RULE 30 -TRIAL
When trial is unnecessary (Bar 1996)
Trial vs. Hearing
Trial:
 Presentation of evidence
Hearing
 Not necessarily a trial
Pre- trial (Rule 18) – roadmap of the trial
Section 7. Agreed statement of facts. — The parties to any
action may agree, in writing, upon the facts involved in the
litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts
agreed upon, without the introduction of evidence.
If the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the
trial shall be held as to the disputed facts in such order as
the court shall prescribe.
 An instance where there is a judgement made by the
court without trial is during pre-trial e.g. court annexed
mediation.
 Court annexed mediation – favorable to both parties
although not necessarily 50/50
In pre-trial:
- pretrial first before mediation
- stipulation of facts (A filed a case against B - action is
recovery of ownership, of possession, plus damages (causes
of action - joined), B unduly transferred the title to B, A said he
bought it in 1980s)
- During the stipulation of facts in Rule 18, they will just say
whether they agree or not on the said facts.
"Is B fully cognizant that A purchased the land in
XXX?" - denied so, there might be agreement or
denial
- If every material issue of facts is admitted, the judge will order
to put it in writing as to the agreed statement of facts. There
may be no trial if what’s left is a question of law.
a) Judgment on the pleadings (Rule 34)
b) Summary judgment (Rule 35)
c) Compromise settlement during pre-trial or while trial is
in progress.(Rule 18, Art.2028 Civil Code)
- For settlement agreement, court will render
judgement out of it and becomes final and
executory
d) Dismissal of complaint with prejudice or when
dismissal has the effect of an ajudication on the
merits. (Section 5, Rule 16; Section 3, Rule17,
Section 5, last par. Rule 7)
- Rule 17 (Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff)
Example:
- A filed a case against B for collection of sum of
money. A dismissed the case only known to her,
and filed a notice of dismissal (which was
submitted to the court before an answer has
been filed). Then, A re-filed the case, A files a
motion to dismiss (submitted after an answer has
been filed). Will the 2- dismissal rule apply?
- Ans. The reckoning point is the “notice of
dismissal”. If the second dismissal is in the form
of a notice of dismissal, then the 2- dismissal rule
will apply.
- If second dismissal is a motion to dismiss, the 2 -
dismissal rule will not apply, so A can still refile it
the 3rd time.
e) Case under the Rules on Summary Procedure
f) Parties submit the case for judgment on the facts
agreed upon, without the introduction of
evidence(Section 7, Rule 30 – Agreed statement of
facts).
RULE 31 – CONSOLIDATION OR SEVERANCE
Section 1. Consolidation. — When actions involving a
common question of law or fact are pending before the
court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the
matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the action
consolidated, and it may make such orders concerning
proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary
 costs or delay.
Consolidation as used in 3 Senses/Ways: (Manuel Riguera)
1. QUASI-CONSOLIDATION. Where all except one of
several actions are stayed until one is tried, in which
case the judgment in the one trial is conclusive as to the
others. This is not actually consolidation but is referred
to as such.
- Happens in cases where rights of the other party
are contingent to another
2. ACTUAL CONSOLIDATION. Where several actions are
combined into one, lose their separate identity, and
become a single action in which a single judgment is
rendered. This is illustrated by a situation where several
actions are pending between the same parties stating
claims which might have been set out originally in one
complaint.
- In actual court, this rarely happens.
- “overhauling of cases”
- Cases lose their separate identity
- Akin to joinder of causes of action
3. CONSOLIDATION FOR TRIAL. Where several actions
are ordered to be tried together but each retains its
separate character and requires the entry of a separate
judgment. This type of consolidation does not merge
the suits into a single action, or cause the parties to one
action to be parties to the other. (Republic v.
Sandiganbayan, December 16, 2011).
- Consolidation for trial is what actually happens in
real life
- Joint trial
Is joint trial, joint hearing, and consolidation the same?
Answer: Technically, they are under the Rules.
Example of consolidation:
 A files for multiple unlawful detainer suits (filed in
the MTC) against, B, C, D, E, and F. Counsel
may file for consolidation of cases.
 Owner wants to vacate all occupants of the
purok. In order to promote speedy disposition of
cases, court will just have a joint trial or will
“consolidate” cases.
G.R. No. 152375    December 16, 2011
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
Held:
A reading of Rule 31 of the Rules of Court easily lends itself to
two observations. First, Rule 31 is completely silent on the
effect/s of consolidation on the cases consolidated; on the
parties and the causes of action involved; and on the evidence
presented in the consolidated cases. Second, while Rule 31
gives the court the discretion either to order a joint hearing or
trial, or to order the actions consolidated, jurisprudence will
show that the term "consolidation" is used generically and even
synonymously with joint hearing or trial of several causes. In
fact, the title "consolidation" of Rule 31 covers all the different
senses of consolidation, as discussed below.
In the context of legal procedure, the term "consolidation" is
used in three different senses:
(1) Where all except one of several actions are stayed until one
is tried, in which case the judgment in the one trial is
conclusive as to the others. This is not actually consolidation
but is referred to as such. (quasi-consolidation)
(2) Where several actions are combined into one, lose their
separate identity, and become a single action in which a single
judgment is rendered. This is illustrated by a situation where
several actions are pending between the same parties stating
claims which might have been set out originally in one
complaint. (actual consolidation)
(3) Where several actions are ordered to be tried together but
each retains its separate character and requires the entry of a
separate judgment. This type of consolidation does not merge
the suits into a single action, or cause the parties to one action
to be parties to the other. (consolidation for trial).
G.R. NOS. 175277 & 175285. September 11, 2013
UNICAPITAL, INC., UNICAPITAL REALTY, INC VS. RAFAEL
JOSE CONSING
G.R.NO. 192073. September 11, 2013
RAFAEL JOSE CONSING, JR., vs., UNICAPITAL, INC.
Facts: Section 2. Separate trials. — The court, in furtherance of
convenience or to avoid prejudice, may order a separate
Consing obtained a loan from Unicapital Inc. secured by REM
trial of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party
over a parcel of land. Plus, Builders Inc. (PBI), a real estate
complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number of
company, entered into a joint venture agreement with
claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party complaints
Unicapital. Later, Plus Builders discovered that the title
or issues. (2a)
submitted by Consing was of dubious origin, which prompted
Plus Builders Inc and Unicapital Inc. to send demand letters to
Consing Jr., the return of the purchase price. Preemptively
Consingfiled a complaint calledfor Injunction against Unicapital RULE 32 – TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER
and PBI in RTC Pasig City. The cause of action was based on
Art. 19 and 26 Civil Code alleging he has been harassed and  Rule 32 applies when cases involve technical matters.
bothered by PBI and Unicapital.
When is trial by commissioner applied?
On the other hand, Unicapital filed a complaint for Sum of
Money with Damages against Consing in RTC-Makati City.  When there is something to be tried which requires
some technical expertise
Consing filed a motion for consolidation of trial of cases in
 Mutual agreement of the parties
RTC-Pasig city pursuant to Rule 31 sec. 2.
GR: Trial by commissioner depends largely upon the discretion
of the court.
Ruling:
XPNS:
It is hornbook principle that when or two or more cases involve
 Expropriation
the same parties and affect closely related subject matters, the
 Partition
same must be consolidated and jointly tried, in order to serve
the best interest of the parties and to settle the issues between  Settlement of estate
them promptly, thus, resulting in a speedy and inexpensive  Submission of accounting
determination of cases. In addition, consolidation serves the
purpose of avoiding the possibility of conflicting decisions
rendered by the courts in two or more cases, which otherwise COC vs. Trial by commissioner
could be disposed of in a single suit.
Clerk of Court Commissioner
However, the two cases, although involving the same parties Must be a lawyer Need not be a lawyer
and proceeding from a similar factual milieu, should remain Cannot rule on objections or Can rule on admissibility of
unconsolidated since they proceed from different sources of on the admissibility of evidence
obligations and, hence, would not yield conflicting dispositions. evidence
The case filed by Consing in RTC Pasig is an injunction and Delegation to the COC is Commissioner can be
made during trial appointed even after the
damages case based on art. 19 and 26 of the Civil Code,
case has become final and
while Civil Case filed by Plus Builders in RTC Makati is a
executory
collection and damages suit based on promissory notes. The
former case deals with whether or not Unicapital and PBI, et al.
abused the manner in which they demanded payment from RULE 33 – DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
Consing, Jr., while the latter case deals with whether or not
Unicapital may demand payment from Consing, Jr. based on
What is a demurrer to evidence?
the subject promissory notes. Clearly, a resolution in one case
would have no practical effect as the core issues and reliefs
sought in each case are separate and distinct from the other.
  Motion to dismiss filed by the defendant after the
plaintiff had rested its case on the ground of
insufficiency of evidence
 Motion to dismiss on the ground that there is no right
to relief

When is demurrer to evidence filed?

 After the plaintiff has presented its evidence and rests

its case. (Defendant was already given the
opportunity to object)
Plaintiff will make an oral offer of evidence first, then will
present his or her evidence.

Reason for filing a demurrer to evidence is “insufficiency of

evidence”

 Insufficiency of evidence or no right to relief

 Atty: may be a misnomer kasi jurisprudence states
that it should be based on the FACTS AND LAW that
there is no relief to support cause of action.
The "facts," contemplated by the rule should include all the
means sanctioned by the Rules of Court in ascertaining
matters in judicial proceedings, i.e., judicial admissions,
matters of judicial notice, stipulations made during the pre-trial
and trial, admissions, and presumptions, the only exclusion
being the defendant's evidence. (Republic vs. Sandiganbayan)

 Rule 33 – must also not consider any evidence from

the defendant