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint be denied admission?

1. A third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant cannot be located within 30 calendar days from
the grant of such leave;
2. Matter extraneous to the issue in the principal case are raised; or
3. The effect would be to introduce a new and separate controversy into the action.
In case of denial, the court shall require the defendant to institute a separate action.

Additional rules
Where the trial court has jurisdiction over the main case, it also has jurisdiction over the
third- party complaint, regardless of the amount involved as a 3rd-party complaint is
merely auxiliary to and is a continuation of the main action. [Republic v. Central Surety,
G.R. No. L- 27802 (1968)]

A third-party complaint is not proper in an action for declaratory relief. [Commissioner of

Customs v. Cloribel, G.R. No. L-21036 (1977)]

Bringing in new parties (R6, S12)

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

Answer to 3rd party complaint (R6, S13)

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

f. Complaint-in-intervention (R19)
Rule 19, Section 1: Who may intervene. – A person who has a legal interest in the
matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both,
or is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of
property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof may, with leave of court, be
allowed to intervene in the action. The court shall consider whether or not the
intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original
parties, and whether or not the intervenor's rights may be fully protected in a separate
proceeding.
Rule 19, Sec. 3: Pleadings-in-intervention. – The intervenor shall file a complaint-in-
intervention if he asserts a claim against either or all of the original parties, or an
answer- in-intervention if he unites with the defending party in resisting a claim against
the latter.

To warrant intervention, two requisites must concur:

(a) the movant has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, and
(b) intervention must not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the
parties nor should the claim of the intervenor be capable of being properly decided in a
separate proceeding. (Mabayo Farms, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 386 SCRA 110) The
interest, which entitles a person to intervene in a suit, must involve the matter in
litigation and of such direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain
or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment. (Garcia v. David, 67
Phil. 279 (1939)

In Bon-Mar Realty and Sport Corp. v. Spouses de Guzman, G.R. No. 182136-37,
August 29, 2008, Bon-Mar was allowed to intervene in Civil Case No. 56393 since he is
not a mere stranger to the litigation but a necessary party who must be joined in the suit
if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete
determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.

Intervention is a remedy by which a third party, not originally impleaded in a proceeding,

becomes a litigant therein to enable him to protect or preserve a right or interest which
may be affected by such proceeding. [Restaurante Las Conchas v. Llego, G.R. No.
119085 (1999), citing First Philippine Holdings Corporation v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
88345 (1996)]

Complaint for Interpleader

The action of interpleader is a remedy whereby a person who has property whether
personal or real, in his possession, or an obligation to render wholly or partially, without
claiming any right in both, or claims an interest which in whole or in part is not disputed
by the conflicting claimants, comes to court and asks that the persons who claim the
property or who consider themselves entitled to demand compliance with the obligation,
be required to litigate among themselves, in order to determine finally who is entitled to
the property or payment of the obligation. The remedy is afforded not to protect a
person against a double liability but to protect him against a double vexation in respect
of one liability. (Alvarez vs. Commonwealth of the Philippines, et al., 65 Phil. 302, 311,
citing C.J., Section 21, p. 438; Beltran vs. PHHC, G.R. No. L-25138, August 28, 1969,
29 SCRA 145, 151)

Example: A who is a tenant of a certain residential apartment paying a monthly rental of

P10,000.00. B and C separately are trying to claim the rental from A. A may file a claim
against B and C before the court for them to interplead and litigate their claim over the
rental of the residential apartment.

g. Reply (R6, S10)

Rule 6, Sec. 10: Reply. – A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to
deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in
the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new matters. If a party does not
file such reply, all the new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.

If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged,
such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint.

The rule is, if a party does not file a reply, all the new matters alleged in the answer are
deemed controverted.

A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial
or avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating to actionable documents attached to
an answer. This is so, because under the Amended Rules, the plaintiff may file a reply
only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her answer. [Sec.
10, Rule 6]

Note: An actionable document is a written document that’s the basis of one’s cause of
action or defense. [1 Riano 280, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

Note: The function of a reply is to merely deny the allegations raised in the answer with
the actionable document, not to impose new causes of action which arise from the
answer.

If the plaintiff wants to interpose a new claim on the basis of the actionable document
attached in the answer, he should do this through an amended or supplemental
complaint.
1. The amended complaint must be with leave of court following Sec. 3, Rule 10.
2. The supplemental complaint is allowed only if it pertains to transactions, occurrences,
or events which have happened since the date of the complaint following Sec. 6, Rule
10.
A reply is not the proper responsive pleading to a counterclaim or a cross-claim, as the
proper responsive pleading would be an answer to the counterclaim/cross-claim. [1
Riano 335, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

If an actionable document is attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder.
The rejoinder must only deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of the new matters
alleged in actionable document attached to the reply. [Sec. 10, Rule 6]

General Rule: There is no need to file a reply since all new matters alleged in the
answer are deemed controverted. [Sec. 10, Rule 6]
Exception: When an actionable document is attached to the answer, the plaintiff must
file a reply in order to avoid the admission of the genuineness and due execution of the
document attached. Failure to file a reply would lead to the admission of the
aforementioned matters. [1 Riano 336, 2016 Bantam Ed.]
Extensions of time to file
General Rule:
A motion for extension to file any pleading is prohibited and is considered a mere scrap
of paper. [Sec. 11, Rule 11]
A motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other papers is a
prohibited motion and shall not be allowed. [Sec. 12 (e), Rule 15]
Exception:
A motion for extension of time to file an answer may be allowed if:
1. For meritorious reasons,
2. For a period not more than 30 calendar days, and
3. A party may only avail of 1 motion for extension

The court may still allow, in its discretion, any other pleading to be filed after the time
fixed by the Rules. [Sec. 11, Rule 11]

When is a reply necessary? Herrera cites 3 instances:

(a) where the answer alleges the defense of usury in which case a reply under oath
should be made; otherwise, the allegation of usurious interest shall be deemed admitted
(Sun Bros. Appliances Inc. v. Caluntad, 16 SCRA 895 (1966); See also last sentence of
Sec. 11, Rule 8 which reads: ―Allegations of usury in a complaint to recover interest
are deemed admitted if not denied under oath.ǁ In Sun Bros, the SC held if it is alleged
that defendant entered into a contract of loan with plaintiff in which the latter collected a
usurious interest there is need to deny the transaction under oath, and if no oath is
taken the only thing admitted is the allegation that the interest is usurious and not that
the contract entered into is a loan. The nature of the transaction is not admitted. The
fact that what is alleged is that the transaction was a loan under the guise of a
conditional contract of sale and that by increasing its price by 150% the consideration
became usurious, such is not deemed admitted by the mere failure to deny the answer
under oath. This transaction must still be proven before usury can be invoked.

(b) where the defense in the answer is based on an actionable document, a reply under
oath pursuant to Sec. 8, Rule 8 must be made; otherwise, the genuineness and due
execution of the document shall be deemed admitted (Toribio v. Bidin, 134 SCRA 162
(1985). In Toribio, the SC observed that the situation obtaining is not a common one.
The usual case is between plaintiff and defendant where, the latter, as his defense,
would present a document to which both parties are parties and which states that the
former relinquishes his rights to the defendant. In the case at bar, we have a situation
where the defendant presented a document in his defense, a document to which the
plaintiff is a party but to which defendant is not. Thus, the question arises as to whether
or not the document is included as a necessary part of the defense so as to make it
actionable. The SC then noted that the deed of sale executed by the petitioners in favor
of their brother Dionisio is an essential and indispensable part of their defense to the
allegation that the petitioners had never disposed of their property.

Thus, Sections 7 and 8 of Rule 8 apply and the proper procedure was for the petitioners
to specifically deny under oath the genuineness and due execution of the questioned
deeds of sale and to set forth what they claim to be the facts. However, the oversight or
negligence of petitioners' counsel in not properly drafting a reply to the answer and an
answer to the counter claim is not necessarily fatal to their cause.

(c) Reply is necessary to set up affirmative defenses on the counterclaim (Rosario v.

Martinez, 92 Phil. 1064 (1952).

A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial
or avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in the answer and thereby join
or make issue as to such new matters. If a party does not file such reply, all the new
matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.

If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged,
such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint.

The most useless pleading is of course a reply, which is a responsive pleading,

because the rules after defining what a reply is continues with another sentence which
says that even if a reply is not filed, the new matters alleged in the answer are deemed
controverted. So the plaintiff does not have to file a reply to an answer even if the
answer contains new matters in avoidance of the claim of the plaintiff. The absence of a
reply by the plaintiff means that the plaintiff has controverted the assertions of the
defendant.

Reply is MANDATORY when answer is founded on actionable document

For instance in the case we had a while ago, where the plaintiff files a complaint for the
recovery of money, and the defendant sets-up the affirmative defense that the loan has
been paid by the defendant. That is a new matter that is introduced by the answer.

Should the plaintiff file a reply in order to controvert that new matter? The answer
is NO.
Even if the plaintiff fails to file a reply to controvert this allegation of payment, the
allegation of payment is deemed controverted. Does it mean to say that there is no
occasion where the filing of a reply becomes mandatory, that is mandatory in the sense
that if no reply is filed by the plaintiff, it could cause him harm or prejudice?

The general rule is that the filing of a reply is mandatory. But it may be mandatory, that
is in the sense that if no reply is filed the plaintiff can be prejudiced in his rights, is that
when the answer is founded on an actionable document.

If the answer of the defendant is founded upon an actionable document, the plaintiff
must file a reply. Does the rule require him to do so expressly? Well there is also
nothing in the Rules, which require the plaintiff expressly to file a reply if the answer of
the defendant is founded upon an actionable document.

But even in the absence of express requirement, the plaintiff is still mandated to file a
reply because of the principle that an actionable document must be specifically denied
under oath. And the only means by which the plaintiff could make a specific denial
under oath is to file a pleading. And the only pleading that could be used to make
specific denial under oath is a reply. The plaintiff cannot make use of an answer
because he is the plaintiff. He cannot make use of this responsive pleading. So the only
pleading that is left for him to use in order to make a specific denial under oath of an
actionable document alleged in the complaint, is a reply.

This is the only known instance where the filing of a reply is mandatory. Mandatory in
the sense that if the plaintiff does not file a reply, he is deemed to have admitted the
genuineness and due execution of the actionable document alleged in the answer.

Supposing the answer of the defendant sets up the defense of usury, is the
plaintiff mandated to file a reply because allegations of usury may need a specific
denial under oath just like an actionable document?
That is NO longer true. Before the 1997 Rules were enacted, that was another instance
where the filing of a reply was mandatory. But under the present rules, there is a need
for specific denial under oath in allegations of usury, when these allegations of usury is
found in the complaint. In other words, the answer must be under oath. But when the
allegation of usury is contained in the answer, as a defense, the law does not require
that there must be specific denial under oath of the allegation of usury.

But if the allegation of usury by the defendant is contained in a claim pleading like a
counterclaim, or a cross-claim, then there must be a specific denial under oath. But if it
is contained in a counterclaim, the responsive pleading to a counterclaim is not a reply.
It is still an answer. So under the present dispensation as crafted in the 1997 Rules, it is
only an allegation of usury contained in a complaint, which needs a specific denial
under oath. If the allegation of usury is contained in an answer and set up as a defense,
there is no need for the plaintiff to make a specific denial under oath. Even if NO reply is
filed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff is deemed to have controverted this allegation of usury.

COMMENT:
REPLY is the response of the plaintiff to the defendant’s answer, the function of which
is to deny or allege facts in denial or in avoidance of new matters alleged by way of
defense in the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new matters.

Effects of failure to file a Reply

General Rule: Filing a reply is merely optional. New facts that were alleged in the
answer are deemed controverted should a party fail to reply thereto.
Exceptions: Reply is required
1. Where the answer is based on an ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT; and
2. To set up AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES on the counterclaim

Note: Only allegations of usury in a COMPLAINT to recover usurious interest are

deemed admitted if not denied under oath. Hence, if the allegation of usury is contained
in an answer, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to file a reply thereto in order to deny
that allegation under oath. (Regalado}
h. Counter-counterclaims, and counter-cross-claim (R6, S9)
A counterclaim may be asserted against an original counter claimant.
A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross-claimant.

Pleadings allowed in small claim cases and cases covered by the Rules on
Summary Procedure
In small claim cases, the pleadings allowed are:
(a) verified Statement of Claim;
(b) verified Response;
(c) compulsory counterclaim, which shall be incorporated in the response; and,
(d) permissive counterclaim provided that the amount and nature thereof are within the
coverage of the Rule and the prescribed docket and other legal fees are paid.

In cases covered by the rules on summary procedure, the pleadings allowed are:
(a) complaint;
(b) compulsory counterclaims and cross claims pleaded in the answer; and,
(c) answer.

i. Rejoinder
When can a rejoinder be filed?
In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a
rejoinder if the same is based solely on an actionable document. (Sec. 10, Rule 6, 2019
Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure)
Therefore, the rejoinder is limited to said actionable document.

B. Defenses:

(i) Negative defenses (R6, S5(a)

Rule 6, Sec. 5 (a): A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts
alleged in the pleading of the claimant essential to his cause or causes of action.
A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the
pleading of the claimant essential to his or her cause or causes of action. [Sec. 5 (a),
Rule 6]
Note: A general denial is considered as an admission. [1 Riano 293, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

There are three kinds of specific denials, namely:

1. Absolute Denials - made when the defendant specifies each material allegation
which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, sets forth the substance of the
matters upon which he relies to support his denial. [PBCOM v. Go, G.R. No. 175514
(2011)]
2. Partial Denials - made when the defendant does not make a total denial of the
material allegations, but denies only a part of the averment. Here, he specifies which
part of the truth he admits and likewise denies. [1 Riano 269, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

3. Denial through Disavowal of Knowledge - made when the defendant alleges he “is
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the material
averments in the complaint”. [Warner Barnes v. Reyes, 103 Phil. 662 (1958)]

(ii) Negative Pregnant

A denial, pregnant with the admission of the substantial facts in the pleading responded
to which are not squarely denied. It is in effect an admission of the averment it is
directed to. [Philamgen v. Sweet Lines, G.R. No. 87434 (1993)]

A negative pregnant does not qualify as a specific denial. It is conceded to be actually

an admission. It refers to a denial which implies its affirmative opposite by seeming to
deny only a qualification or an incidental aspect of the allegation but not the main
allegation itself [1 Riano 358, 2014 Bantam Ed.]

Examples: When the defense alleges “I have never borrowed money from the plaintiff
from 2011 to 2013,” such may imply that there was borrowing of money at other times.
[1 Riano 297, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

A negative pregnant is a form of negative expression which carries with it an affirmation

or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is a denial
pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading. Where a fact
is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the allegation as so
qualified or modified are literally denied, has been held that the qualifying circumstances
alone are denied while the fact itself is admitted. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
152154, July 15, 2003)

Concept of negative pregnant

This principle of specific denial also gives us the concept of a negative pregnant. The
word pregnant does not of course refer to the condition of a woman. If you go to the
dictionary, pregnant means silence, which is suggestive of an unexpressed feeling. That
is the meaning of pregnant in the dictionary. So in pleading, if there is a negative
pregnant, the defendant is really silent as to whether or not he is denying or admitting,
the allegations in the pleading, which is not allowed by the rules. He should state
expressly and firmly whether or not he is specifically denying certain allegations in the
complaint. He should not leave matter to the court and let the court guess whether or
not he is denying or admitting certain allegations. That is the duty of the defending
party. There are some court decisions to the effect that a mode of specific denial, in
mode #3, that is denial for lack of knowledge or information could be considered as a
negative pregnant. That is, it will result again to a judicial admission of the allegations
contained in the pleading.
Three ways of making a specific denial
1. Specific Absolute Denial by specifically denying the averment and, whenever
practicable, setting forth the substance of the matters relied upon for such denial
2. Partial Specific Denial part admission and part denial;
3. Disavowal of knowledge by an allegation of lack of knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the averment in the opposing party’s
pleading.

This does not apply where the facts as to which want of knowledge is asserted is, to the
knowledge of the court, so plain and necessarily within the defendants knowledge that
his averment of ignorance must be palpably untrue.

(iii) Affirmative defenses (R6, S5(b)

Rule 6, Sec. 5 (b): An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while
hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would
nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him. The affirmative defenses include fraud,
statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of confession and
avoidance.

An affirmative defense on the other hand, is an allegation, which admits the allegations
in the complaint hypothetically. But the defendant sets up new matters, which will avoid
his liability in favor the claimant. So contrasted to a negative defense, which denies the
allegations in the complaint an affirmative defense admits the allegations in the
complaint. But the defendant still tells the court, “Although the allegations in the
complaint are true, I am still not liable for the claim contained in the complaint.”

To illustrate, in a complaint for the recovery of money, the plaintiff will of course allege
the matters we said a while ago. The names and residence of the parties, the fact that
defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff, that the loan has become due but fell the
loan has been defaulted and so on and so forth, together with the conditions precedent.
In a negative defense, the defendant will tell the court “I specifically deny that I
borrowed money from the plaintiff, the truth being that. . . (then he will state the grounds
upon which he is going to rely for his defense).” In an affirmative defense, the defendant
will tell the court, “ I admit that I borrowed from the plaintiff, but I am not liable to pay the
plaintiff because I have paid the loan”. That is an affirmative defense. There is an
admission of the allegations in the complaint, but he is going to introduce new matters
that will release him from liability.

An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically

admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless
prevent or bar recovery by him or her.

The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality,
statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other
matter by way of confession and avoidance.
Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint,
specifically:
1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter
2. That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause
(lis pendens), or
3. That the action is barred by a prior judgment. [Sec. 5 (b), Rule 6]

Note: The foregoing three (3) grounds need not be included in the answer due to the
use of the word “may”. Also note that these grounds for dismissal (in addition to statute
of limitations) may still be raised at any time since they are not waivable. [Sec. 1, Rule 9
in relation to Sec. 12 (a), Rule 15]

Cases:
1. Alba vs. Malapajo – 780 SCRA 534
TOPIC: Nature of Compulsory and Permissive Counterclaims
DOCTRINE: A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an
opposing party. A compulsory counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the
regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim and does not require for its
adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.
Such a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount
and the nature thereof, except that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court,
necessarily connected with the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim or even
where there is such a connection, the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim or
it requires for adjudication the presence of third persons over whom the court acquire
jurisdiction. A compulsory counterclaim is barred if not set up in the same action. A
counterclaim is permissive if it does not arise out of or is not necessarily connected with
the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim. It is essentially an independent claim
that may be filed separately in another case.

Tests to Determine Whether a Counterclaim is Compulsory or Permissive.·

To determine whether a counterclaim is compulsory or permissive, we have devised the
following tests: (a) Are the issues of fact and law raised by the claim and by the
counterclaim largely the same? (b) Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on
defendants’ claims, absent the compulsory counterclaim rule? (c) Will substantially the
same evidence support or refute plaintiffs’ claim as well as the defendants’
counterclaim? and (d) Is there any logical relation between the claim and the
counterclaim? A positive answer to all four questions would indicate that the
counterclaim is compulsory.

2. Lim Teck Chuan vs. Uy -752 SCRA 268

TOPIC: DISMISSAL OF A COUNTERCLAIM
DOCTRINE: The case of Pinga v. Heirs of German Santiago, 494 SCRA 393 (2006), is
quite instructive which this Court finds worth reiterating. In Pinga, the Court clearly
stated that the dismissal of the complaint does not necessarily result to the dismissal of
the counterclaim, abandoning the rulings in Metals Engineering Resources Corporation
v. Court of Appeals, 203 SCRA 273 (1991), International Container Terminal Services,
Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 214 SCRA 456 (1992), and BA Finance Corporation v. Co.,
224 SCRA 163 (1993).

3. Metrobank vs. CPR Promotions -760 SCRA 59

TOPIC: FAILURE TO DEFEND A COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
DOCTRINE: It is elementary that a defending party’s compulsory counterclaim should
be interposed at the time he files his Answer, and that failure to do so shall effectively
bar such claim. As it appears from the records, what respondents initially claimed herein
were moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney’s fees. Then, realizing, based
on its computation, that it should have sought the recovery of the excess bid price,
respondents set up another counterclaim, this time in their Appellant’s Brief filed before
the CA. Unfortunately, respondents’ belated assertion proved fatal to their cause as it
did not cure their failure to timely raise such claim in their Answer. Consequently,
respondents’ claim for the excess, if any, is already barred.

4. Valdez vs. Dabon – 775 SCRA 1

TOPIC: CONCEPT OF NEGATIVE PREGNANT
DOCTRINE: The respondent’s denial is a negative pregnant, a denial coupled with the
admission of substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not squarely
denied. Stated otherwise, a negative pregnant is a form of negative expression which
carries with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the
adverse party. Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the
words of the allegation as so qualified or modified are literally denied, it has been held
that the qualifying circumstance alone is denied while the fact itself is admitted. It is
clear from Atty. Dabon’s Comment that his denial only pertained as to the existence of a
forced illicit relationship. Without a categorical denial thereof, he is deemed to have
admitted his consensual affair with Sonia.

5. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan – 406 SCRA 190

TOPIC: NEGATIVE PREGNANT, INDISPENSABLE PARTIES, SUMMARY
JUDGEMENT

DOCTRINE:
A negative pregnant is a denial pregnant with the admission of the substantial facts in
the pleading responded to which are not squarely denied, in effect an admission of the
averments it was directed at; A negative pregnant is a form of negative expression
which carries with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to
the adverse party. ·Evidently, this particular denial had the earmark of what is called in
the law on pleadings as a negative pregnant, that is, a denial pregnant with the
admission of the substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not squarely
denied. It was in effect an admission of the averments it was directed at. Stated
otherwise, a negative pregnant is a form of negative expression which carries with it an
affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is a
denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading.
Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the
allegation as so qualified or modified are literally denied, it has been held that the
qualifying circumstances alone are denied while the fact itself is admitted.

The form of denial based on ignorance or lack of information must be availed of with
sincerity and in good faith, and certainly not for the purpose of confusing the adverse
party as to what allegations of the petition are really being challenged, nor should it be
made for the purpose of delay. When matters regarding which respondents claim to
have no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief are plainly and necessarily
within their knowledge, their alleged ignorance or lack of information will not be
considered a specific denial.

An unexplained denial of information within the control of the pleader, or is readily

accessible to him, is evasive and is insufficient to constitute an effective denial. The
form of denial adopted by respondents must be availed of with sincerity and in good
faith, and certainly not for the purpose of confusing the adverse party as to what
allegations of the petition are really being challenged; nor should it be made for the
purpose of delay. In the instant case, the Marcoses did not only present unsubstantiated
assertions but in truth attempted to mislead and deceive this Court by presenting an
obviously contrived defense.

Simply put, a profession of ignorance about a fact which is patently and necessarily
within the pleader’s knowledge or means of knowing is as ineffective as no denial at all.
Respondents’ ineffective denial thus failed to properly tender an issue and the
averments contained in the petition for forfeiture were deemed judicially admitted by
them.

6. Caneland Sugar Corp. vs. Alon – 533 SCRA 28

TOPIC: NEGATIVE PREGNANT
DOCTRINE: Negative pregnant is a "form of negative expression which carries with it
an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is
a denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading.
Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the
allegation as so qualified or modified are literally denied, has been held that the
qualifying circumstances alone are denied while the fact itself is admitted."

―These vague assertions are, in fact, negative pregnants, i.e., denials pregnant with
the admission of the substantial facts in the pleading responded to which are not
squarely denied.
As defined in Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, 406 SCRA 190 (2003), a
negative pregnant is a ―form of negative expression which carries with it an affirmation
or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party.

It is a denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading.
Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the
allegation as so qualified or modified are literally denied, has been held that the
qualifying circumstances alone are denied while the fact itself is admitted.